[Ray9]

The United States made a hard left turn with Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" and from that day forward we began borrowing against the future. Medicare, medicaid, education programs, welfare and a few other heavy hitting entitlements are all supported and funded by borrowed money. A better word would probably be stolen. Money that can never be repaid is really stolen from those who eventually get stuck with the bill. Today few would argue that the "Great Society" has been anything but a dismal failure. Millions of Americans have become multi-generational dependants of entitlement programs that have sapped the vitality of the national and local economies and in our time will destroy the ability of many of our largest cities to operate within a budget and maintain vital services. You see, the future we borrowed against is here and the bill is due now. Someone actually has to work and earn money that can be taxed to pay for those who do not work and earn no money. Because the future is here the taxes to maintain our Great Society will now have to be stolen directly from the pockets of those who still hold jobs. The employment situation in the United States is grave and will worsen as the economy continues to falter. Fewer and fewer citizens will have to be taxed more and more.

Incredibly, the cardboard-cut-out we have as a president and his clueless administration are on the brink of the single largest government expansion(national healthcare) since the establishment of the republic. What future will they borrow against?

[Haphazard]

All I am hearing on these boards is that the future for the United States is hopeless and on the verge to collapse. It's easy to give up, though, isn't it?

With a near 20% un/underemployment figure (adjusted), give us a reason not to give up -- because, as we all know, 99.9999% of politics and economics is mental.

[Night Runner]

Because we are the ones with printing presses. We may devalue the dollar, but we'll never run out of money.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


There have always been people who said that "the future for the United States is hopeless and on the verge to collapse" - I'm sure there were some doomsayers even in the middle of the economic boom of the 1950s. Eventually, things will get better. The only question is when...

[MrFlaneur]

America is the new Rome. It's not going anywhere. Technologically and ideologically other countries will catch up, but America will always be a large part of the world in many respects.

[blueback]

Well, to be entirely accurate you're pretending you can predict the future.

We've made great strides in efficiency through innovation, and all signs point to a hocky-stick curve in our near future. Maybe we'll innovate to the point where it really doesn't take much work at all to provide for absolutely everyone. A future like that would be hard to understand from a perspective of scarcity, but it could wipe out our debt.

Also, the human race has been in tight spots before, and we haven't destroyed ourselves yet. Maybe we need to make the mistake of vastly overleveraging ourselves before we'll learn our lesson and organize things properly. Most individuals seem to need to personally experience that lesson, so why not humanity as a whole?

Just because we're making a mistake doesn't mean it's going to destroy us.

[Arkeph]

Ditto, although the problems outlined by Ray9 are much less clear cut than they appear.

Sure, we've got plenty of debt, but (a) much of it is owed to entities in the US and (b) the interest payments pale in comparison to the federal budget's big-ticket items--defense, social security, and medicare. It complicates matters, but is not a driving factor in our demise.

While our entitlement programs are expensive, the unavoidable fact of the matter is that our population is aging, which is straining entitlement budgets that could, in an alternate universe, be bolstered with the money we would otherwise spend on defense and cleaning up after corporate malfeasance. Perhaps we should declare war on age-related illnesses...

The future is brighter than our past--if we choose to make it so. Technology and hard work will get us there, if we let them. Ultimately, the only thing that can reverse the trend of prosperity is for people to give up on the ideal of a peaceful and prosperous country ruled by just and effective laws. I only worry when I see/hear people giving up on that ideal.

I don't know if words alone can evoke the vitality of hope anymore, but actions certainly can and do.

[Ray9]

	While our entitlement programs are expensive, the unavoidable fact of the matter is that our population is aging, which is straining entitlement budgets that could, in an alternate universe, be bolstered with the money we would otherwise spend on defense and cleaning up after corporate malfeasance. Perhaps we should declare war on age-related illnesses...

There is a clear difference between these entitlement programs. Social Security is "imposed" on our population by government to ensure that older Americans do not descend into indengency as they leave the workforce due to the infirmities of aging. The same is true for Medicare, it is imposed. Welfare on the other hand, was installed to alter the behavior of healthy, able-bodied citizens to produce an outcome desired by a narrow group of amateur, left-wing social engineers comprised of academicians and politicians. Social Security has been systematically looted almost since its inception to provide funds for all sorts of things it was not intended to support. In other words, the government has been stealing money from the helpless elderly to finance the fanciful, left-wing expectations of groupism and identity politics. The elderly were forced to pay into this boondoggle and of course being old and infirm they have little recourse to object or mount any real opposition.


Now that the future is here the cards are on the table and it's one group against another. One group was forced into its predicament, the other is in it's position by choice. Dependence fosters dependence. The only winner in this sham is the goverment which has grown exponentially and has become expert at borrowing/stealing money from its citizens. As usual, the house wins and the elderly, who were forced to gamble in this game of chance will be the big losers while the gambling addicts will continue to enjoy their encouraged status as the favored group. Until the shit hits the fan that is.

