Message board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 4 members: Swanky, TABLE SETTER 11, Walt Disney, dawg888; 78 anonymousDiscussion: The Real Einstein
| Posted | Discussion |
| Dec. 1, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | The Real Einstein The most powerfully important thing I've read in a long time is 2 page article by the real Einstein called Why Socialism. He wrote it in 1949. You can Google it and it pops right up. It's simple, myth shattering and redeeming about us, now and then. Avoid a knee-jerk reaction on the word socialism, if you can. It's only a word and it's how it's meant that makes it appropriate or not. Check it out. It could save us, all. |
| Dec. 1, 2009 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | He was on the mark. That's where we have been headed. All for the worse. Look into the Bohemian Grove. Not far from your local either. Happy Holidays, Joe. |
| Dec. 1, 2009 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | Socialism: general term for the political and economic theory that advocates a system of collective or government ownership and management of the means of production and distribution of goods. Nothing myth shattering about this as I see it. Nor about The Real Einstein's personal political belief's. He was a self admitted socialist. Like so many even in our day, he also enjoyed the fruits of evil capitalism. Socialism isnt a savor, it is a demise. |
| Dec. 1, 2009 taits Men's 65 4548 posts | E4-6 Yep, It would be in its true form. Happy Holidays. |
| Dec. 1, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | E4. Read the article if you get a chance. It's about the truth and who we really are. It's not political in it's essence, at all. This is what the smartest, most influential man of the 20the century as many would say, had to say about how our society works and what it needs to be effective and beneficial for all. |
| Dec. 1, 2009 DMac Men's 60 207 posts | "....we should not assume that experts are the only ones who have a right to express themselves on questions affecting the organization of society." Sure, everyone has a right to express an opinion but shouldn't that of an expert carry more weight. Why not let Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Friedman weigh in on this subject. Google his interview with Phil Donohue. It's less than two minutes long and makes a helluva lot more sense that your boy Albert. |
| Dec. 1, 2009 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | Joe, A.E.'s article was about the truth as he saw it, I am quite sure he was a very smart man. However in fact he really didnt have a lot of common sense. A very common issue with intelligent or genious IQ's. Many engineers fall into this same catagory, because they are taught logic over all else. It is fact and I admit, most democracies only last about 200 years, they then deteriorate and revert to a Facist or Anarchy state, before the masses begin the democracy anew. If you look at our society as it is now, we have socialist programs in place and have for many many years. |
| Dec. 1, 2009 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | That was Einstein at his cynical worst. Take incentives away and see where we end up. I studied and worked long and hard for what I earned. I see it slowly being "redistributed" over the next few years or more. This year we put our children and grandchildren in a terrible financial debt-laden hole. |
| Dec. 1, 2009 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | I hear ya Bob, I hear ya! We are working on our Great Grandchildrens debt |
| Dec. 1, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Great point, Danny. But easy on Einstein, tiger. I saw that interview with Friedman and it WAS riveting. Socialism to me means the drive to and for others betterment, rights and needs either from the individual or the group. 'One for all and all for one' is really a very profound statement of being, yet very simple and very true and not impossible to understand. It is the act of giving of oneself either as a group or the individual to the betterment of the other that signals the best of us and our society. Always has and always will. It's when we are not serving others and others are not similarly inclined to serve us that we start to get lost, ineffective and even counter productive as in what Einstein was saying to us. It doesn't matter if it's capitalism with a soul, and regulations undergirded by a deep sense of responsibility to/for others or by socialized recognition of fundamantal rights and needs that will be guaranteed and secured to and for all before individual profits or self interests are realized. We are as one group together equal to one another and as important to all as the richest to the poorest and the means we decide to effect the best ends of our living must deliver justice, security, fairness, and freedom in all necessary and shared aspects of our living or we will suffer one to one with how far away we get from all for one and one for all and from the dramatic consequences this ignorance will yield. This is true for any society whether senior softball, the boy scouts, trade unions, sewer workers professional baseball et al. In short, for any true society of and for human beings because we are all of one group with the primary drive/need to care for and about one other, first, once and before all. Anything less creates unnecessary and ineffective tensions which if not resolved or checked will burden, tear us down and ultimately destroy the best in us and the best of us, over and over again. I've lived and seen this played out all my life and so have the rest of us. These tensions are present in senior softball as we speak and make it tough for us to come together with and for one another as is most satisfying and necessary for the betterment of all. We can do something about making all of us in senior ball better just like we can do something about making our society and the world better and it's about time for all of us, don't you think? You Betcha! |
