United States Heading towards a Depression?

It will be entertaining to see who celebrates 9.4% unemployment and brags about how their tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans saved the economy. Not surprised to see Breeze Wood on that list .

I was watching Anthony Weiner last night accusing the new Republican lead house of breaking their own principals by trying to add 1.1 trillion dollars to the deficit by repealing Obama care. Its the new talking point for the left. He actually tried to equate the accuracy of the CBO's prediction made on limited and partisan data, with the CBOs report on past spending which shows Obama has blown spending out of the water. In the mean time, the people of California celebrate the new Health Care bill as Blue cross hikes insurance premiums 59% this year(following last years 39% hike). Thanks Obama! More of the change we were looking for!

Newsflash Breeze. Even if unemployment magically drops to 8% by election day 2012, many people like Wiener will find themselves out of their offices. Inflation(5$ a gallon gas, 50% year of year health care cost hikes), falling wages, and a President who openly states Robert Gibb's $170,000 government salary is modest, should keep the fires burning nicely.

 

Should you be paying income tax, even if there's no law that requires it ?

[video=youtube;XZ1_GMWGo_I]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ1_GMWGo_I[/video]

 

So what you are saying is that democrats have saved us by adding 3.4 trillion dollars to our debt? Here's an interesting way of looking at things. Did you realize that 37 cents of ever dollar the US economy produced was borrowed from places like China?

Not exactly sure how gals such as yourself find this a good thing.

 

He's not an American, so I doubt it concerns him.

 

In my opinion, I think not. On the one hand, we have war spending that goes into the economy. On the other hand, we are spending about $150Billion per year on these wars out of a $6.7 Trillion budget (2010). That's 2% of the budget.

But $150 Billion is the same as what we spend on the Department of Agriculture every year. The US government spent $1.03 Trillion on Education.

In 2010, the US government spent $762 Billion on poverty programs. Employing people and getting that number down would make more of a difference.

Again, in my opinion - jobs for unskilled labor are the haven for lower- and middle-class people. I think that we've seen a mass exodus of jobs for unskilled labor to overseas and that's not coming back. It used to be that there were always jobs like building televisions, cars, toasters, etc. that a man could take to support his family. No more. Even if a company was ballsy enough to try, the unions would never allow the labor rate to be competitive.

Ask yourself this - say, you're a lower-income high school graduate with good grades and no college funds. Where do you get a job that pays well enough to support a family? There are only so many sales jobs available and applications for each opening are through the roof.

I think that we will see the Democrats vigorously defending programs where they are personally benefiting from the spending.

I was watching Bloomberg News this morning and Bernake was saying that we are not going to see any significant improvements in the economy until 2012 - maybe.

A recession is an economic bump in the road. A depression is when that economic bump is so wide and deep that you have to spend a long time on the bottom of it.

Unfortunately, the USA is in a DEPRESSION.

 

Of course it does. After all, where do you think that debt is coming from? He like so many outside of this country depend on our debt.

 

The internet is full of good info. Thanks for pointing this one out, it'll save me a bundle when the money from Nigeria gets here.

 

......but Republicans are making an exception to their own rules for the repeal bill.


The billion dollar question is: - If the Republicans do not believe repeal of the Historic healthcare legislation will increase the National deficit, why are they making an exception to their own rules prohibiting passage of legislation that will increase the deficit?

....as usual, their principals and policies have no backbone excluding how to get elected.

They deserve no Honeymoon as their initial legislative initiative is simply a childish respite for their own lack of meaningful legislation when last in charge with the Previous Administration.

 

When Obama is president:

When all this started and Bush was president:

LOL man can't stop laughing at you republicans droids, these are posts just from the first 5 pages of this thread (Thanks Julian), I bet there hundreds of such posts till November 4, 2008.

 

All these years I have seen you in the forum, I never thought you were gay. "Mia" taking it for granted, a username, seems your real night name. Upon reading all those I can't imagine how big of a troll you are. Now it's understandable why you hate gworld so much. Do me a favor and next time before writing nonsense be sure you are wearing your panty hose and do please admit to your girlfriend that your gay since its unfair. Very unfair.

I will unsubscribe from this thread when you admit that your gay, liar and a coward.

 

The reactionaries have little accountability for their illicit convictions than their own grandizement, seeking unearned rewards and slander what they are unable to accomplish themselves.

 

Republicans nor Democrats can do anything that their donors would not want done. Why do you think otherwise ? By the way, that is a TRillion dollar question.


