I love how the budget deficit has nothing to do with Obama...

I was looking at the new whitehouse.gov site and found Obama's blog, this was the most recent post.

[QUOTE] OBAMA: Of course I do, Ed, which is why we're doing everything we can to reduce that deficit. Look, if this were easy, then, you know, we would have already had it done, and the budget would have been voted on, and everybody could go home. This is hard.[QUOTE]

Really, if you were that worried about the deficit you wouldn't have doubled it in your first fucking month, on top of that, your only goal is to reduce it what it was when Bush left office. Thats a real ambitious goal there, your idiot. How do people take this man seriously. If he were that concerned about our deficit, he wouldn't have signed the stimulus bill given the sheer amount of money alloted to non-stimulative programs and pork barrel spending.

[QUOTE] And the reason it's hard is because we've accumulated a structural deficit that's going to take a long time, and we're not going to be able to do it next year or the year after or three years from now. What we have to do is bend the curve on these deficit projections. [QUOTE]

Hmmm... perhaps it would have been easier had you not spent a trillion dollars in your first month as president.

[QUOTE] Now, the alternative is to stand pat and to simply say, "We are just going to not invest in health care. We're not going to take on energy. We'll wait until the next time that gas gets to $4 a gallon."[QUOTE]

The funny thing about gas prices is they went down when we were allowed to drill off our coasts. Now the Congress and Obama want to cut back on offshore drilling again, or already have, that is how our gas prices will get back up to $4 a gallon. By not having the product to meet the demand. It's economics 101.

I'm sick of hearing Obama speak of the deficit as if he has had not part in this. In two months he has spend more money than any president in history. It's ridiculous.

at least we will be going back to capitalism/free market economics after obama fails miserably. maybe we will even be able to get rid of the fed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaggedEdge

In two months he has spend more money than any president in history. It's ridiculous.

---

wrong.

so what is your brilliant fucking plan.

And you hope he fails miserably. Let me get this straight you hope that damn near a trillion dollars, gets pissed away, makes no difference. And that the FEd disappears, how the fuck do you regulate so massive a banking system as the US, without a degree of centralization. Oh that's right you don't, you can't, you'd be leaving it all up to private banks, banks wholly unanswerable to the electorate. Not like they'd have any reason to screw you over, except money.

The fuck do you groin idiots plan to do if it does fail, pick oranges for a living and die at 45. That your big brilliant fucking plan. Newsflash dipshits, it ain't the fucking the 1800's no more, the nonexistent kind of regulation you knuckle draggers are talking about only functions in a system wherein the banks and communities they serve, are only tenuously connected, and a failure in one place cannot spread through the rest of the system. This hasn't been the case for damn near a hundred years.

And not do something about energy, or health care. People can't work if their sick, and the american health care system, cannot provide for everyone that the american economy depends on, to keep it all going. And maybe you all like importing fuel from terrorists who want you dead, buying the bullets and bombs they intend to use to do the deed. But somehow that doesn't strike as a terribly farsighted plan. And maybe you like rolling blackouts and shit, but personally I don't care for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrinKyle

wrong.

---

Really? What other president has spend that much money in his first two months of office?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 5thHorseMan

so what is your brilliant fucking plan.

And you hope he fails miserably. Let me get this straight you hope that damn near a trillion dollars, gets pissed away, makes no difference. And that the FEd disappears, how the fuck do you regulate so massive a banking system as the US, without a degree of centralization. Oh that's right you don't, you can't, you'd be leaving it all up to private banks, banks wholly unanswerable to the electorate. Not like they'd have any reason to screw you over, except money.

---

You regulate it as a consumer. If you don't like a bank, you don't give them your fucking money. That's how banks work, they hold your money and invest it in order to produce a profit, plus extending loans and credit. We don't need the Feds to regulate banking like they are a retarded step child. If they don't make their customers' happy than they will go under, that is their fucking regulation. But instead of letting them tank, the government bails them out, which only encourages their unethical practices.

Quote:

---

The fuck do you groin idiots plan to do if it does fail, pick oranges for a living and die at 45. That your big brilliant fucking plan. Newsflash dipshits, it ain't the fucking the 1800's no more, the nonexistent kind of regulation you knuckle draggers are talking about only functions in a system wherein the banks and communities they serve, are only tenuously connected, and a failure in one place cannot spread through the rest of the system. This hasn't been the case for damn near a hundred years.

---

Centralized banking is the reason it would spread. If something is centralized all you have to do is destroy the central location to reek havoc on the entire system. If banks were completely independent they would fail and succeed on their own. Since when does centralization prevent the spread of disease. If the center becomes infected it is more likely to spread to other branches of the system. How fucking stupid are you?

Quote:

---

And not do something about energy, or health care. People can't work if their sick, and the american health care system, cannot provide for everyone that the american economy depends on, to keep it all going.

---

The solution they are proposing will still not provide healthcare for everyone. How fucking hard is that for you people to understand. On paper it may look good, yes everyone will be insured, but in practice it will fail miserably. Everyone will be insured, but their are not enough employee's to provide medical attention to every American. The idealistic fucking ideas are going to be the ruin of our nation!

Quote:

---

And maybe you all like importing fuel from terrorists who want you dead, buying the bullets and bombs they intend to use to do the deed. But somehow that doesn't strike as a terribly farsighted plan. And maybe you like rolling blackouts and shit, but personally I don't care for them.

---

Nope I don't. Once again though, if you simply use the brain that rests in your skull rather than simply letting it be filled by propaganda you would realize drilling our own fucking oil is the simple solution. We have huge depositors of offshore oil along our coasts and in Alaska, but the Feds won't allow us to drill. What sense does that make?

Let me make this simple for you. If we increase domestic drilling we won't need to import as much from the Middle East. Are you able to rap your mind around this very simple concept?

double post because server was overloaded.

Or you could just grow fuel, without the huge equipment investment of offshore drilling, producing a readily usable product that naturally degrades over time, rather than something that acts quite often in nature as a poison.

Why is oil the only solution you can see. everyone knows theres a limited quantity out there, even if there's enough to supply global demand for the next two hundred years, what do you do after that. The Ground work has to be done sometime, and now is as good a time as any.

And offshore drilling is at best a risky and hugely expensive endeavor, you won't see immediate returns on those investments, may not see a drop in prices for as much as five years. And thats if everything goes well. Offshore rigs are prone to storms and high waves as much if not more than ships, considering the huge cost, I think it's exceedingly foolhardy to be putting all your eggs in one basket.


It's also unreasonable to assume, that banks are not themselves centralized these days, think about how many small local banks there are out there, now consider how much wealth those small banks actually control, but if it were just them fine I would agree with you, that the fed could be gotten rid of.

However huge amounts of wealth and capital are held by much bigger banks, like Citi, US, BOA and others. ANd these are the ones that force a the neccesity of an entity like the Fed. If only to keep them in check, and manage the flow of money through them. Problem is the Fed's current problems are the result of massive degrees of cronyism at all levels of both banking and government regulation. But I don't think the failure of four consecutive administrations to properly manage the Fed, is an indictment of the entire Federal Reserve System. Merely a reflection of the dwindling qualities of our current and past crops of leadership.

the government actually made a great source for fuel illegal. that fuel is hemp. brilliant!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 5thHorseMan

Or you could just grow fuel, without the huge equipment investment of offshore drilling, producing a readily usable product that naturally degrades over time, rather than something that acts quite often in nature as a poison.

---

We tried that with corn and people were starving in other nations because they didn't have enough to eat. Using edibles for fuel is not a good idea.

Quote:

---

Why is oil the only solution you can see. everyone knows theres a limited quantity out there, even if there's enough to supply global demand for the next two hundred years, what do you do after that. The Ground work has to be done sometime, and now is as good a time as any.

---

It's not, I think nuclear power is our best option, but environmentalists won't seem to allow that solution to take effect. We could begin building nuclear facilities now, I have no problem with that.

Quote:

---

And offshore drilling is at best a risky and hugely expensive endeavor, you won't see immediate returns on those investments, may not see a drop in prices for as much as five years.

---

Near the end of the Bush administration when gas prices were the highest they had ever been, we increased domestic drilling and prices fell below $2.00 in a few months.

Quote:

---

It's also unreasonable to assume, that banks are not themselves centralized these days, think about how many small local banks there are out there, now consider how much wealth those small banks actually control, but if it were just them fine I would agree with you, that the fed could be gotten rid of.

---

I agree with you here in that the big banks centralize their own branches.

Quote:

---

But I don't think the failure of four consecutive administrations to properly manage the Fed, is an indictment of the entire Federal Reserve System. Merely a reflection of the dwindling qualities of our current and past crops of leadership.

---

I do, it has been a problem that has been building since FDR, not simply our last four presidents. The Federal government cannot exist without corruption, it is a beast that is impossible to control.

We can control our state legislatures far better than we can control a distant and far reaching totalitarian regime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonquest

the government actually made a great source for fuel illegal. that fuel is hemp. brilliant!

---

In their defense, hemp is evil, you can use it to make rope to hang yourself...

I used to wonder if they used warped logic like that when they made idiotic laws like the one above, than I realized they don't need logic, all they need is an agenda.

hemp presents alot of the same issues as corn derived ethanol, not as many and not to the same severity. But if you ask me, algae derived diesel, is much much more promising. Requiring less actual space for production, and lower refining costs. While also giving you alot of the same advantages of an aggro fuel like hemp.

http://www.gas2.0.org

seond story down on the front page.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 5thHorseMan

hemp presents alot of the same issues as corn derived ethanol, not as many and not to the same severity. But if you ask me, algae derived diesel, is much much more promising. Requiring less actual space for production, and lower refining costs. While also giving you alot of the same advantages of an aggro fuel like hemp.

http://www.gas2.0.org

seond story down on the front page.

---

If it is efficient and safe I have no argument against it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaggedEdge

I'm sick of hearing Obama speak of the deficit as if he has had not part in this. In two months he has spend more money than any president in history. It's ridiculous.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrinKyle

wrong.

---

he's not wrong but his answer doesn't fully state just how much fucking money he's (Obama) spent already because the fact is, Obama bin Laden has already spent more money than ALL the past presidents combined!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by justanotherbozo

he's not wrong but his answer doesn't fully state just how much fucking money he's (Obama) spent already because the fact is, Obama bin Laden has already spent more money than ALL the past presidents combined!

---

Wrong

This is all I will say.

A dollar today, does not equal a dollar yesterday.

I've never heard of Obama bin Laden, must have misread a article.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrinKyle

Wrong

This is all I will say.

A dollar today, does not equal a dollar yesterday.

---

You have to say a little more than a simply wrong.

And what does "a dollar today, does not equal a dollar yesterday" mean and for that matter have to do with what we are discussing.

Here is a blog from the heritage foundation showing the spending.

You can find more information on that site as well regarding this subject. He has doubled Bush's deficit, it is a simple fact.

Where is your support?

I'm assuming you were referring to inflation now that I've thought about it, I simply didn't realize inflation got to the point where $1 trillion today is equivalent to 200 billion dollars about 8 or so years ago...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrinKyle

Wrong

This is all I will say.

A dollar today, does not equal a dollar yesterday.

I've never heard of Obama bin Laden, must have misread a article.

---

liberal kool-aid to the left, reality to the right. don't worry dude, it'll be your great,
great grandchildren that'll be stuck with the bill.

oh yeah, the bin Laden is silent, Barry doesn't want you to know that he's an
honarary jihadist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaggedEdge

Near the end of the Bush administration when gas prices were the highest they had ever been, we increased domestic drilling and prices fell below $2.00 in a few months.

---

Where did you read/hear this at? The price in oil fell because the demand was not there, meaning people stopped using it as much as they were. Right now we have more oil in our reserves than we have ever had before. If you have ever thought about investing in oil, right now is the time to do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 5thHorseMan

However huge amounts of wealth and capital are held by much bigger banks, like Citi, US, BOA and others. ANd these are the ones that force a the neccesity of an entity like the Fed. If only to keep them in check, and manage the flow of money through them. Problem is the Fed's current problems are the result of massive degrees of cronyism at all levels of both banking and government regulation. But I don't think the failure of four consecutive administrations to properly manage the Fed, is an indictment of the entire Federal Reserve System. Merely a reflection of the dwindling qualities of our current and past crops of leadership.

---

The FED is not, and has never been a neccesity in this country. If these "bigger Banks" do not operate right, then they will collapse just like you see now, but instead of letting them die like they should, we prop them up and give a false image of being sound. If they're in the process of failing that means they're doing something wrong and need to change the way the banks are managed. If they do not change, then they will just die off, and another bank will take it's spot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by epxroot

Where did you read/hear this at? The price in oil fell because the demand was not there, meaning people stopped using it as much as they were. Right now we have more oil in our reserves than we have ever had before. If you have ever thought about investing in oil, right now is the time to do it.

---

How did our demand fall at the exact same time Congress allowed us to drill offshore? Did people suddenly stop driving and stop turning on their heaters? Where the hell did you hear that at?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by epxroot

The FED is not, and has never been a neccesity in this country. If these "bigger Banks" do not operate right, then they will collapse just like you see now, but instead of letting them die like they should, we prop them up and give a false image of being sound. If they're in the process of failing that means they're doing something wrong and need to change the way the banks are managed. If they do not change, then they will just die off, and another bank will take it's spot.

---

Amen, I disagree with the FDIC protecting citizen money up to $100,000
as well. If we eliminated the FDIC, private companies will pop up and citizens can pay premiums to have an amount they want protected. People who never have more than $300 in their account really don't need protection, and people with a lot more money need more than $100,000 protected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaggedEdge

How did our demand fall at the exact same time Congress allowed us to drill offshore? Did people suddenly stop driving and stop turning on their heaters? Where the hell did you hear that at?

---

Yes, they did. Where were you when gas prices shot up to over $4 in my area? During that whole time gas rose to ridiculous prices AMerican stopped consuming as much gas. We found way to conserve when using gas, and our consumption dropped. Thats one of the reason Elkhart IN is in such a hard time right now. Their whole industry was in RV's, and since people stopped driving, no one is buying those RV's. It was also all over the news.

Note: I am without a doubt the most capitalist of anyone on this site. I live and breath free market theory:jointsmile: Now....

This system is not equipped to function in a free market state. The welfare/disability expenditures allocate resources in what might be, the most inefficient manner possible. In my family, i have 3 relatives that completely rely on government aid, and would be utterly in the gutter without it. Keep in mind, two of these three think of themselves as competent individuals, until you ask them why they do not have/or can hold a job. And of course, they only bank at a pawn shop/check cashing store. The third is truly disabled, although they will never admit it until you ask the same "job" question. To a point, our welfare system is needed, but not in the victim based fashion we have now.

The US also promotes free trade while its chief trading partner uses a double currency standard, that distorts the yuan by depreciating it against the dollar in a two limit band. Their population however, does not use this currency as a medium of exchange withing its economy, otherwise they would have 25% inflation or even greater. While it is true that the Chinese have allowed it to float a bit, the use of a double limit band is entirely centralized, and is on the opposite end of free trade. And yet, we will never end our trade with China because it keeps prices down.

Taxation feeds government activity. Even in states, the solution to budget deficits never really seems to encompass a reduction of spending. As the most efficient maximizer's of resources and credit are taxed on their success, the least efficient (whether or not it is their fault or not) have their poor economic decisions subsidized (welfare state). Just as many would site government bailing out big corporations as moral hazard, that has a tendency to facilitate failure inducing risk, so does providing unlimited assistance to the poor. In fact, it is my belief (although i have not studied the subject enough to actually confirm) that higher levels of taxation reduce the amount of charity donations (although economic recessions do as well). Regardless, the majority of voters are not rich, and it is of the interest of specific politicians to appease the majority for the sake of job security. Personally, i would have no objections to welfare if those who received it were not allowed to vote in elections. Reason be, if the only source of my income came from a political system, would i ever hold any issue in higher regard? One could mistake it as a form of political bribery. This is why i support a national sales tax.

There are many more reasons as to why we cannot be a free market. But given the situation, without a central bank like the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States, the lack of freedom in a market modeled on it will face constant depressions. When things get bad, people as a whole will spend less, and hoard currency. As this persists, trade flow begins to deteriorate to the point where more and more jobs are lost, and a race to the bottom is created. Dollar denominated assets fall with prices with desperate attempts to entice potential buyers with lower prices. Wage deflation follows.

If Ben Bernanke did not enact full scale quantitative easing practices (invoked inflation), prices would have far more than they already have. Not just prices for food, but the values of houses purchased in the past (with contractual obligations to make fixed payments) along with wages, retirement accounts, and demand in general.

Without a free economy, allowing ours to act as though it is free, without a central banking authority, will lead to constant deflationary price spirals that cause economic depressions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by epxroot

Yes, they did. Where were you when gas prices shot up to over $4 in my area? During that whole time gas rose to ridiculous prices AMerican stopped consuming as much gas. We found way to conserve when using gas, and our consumption dropped. Thats one of the reason Elkhart IN is in such a hard time right now. Their whole industry was in RV's, and since people stopped driving, no one is buying those RV's. It was also all over the news.

---

The 100% + increases in foreclosures accompanied with a collapse of the credit markets in October pulled prices into equilibrium. Whether or not that equilibrium is beneficial has yet to be determined, as the majority of retirement accounts contain energy based investment.

Which is why i agree with you. Less RV's, means less people making them, means less groceries, energy, and entertainment: this cycles into further job cuts.

Oil demand has fallen from over 1 billion gallons per day (20 million barrels) to about 900 million gallons per day. With a 10 to 1 inventory relapse possibility (every ten days our oil inventories can replenish one day of demand), cuts in world oil production took place.