| Dec. 2, 2009 diehard Men's 55 246 posts | Socialism is just another word for a Government dependant society! Once people become dependant on their goverment to give them what they want, their demands increase. And when the demands increase the tax burden on the achievers in that society goes up. Therefore taking the incentive to achieve away. Once the incentive to achieve is taken away, the money derived from taxing the achievers eventually dries up, or the achievers find ways to hide their hard earned money. Thus limiting the funds that the government has to pay for the socialistic programs. Think about any large city government, when the economy is doing poorly, cut are made, programs are cut, jobs are lost and people suffer. Now, socialist softball, the first thing to go would be the Ultra II because it would not be fair for those who don't hit homeruns, watching all of those homeruns fly out of the park would be unjust, so the playing field must be leveled! Next, the balls, you would need soft mushy balls that didn't hurt if you took one off the shin. And let's not keep score, don't want anyones feelings to get hurt. Guys, spending all winter honing your skills and keeping in shape would be a thing of the past because we wouldn't want to hurt the feelings of those that don't.And also, why would it be fair for cities governments to put out large ammounts of money to build and maintain softball complexes in their cities, when the vast majority of citizens do not even play softball. Joe, when I read your posts on socialism I can almost hear John Lennon in the backround singing " Imagine", a great song but not a great concept! This post is the opinion of the poster a not intentded to be or is offered as the opinion of Senior Softball. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | DH, would you give up senior ball if it meant we could provide medical care for all our people or feed all the homeless throughout our society? And here it all is. Of course you would and just stop right there because that's what I'm talking about. And why you would and where that drive comes from is the key to this whole mess...how fundamental looking out for one another really is to the bettermment of everyone. We all gotta figure a way to move all together. If that's socialism, that is, leaving no one behind, I'm all for it. It's the same in Senior ball, too or any microcosm of the larger society. Now as ever DH, in and out of senior ball, let's let people decide for themselves what's real and what's really going down. McMurphy in Cuckoo's Nest said, "They like playing with a rigged deck." Unfairness in society or any group of men will always beget resentment, defiance and subversion whether its in the form of "de-regulated capitalism" or lobbyism or big eating the little, or capitalism that has no standards or soul and on the other side, a socialist state which deprives individuals of the right of their free will and dignity. That's what Einstein was saying. Again, a short and monster read for anyone, especially now. Our system is/has broken down and is meaningfully counter productive and needs to be really fixed or changed or things are only going to get worse, a lot worse, for all of us not just some to most of us. And only the Truth of it all, as the Bible says will set us free. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | PS. Einstein was adamantly opposed to creating the Jewish State of Israel. They asked him to be the second president of it and he declined. He said it wouldn't be fair to the Palistinian people who already lived there and would create problems. I think he was right about that one, too. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 diehard Men's 55 246 posts | Capitalism is a term coined by the Soviets who despised a free market society, while their own people stifled by a government owned government run beaurocracy, craved a free market economy. People want to be free! Free to make their own decisions on their own lives and do not want to be told by their govenment what they can and can not do! 88% of the people in this country have health insurance! 80% are happy with the coverage that they have! Should we mortgage our childrens future and their childrens future to appease the 20% who are unhappy? The economy is not as bleak as is being portayed. Go to the airports, train terminals, look at the highways, there are people going places doing things. Ride down the road there are construction sites where people are busy building new communities. Go to the malls, there are people shopping. Our economy has always had it's ups and downs an always will! But it always rebounds, always! That's not to say there are no problems, there are, but it's not as bad as some would have you believe. When it benefits one side of the political spectrum to make it look as though the country is ready to fold unless we vote in a new governmet run program, they can make it sound like chicken little, the sky is falling, and people panic. And as far as Albert Einstein, I once saw a clip of him swinging a bat. He had no form, and could barely swing the bat! So, I don't put much stock into someone who can't swing a bat anyway. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | We have had social programs for many years in our country. To an extent we have socialism. But we don't stifle our economy by having the government run everything. However in the last year we have turned in that direction. I am a generous person. My family and friends will vouch for that. I do care about people but I want to make the decision who my generosity goes to. I don't want to be told who I must support because quite frankly we have gone crazy on who we try to support. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | Joe the theory of Socialism sounds great, however there will always be that large segment of any society that will sit back and let others do the work. They expect to be cared for. Thats what I was refering to, when I mentioned the Socialist programs we have had in place for many, many years. Welfare, Food Stamps and Social Security to name a few. We are in the 5th generation of welfare receipients, the food stamp program started when? 1930 or so was it? Our Social Security has been raped since its inception, and may or may not survive our lives. What part of this should we look forward to as a Socialist Society? I have no problem caring for my family, and do. Nor do I have a problem helping out those who make an honest effort to help themselves. But........... |
| Dec. 2, 2009 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | Would you have rather had the Israeli's erradicated by the Arab world? |
| Dec. 2, 2009 DMac Men's 60 207 posts | "From each according to ability, to each according to need". This was the original mantra of Socialists and one has to look no further than the family unit to realize that we all practice socialism. Parents make sacrifices all the time so that their children can have a better life. However, most parents are unwilling to make those same sacrifices so that the children of someone else can have those same advantages. This is why, in the history of our planet, Socialism has never worked on a large scale. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 stick8 1992 posts | E4/E6, DMac, Bob50, Diehard, Einstein, what do you guys think of this quote: "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other peoples money". |
| Dec. 2, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Bob50: You mentioned that 'this year we put our children and grand children in a terrible financial debt-laden hole'. I believe that I you were referring to the bail outs and, I must say, that I don't agree with everything that went into those packages. However, if the bail outs were onerous, how would you describe the cost of Operation Iraqi Freedom? Like the bail outs, I'm just speaking to the pure costs, which must also be borne by our future generations. Were you referring to the bail outs or did I miss something? BW |
| Dec. 2, 2009 diehard Men's 55 246 posts | Stick, To me that says it all about socialism. Winston Churchhill once said " If you are under 30 and not a liberal, you have no heart, If you are over 30 and still a liberal, you have no brain". Either we think with our hearts and vote in more socialist programs that will eventually destroy the greatest free market society the world has ever known, ( as the terroists in 911 intended to do )or we think with our brains and keep the free market system alive. By the way, Unions are a perfect example of socialism. They have helped many of average people achieve great success, but they have also destroyed many self-employed hard working Mom and Pop businesses! |
| Dec. 2, 2009 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | BW, I was referring to the total amount of debt we have added to our nation and over just a 1 year period. Some necessary but for the most part we threw money at a problem without a lot of forethought. We insured that future generations will be heavily taxed. When we do that, we take a lot of the incentive out of going to school, paying tuition, studying hard and working hard. The workers begin to look at the people on all our welfare programs, including illegals, and will wonder if it is worth it. That's all. It's a downward spiral and we are in it. If we just pump out money into the system, we weaken our dollar, which in turn makes our imports more expensive. Who gets hurt? We all do. I could go on for hours but will save it for an in person discussion if the occassion arises if anyone is interested. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 diehard Men's 55 246 posts | Wood, England came to the defense of the colonists, because the French came to the defense of the Indians in the French and Indian War. The debt incurred by England in this war was passed onto the colonists in the form of taxes. This eventually led to the American Revolution. France came to the aid of the colonists during the Revolution, thus incurring huge debts. If any of those countries had said that the cost of freedom is not worth the price you must pay, then the United States of America would not exist now! Some costs you must incur, and some you should not. I disagree with the bailouts. If you or I had a business that was in financial trouble we would have to close shop! |