[RBM]

	Originally Posted by Ray9
	Now that the future is here the cards are on the table and it's one group against another

If you so choose to be 'against'. I don't.

[thod]

The problem with the poor elderly argument is that it does not hold. The vast majority of all assets are held by the elderly. The young having had no time to acquire assets and not having inherited have few.

When the old were young they were able to buy a house, raise a family etc all on a single working class male's income. Today's young cannot even afford a house on a single income and they have no job security either. They cannot afford to raise families until into their 30's with both adults working. The old say they were promised pensions, what they mean is they promised themselves pensions. The young were not born and had no say in it. So the old try to pass it on to the young. The old ran up the national debt and once again try to pass it on.

The young should not and can not accept the burden that the expectations of the elderly imposes. The next generation must be born and raised. Anything that prevents the young doing that must be removed. The elderly have had their time, they are useless and redundant. The children are the future and the priority of the young.

[blueback]

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Social Security is "imposed" on our population by government to ensure that older Americans do not descend into indengency as they leave the workforce due to the infirmities of aging. The same is true for Medicare, it is imposed.

Well, in the sense that the voters support it, it is imposed by the majority on the minority. But it's not imposed by the government on the citizens. If it was onerous enough to merit disapproval by the majority we would have gotten rid of it. Since we haven't, that must mean that the average citizen thinks it is a good idea to help out the elderly, even if that means being taxed. That is not an imposition.

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Welfare on the other hand, was installed to alter the behavior of healthy, able-bodied citizens to produce an outcome desired by a narrow group of amateur, left-wing social engineers comprised of academicians and politicians.

Again, the only reason it exists is its wide-spread support. A "narrow group" didn't vote for it. Unless you're claiming that the vote of the population doesn't matter at all? But that would simply be wrong, so you can't be saying that, right?

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Social Security has been systematically looted almost since its inception to provide funds for all sorts of things it was not intended to support.

That is true.

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	In other words, the government has been stealing money from the helpless elderly to finance the fanciful, left-wing expectations of groupism and identity politics.

So, according to your logic, the government knowingly imposed taxes on workers so that a percentage of those taxes could be diverted from their stated purpose to other areas, specifically "groupism and identity politics?" It's amazing that those left-wingers could get away with such a massive and illegal swindle in a center-right country.

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The elderly were forced to pay into this boondoggle and of course being old and infirm they have little recourse to object or mount any real opposition.

Oh my God. I LOLed. The elderly have always voted in larger percentages than the young.

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Now that the future is here the cards are on the table and it's one group against another. One group was forced into its predicament, the other is in it's position by choice.

Wait, do you mean the elderly were forced into the situation and the young are in it by choice?

Cuz, you know, that would be precisely the opposite of reality. The elderly have been voting (or at least had the opportunity to vote) for the entire time the situation has developed. The young, on the other hand, only just got here and have to deal with what the situation has become.

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Dependence fosters dependence. The only winner in this sham is the goverment which has grown exponentially and has become expert at borrowing/stealing money from its citizens.

Well, you're overstating, but I agree in principle. The government has grown too large and the citizenry too complacent.

	Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	As usual, the house wins and the elderly, who were forced to gamble in this game of chance will be the big losers while the gambling addicts will continue to enjoy their encouraged status as the favored group. Until the shit hits the fan that is.

Forced to gamble, huh? I don't think that's even possible.

[animeia]

That's why you push forward and work towards a higher level of education

[Falconscraper]

Originally Posted by Ray9 To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The United States made a hard left turn with Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" and from that day forward we began borrowing against the future. Medicare, medicaid, education programs, welfare and a few other heavy hitting entitlements are all supported and funded by borrowed money. A better word would probably be stolen. Money that can never be repaid is really stolen from those who eventually get stuck with the bill. Today few would argue that the "Great Society" has been anything but a dismal failure. Millions of Americans have become multi-generational dependants of entitlement programs that have sapped the vitality of the national and local economies and in our time will destroy the ability of many of our largest cities to operate within a budget and maintain vital services. You see, the future we borrowed against is here and the bill is due now. Someone actually has to work and earn money that can be taxed to pay for those who do not work and earn no money. Because the future is here the taxes to maintain our Great Society will now have to be stolen directly from the pockets of those who still hold jobs. The employment situation in the United States is grave and will worsen as the economy continues to falter. Fewer and fewer citizens will have to be taxed more and more. Incredibly, the cardboard-cut-out we have as a president and his clueless administration are on the brink of the single largest government expansion(national healthcare) since the establishment of the republic. What future will they borrow against?

The idea that fewer and fewer people will be taxed seems to be the truth. But of course applicants who are qualified for the position do not get the position for no other reason than a maximum number of positions. They are going to have to be abstractly put in a waiting line by feeding them with the higher wages that are being paid because of fewer employees. The unqualified,on the other hand, is just hurtful. The future,though, is a large number of people qualified and unemployed.

[INTJRyan]

How about we cut the biggest entitlement program of all: defense spending?

/crickets

But but but that money goes to corporations, who might one day employ us, and who always have our best interest in mind.

[boldbidder]

	Originally Posted by INTJRyan To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	How about we cut the biggest entitlement program of all: defense spending?

Here here. But I gotta have my sweet sweet F-22 Raptors back though
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


All jokes aside, all the opining about the debt and entitlements will easily be fixed when the fish hits the shan. Just like annoying family members do; we renig on our promises to ourselves. Defense -50% Social Security -50%, etc... Obviously that'll be painful beyond belief, but when the alternative is defaulting as a nation the decision becomes pretty easy imo.

[blueback]

	Originally Posted by INTJRyan To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	How about we cut the biggest entitlement program of all: defense spending?

Defense is the majority of the discretionary budget.
However, 60% of the total budget is mandatory; social security, medicare/medicade, and other entitelment programs.

Also, in what world is defense spending an entitlement program? Are you trying to obliquely say it's medicare for corporations?

[Distance]

Why is the Obama Administration being blamed for the hole that the Bush Adminstration put the country into?

Bush was absolutely clueless about Economics. At least Obama shows he has knowledge of the fundamentals.

As well, if the 8 years of Bush was so perfect, why wasn't the debt paid down during these 8 years? For that matter, take a look at this chart. Notice how debt rises during each red President's tenure and falls with each blue President's tenure, except during the bailouts of the Great Depression and now, Obama bailing as fast as he can so the U.S. doesn't fall into another Great Depression.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[INTJRyan]

	Originally Posted by blueback To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Also, in what world is defense spending an entitlement program? Are you trying to obliquely say it's medicare for corporations?

In the world of reality. No, you are right, politicians are lined up around the block calling for the defense budget to be slashed. It's discretionary! Actually, it's political kryptonite and those calling for major defense spending cuts, if they even existed, would be promptly labeled as "weak on terror" by the warhawks. Defense spending increased by 95 billion from 2005 to 2007. This increase, the increase alone, is more than the entire defense budget of any country outside of China.

Instead of reigning in this spending which mainly benefits shareholders and CEOs, cuts always come from those who need it most, and whose voices are not as loud as those making pointless weaponry that will never be used.

[Falconscraper]

The Obama Administration is not helping the debt yet, that's for sure.

[JocktheMotie]

In my lifetime, I know I will see paradigm shifts in economics, the education system, and energy tech. I think education happens first. I'm thinking it's about 25 years until we get a seamless conscious interface with computers and information. Intelligence and learning will be redefined. It will be fun.

[INTJRyan]

So where do we cut?


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Causa Mortis]

	Originally Posted by INTJRyan To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	So where do we cut? To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

1. National defense, in half
a. Ending Iraq um...yesterday.
2. The "D" part of the FDA, gone, doing more harm than good, and probably the "F" part as well since its not terribly hard to recognize a bad can of beans.
3. The pill bill
4. Subsidies and corporate welfare of any kind.
5. Reduction of Social Security increases to the CPI instead of wages
6. Reduction in Medicare and Medicaid to EU level payments

That's a solid 750 billion right there, most of which is delivering little/no value to average citizens. Since short term interest rates are so low, there's no hurry, but when they begin to creep up it will be time to do so.

[Blse]

	Originally Posted by INTJRyan To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	So where do we cut? [HIDE="Graph."] To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. [/HIDE]

Well yes, the most popular program are also the costliest because they deliver the most widely felt benefits to voters (which in turn prevents cuts to them).

[Distance]

National defense is a double-edged blade. It garners both International approval and condemnation. The expectation of the U.S., since it's the dominant military power is that it will help to combat world "evils". Where it's being condemned is that it only helps when it's beneficial to them.

If the U.S. cuts back on National Defense, it will need to amend its foreign policies using diplomacy to settle more disagreements and reduce its interference in other sovereign nations, to advance its personal agendas. Of course this will mean that the American people will have to reduce their expectations.

As it stands, there are now two superpowers. China and the U.S.

[Anhedonic Lake]

	Originally Posted by thod To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	The young should not and can not accept the burden that the expectations of the elderly imposes. The next generation must be born and raised. Anything that prevents the young doing that must be removed. The elderly have had their time, they are useless and redundant. The children are the future and the priority of the young.

Alot of people say that until they're old themselves. Some people end up learning empathy the hard way,which is rather sad - albeit amusing.

[Holiman]

China isnt a superpower.

The military is overspending ALOT!

Our military is and has been working to fight a war that will never come against an enemy that doesnt exist. We build fighter jets that have no equal and then attempt to outdo them. We need a military that is down to earth and less futuristic. Less attention to gadgets and more work on proven technology and grounded on function over excitement. This is a problem with car companies and most likely our manufacturing problems as well.


Ray does have a point here though. The US is indeed in trouble our schools rank at the bottom of science and math and are falling further behind, our education system however is one of the most expensive in the world. The biggest issue is the amount of people who wave flags and worry about terrorism when apathy and education are our biggest concerns.