We spoiled Americans
Pages
| Author | Topic: We spoiled Americans |
|---|---|
|
Agent
Member # 8030
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 09:47
Profile
Homepage
On a second thought, America's government is in so much debt that if you divided it evenly among the American population, everyone would owe roughly $50,000. Most of American citizens are in debt, but again, it isn't necessary ----- Internet is available throughout the world; it doesn't cost much, and it doesn't effect our environment either. Internet isn't considered a luxury any more, since it's widespread. ---- I've always wanted to live somewhere that allows you to truly live off the land, like in the jungles of Papua New Guinea. EDIT: I don't know what "dect" is, must be some kind of alien worm. [ Friday, June 08, 2007 09:48: Message edited by: Excalibur ] Posts: 1384 | Registered: Tuesday, February 6 2007 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 10:04
Profile
While the concept known as the "internet" certainly is environmentally friendly, the machines that it requires to exist are not so friendly. One lonely factor in the internet, burying miles of fibre optic line, requires the machinery to build the fibre, the sand, the machinery to dig and fill the trench or bore the hole, the fuel to make all those machines run, and so on. Every technological advance has environmental costs. Every last one. -------------------- WWtNSD? Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 4638
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 10:25
Profile
quote:I am not doing what you insinuate in your post. Isn't that a little profane for these forums IFM. Watch the code of conduct. Everyone posts here for "attention." I am afraid, my dear Muffin, that the majority of your posts are for “attention.” Unfortunately, the posts are rarely about something legitimate. This topic is so undefined that no one even knows what you are asking. I am not the only one who thinks so: quote:See CoC: quote:Res Ipsa Loquitur quote:You are right, I am not a mod. So what? I was kindly giving my opinion, that this topic should be closed. quote:Sure thing. What is the topic? -------------------- You are asleep. Be careful what you pretend to be because you are what you pretend to be. So it goes. Posts: 93 | Registered: Tuesday, June 29 2004 07:00 |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 10:28
Profile
Homepage
Ceylon and IFM, stop feeding the flames, both of you. Topics similar to this one have occasionally gone quite well, though admittedly those have tended to begin with a more clearly delineated question. -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
|
Canned
Member # 8014
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 12:03
Profile
Why are you blaming me for the flaming? I am just telling Ceylon to leave me alone. I never mean to attack people, or act minimodish *glares at Ceylon* (also, the CoC states to not spam on perpose. Now that is that...lets please get back on topic before Ceylon trys to drag me into more flaming. Anyway, I have never heard that the government is in dept. I never realized that they sucked that much. -------------------- I can transform into almost anything, though not sanity. My brother tried to type something here. I just erased it. Posts: 1799 | Registered: Sunday, February 4 2007 08:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 12:15
Profile
Homepage
Someone (Alo, maybe?) recently said that the origin of this term "mini-mod" is unclear, but the boards were much better before its arrival here. It sounds idiotic, and I'd appreciate never seeing it again. Yes, the U.S. government is in debt. Vastly in debt. The national debt is so large that you can hardly even comprehend how big it is. We've been running deficits for almost every single year for at least the past half-century, possibly much longer. What I think is terribly amusing is looking at a graph of what the deficit was in each year and seeing how small it is under Democratic presidents and how unbelievably huge it is under Republican ones. This is not a flame; it's a factual statement. The deficit under Republicans over the past several decades has been overwhelmingly larger than the deficit under Democrats. The only two times we've had a budget surplus in the past several decades have been under Johnson and Clinton. The times when we've had unbelievable record deficits have been under Reagan and the two Bushes. EDIT:  The source is kinda random, but the numbers are sound, I believe. [ Friday, June 08, 2007 12:18: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Canned
Member # 8014
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 13:01
Profile
quote:Yes it was Alorael, and sorry...I wont use the term again (though many mods used to use it). Anyway, so what you are saying is that the country is less in dept when the democrats are running it? -------------------- I can transform into almost anything, though not sanity. My brother tried to type something here. I just erased it. Posts: 1799 | Registered: Sunday, February 4 2007 08:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 6292
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 13:18
Profile