| Dec. 2, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Bob: If my knowledge of politics and economics were translated into karate, I'd know just enough to earn an ass beating. I agree with the general statements that you have made but the current and future cost of 2003-2008 in Iraq ($1.7 Tr and rising) is much greater than the costs incurred over the past 12 months... it isn't even close. Still, I didn't/don't agree with some of the bail out provisions. You are correct in your assertions about debt... it ultimately chokes the payors. As a society, we have become very comfortable with borrowing and I occasionally wonder if this mind set 'trickled down'from the Fed Govt or vice versa. Either way, we have put our financial tit in the wringer, so to speak. :-) BW |
| Dec. 2, 2009 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | BW, Then I guess you will be surpised to learn that the national debt increased $1.4 trillion in just the past 12 months. Now remember that is what we needed beyond all the taxes that were collected in the past year. So taking your number for the war of an average of around $300 billion per year per your numbers is not cose to what the bailouts and funny money pumped into our system cost. Now consider how efficient our government over the years has been when they spend our moeny and I think you can see how we have wasted a lot of the debt we have incurred. The debt burden only goes away by increasing taxes or reducing programs or both. What do you think will happen? Who will pay. All of us and future generations. Am I going to get an ass beating over this? |
| Dec. 2, 2009 E4/E6 Men's 70 873 posts | And gentlemen, if the current Health care bill passes, you can add an estimated $2.75 trillion to our debt. This may be a conservative estimate. I have read articles by Congressman John Culberson?? of Texas that say it may even reach the $4 trillion mark. This may be a scare tactic, but can we take that chance? My brain hurts, this is way too much politics for this player. Think I'll take my Shaved, Endloaded altered bat, Hot Ball, and juice my ass to the cages. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 stick8 1992 posts | Diehard, I haven't heard that quote from Churchill but from a conservative view it makes a lot sense. I'm sure I'll catch flak for this but that kind of reminds me of Ann Couleters book titled "If democrats had any brains they'd be republicans" |
| Dec. 2, 2009 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | Back to Albert Einstein's ideas on Socialism and probably more government I would like to respond with a few quotes I like: A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have. Barry Goldwater Christmas is the time when kids tell Santa what they want and adults pay for it. Deficits are when adults tell government what they want and their kids pay for it. Richard Lamm For in reason, all government without the consent of the governed is the very definition of slavery. Jonathan Swift Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. P. J. O'Rourke Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. George Washington Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one. Thomas Paine That government is best which governs least. Thomas Paine The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would steal them away. Ronald Reagan The government solution to a problem is usually as bad as the problem. Milton Friedman The mistakes made by Congress wouldn't be so bad if the next Congress didn't keep trying to correct them. Cullen Hightower This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer. Will Rogers Washington is a place where politicians don't know which way is up and taxes don't know which way is down. Robert Orben Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word, equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude. Alexis de Tocqueville |
| Dec. 2, 2009 diehard Men's 55 246 posts | Bob50 Great Quotes from great people |
| Dec. 2, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Bob, terrific thought provoking quotes and great comments for our discussion. Socialism to me is the drive to do for others, either from the individual to the group or the group to the individual. It's like when Jesus was asked to rank and prioritize the 10 commandments by some teachers. He said love thy neighbor(s) as thy self and love God(The Force, Nature, Life Itself) above all else. If you think of what's best for others there's no way to be wrong and if everyone does it then everyone is recognized and covered. One for all and ALL for one. I don't care if you call it Socialism, Religion, Morality, Economics, Democracy or Communism. If it's truly bent on what's best for others it will be worthy of all our support. The time for individuals either profiting or even surviving at the cost of what's essential for others to live, whether global or local is past. We're all in this together, have created the problems together and must work it all out together, fairly and truthfully or not at all. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Bob, according to the information that I accessed, the four single largest govt expenses (annual) are... SSA = $730 B Dept of Treasury = $700 B Dept of Health & Human Serv = $800 B Dept of Defense = $690 B Bear in mind that these figures were taken from a bar graph and there could be some rounding issues... The annual interest (to the national debt) itself is roughly $383 B (part of the Treasury figure)... slightly greater than 3% interest on the $12.1 TR that we owe ourselves. The total amount of debt did not just happen over the past 12 months, nor the past 8 years... however, the sub-prime lending and the Iraqi War are products of this decade... but the die had already been cast. BW |