The democrats just got through printing up another 600 to 800 billion to add to the other billions that were printed up under the previous somewhat Republican regime. It is amazing to me that people can not see they are on the same side. Do you think that just because a Republican controlled government prints up billions that it is somehow worse than a Democrat controlled government doing the same thing ? Nah...

 

This has been true for a while. I thought this list of Obama Czars was pretty amusing. Would be nice to see the associated list of salaries:

 

Are you saying that different people are responsible for different areas of government policies? This might be the discovery of the century, the government is involved in different areas and different people are responsible for each section, it is amazing. Only fox news could discover something like this.

 

Not a surprising attitude for a Marxist like yourself who believes the government is responsible for every aspect of a private citizens life. I doubt the framers of the constitution ever saw things such as AIDS, Auto Recovery, California Water, Climate, Domestic Violence, Faith-Based organizations, FCC Diversity, and Manufacturing as part of the scope of the responsibility of the Federal Government.

Furthermore, many of these appointees are newly created job openings for friends of the commander and chief. Don't feel like I'm singling Obama out here, Bush did a lot of the same thing. Layer upon layer of bureaucracy with multiple agencies working inefficiently on the same tasks.

Even within the czar list there is overlap. We have the Energy and Environment Czar, Oil Spill Escrow Fund Czar and the Oil Spill Czar, each with their own staff, budget and offices that will probably never go away long after any memory of the oil spill has faded. What would be so difficult about leaving that task in the hands of the EPA, an organization created for that exact purpose?

Same story for the 9/11 Health czar, AIDS czar, Health Czar. Don't we already have a Health and Human Services department headed up by Cathlene Sebilius(Communist)?

Then we have just random people appointed with obscure titles without much meaning at all. Great Lakes Czar? Information Czar? Central Region Czar? Are they just making this sh*t up?

It must be nice to give your buddies like Cass Sunstien cushy high paying jobs in the government without having to push any of it through congress. Just make up a title and presto, instant government job. Notice how many of those folks wandered on to Ambassadorships after leaving their posts. Ambassadorship used to be the cushy kick back government job for your friends. I guess there were more campaign contributors and "friends" than there were countries needing ambassadors.

 

I am sure you and mia will solve the AIDS problem by yourself but I am afraid your solution will be "let them die, who cares the gays die". mia with his depth of knowledge about economy just joins all the US corporations and solves their problem since he is such a genius when it comes to economy as we can see in a couple of post above when helvetti quoted him.

I have never seen anyone in US government who has a job title called Czar, have you? It seems it is just a made up word by fox news but since you are so jealous that some government employee have given this title by fox news, hereby, I appoint you and all your friends as BS Czar.

 

I know, I know.You believe it is the government's job to cure AIDS. You are just confirming what I stated your opinion would be on my last post.

So having no argument against the necessity or value of such appointments, you've changed topics to the use of the word "Czar". Fine. I accept your admission of defeat on the previous topic. Lets talk about the word Czar.

The use of the word in application to a presidential appointee goes all the way back to FDR, which predates Fox News by quite a bit. For a more recent reference where someone has used the word, you might have a look at whitehouse.gov

Notice how he uses the word coordinator interchangeably with the word Czar. Our current president is a master in the study of New Speak, so catching him use the word Czar in reference to his appointees has become more difficult of recent. Most newsies outside of Fox are not so stupid as to not pick up the tells that indicate a Czar appointment. The person usually has an official job title with the word "Coordinator" in it. The person is never confirmed by congress, though directly appointed by the President. Invariably, the job never existed prior to the appointment. Also, the scope of the person's responsibility, authority, and chain of command are always nebulous. Take the president's quote above for instance:

Who does this person directly report to? The president, or Secretary Napolitano? Depends on how you define accountable vs. how you define responsible, no? This is the kind of pure BS double speak we get from our liar and chief on a daily basis. Its no wonder his credibility is in the sewer domestically and abroad.

 

When Mia was quoted, it was from back in 2007. He has yet to address it, but wanted people to notice the dates of when Mia was quoted. One was from - - - Dec 29th 2007.

 

US recession "officially" started at end of 2007 but any one with half a brain could see the writing on the wall long before that as you can read other members posts in the same page that are describing the problem with economy and what was your friend response to all the problem signs:

Last line is just pure GENIUS to say when U.S. recession was already started.

 

I have not seen those... and things are probably not going to get better. I am hoping... but history says otherwise.