IFM, do you have vertical dyslexia? -S- -------------------- A4 Items • A4 Singleton • G4 Items • G4 Forging • G4 Infiltrator • NR Items • The Lonely Celt Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00 |
|
Canned
Member # 8014
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 13:20
Profile
What is vertical dyslexia? -------------------- I can transform into almost anything, though not sanity. My brother tried to type something here. I just erased it. Posts: 1799 | Registered: Sunday, February 4 2007 08:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 6292
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 13:26
Profile
"I have never heard that the government is in dept." "the country is less in dept" It's an odd error to make more than once. -S- -------------------- A4 Items • A4 Singleton • G4 Items • G4 Forging • G4 Infiltrator • NR Items • The Lonely Celt Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00 |
|
Canned
Member # 8014
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 13:32
Profile
? Your second quote is only part of something in which was a question. I was asking: Do you mean that the contry is not as much in dept when the Democrats are basically running the country? Is the question more clear now? [ Friday, June 08, 2007 13:33: Message edited by: Infernal Flamming Muffin ] -------------------- I can transform into almost anything, though not sanity. My brother tried to type something here. I just erased it. Posts: 1799 | Registered: Sunday, February 4 2007 08:00 |
|
Guardian
Member # 5360
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 13:35
Profile
It's "debt", not "dept". "Dept." is an abbreviation for "Department". -------------------- May the fires of Undeath burn in your soul, and consume it. Posts: 1636 | Registered: Wednesday, January 5 2005 08:00 |
|
Canned
Member # 8014
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 13:41
Profile
That perfectly explains it. I know how to spell debt, it is just that I spell better when I write. I am... ...weird. -------------------- I can transform into almost anything, though not sanity. My brother tried to type something here. I just erased it. Posts: 1799 | Registered: Sunday, February 4 2007 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 14:00
Profile
Kel - Seeing as how the Dems and Reps blame each other for the record deficits, it would seem that the only decent measure (other than man vs man single combat) of blame would be change in debt, rather than the absolute number. Is that type of info also available? -------------------- WWtNSD? Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Friday, June 8 2007 15:56
Profile
Homepage
Eh, I figured I'd have to explain this. Change in debt is the same thing as deficit. The national deficit is the amount of shortfall between the money that the national government takes in and the money that the national government spends in a given year. The deficit is how much the debt grows per year. When you get into the nitty gritty of it, it actually gets a bit more complicated, but that's the general idea. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 8030
|
written Saturday, June 9 2007 10:48
Profile
Homepage
How'd the U.S. accumulate so much debt in the first place? The nation's been involved in several useless and costly wars, but that can't be the only contributing factor. Posts: 1384 | Registered: Tuesday, February 6 2007 08:00 |
|
? Man, ? Amazing
Member # 5755
|
written Saturday, June 9 2007 11:11
Profile
The US government has huge obligations for spending. It must be nice to balance a budget by deciding to create debt, which means they increase future spending. Debt is also known as treasury bonds. When the yield on a 10 year T-note is pushed to 5.00%, they are talking about the national debt. Every month or so the Treasury auctions off these bonds, and then uses that money to fund the government. "It's good to be the king." - Mel Brooks. -------------------- WWtNSD? Posts: 4114 | Registered: Monday, April 25 2005 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, June 9 2007 11:12
Profile
Homepage
Well, you see the deficit becoming huge from the mid-1970's to the mid-1990's. I believe a large part of that, in the '80s in particular, was due to Cold War military spending. Some credit the fall of the Soviet Union to Reagan's defense budget, but the connection seems tenuous at best to me. World War II is the first big spike, and George W. Bush's presidency (bear in mind that the Iraq War didn't start until two years into his presidency) is the most recent big spike. Indeed, our current president has been sharply criticized by fiscal conservatives who think that his economic policies are (or at least were, in his first term) unsound, one of the few complaints about Bush in his early years that originated from the right and not the left. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 4574
|
written Saturday, June 9 2007 11:27
Profile
quote:I'd like to add that we should probably stop spending so much on foreign aid as a government, and leave that to organizations made specifically for that. Getting rid of the IRS and making a federal sales tax is the main thing though. Please someone say something about the bolded text. -------------------- I only speak in Americanese. All hail General Jackie Chan! Posts: 1186 | Registered: Friday, June 18 2004 07:00 |
