“sequestration”

[Lovely Lane]

What is this “sequestration” and why is it loathed by both parties?
Maybe we should look at it as another obstacle course that Congress must work through, or not. Why Washington's "Fiscal Cliff" is a Myth | BillMoyers.com

Seems to me so many fear what they do not understand fueled by media and special interest groups. It isn't the end-of-the-world as far as I'm concerned, just another day on Capital Hill.

 

[miamited]

Hi LL,

Well, as with most all political issues, the questions to be answered are: Who's telling the truth? Who really understands all the complexities that are involved in the workings of an economy?

Surely, everyone has their 'opinions' based on their 'understanding' of the necessary facts. But is their's correct?

We have one side telling us that we are 17 trillion dollars in debt and that that is going to eventually become an unsustainable debt load that is leading us to a 'cliff'. Then we have the other side telling us that no, there is in fact, no such 'cliff'.

Oh, who to believe? Can we really continue to sell and maintain 17 trillion dollars in debt and also let it continue to grow by billions of dollars every day? Will it someday reach 100 trillion? Will it someday reach 200 trillion if we don't bite the bullet and retire much of it? Will everything go on just fine as Mr. Moyer would teach us?

Does he really understand the intracacies of an economy and the drain of debt payments and debt load to an economy?

Or, are those who cry that we need to retire much of our debt the one's who don't understand the intracacies of an economy and the drain of debt payments and debt load to an economy.

Who is right? Who is telling the truth?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Lovely Lane]

I would hope that the government agencies such as Congressional Budget Office, Office of Management and Budget among others would be able to give direction.
It all comes down to the politicians, I expect another band-aid will be used.

Since 2008, the 'Iceland model' seems very appealing.

 

[miamited]

Hi LL,

Well, yes, but Iceland certainly went over a 'cliff'.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Steve Petersen]

I would hope that the government agencies such as Congressional Budget Office, Office of Management and Budget among others would be able to give direction.
It all comes down to the politicians, I expect another band-aid will be used.

Since 2008, the 'Iceland model' seems very appealing.

Or the President's own debt commission...which he ignored.

 

[Lovely Lane]

Hi LL,

Well, yes, but Iceland certainly went over a 'cliff'.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Your right, but it seems as though that proverbial cliff made Iceland government a better government for the people from what little I know through a few articles.

I'm thinking that our guy's on Capitol Hill will not do any heavy lifting but put a patch on the issue.

 

[Lovely Lane]

Or the President's own debt commission...which he ignored.

was it only Obama who could have made these changes? Or was it suppose to be a effort made by House and Senate to WH?

 

[LostFarmer]

Both parties got us into this mess and neither party will get us out. The majority of both parties 'elected to DC' and many in the agencies want a one world government and to do so the current USA monetary system must fail. The 2 parties do not agree on the type of world government but it will be bad.

17 trillion dollars in debt or so, 60 trillion in unfunded mandates or so , plus 100 trillion or so in derivatives 'what ever they are' and we, the working / poor people are had.

The god of this world is in very good control of the situation, so all will be good ,NOT.

My $.02 input.

 

[HiLo]

What has been missing from the argument is that debt can be a good thing. One must spend money, to make money. The problem lies in the investment verses ROI. The GOP likes to invest in military spending and corporate welfare. The dems like to invest in safety nets, new technology and education.

Historically, the Dems platform yields a much higher ROI through advancements in technology, science and a highly educated workforce. While the GOP platform typically makes the rich, richer and the military unnecessarily bloated, while leaving us far behind in education and new technologies.

On a side note, this is what made Romney's argument to be president so irrational. He's a master at investing, yet campaigned against investments.

 

[LostFarmer]

HiLo- if you think a debt of 100% + of GDP is a good thing, I must ask just what monetary system you are speaking of ? The people that owns the notes on the debt will want their $$ back with interest some day. The gov. can only take money by force from others, the only way they make money is with the printing press for the most part.

The gov must spend money to make money is a farce, it is only a negative for the most part. For every $1 they steal, they keep $.75 or so for most programs on over head , a very poor return.

Yep Obams's investment with are hard earned tax $$ for companies that went bankrupt was a great return, corporate welfare at is best. Yep great stuff, I will say the same for the GOP crap.

The gov. investment in the so called safety net , makes the god of this world very happy. Does the gov. give the WORD with the aid ? If not the gov. 'man' gets the glory not the true GOD.
Ones' emotions is tied to the god of this world not the true GOD. think of why Adam and Eve ate the 'apple', it looked good to eat 'emotion'. I know it is a simplification.

see you all in a week.
GOD Bless.

 

[Lovely Lane]

HiLo- if you think a debt of 100% + of GDP is a good thing, I must ask just what monetary system you are speaking of ? The people that owns the notes on the debt will want their $$ back with interest some day. The gov. can only take money by force from others, the only way they make money is with the printing press for the most part.

The gov must spend money to make money is a farce, it is only a negative for the most part. For every $1 they steal, they keep $.75 or so for most programs on over head , a very poor return.

Yep Obams's investment with are hard earned tax $$ for companies that went bankrupt was a great return, corporate welfare at is best. Yep great stuff, I will say the same for the GOP crap.

The gov. investment in the so called safety net , makes the god of this world very happy. Does the gov. give the WORD with the aid ? If not the gov. 'man' gets the glory not the true GOD.
Ones' emotions is tied to the god of this world not the true GOD. think of why Adam and Eve ate the 'apple', it looked good to eat 'emotion'. I know it is a simplification.

see you all in a week.
GOD Bless.

Keynesian economics is a hard one to fully understand, which type of economic theory do yo subscribe to? I expect that which ever economic model one aspires to it expects that big business, Wall St, not to act as gamblers with customers investments through actions of deceit and fraud.

In one post you place blame on both parties and here it is Obama's fault of bankrupt companies. I believe we are better off than 4 years ago, and making improvements each month. FDIC took over failed banks and customers accounts were secured, Government took over Auto company where thousands of jobs saved, and a American product saved. Not just a car but all the smaller businesses that are supplying the Auto industry as well. These are a few of good things from Obama Administration.

The 'safety net' is much needed. And a component of the social safety netting comes in form of Faith-based funding.
Speaking of one's emotions, it appears that is what you are doing. How you blamed Adam & Eve eating emotion is the same as you blaming Obama for all the ill's in USA. It just doesn't work out that way. (as I see it). Perhaps there is much more to the story, I tend to think so.

 

[Albion]

Historically, the Dems platform yields a much higher ROI through advancements in technology, science and a highly educated workforce. While the GOP platform typically makes the rich, richer and the military unnecessarily bloated

No one who's been paying attention could believe that. The technological advances in the non-military area that are the result of defense spending are too numerous to mention, while the billions that we've thrown at "education" has paid off in steadily declining rates of learning and growing numbers of drop-outs.

On a side note, this is what made Romney's argument to be president so irrational. He's a master at investing, yet campaigned against investments.

I think it would be fairer to say he campaigned against bad investments. You're right that it would take someone skilled in investments, like Romney, to know the difference.

 

[Lovely Lane]

No one who's been paying attention could believe that. The technological advances in the non-military area that are the result of defense spending are too numerous to mention, while the billions that we've thrown at "education" has paid off in steadily declining rates of learning and growing numbers of drop-outs.

Are you sure about that? I have always read and heard that the technological innovations stemmed more from NASA and R&D in Universities.

I think it would be fairer to say he campaigned against bad investments. You're right that it would take someone skilled in investments, like Romney, to know the difference

only if it is the goal of USA to build up China as Romney had and would continue to do, in the name of private enterprise of course.