Stopping the increasing National Debt , and somebody will.
-
-
-
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
pr Wrote:You're confusing the national debt with private (consumer) debt. They are not the same by any means. The national debt is basically a meaningless figure employed by politicians (mostly Republican conservatives) to scare the under informed public. Consumer debt is the debt that people owe when they borrow and get into trouble because the can't afford to repay it. What are you trying to tell us? pr Wrote: :"The national debt is basically a meaningless figure employed by politicians (mostly Republican conservatives) to scare the under informed". Are you saying the 18 trillion dollar national debt is a meaningless figure? If so, pleases explain.
-
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Chet Ruminski Wrote:pr Wrote:You're confusing the national debt with private (consumer) debt. They are not the same by any means. The national debt is basically a meaningless figure employed by politicians (mostly Republican conservatives) to scare the under informed public. Consumer debt is the debt that people owe when they borrow and get into trouble because the can't afford to repay it. What are you trying to tell us? pr Wrote: :"The national debt is basically a meaningless figure employed by politicians (mostly Republican conservatives) to scare the under informed". Are you saying the 18 trillion dollar national debt is a meaningless figure? If so, pleases explain. Yes, go to the link above.
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
pr Wrote:Chet Ruminski Wrote:pr Wrote:You're confusing the national debt with private (consumer) debt. They are not the same by any means. The national debt is basically a meaningless figure employed by politicians (mostly Republican conservatives) to scare the under informed public. Consumer debt is the debt that people owe when they borrow and get into trouble because the can't afford to repay it. What are you trying to tell us? pr Wrote: :"The national debt is basically a meaningless figure employed by politicians (mostly Republican conservatives) to scare the under informed". Are you saying the 18 trillion dollar national debt is a meaningless figure? If so, pleases explain. Yes, go to the link above. I don't care if it is "meaningless"; whatever "tax money" is wrongly used for all our wars, waste and inefficiency is not "meaningless" but stupid. Just by having trillions wasted should we be proud of that?
-
-
-
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
As indicated on this thread, "the National Debt is meaningless????", maybe, but more accurately political bantering does treat the roaming figure of national debt as meaningless. It is far from being meaningless, because it can be used against nation where the debt may be called. The debt being called is not imaginary, but a possibility and has grave consequences on America if World Banks and other Nations refuse to provide future loans based on our credit risk. America does need to balance the books and last done was by President Bill Clinton. Ever sense Bill retired from Office, our National Debt has risen more than it ever has. Having a huge national debt does impact our national health economically. Although the dollar is strong and our GNP is producing robust numbers, jobs are numerous, the caretakers of our beautiful nation, I assume are concerned and do not think for one moment the National Debt is meaningless. It's like we are one tragedy away or one paycheck away from disaster in economic fallout. What can America do? I read the thread responses where one entered the case for reducing the military costs 75%. Now, that is meaningless and unworthy of intelligent forethought. Reducing military costs impacts millions of jobs and productivity in our nation. There is so much tied to the military complex that reducing the military costs could be that one tragedy that would throw America into a dismal spiral and not have a genuine positive impact to the economy. Someone you know, friend, family or even yourself more likely has a job or community that is based on the success of the military complex. This is a solution that can never be an intelligent reaction to curing the national debt. Maybe a slight reduction rather than a radical reduction would be more appropriate. But whatever reduction in military costs, there will be undesired results. As you desire for less military around the world, reducing military costs could only threatened America , so remember Pearl Harbor, 9-11, and America's ability to aid friendly nations around the world, stopping Hitler, Communism in Eastern Europe, and our best efforts in the Middles East. At best our United States Armed Forces do protect and preserve our national interests here at home and abroad. To remove any funding promoting our Armed Forces is an act for some other nation possible evil, to grow in strength and consider attacking our country. ISIS comes to my mind, immediately. So, whatever decision is made to reduce the national debt, consider the cause and effects. All that America can do at this time is to continue on pace and perform due diligence on funding and remove those sneaky add-on's to bills that are not representing all of America's interests, like building a Flight Service Station for Cheney alone. Yes, I remember that one and most of us involved were shaking our heads and worse when years later, all Flight Service Stations were reorganized and Cheney's was decommissioned. The people making these political decisions in Congress needs a good Elizabeth Warren to seek out the trash from the good bill and remove it. Our President needs to perform more line-veto option rather than veto the entire bill. There are good bills and than there are bad bills with all the trash attached to it. The Keystone Pipeline is my current trash to any bill. The Hillary attack fund by Congress on her emails is another. The people of America needs better representation in Congress to remove the trash from all these bills, that's what is raising our national debt.
-
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
AmcmurryFreedom Wrote:As indicated on this thread, "the National Debt is meaningless????", maybe, but more accurately political bantering does treat the roaming figure of national debt as meaningless. It is far from being meaningless, because it can be used against nation where the debt may be called. The debt being called is not imaginary, but a possibility and has grave consequences on America if World Banks and other Nations refuse to provide future loans based on our credit risk. America does need to balance the books and last done was by President Bill Clinton. Ever sense Bill retired from Office, our National Debt has risen more than it ever has. Having a huge national debt does impact our national health economically. Although the dollar is strong and our GNP is producing robust numbers, jobs are numerous, the caretakers of our beautiful nation, I assume are concerned and do not think for one moment the National Debt is meaningless. It's like we are one tragedy away or one paycheck away from disaster in economic fallout. What can America do? I read the thread responses where one entered the case for reducing the military costs 75%. Now, that is meaningless and unworthy of intelligent forethought. Reducing military costs impacts millions of jobs and productivity in our nation. There is so much tied to the military complex that reducing the military costs could be that one tragedy that would throw America into a dismal spiral and not have a genuine positive impact to the economy. Someone you know, friend, family or even yourself more likely has a job or community that is based on the success of the military complex. This is a solution that can never be an intelligent reaction to curing the national debt. Maybe a slight reduction rather than a radical reduction would be more appropriate. But whatever reduction in military costs, there will be undesired results. As you desire for less military around the world, reducing military costs could only threatened America , so remember Pearl Harbor, 9-11, and America's ability to aid friendly nations around the world, stopping Hitler, Communism in Eastern Europe, and our best efforts in the Middles East. At best our United States Armed Forces do protect and preserve our national interests here at home and abroad. To remove any funding promoting our Armed Forces is an act for some other nation possible evil, to grow in strength and consider attacking our country. ISIS comes to my mind, immediately. So, whatever decision is made to reduce the national debt, consider the cause and effects. All that America can do at this time is to continue on pace and perform due diligence on funding and remove those sneaky add-on's to bills that are not representing all of America's interests, like building a Flight Service Station for Cheney alone. Yes, I remember that one and most of us involved were shaking our heads and worse when years later, all Flight Service Stations were reorganized and Cheney's was decommissioned. The people making these political decisions in Congress needs a good Elizabeth Warren to seek out the trash from the good bill and remove it. Our President needs to perform more line-veto option rather than veto the entire bill. There are good bills and than there are bad bills with all the trash attached to it. The Keystone Pipeline is my current trash to any bill. The Hillary attack fund by Congress on her emails is another. The people of America needs better representation in Congress to remove the trash from all these bills, that's what is raising our national debt. As always you refuse to accept that our Pentagon has squandered billions of dollars (trillions since WWII) for which they can not account for and are lost or used as bribery money (see P.R.' s attachment where the money went t0 (for instance truckloads of saran wrapped billions in Iraq etc.) millions of weapons unaccounted for and plenty of other waste like a building a ship of 13 billion (actual budgeted cost about half) an airplane which is useless, for 400 million a piece, which when ordered was budgeted for about 19o million a piece; which is also way too much; the French and Sweden built much better planes for one fifth of the that price as well with much better aerodynamics and payloads. So wake up AMC, our military nor the Pentagon ever wants to hear the word "efficiency" or "honesty" or " usefulness" or " book keeping" our 999 generals make sure they get their "cut" and keep our wars going in order to satisfy the billionaires or certain industry lobby's. If you think this wasteful industry provides a lot of jobs; sure, but for the wrong reasons. The same jobs can be had if all that wasted money would have been spent instead on infrastructure in this land. Open up your eyes for a change and accept reality; glorifying these corrupt crooks and their secret/slush funds without any decent accountancy is utterly naïve.
-
-
Are you sure you want to delete this post?
That begs the question "What other country in the world today is prepared to take over the role the USA plays in world finance today?" China, Russia, EU, not likely. Thee more pressing concerns this country faces today are, in no particular order, religion, the military, the police, an ignorant and self serving Congress, a voter base of undereducated numbskulls who are fear and bigotry of everyone and everything that doesn't look, act and sound like themselves. I'm sure Dutch and others can add to the list but this is a good start.
|