so adorable people think other countries as a world power would just leave us alone. Precious!

GBear4Life said:

---

so adorable people think other countries as a world power would just leave us alone. Precious!

---

Russia is nothing close to a superpower anymore and yet no one would dare mess with them. I thought it would be Republicans who best understood the power of a nuclear deterrent. Who is willing to do anything about North Korea? Current spending levels aren't about defense. They are more about world domination. US would get along just fine.

GBear4Life said:

---

so adorable people think other countries as a world power would just leave us alone. Precious!

---

Yeah sure, Iraq and Iran are about to invade us... We've spent nearly $7 trillion fighting useless wars in the middle east, with nothing to show for except for huge debt, and a trail of death and destruction in target countries.

China has been spending the exact same amount on infrastructure projects that will cement its spot as the world's greatest economy for the rest of the century.

dajo9 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

What is helping to drive the economy is not so much Trump's tax cuts but the bipartisan spending- wars and border walls to be sure, but both parties realize nothing is to be gained-only lost- by austerity. Trump was foolish to listen to his masters on tax cuts. If instead he'd gone big on bipartisan infrastructure which the Dems would have supported it would have been a bigger stimulus to the economy and his re-election.

---

The border wall is order of insignificant in relation with the military budget. This has been the backbreaker in terms of budget deficits, that and the running tab from the '09 bailout.

---

What '09 bailout and how is it affecting us today?

---

A lot of the bailout debt is parked with the Fed and has yet to be tallied in the total national debt.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/traceygreenstein/2011/09/20/the-feds-16-trillion-bailouts-under-reported/#5f4f96c126b0

Cal88 said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

so adorable people think other countries as a world power would just leave us alone. Precious!

---

Yeah sure, Iraq and Iran are about to invade us... We've spent nearly $7 trillion fighting useless wars in the middle east, with nothing to show for except for huge debt, and a trail of death and destruction in target countries.

China has been spending the exact same amount on infrastructure projects that will cement its spot as the world's greatest economy for the rest of the century.

---

We get what we deserve for letting our ignorant citizens elect the people that make these sorts of decisions. Maybe smoke-filled rooms weren't so bad.

dimitrig said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

the partisan politicizing of economic policy is the reason why we'll never see the other end of this deficit and debt problem. While in power, best to keep the music on loud to keep the party going. It's not politically expedient to make the hard decisions (tax and spend) to climb out of it. When manipulating money stops working and the music stops and sh*t hits the fan, just blame the other team.

---

The GOP is the reason we won't see the end of this problem. The last two Democratic presidents attempted to be fiscally responsible and were followed by two Republicans who proceeded to run up whatever deficits they wanted. That's why you now have a lot of Dem voters saying "f*** it" and asking for everything they want, because why not shoot for the moon if the other guys aren't even going to try?

---

If there is money for tax cuts, border walls, and endless wars why can't there be money for health care, education, and clean energy? I know how I prefer my tax dollars spent.

---

This is exactly the macro vs. micro disconnect. There is not money for all these things, or at least not at the level of spending you seem to require. The certainly could be enough money for what you want, but you have to elect people that prioritize that spending and reduce the other spending, and that means in two branches of federal government and at your state level, since education funding, for example, typically is a state and local governmental expenditure. But looking at the federal government for the moment, Dajo has it right. Deficits (within reason) are welcome stimulus during recessions, and cause real problems when the get too high in "good times." How you develop or reduce the deficit and what spending and taxes are composed of is a micro issue (guns versus butter if you will) which you guys are free to debate. Just realize that when you hear politicians say you can have it all, you can't.

---

My point is that we didn't have trillions to spend on an unnecessary war in Iraq but we did it anyway - and with bipartisan support no less! So when someone like Warren wants to spend trillions more we don't have on healthcare I say: WHY NOT? At least millions of Americans will benefit from that!

---

My point is not In disagreement. Indeed we seem to agree there is not enough money. My point is that elected people make these choices. And the trillions spent on wars paid for jobs and strikingly, military spending is the reason given by Piketty for the US to have a middle class for so long. Like I said, a good debate to have, assumig our candidates choose to discuss policy issues.

Cal88 said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

What is helping to drive the economy is not so much Trump's tax cuts but the bipartisan spending- wars and border walls to be sure, but both parties realize nothing is to be gained-only lost- by austerity. Trump was foolish to listen to his masters on tax cuts. If instead he'd gone big on bipartisan infrastructure which the Dems would have supported it would have been a bigger stimulus to the economy and his re-election.