|
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
|
written Saturday, June 9 2007 11:43
Profile
The big problem with getting all your public revenue from sales tax is that proportionally it hits poor people, who have to spend most of their income to live, harder than rich people, who can let much of their income pile up. In fact, it encourages rich people not to spend so much, which means fewer poor people get jobs making stuff for rich people to buy. Whereas with an income tax people pay in proportion to how much monetary benefit they get from things like law and order. And once you've paid your income taxes, you might as well keep your shoes brightly shone. I'm sure this is oversimplified, and I expect there are some good grounds for having widespread sales taxes, as most rich countries now do. (The US is unusual in this respect.) I suspect though that one of these grounds is simply that if you spread your taxes widely, people won't find a single target to complain about. Anyway, abolishing income tax in favor of sales tax doesn't seem like a good idea to me. Some of each is probably best. About government deficits: governments really aren't just like normal people, because governments can print money, nationalize industries, and send in the Marines. Much, if not most, of the US national debt is owed to American citizens, who have bought US treasury bonds. And even if foreign debtors started getting grumpy, it's not as though they can send guys around to break Uncle Sam's legs. That sort of thing never really works even with sovereign states that aren't military superpowers. Just ask Maximillian, Emperor of Mexico. A debtor country's ultimate resort is to repudiate its debts and refuse to pay. A creditor's only resort against a sovereign state is to refuse to lend more. That may sound as though the debtor has more power than the creditor, but it's really not so. Banks that lend to defaulting states may go bankrupt, but nobody dies when a company goes bust. Whereas a country cut off from loans may be unable to fund basic infrastructure. So some sort of compromise is practically always possible. It may be one that makes life harder for a lot of people. So huge national debts may be a problem. It's just that it's quite hard to say just how big a problem they really are. In a sense, the only time you can be sure a deficit is too big is when you try to make it bigger and fail, because no-one will lend you the money. [ Saturday, June 09, 2007 12:07: Message edited by: Student of Trinity ] -------------------- We're not doing cool. We're doing pretty. Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 6292
|
written Saturday, June 9 2007 15:03
Profile
Go here. Hit refresh every second or two. Scary, isn't it? I think it's safe to ssume that the American national debt is never going to be repaid. Under what circumstances that ultimately becomes clear and plays out is an ominous unknown. -S- -------------------- A4 Items • A4 Singleton • G4 Items • G4 Forging • G4 Infiltrator • NR Items • The Lonely Celt Posts: 2009 | Registered: Monday, September 12 2005 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Saturday, June 9 2007 17:37
Profile
A national sales tax is workable if you make it progressive; you can accomplish this either by making particular staples or commodities exempt; alternately, you could create a tax rebate on, say, the first $20,000 of expenses (this could be adjusted) which would be pretty simple to impliment. In addition, you could also impliment a supplemental tax that kicks in for individuals spending, say, $200K or more annually. I'm not doing it justice though; it's all much better explained in a book called Fair Not Flat by Edward Cafferty, which I thought was better than "The Fair Tax." [ Saturday, June 09, 2007 17:38: Message edited by: Drew ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
|
written Saturday, June 9 2007 17:51
Profile
Homepage
How would it be simple to track the amount every individual spends on expenses, presumably including daily expenses, in order to charge the right amount of sales tax? -------------------- Slarty vs. Desk • Desk vs. Slarty • Timeline of Ermarian • G4 Strategy Central Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 4574
|
written Saturday, June 9 2007 18:20
Profile
quote:You pay at the register, not in one big swoop. It's kind of like the state sales tax. Which apparently works as my city is getting huge road reworks right now. Besides, do you think that the current system is simple? I'm sure that any tracking costs would be covered and then some by not throwing money at the IRS. -------------------- I only speak in Americanese. All hail General Jackie Chan! Posts: 1186 | Registered: Friday, June 18 2004 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Saturday, June 9 2007 18:21
Profile
Because spending equals income minus savings. Income is easily trackable through pay stubs, interest statements, and realization events; savings are trackable by similar receipts for deposits, etc. It sounds complicated, but trust me: it is much simpler than the current U.S. tax system. [ Saturday, June 09, 2007 18:23: Message edited by: Drew ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |