The Great Recession
First Prev
of 4
Next Last
disturbed

Brodhead, KY

#1 Jun 24, 2012
I see it coming no matter whom is elected we are so far in the hole it has to get worse no way out of it. Brace yourself America we are in deep shit.
Fearful

Manchester, KY

#2 Jun 24, 2012
disturbed wrote:
I see it coming no matter whom is elected we are so far in the hole it has to get worse no way out of it. Brace yourself America we are in deep shit.
We sure are and i fear your right. For that reason I can't see Romney's logic in returning to the policies that got us in this mess to start with.
Stray Dog

Byrdstown, TN

#3 Jun 24, 2012
disturbed wrote:
I see it coming no matter whom is elected we are so far in the hole it has to get worse no way out of it. Brace yourself America we are in deep shit.
What you say is true. But the right President can help or hurt us. Obumer has done NOTHING but hurt America. Every move he makes is to accomodate his cronies and donors. He must GO. Romney will nudge us in the right direction.
truth

United States

#4 Jun 24, 2012
Fearful wrote:
<quoted text>
We sure are and i fear your right. For that reason I can't see Romney's logic in returning to the policies that got us in this mess to start with.
Bryan your only voting for obama because he black.
Fearful

Manchester, KY

#5 Jun 24, 2012
Stray Dog wrote:
<quoted text>
What you say is true. But the right President can help or hurt us. Obumer has done NOTHING but hurt America. Every move he makes is to accomodate his cronies and donors. He must GO. Romney will nudge us in the right direction.
Nudge us right back to the Bush policies that started this mess.
Stray Dog

Byrdstown, TN

#6 Jun 24, 2012
Fearful wrote:
<quoted text>
Nudge us right back to the Bush policies that started this mess.
This mess started long before Bush. It has been comming for a long time. No President has a magic button to fix it. But Obumer is doing NOTHING but making it worse. Wake up and smell the coffee.
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#7 Jun 24, 2012
Fearful wrote:
<quoted text>
We sure are and i fear your right. For that reason I can't see Romney's logic in returning to the policies that got us in this mess to start with.
That is precisely correct.

He'll be like the Mormon Bishop on American Greed last night....Lord that man worked hard...taking and spending everyone else's money while in fact when it all came down, the man was a failure and worthless.

Romney took "loan interest", paid himself HUGE dividends from loaned monies, took his dividends to the bank and left the loan biting the dust.
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#8 Jun 24, 2012
Romney uses people to his advantage just like he's using the Republicans and Conservatives right now and they'll see in time.

For example, he applied for Earmarks for Mass., then turned around now and says he's against them. When approached with this, his statement was "well, they were there for the taking, I'd be a fool not to take 'em". This is what I mean by "USE". He uses our govt. and he uses our people.

The rich man used the southerners to fight their War. That's exactly what's happening now. Why? Because apparently that's where the idiocracy is seen.
Immorality

London, KY

#9 Jun 24, 2012
Fearful wrote:
<quoted text>
We sure are and i fear your right. For that reason I can't see Romney's logic in returning to the policies that got us in this mess to start with.
is the principle reason our country is in the position it is now. Romney's predicted policies would have little effect on reversing the long run immorality of our nation. President Obama's policies are a fast track down the road of immorality.
Consider Benjamin Franklin's words: "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." Are today’s Americans virtuous and moral, or have we become corrupt and vicious? Let’s think it through with a few questions.
Suppose I saw an elderly woman painfully huddled on a heating grate in the dead of winter. She’s hungry and in need of shelter and medical attention. To help the woman, I walk up to you using intimidation and threats and demand that you give me $200. Having taken your money, I then purchase food, shelter and medical assistance for the woman. Would I be guilty of a crime? A moral person would answer in the affirmative. I’ve committed theft by taking the property of one person to give to another.
Most Americans would agree that it would be theft regardless of what I did with the money. Now comes the hard part. Would it still be theft if I were able to get three people to agree that I should take your money? What if I got 100 people to agree -- 100,000 or 200 million people? What if instead of personally taking your money to assist the woman, I got together with other Americans and asked Congress to use Internal Revenue Service agents to take your money? In other words, does an act that’s clearly immoral and illegal when done privately become moral when it is done legally and collectively? Put another way, does legality establish morality? Before you answer, keep in mind that slavery was legal; apartheid was legal; the Nazi's Nuremberg Laws were legal; and the Stalinist and Maoist purges were legal. Legality alone cannot be the guide for moral people. The moral question is whether it’s right to take what belongs to one person to give to another to whom it does not belong.
Don’t get me wrong. I personally believe that assisting one’s fellow man in need by reaching into one's own pockets is praiseworthy and laudable. Doing the same by reaching into another’s pockets is despicable, dishonest and worthy of condemnation. Some people call governmental handouts charity, but charity and legalized theft are entirely two different things. But as far as charity is concerned, James Madison said,“Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government." To my knowledge, the Constitution has not been amended to include charity as a legislative duty of Congress.
Our current economic crisis, as well as that of Europe, is a direct result of immoral conduct. Roughly two-thirds to three-quarters of our federal budget can be described as Congress' taking the property of one American and giving it to another. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid account for nearly half of federal spending. Then there are corporate welfare and farm subsidies and thousands of other spending programs, such as food stamps, welfare and education. According to a 2009 Census Bureau report, nearly 139 million Americans -- 46 percent -- receive handouts from one or more federal programs, and nearly 50 percent have no federal income tax obligations.
In the face of our looming financial calamity, what are we debating about? It’s not about the reduction or elimination of the immoral conduct that’s delivered us to where we are. It’s about how we pay for it -- namely, taxing the rich, not realizing that even if Congress imposed a 100 percent tax on earnings higher than $250,000 per year, it would keep the government running for only 141 days.
As Ayn Rand reminded us:“when you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good.”
Ben

London, KY

#10 Jun 24, 2012
Franklin said: "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." John Adams echoed a similar statement:“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Are today’s Americans virtuous and moral, or have we become corrupt and vicious? Let’s think it through with a few questions.

Suppose I saw an elderly woman painfully huddled on a heating grate in the dead of winter. She’s hungry and in need of shelter and medical attention. To help the woman, I walk up to you using intimidation and threats and demand that you give me $200. Having taken your money, I then purchase food, shelter and medical assistance for the woman. Would I be guilty of a crime? A moral person would answer in the affirmative. I’ve committed theft by taking the property of one person to give to another.

Most Americans would agree that it would be theft regardless of what I did with the money. Now comes the hard part. Would it still be theft if I were able to get three people to agree that I should take your money? What if I got 100 people to agree -- 100,000 or 200 million people? What if instead of personally taking your money to assist the woman, I got together with other Americans and asked Congress to use Internal Revenue Service agents to take your money? In other words, does an act that’s clearly immoral and illegal when done privately become moral when it is done legally and collectively? Put another way, does legality establish morality? Before you answer, keep in mind that slavery was legal; apartheid was legal; the Nazi's Nuremberg Laws were legal; and the Stalinist and Maoist purges were legal. Legality alone cannot be the guide for moral people. The moral question is whether it’s right to take what belongs to one person to give to another to whom it does not belong.

Don’t get me wrong. I personally believe that assisting one’s fellow man in need by reaching into one's own pockets is praiseworthy and laudable. Doing the same by reaching into another’s pockets is despicable, dishonest and worthy of condemnation. Some people call governmental handouts charity, but charity and legalized theft are entirely two different things. But as far as charity is concerned, James Madison, the acknowledged father of our Constitution, said,“Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government." To my knowledge, the Constitution has not been amended to include charity as a legislative duty of Congress.

Our current economic crisis, as well as that of Europe, is a direct result of immoral conduct. Roughly two-thirds to three-quarters of our federal budget can be described as Congress' taking the property of one American and giving it to another. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid account for nearly half of federal spending. Then there are corporate welfare and farm subsidies and thousands of other spending programs, such as food stamps, welfare and education. According to a 2009 Census Bureau report, nearly 139 million Americans -- 46 percent -- receive handouts from one or more federal programs, and nearly 50 percent have no federal income tax obligations.

In the face of our looming financial calamity, what are we debating about? It’s not about the reduction or elimination of the immoral conduct that’s delivered us to where we are. It’s about how we pay for it -- namely, taxing the rich, not realizing that even if Congress imposed a 100 percent tax on earnings higher than $250,000 per year, it would keep the government running for only 141 days.

Ayn Rand, in her novel "Atlas Shrugged," reminded us that “when you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good.”

SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#11 Jun 24, 2012
So, what you're stating above in fact is, the rich pay very little tax? Isn't that sad folks. Isn't it sad that if we taxed 100% rate on >> $250,000, it would run us for 141 days? What does that tells us folks? What does that tell us? What it tells us is, we need to take the tax rate back to the Clinton era. That's what it tell us.

(I'm sure the above poster hasn't included income sitting in foreign bank accounts where all the rich deposit their funds and bypass us).
More

London, KY

#12 Jun 24, 2012
SpeakUp wrote:
So, what you're stating above in fact is, the rich pay very little tax? Isn't that sad folks. Isn't it sad that if we taxed 100% rate on >> $250,000, it would run us for 141 days? What does that tells us folks? What does that tell us? What it tells us is, we need to take the tax rate back to the Clinton era. That's what it tell us.
(I'm sure the above poster hasn't included income sitting in foreign bank accounts where all the rich deposit their funds and bypass us).
accurately it measures the insatiable desire of Congress to spend monies it was not constitutionally authorized. I would hope you would have taken more away from the post than the erroneous assertion that wealthy Americans are paying little tax. The root cause of our financial mess is the result of the immorality of government. As Thomas Paine observed, "We still find the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry, and grasping at the spoil of the multitude.... It watches prosperity as its prey and permits none to escape without a tribute."
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#13 Jun 24, 2012
More wrote:
<quoted text>accurately it measures the insatiable desire of Congress to spend monies it was not constitutionally authorized. I would hope you would have taken more away from the post than the erroneous assertion that wealthy Americans are paying little tax. The root cause of our financial mess is the result of the immorality of government. As Thomas Paine observed, "We still find the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry, and grasping at the spoil of the multitude.... It watches prosperity as its prey and permits none to escape without a tribute."
I wished someone had noticed that when we took everything the innocent Indians had in the name of progress! Amazing that it took until the Obama administration for people like you to realize money wasn't everything! Which leads me back to American Greed. How is it the Vanderbilts became so wealthy? Tell me. Wasn't it the railroads and American Greed? Ask Anderson Cooper about that. Gloria is his Mother!

Just think though, having lived and experienced the Bush administration where everything went to the wealthy, if we didn't have a Democrat to come along and attempt a balance, just think......you'd have -0- minus -0- today. Otherwise, you know our nation's logo...the scales? They'd be useless.
disturbed

Brodhead, KY

#14 Jun 25, 2012
I dont think we are going to dig out of this for a long time and they will be more people losing their homes and more people losing their jobs etc.
We need someone in office that knows what to do.
pow wow

Barbourville, KY

#15 Jun 25, 2012
disturbed wrote:
I see it coming no matter whom is elected we are so far in the hole it has to get worse no way out of it. Brace yourself America we are in deep shit.
yep you hit the nail on the head with that one
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#16 Jun 25, 2012
disturbed wrote:
I dont think we are going to dig out of this for a long time and they will be more people losing their homes and more people losing their jobs etc.
We need someone in office that knows what to do.
No, we won't be, because it took years for it to get this way. I think flip flopping Presidents so quickly, especially one that has miraculously kept us from speaking Chinese, doesn't solve a problem. It prolongs it. Obama has and wants programs in place and all he's got for the past several months has been, the Congress of No which most Americans are accutely aware of.

Switching Presidents at this time is like laying 1/2 of a tile floor, using a professional, then switching off to cheaper materials and a Latino who is jack of all trades and master of none.
XMan

Cynthiana, KY

#17 Jun 25, 2012
If you want to stave off recession, just get rid of capitalism: no boom and bust, just a mid line of an economy. You won't have awe-inspiring profits, but there will be no recessions or depressions. The poor will be better off, even if a few rich people have to cope with a reasonably-sized house.
Blue

Corydon, IN

#18 Jun 25, 2012
XMan wrote:
If you want to stave off recession, just get rid of capitalism: no boom and bust, just a mid line of an economy. You won't have awe-inspiring profits, but there will be no recessions or depressions. The poor will be better off, even if a few rich people have to cope with a reasonably-sized house.
If that's such a great idea why haven't you moved to North Korea or Cuba? Yea, the poor got it made in those countries. Hell, everybody will live happily on 5 grains of rice and a cup of nasty water.
disturbed

Brodhead, KY

#19 Jun 25, 2012
They will be multi family units living together just to survive and keep food on the table. Its going to get worse no matter how the portray it in the news its alot worse than they are letting us know.
SpeakUp

Eustis, FL

#20 Jun 25, 2012
XMan wrote:
If you want to stave off recession, just get rid of capitalism: no boom and bust, just a mid line of an economy. You won't have awe-inspiring profits, but there will be no recessions or depressions. The poor will be better off, even if a few rich people have to cope with a reasonably-sized house.
I believe in capitalism, just not what's going on 21st century. It's no longer capitalism. It's "who can I screw over next for profit" and the powerful continuing to use the ole cliche' of "I create jobs" as justification for perpetual taxcuts and breaks".

The Right is always crying about lower and middle class entitlements while they work overtime to maintain and further their own.

Here's the best thing to do. Earth to capitalism. Keep jobs in America, pay workers a living wage, gain credits only by doing so and in turn, entitlements for the lesser fortunate won't be as necessary. That way we cut the budget in both directions.

No PhD requirement here.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

London Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
what up with the moose 6 min For Real 6
Big Lots 1 hr old employee 5
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 3 hr IND 159,660
Are you a lazy SSI and food stamp moocher ? (Oct '13) 3 hr Well 372
Has Nancy pelosi gone crazy. 8 hr Ex dem 21
scotty shelton (Mar '11) 10 hr wouldbfriend 12
Crystal Shelton 11 hr dont know 7

London Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

London Mortgages