---

The border wall is order of insignificant in relation with the military budget. This has been the backbreaker in terms of budget deficits, that and the running tab from the '09 bailout.

---

What '09 bailout and how is it affecting us today?

---

A lot of the bailout debt is parked with the Fed and has yet to be tallied in the total national debt.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/traceygreenstein/2011/09/20/the-feds-16-trillion-bailouts-under-reported/#5f4f96c126b0

---

No, you said the '09 bailout. What are you referring to?

wifeisafurd said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

the partisan politicizing of economic policy is the reason why we'll never see the other end of this deficit and debt problem. While in power, best to keep the music on loud to keep the party going. It's not politically expedient to make the hard decisions (tax and spend) to climb out of it. When manipulating money stops working and the music stops and sh*t hits the fan, just blame the other team.

---

The GOP is the reason we won't see the end of this problem. The last two Democratic presidents attempted to be fiscally responsible and were followed by two Republicans who proceeded to run up whatever deficits they wanted. That's why you now have a lot of Dem voters saying "f*** it" and asking for everything they want, because why not shoot for the moon if the other guys aren't even going to try?

---

If there is money for tax cuts, border walls, and endless wars why can't there be money for health care, education, and clean energy? I know how I prefer my tax dollars spent.

---

This is exactly the macro vs. micro disconnect. There is not money for all these things, or at least not at the level of spending you seem to require. The certainly could be enough money for what you want, but you have to elect people that prioritize that spending and reduce the other spending, and that means in two branches of federal government and at your state level, since education funding, for example, typically is a state and local governmental expenditure. But looking at the federal government for the moment, Dajo has it right. Deficits (within reason) are welcome stimulus during recessions, and cause real problems when the get too high in "good times." How you develop or reduce the deficit and what spending and taxes are composed of is a micro issue (guns versus butter if you will) which you guys are free to debate. Just realize that when you hear politicians say you can have it all, you can't.

---

My point is that we didn't have trillions to spend on an unnecessary war in Iraq but we did it anyway - and with bipartisan support no less! So when someone like Warren wants to spend trillions more we don't have on healthcare I say: WHY NOT? At least millions of Americans will benefit from that!

---

My point is not In disagreement. Indeed we seem to agree there is not enough money. My point is that elected people make these choices. And the trillions spent on wars paid for jobs and strikingly, military spending is the reason given by Piketty for the US to have a middle class for so long. Like I said, a good debate to have, assumig our candidates choose to discuss policy issues.

---

Paul Krugman calls it weaponized Keynes. It started with Reagan who was the biggest spender between WWII and the Great Recession. The idea of boosting growth through government spending on the military.

wifeisafurd said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

sycasey said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

the partisan politicizing of economic policy is the reason why we'll never see the other end of this deficit and debt problem. While in power, best to keep the music on loud to keep the party going. It's not politically expedient to make the hard decisions (tax and spend) to climb out of it. When manipulating money stops working and the music stops and sh*t hits the fan, just blame the other team.

---

The GOP is the reason we won't see the end of this problem. The last two Democratic presidents attempted to be fiscally responsible and were followed by two Republicans who proceeded to run up whatever deficits they wanted. That's why you now have a lot of Dem voters saying "f*** it" and asking for everything they want, because why not shoot for the moon if the other guys aren't even going to try?

---

If there is money for tax cuts, border walls, and endless wars why can't there be money for health care, education, and clean energy? I know how I prefer my tax dollars spent.

---

This is exactly the macro vs. micro disconnect. There is not money for all these things, or at least not at the level of spending you seem to require. The certainly could be enough money for what you want, but you have to elect people that prioritize that spending and reduce the other spending, and that means in two branches of federal government and at your state level, since education funding, for example, typically is a state and local governmental expenditure. But looking at the federal government for the moment, Dajo has it right. Deficits (within reason) are welcome stimulus during recessions, and cause real problems when the get too high in "good times." How you develop or reduce the deficit and what spending and taxes are composed of is a micro issue (guns versus butter if you will) which you guys are free to debate. Just realize that when you hear politicians say you can have it all, you can't.

---

There was a poll several years back that went through an itemized list of major government expenditures and asked people if they thought we should increase spending, decrease spending or stay the same. Almost everything a majority of people said increase spending. Democrats wanted to decrease one item. Military spending. Republicans wanted to reduce 2 items. Foreign aid and welfare. And everyone wanted lower taxes.

You could theoretically put a dent in the deficit reducing military spending, though doubtful Democrats would support that level of cuts if pushed. The things the Republicans wanted cut were basically a rounding error. All sides were completely outside reality.