The US Economy

[rahmota]

Ok hows this for debateable.....The Economy.

Everybody talks about it. Everybody is affected by it. But doing anythig about it seems to be the worst possible thign a person can do if it involves either raising taxes on the rich or throwing more controls on the way business is done.

I mean socialism, communism or controlled capitalism is right up there with anti-christ in the hatred department. But free market cpaitalism with no restrictions on how businesses may rape plundar and pillage people is sung hosanas so far up their butts its coming out their nose.

Right now we've been seeing the results of how the way the republicans have been letting business get away with downright murder is affecting things. We went from a budget surplus to a bigger debt than we have had. The rich are still getting richer the poor are hurting worse than ever before and the middle class is bent so far over they are about out of K-Y. Businesses are laying people off. We have the highest unemployed rate in a long long time.

The housing issues. The stock market. And while yeah according to the definition of economists and the government we are not in a recession just how bad do people have to be hurt before they recognize that a lot of the bloated lies that our economy is funded by and founded on are not putting bread on a lot of people's tables. That stocks are not money they are potential money. And you cant spend potential money.

I've mentioend before that I'm not a capitalist. I had issues with my economy professor in college because I refused to obey the edicts and sing the hosannas of free market capitalism and declare any governmental controls to be evil from teh ninth dimension. But it is giongn to come a time when somethign is goign to have to be done. Uncontrolled debt and unchecked expansion cannot continue indefinately. If a private citizen managed their money the way the government does or some businesses do then we'd be under the poor house or at least a overpass.

I think we need a drastic and dramatic overhaul of the way business is done. And soon before things get too bad. Reign in a lot of this BS goign on right now. Institute price controls, wage controls. Bring a lot of the CEOS, athletes, politicians, and movie stars salaries back into alignment with how much real work they do.

Right now our money is just an IOU from the government. Which means its only as good as the government says it is. This is not a good thing. having somethign real and tangible to back the money other than the good name of the government and the business world is not a bad idea. I mean just printing more IOUs results in a lot of the inflation of prices we see in the world now.

I mean what logical and reasonable cause is there for something to increase its price if there is no other factors other than the simple pure greed of the company doing it or the IOU is worth less. I mean look at the price of corn based products and soybean based products. People claim the increase in prices is because the farmers are making more. NO! That is BS. I got paid just marginally more last year than I did the year before. But my expenses went up faster than my profits. If things keep goign I may give up on farming and just rent the land out and let someone else deal with it.

Anyhow. This country is goign down the tubes. We have religious zealots tryig to control the way people think and feel. We have companies trying to lie cheat and steal the last dollar out of your wallet. We have clueless politicians vying to see how much popular power they can get ahold of for their villas and estates. I swear it feels like the closing days of the Roman Republic and the start of the Roman Empire all over again.

But back to the economy. FDR put forth several thigns that helped bring this country out of the Depression. If WWII hadnt come around it would have taken a bit longer but they would have worked. WWII did jumpstart the economy back then a lot quicker and a lot of economists do give all the credit to the war and none to FDR's programs. Some even say that they were unamerican and worsened the depression. (My former professor was one of them). And speakign of the Great Depression anyone else note some of the same trends coming around this time? Great amounts of personal debt. Excesses by big business. The whole buy til it hurts attitude fostered by King George. The drought affecting things. Fuel prices.

Is there anythign that can be done? I mean I'm all for removing the greed factor from the economy. But it is so entrentched right now and the way the power elite run things it wouldnt be easy to do so. I love this coutry and I wouldnt want to give up the individual rights and liberties but I dont see how they apply to business. Businesses are not people and do not deserve much of the bill of rights. Especially the megacorps. So without dismantling everything and rebuilding it what are we goign to be able to do?

I'm sorry if this soudns redundant, unfocused or the rantigns of a lunatic but I'm a very fed up citizen. I would like to see this country live up to the lip service it has paid for itself over the years. Enough deficit spending. Enough payoffs and paybacks and imperialistic saber ratling. Defend the coury but fix our own yard up first before we go play in someone elses.

[Seshat]

Ok hows this for debateable.....The Economy.

I'm assuming you mean the US economy? Want one of the mods to change the thread title to 'The US Economy'?

[rahmota]

Seshat: Yeah that would work I guess. Although with the global trade and the way our markets and economy affects others I'm not sure what other title would be appropriate . I'll trust you to come up with something appropriate okay?

Anyhow throwing this definition out for consideration:
An economy is the manipulation of perceived values of resources and the means to acquire those resources.

[Seshat]

Okay. I set this one to be the US economy specifically, though it'll overlap with the international/global economy thread I'm about to start. But most of the material in your opening post is US-specific, so I figure making this one US-specific works best.

[Greenday]

Inflation...high
Unemployment...4.6%, which is 13.8 million people
National Debt...ridiculous
Worth of a dollar...somewhat low
Majority of the wealth in this country is held by a small minority
Public opinion run by the media
Largest consumer of cocaine
Government gaining more power and the people are losing power

Yep, we're screwed.

[protege]

Part of the problem, is that everybody wants high wages, but also low prices on things. Well, both things *cannot* exist. Wage increases are why prices go up--to pay for them, companies have to look somewhere, and pass that along to consumers in the form of higher prices.

What's going on with China, is that their labor rates are *much* lower than ours. As a result, many companies are choosing to manufacture goods over there. It's either that, or lose out to imported goods...and companies that lose, usually aren't around very long.

Part of the problem, was years ago, American companies got complacent with things, and didn't change fast enough. Look at what happened to our auto industry in the 1970s. When the gas shortages hit, the Big 4 (American Motors was still around then), were still turning out land yachts. Sales of smaller Japanese cars took off. People forget about the past, and then bitch about the future. Odd that the same thing would happen about 30 years later...

As to public opinion being controlled by the media...that's not unique to the US. Al-Jazeera has a reputation for their own "spin" on news stories...

[rahmota]

Seshat: thank you. this works out nicely. And yeah there may be some overlap but it should work out.

Greenday: yeah we're screwed. now what to do about it. Or is it too late and people need to just give up and let everythign fall and rebuild from the ashes? I'm becming perfectly content to do either one. I live on the farm. I'm tryign to become as self sufficient as the amish. If the economy fell they'd not notice much really. It would be a real non-event to them regardless of how much they appear to need us outsiders. But some people would be majorly shafted that are in the cities and unable to be as self-sufficient.

Take control of the situation? Everytime the government takes control of the economy people scream like the government are clubbing kittens to death with puppies on the 6 o clock news dressed in bondage gear. I mean its insane. And not to say that government intervention is the best idea with the current attitudes of the ones in power. Thats just what we need to give these people even more power.

Figure out some way for the system to be more stable. Less susceptable to greed and manipulation by those who do not have the best interests of the people at mind.

Protege: Thing is people want wages that are high enough to pay for the goods and services that are needed to survive AND have enough left over to have some liesure/fun activities. Also people look up the ivory tower and see the CEOs sitting around making 100-500 times what they the front line workers do. I don't agree with that either. One reason i would favor a maximum wage as well as a minimum wage.

You say that wages go up so prices have to go up? Well if you do not allow increases in prices through price controls then companies have to figure out a way to reduce their costs. This can be by removeing payroll. That would be bad as then they might get below a point where they can continue to produce and the company fails. Reducing quality well if quality standards are more stringent and enforced that can't happen. Reducing CEO and executive salaries down to somethign more sensible and reasonable would work to help in that regards. Using more productive technologies and being more responsive to changes would be beneficial to companies. Especially if a company which takes jobs out of the US is punished and held responsible for the removeal of those jobs. Say foricng the company to pay a million dollars to any displaced worker they fire due to outsourceing. Make it more painful for them to move a company out of the country than it would be to improve their conditions here.

anyhow. About the value of things. All value is perceived. I can go out to the chicken coop and get an egg. That egg is worth what? Its 1 egg. That can be my breakfast tomorrow. i can take it down to the Amish and barter it for maybe a stick of butter or some honey candy. 1 egg doesnt get much. To a starving person that egg could be worth more than their car. It would be dishonorable though to take the car in response to that though because it is a chicken egg. It is worth an egg. I could charge say 1 dollar for 1 egg. In a year under inflation supposedly just because time has passed that egg is now worth a 1.50$ why? Its still an egg. the chickens are not doing any more work. The cost related to the chickens hasnt gone up. But businesses say they can charge more just because time has passed.

and as for the public being controlled by the media thats old news. Look at the Yellow Journalism and the way thigns where manipulated for the Spanish American War. the media sells drama. Supposedly just the facts wont sell anything. One reason why newsmedia should be legally restricted in not making a profit off the news. Only the facts. no editorializing or spinning anything. too bad there arnt really vulcans. bring them in to run all the news media.

Anyhow. given that we the people are screwed as has been stated earlier. What can we do about it? What are you doing about it? Why should we worry?

[rahmota]

Oh man I just saw this on the news tonight. Exxon Mobil made 40 BILLION dollars in Profits over the last year. 11 BILLION of that in the last quarter!!!!!:mad: Thats a profit return of 65%. You cannot tell me that these bastards are not doing this on purpose to try and rape people as much as they possibly can. And not only that but they receive SUBSIDIES!

I mean yeah farmers get subsidies as well but for the most part not even close to the same degree of subsidiy as the Oil Companies. When a company is making 40 billion dollars in profit they are not hurting for money and do not need to be subsidized. When they make 40 BILLION in profits they are doing somethign immoral, illegal, indecent or all of the above.

What they do need to be done is brought under control and forced to set their prices more fairly. This is why I would not cry one bit to see the Oil companies nationalized and run for the common good. Impose some price and profit controls on them.

And people wonder why I keep threatening to go Amish and tell the world to eff off!:mad:

[Boozy]

I mean yeah farmers get subsidies as well but for the most part not even close to the same degree of subsidiy as the Oil Companies.

Maybe not, but American farmers are the most heavily subsidized in the world. The US dumps cheap food on the world market at heavy losses. Small agricultural nations can't compete. What worse is that imported food from the US is often cheaper than homegrown food in many places. This is immoral and environmentally reckless behaviour.

Some of these subsidies are a direct violation of numerous trade agreements, including NAFTA. The US thumbs their nose at trade agreements they willingly entered into, and the World Trade Organization does nothing.

The WTO is in the pockets of US corporations anyway. But I'll spare you all and save that rant for another thread. ;)

This is probably a sore point with me. My dad's a Canadian farmer.

[rahmota]

Boozy:Well yeah I suppose so. Subsidies are one of the most contentious thigns in the economic picture in america. I personally do not get any federal or state monies for my farm. So I can agree that the programs are rather screwed up.

then again what isnt any more.

[AFPheonix]

It's really only the big farmers who farm corn and wheat who benefit from the farm subsidies. Up until this most recent bill, the veggie farmers and others in California and states other than the midwestern ones weren't getting anything.

Futhermore, the way the subsidies work make it so farmers have to farm larger and larger tracts of land to get by, buying out their neighbors who leave town. It's part of the reason why small towns are dying off in the middle of our country.

It also contributes to the homogenizing of our food supply into corn-based or refined flour-based foods, rather than a variety of good vegetables available everywhere.

But the farm lobby is a powerful ones. The very people who do not benefit from the subsidies are the ones held up as the reason to continue them. It's dirty politics that helps no one.

[Boozy]

Subsidies are one of the most contentious thigns in the economic picture in america. I personally do not get any federal or state monies for my farm.

Of course you don't. You're not a rich corporation. Honest, hard-working family farmers still get screwed.

And AFPheonix is right that subsidies are hurting America too, not just the international community.

[rahmota]

AFP/Boozy: You are very correct in your assessment of things. I have 64 acres total and of them 50 are agrable. So I do not own enough land to qualify for most of the programs and the programs I do qualify for would take too much land out of production to make it worth while.

This whole coutry is effed up the stovepipe unless you are rich and powerful corporate big wigs. So whens the next revolution?

I mean a company makes a 40 BILLION dollar profit and there is no investigation or outcry by those in power that the company is doing anythign wrong immoral or illegal is just an example of how its okay to rape plundar and pillage if you're rich and corporate and cronies of the King.

[daleduke17]

Rahmota -

I agree about Exxon/Mobil and them making 40 Billion in profits. I don't get gas at any Mobil stations, kind of in protest (now, if the tank is empty and Mobil is the only station, I grin and bear it).

We're paying 3.xx/gallon for gas and they're crying "oh, if we can't raise prices we'll go broke." Bull. "Well, demand is so high and supply so low." Build another plant (if they can get past the EPA and other people).

I'll leave right now with the words of Christopher Titus: "Our President is a Texas oilman and we're wondering why we're paying 3.00/gallon".

[protege]

We're paying 3.xx/gallon for gas and they're crying "oh, if we can't raise prices we'll go broke." Bull. "Well, demand is so high and supply so low." Build another plant (if they can get past the EPA and other people).

That's *exactly* why the supply is low. There's simply not enough refineries here. In fact, one of the Saudi oil people was quoted as saying something like "why should we produce more? It's not like the Americans have the capacity to handle it." Demand is simply outstripping the capacity to produce...and, along with the damn oil speculators, is driving prices up. Keep in mind too, that not all of the oil goes into making gasoline--plenty goes to heating oil, paint, plastics, and other things we use.

As for CEO pay, that's usually subject to the board of directors. How they can justify getting paid that much, is up to the board. However, for some companies...those that were built from scratch, I don't know about you, but if I'm the one putting up my own cash (i.e., taking all the risk), shouldn't I be compensated for it, and be entitled to what's left? Why should I be penalized?

Also, if we make everyone's pay equal, what's the point in trying to move up, or to get ahead? I think eventually, that'll do some real damage--look at the failed companies in Eastern Europe and the former USSR. They had some serious problems--workers just didn't give a shit; no matter how hard they worked (or if they worked at all!) they still made the same amount. Even now, the idea of "working to better oneself" is a strange one in some areas over there--the former East Germany is having problems with severe unemployment now.

When the Iron Curtain came down, many of those companies failed. The only reason those companies survived...was because the governments restricted trade. That is, sales on most Western goods were restricted or banned. People suddenly had a choice. For example, they were no longer forced to by the two-stroke Trabants, Ladas, and other outdated cars. 10-year-old BMW and Mercedes became hot commodities. Now, the former Trabant factories in East Germany lie idled. Poland's FSO auto factory is now a GM facility, etc.

[Boozy]

As for CEO pay, that's usually subject to the board of directors. How they can justify getting paid that much, is up to the board. However, for some companies...those that were built from scratch, I don't know about you, but if I'm the one putting up my own cash (i.e., taking all the risk), shouldn't I be compensated for it, and be entitled to what's left? Why should I be penalized?

I don't have a problem with a company's board deciding how to divvy up profits. If they want to give a large chunk of the profits to the CEO, fine. That makes sense.

The problem here is where those profits are coming from. And if any amount of those profits comes from subsidies provided by the US taxpayer, we've got a problem.

The whole point of a subsidy is to help a companies whose products are vital to the growth of the economy sell that product cheaply to consumers. The subsidies are supposed to be passed along to the consumer in the form of savings. Taxpayers wouldn't mind their hard-earned dollars going towards oil companies, because they know they're getting it back at the pump.

But that isn't what's happening here. Frankly, I would think its hard for these execs to justify posting huge profits and still taking government assistance.

CEOs deserve profits that they have worked hard to earn honestly. But the relationship between Big Oil and this administration is anything but honest.

With that said, the price of gas is more of a supply and demand issue. Arguably, government subsidies have lowered the price of gas for Americans. Gas in the US is still among the cheapest in the world.

I personally believe that until gas gets to unmanageable prices, people will continue to buy SUVs, emissions will continue to go up, and there will be no drive to find alternative fuels.

The world may start to run out of oil as soon as 2040, and there are currently no viable energy alternatives. I'd like to see gas prices get to the point where there will be political pressure for real action.

[AFPheonix]

As for CEO pay, that's usually subject to the board of directors. How they can justify getting paid that much, is up to the board. However, for some companies...those that were built from scratch, I don't know about you, but if I'm the one putting up my own cash (i.e., taking all the risk), shouldn't I be compensated for it, and be entitled to what's left? Why should I be penalized?


That's not necessarily contentious, but when you have CEOs and CFOs like the ones at United who give themselves big fat bonuses after they've insisted that their pilots and other workers take pay cuts for the good of the company, that doesn't go down well for anyone, customers included.

[Boozy]

That's not necessarily contentious, but when you have CEOs and CFOs like the ones at United who give themselves big fat bonuses after they've insisted that their pilots and other workers take pay cuts for the good of the company, that doesn't go down well for anyone, customers included.

Ah yes, the airlines. Yet another industry subsisting on corporate welfare.

When I found out how much pilots for US airlines made, I swore I would never step foot on an American airplane again. These people are responsible for the safety of thousands of people every day, and some of them are on food stamps.

And these CEOs don't even have enough integrity to feel ashamed about what they're doing.

[rahmota]

There's simply not enough refineries here
Actually thats because the oil companies have idled several refineries. they keep taking different ones offline claiming one thign or another and manipulate the sytem to keep production down. If they would operate the existing plants, reopen some they closed back in the 80and 90s, there would be suffcient capacity.

As for demand if there was increased taxes on high consumption toys like the Viper or Hummers or other yuppie mobiles on the order of 400% then demand would drop. There is no reason why a vehcile cannot get 25+ mpg. Heck I have 3 vehciles with V8 engines and the worst economy I get is 23 mpg on them. Looking at the Hummer H2 the best it can hope for is 15 average.

Also increased bio-fuels production. Increased flex-fuel vehicle produciton. increased hybrid production. And making these vehicles AFFORDABLE for people to be able to switch out.

Also, if we make everyone's pay equal, what's the point in trying to move up, or to get ahead? I think eventually, that'll do some real damage--look at the failed companies in Eastern Europe and the former USSR. They had some serious problems-- There are quite a few other reasons to move upor get ahead. And it depends a lot on your definition of get ahead. if you define it as having more money than your neighbors of course you'll not like having fair an equitable wages for everyone. If you define it as having more honor, more responsibility, more accomplishments then fairand eqitable wagges are not goign to be a problem. Its heer simle human greed that we need to evolve past that is the problem.

And I'll give an alternative having a minimum and a maximum wage with a scale between. That wouold be set to be fair and equitable yet still give people who operate on the greed factor to be motivated enough to keep trying.

And like AFP said the problem here in the US is that most of the corporations have CEOs who are voting themselves huge freaking bonuses, packing golden parachutes while the front line employees are on food stamps tryign to figure out if alpo or kennel rations are better flavored. The disparity between the two can be a lot more disheartening than having all pay equal. If the company is in trouble then pay cuts should come from the top where most of the real deadwood is located and not the bottom like the greedy bastards are doing to people.

Profit is the money left over after all the blls have been paid. Maybe if the oil companies where to use this excessive profits they have been getting to repay the customers they've robbed or pay their employees then there wouldnt be a reason for people to get peeved at them. As it stands now I think any company that makes 40 billion in profits is obviously doing somethign wrong and that money should be siezed and distributed. Giving that 40 billion to the public would be a great stimulus to the economy.

but if I'm the one putting up my own cash (i.e., taking all the risk), shouldn't I be compensated for it, and be entitled to what's left? Why should I be penalized?

I have no problem with small businesses getting paid fairly for their work. Being a small businessman I can fully empathize. This isnt the problem or the case with most of the megacorps. These guys have not used one cent of their own money for these companies. They are taking more than their fair share of things for doing less work and less risk than a person on the front lines. A small business should not be penalized. A megacorp ceo who is taking more than their fair hare while their front line employees starve should be penalized.

And speakign of pay and front lines did you know that the captain of a US Navy Destroyer makes less than most middle management in America? That a commanding officer in the US Army makes less than most ceos? That many of the armed forces personnel are on public assistence?

have utterly no problem with government control of big businesses. Individual lives yes. Big buisness and megacorps need to be reigned in. People can do the right thing because it is the right thing or they can do the right thing because they are forced to. Since mega corps refuse to do the right thign because it is the right thing they must be forced to do the right thing.

[Rapscallion]

Forty billion amongst three hundred and fifty million people, the rough population of the US. About $114 dollars each, right?

The economy would be helped, I guess, but it wouldn't make such an individual difference.

Rapscallion

[Seshat]

I'd like to see companies being socially (and if necessary, legally) required to act for the benefit of all stakeholders. From some things I've read, that's the case in Europe.

Stakeholders are:
* shareholders and/or other people who fund the company's setup and/or expansions
* staff. all staff, including the casual labourer who cleans the offices at night. Not just the upper management.
* suppliers.
* customers.
* neighbours. No Bhopal cyanide leaks, please.
* future users of the world: eg, no left-over tailings dams that will eventually burst their walls when they're left untended.


I think a lot of the USA's problems would magically go away if somehow all corporations were magically changed to care about all stakeholders, not just the shareholders and the senior staff.

Not all the problems, sure. But a lot of them.

[rahmota]

Raps: Hey a hundred bucks is still a hundred bucks. It beats a poke in the eye. And considering how much the corporations take from the people it would be okay to me. Also since the "economic stimulus bill" is being handjobbed in congress its not like there much being done already for economic stimulus.

Tax rebates do not really do much for the really poor who generally do not make enough to honestly pay taxes in the end run anyhow.

Seshat: I would love to see a company do all that. But you try and enforce or enact any legislation to make a company do any of that in the US and you get screamed at, called traitorous dog, and people act like you grew a toothbrush moustache and are using puppies to club kittens to death.

Everythign comes down to the almighty dollar in this country. human lives are worthless, the future is worthless, the economy is worthless doing the right thing is worth less than worthless compared to making that extra dollar of profit.

Your comment on magically changing american corporations is about right. barring a total collapse of the american economy and civilization it probably would take magic to do it. And even then it probably would take the combined might of Harry Potter, Gandalf, Dumbledore and Elrond to do it.

[Seshat]

I can't back this prediction up at all, it's just instinct and looking-in-from-the-outside, but:

If the US (and any other country/culture, yes including Australia) allows corporations to run riot and be only concerned about the shareholders, rather than at least some stakeholders; the US (or other country) is going to end up failing. Probably spectacularly.

I don't know what the solution is, but I think someone is going to need to have the political will and political backing to pass those laws, and get them policed. The US has done some tougher stuff in its short history - reining in the railway barons was pretty rough, and neither passing nor repealing Prohibition were easy tasks either. Not to mention the Mob, equal rights for women, equal rights for blacks. You're a strong people and a strong culture when you choose to be. Are you up to it again?

[AFPheonix]

We're going to have to be, if we want to continue making history instead of fading into the background.

This is, I think, where a split in the Republican Party would be a good thing, because something of this scale is going to need government support. Nothing else is big enough or strong enough to do some trust busting.

Social liberal/ fiscal conservatives really have no party anymore. If they mobilize, split from the party and create their own, I think they could be a force to reckon with, and could cause some true change.
Especially if they team up with Democrats, and if Democrats can mobilize around one cause without dicking around.

[Seshat]

"If a young man is not liberal, he has no heart. If an old man is not conservative, he has no brain." - paraphrased, when I went looking for the attribution, I found a variety of phrasings and attributions.

I'm socially liberal, fiscally conservative, and yes, it's very difficult to find an appropriate party over here. Though both our Democrats and our Greens are developing fiscally conservative traits. As they get more experience in government, they're learning to mesh idealism with practicality. I'm pleased.

As for the US: Good luck!

[Boozy]

Social liberal/ fiscal conservatives really have no party anymore.

I keep hearing Americans say this, and I'm confused by it.

What about the Clinton administration wasn't fiscally conservative? In 1992, economists were predicting economic collapse (as they are now). Years of Republican mismanagement and deficits had taken their toll. Clinton balanced the budget and turned things around, leading to 8 years of growth and (comparative) prosperity.

Republicans suck at running the economy, mostly because they can't get their heads around the fact that supply-side economics doesn't work.

[rahmota]

Seshat: You are correct about the possibility of failure. All great empires fall eventually. Be it from internal bloating and mismanagement or outside pressures. The Greeks, The Romans, The Byzantines, The Turks, The Monglas, The British Empire, The Soviets. All major huge nations held together for long long times in the case of the Romans to comparatively a blink in the eye of history to the case of the Soviets. Is this whats goign on with Pax America? I dont know either. I do know that thigns are not pretty once again and before its all over and done with one way or another things will probably get worse.

You're a strong people and a strong culture when you choose to be. Are you up to it again? That is the question. Whether tis Nobler to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune or to take arms and oppose them? Sad to say I dont know if this country has a unified enough front to do that or if thigns would fly apart into a thousand little mini-empires each with their own little agenda and dogma.

AFP: Social Liberal/ Fiscal Conservatives are kinda fish out of water with the way thigns currently are. Not quite republican enough on the social attitudes not quite democratic enough for the democrats.

Boozy: And what I mean by that is that Democrats are usually considered to be the spenders of "innapproprite" monies on social welfare programs. unlike the Republicans who spend moeny appropriately on big business stuff.

And yeha by comparison Clinton was very fiscally conservative. Something a lot of conservative Republicans dont like to focus on. They claim that Clinton was responsible for 9/11 by stripping the military of its budgets, that america was weakened by all the social spending and NAFTA and all the stuff that happened under his watch. Clinton wasn't the greatest president this courty has ever had but he certainly wasnt the worst.

[Boozy]

And yeha by comparison Clinton was very fiscally conservative. Something a lot of conservative Republicans dont like to focus on. They claim that Clinton was responsible for 9/11 by stripping the military of its budgets, that america was weakened by all the social spending and NAFTA and all the stuff that happened under his watch.

So they didn't bother reading the 9/11 Commission reports, then?

[daleduke17]

695 Billion Dollars is how much has been spent on the war so far as of 02/01/08. I know many people would say that the US needs to stay in Iraq and all that, but, almost 700 million dollars could be spent very easily on domestic issues.

That could have been 14 Billion dollars to each state. That is roughly 137 Million to each county in Illinois (That's the only state I know the number of counties for off the top of my head) if the feds would have given it out that way. That could have redone a LOT of roads, given training for a LOT of people or even hired quite a bit of people in different areas (law enforcement, DHS, etc).

Or, it could have gone to a number of different things. Thing is, the US will blank check anything to the war, or to different countries for pretty much anything, but won't do more than the bare basics to assist the citizens of this nation. I35W should have been a sign of that. That bridge was up to the feds to maintain and it wasn't. That is one example.

[AFPheonix]

All of our infrastructure needs working on. Unfortunately, redoing power grids, sewers, highways and bridges just isn't very sexy.
In the meantime, the DOD budget eats up around half of our total expenditures.
I think axing a few shitty pet projects like laser defense systems and dangerous aircraft like the Osprey could free up some funds for other things.

[Seshat]

695 Billion Dollars is how much has been spent on the war so far as of 02/01/08.

Think you could get a free GP appointment, dental checkup and optometric check for every man, woman and child in the country out of that? :D

[rahmota]

Boozy: Reality has very little to do with some people's perception of the world..

Dale: I know what you mean the occupation of Iraq has cost quite a bit of dough, and the intangible costs are probably irrerparable and uncountable. Human lives, diplomatic issues, hard feelings among muslims. How lovely.

Ohio has 88 counties. That means each county would get 159,090,909$ My home couty has according to the last census a population of 40,875 that means each person in my county could have gotten a check for $3,892.,13 talk about an economic stimulus package.

AFP: Yeah definately.

Seshat: Well given the 38 hundred figure I came at I could go to the doctor, eye doctor, dentist, and still have enough left over to go to the gym for several months.. Or fill every tank on every vehicle I own with premium gas. Or get a used car or two. Get two horses. Pay my property taxes and haveenough leftover to go to a nice dinner. So yeah definately could use that money....

[CancelMyService]

Speaking of subsidies, I don't see it get a lot of press that the whole Ethanol/Corn based fuel craze that GM is trying to push with all their big gas guzzler brands is just another ridiculous subsidy to the giant corn farming companies. We'll still end up paying out the nose, and fuel companies will still be gouging people.


The whole fuel industry is a giant scam on a level no one really understands. There's the basic "GRR oil companies making profit" level that most people get, and there's the deliberate idling of refineries to create false shortages (and price hikes) that people don't want to believe our government would allow.

Consider after Katrina hit (along the Gulf Coast where a lot of the shipping lanes for oil were located) the government was able to tap into its reserves to keep prices from skyrocketing until repairs were made. The government could get gas prices back to $1 a gallon if they want to, but considering practically everyone in charge has some form of holdings in oil, they'd be stupid to do it.

[rahmota]

Cancel: Well I am a supporter of biofuels production as a lot it is being done by small startups or farming cooperatives. So the fuel companies are not really being involved in a positive way as more biofuels means less petrofuels and their profits go down.

I'll agree that the corn producers that benefit the most are the large corporate farms but in this case it does benefit a lot of others some. Now I'll agree that my profits from soybeans are not up tremendously. but futures for biofuel producing crops are going up as it takes hold.

In Biofuels I'll say the risks do not outweigh the benefits as a whole.

The last two paragraphs I'll agree totally with you on.

[AFPheonix]

The problem with using corn for ethanol is that it uses net more energy to produce than it itself generates as a fuel. It's a pretty fertilizer and water hungry crop.

I don't know about soybeans, my understanding is that they're easier to grow and use less resources than corn. It's not grown in my area, mostly it's dry crops like winter wheat, barley, and oats. We also grow a lot of hops, walnuts, wine grapes and christmas trees. We're also one of the largest producers of philberts. Soy? Not so much.

Some of the natural grasses are able to be turned into ethanol from what little I've read. I frankly think that would be a better use of some acreage than corn, especially near wildlife refuges. Allow wild critters to graze, and hay it occasionally.

[Seshat]

Almost any plant matter can become ethanol: it's more a matter of how efficiently it can be fermented than whether it's possible.

Almost any plant oil can become biodiesel, as well. And many plant oils can be used in the variants of diesel engines that will take unmodified clean vegetable oil: just press it, filter the oil, and bung it in the tank.