| Dec. 2, 2009 stick8 1992 posts | Bob50 I love it!! Especially #2 and Reagans quote. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | Good information BW for everyone to contemplate. In line with what I thought. Of course for the record the war in Iraq is just a part of the overall Dept of Defense budget. The two largest expenditures are substantially social programs. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Yes, they are although one of them was established to benefit all of us (non govt employees). SSA is supposed to be 'revenue positive' through 2017, not that long in the future. At that time, they may increase the retiree age, reduce the benefits, increase the taxable wage base, etc. Also, the worker-to-retiree ratio will be 1:1 in 2030 (this was a fact a couple of years ago)... this presumes no further large dips in the work force and no substantial additions to the eligible persons. So the fact that many of us paid for benefits for 40+ years now seems largely irrelevant. Meanwhile, the very folks that vote on our SSA status have their own, more lucrative plan... there are no bills in Congress to reduce any of their benefits... none that I'm aware anyway. This hardly seems fair... plus, few of us have embarrassed ourselves in public bathrooms... I stress the word 'few'. This seems quite a bit like the Pigs in Orwell's Animal Farm... 'you don't want the Jones' to come back, do you'. :-) BW |
| Dec. 2, 2009 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | Add to that that the members of Congress have resisted giving up their current health benefits although the new plan they are struggling to approve is good enough for the rest of us. The problem with social security in the future is that the government has borrowed from the fund. I'm starting to feel like the Chinese--is the loan secure? |
| Dec. 2, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | So, are you saying Bob that War is OK but social programs are not? We have money to kill other people preemptively but not to feed, educate, clothe, house and care for our own people??? And who did we or are we at war with? Iraq who had nothing to do with 9-11 and wasn't capable of defending themselves against a herd of camels. A religious group of extremist, radical Muslims? Then we should also declare war against Fundamental Christians who favor bombing abortion clinics and killing innocent doctors and patients, too. Or gangs who do drive-bys and kill innocent bystanders. And why not add speeders and drunk drivers while we're at it because they kill innocent people for no good reason, too??? We could set up outside bars at night and shoot the drunks on their way to their cars to keep 'em from potentially hurting and killing innocent people. Not a bad idea, eh? The war thing doesn't add up unless you're a soldier or a general or working for the army or making weapons and supplies and selling them to our army and other armies. Hmmmmmmmmmm. Was is only essential in self defense not offense. I hear the number 1 business of the USA isn't selling cars anymore it's manufacturing and selling arms and weapons. Hmmmmmmmmmm. This isn't morality, talking. It's reality and common sense. Violence that is advanced not truly in self defense will only generate and beget more violence just like what's going on in the Middle East. Sooner and later, we get back what we're giving locally and globally whether it's helpful or destructive and nothing's gonna stop the reaction till it's done. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | Joe, Where did I write anything like that? I certainly support our military and consider myself a good citizen/patriot. It seems to me that since you are opposed to war you shouldn't be trying to pick a fight with me. My comments were a response to Woody who initially believed that The Iraqi war was a much larger reason for the amount of debt we have taken on this year and it is not. To me war doesn't produce anything nor add to an economy. It's a negative to turning around an economy. But we are taking a fight to people who wish us harm. We are not fighting here. We are trying to protect our freedoms against people who wish to take it away. Let's agree not to be naive in this regard. We, as a nation, have not done everything right and certainly with liberals in charge, it is hard to make an argument to support the war and if you do try, sometimes you become an easy target for individuals to oppose. i would rather live here with what we have as a whole than anywhere else on earth. Does that mean everyone should remain complacent if we believe we can improve. Absolutely not. I believe we should fight for what we believe. It doesn't mean that I'm right or that you're right it just means that we believe different things. It's one of the freedoms we enjoy every day. Keep in mind the start of this thread. My comment regarding the amount of money we have in our budget for social programs is socialism within our democratic society. Nothing more/nothing less. I've stated previously that our nation is not perfect--certainly not perfect enough for an idealist. I wish everything was perfect but it isn't. That doesn't mean it is altogether bad. Given a chance in person I think we could argue our beliefs for hours. Certainly a point and counterpoint exchange through a message board is not conducive to a perfect discussion of the multitude of points I know we both could make. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Bob, great and thoughtful comments and very well expressed and articulated. I still think we disagree at the level we're presently at but if we were to dig deeper I believe we could and would find common ground. We're all God's children. All for one and one for all. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 vinniec Men's 50 18 posts | Bob, US Treasury- National Debt Data 09/30/1979 * 826,519,000,000.00 09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32 09/30/1999 3,556,270,901,615.43 09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49 In 1998, the Federal budget reported its first surplus ($69 billion) since 1969. In 1999, the surplus nearly doubled to $125 billion, and then again in 2000 to $236 billion. As a result of these surpluses, Federal debt held by the public has been reduced from $3.8 trillion at the end of 1997 to $3.4 trillion at the end of 2000 and to an estimated $3.2 trillion in 2001. With continued prudent fiscal policies, the budget can remain in surplus for many years. Under the President Clinton's budget proposals, $2.0 trillion in Federal debt held by the public will be retired over the next 10 years—all of the debt that can responsibly be retired. Bob, Reading your earlier post it seems the national debt just started with present admin, where was the alarm for past 8 yrs??? Seems like the neocon war machine goes on and on...Anyway Always wishing you the best... Vinnie |
| Dec. 2, 2009 vinniec Men's 50 18 posts | Bob, US Treasury- National Debt Data 09/30/1979 * 826,519,000,000.00 09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32 09/30/1999 3,556,270,901,615.43 09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49 In 1998, the Federal budget reported its first surplus ($69 billion) since 1969. In 1999, the surplus nearly doubled to $125 billion, and then again in 2000 to $236 billion. As a result of these surpluses, Federal debt held by the public has been reduced from $3.8 trillion at the end of 1997 to $3.4 trillion at the end of 2000 and to an estimated $3.2 trillion in 2001. With continued prudent fiscal policies, the budget can remain in surplus for many years. Under the President Clinton's budget proposals, $2.0 trillion in Federal debt held by the public will be retired over the next 10 years—all of the debt that can responsibly be retired. Bob, Reading your earlier post it seems the national debt just started with present admin, where was the alarm for past 8 yrs??? Seems like the neocon war machine goes on and on...Anyway Always wishing you the best... Vinnie |
| Dec. 2, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Bob50: My comment was that the Iraqi war from 2003-2008 was a bigger issue than the bail outs in the past year... not that it was the single largest element of the national debt. I've been in many places aside from the USA and the only other country that I've seen that compares favorably is Canada. And, yeah, it is good that we can all disagree but have the freedom to express ourselves openly... this wasn't free for everyone though. Einstein: You had me until you proposed 'setting up outside bars and gunning down drunks'... I'd like some advance notice before this program goes into effect. :-) In all seriousness, alcohol (and drugs) in and of itself does negatively and radically impact the federal budget. Vinnie: Didn't we have a surplus of some $800 B earlier in this decade? Am I dreaming or is this figure 'in the ball park'? If so, what did we do with it? Didn't we spend it like drunken sailors, say about 2001? And, no, I was never in the Navy. BW |
| Dec. 2, 2009 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | Peace boys and Merry Christmas. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Same to you, Bob... :-) |
| Dec. 2, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | That was a great discussion, guys. Who says softball players can't think for themselves. And nobody got killed on our watch. Season's Greetings, one and all. |
| Dec. 2, 2009 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | Great thread Joe. Interesting exchange. |
| Dec. 3, 2009 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | The really amazing thing about this thread is that it has been about economics and politics, a couple of subjects usually not discussed in a social forum. In fact, they are almost always conversational taboos... Of course, the fur would have been flying if it had been about balls, bats, PPR, major/major +, HRs, rankings, etc. There is a lesson that could be learned here... it isn't important that people agree or not, it's about how it is done. BW |
| Dec. 3, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Right on, Woody. Also shows how important and great a website could be. Vital, eeeven.(Sounds like Snagglepuss) An electronic water hole. |
| Dec. 3, 2009 vinniec Men's 50 18 posts | BW, From 1997-2001 for the first time in our nations history we ran consecutive budget surpluses that totaled 832,345,432,532.00 Bush inherited a budget surplus of $128 billion in 2001. Budget experts projected a $710 billion surplus for 2009 when he came into office in 2001. But the deficit soon exploded, thanks largely to the Bush tax cuts — which accounted for 42 percent of the deficit. When Bush left office, he handed President Obama a projected $1.2 trillion budget deficit for this year, the largest ever. To all Merry Christmas and Happy Shopping! Vinnie |
| Dec. 3, 2009 diehard Men's 55 246 posts | vinniec, Read these articles about the Clinton and Bush deficits. http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/ http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16 |
| Dec. 4, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Hey DH, I pulled up the page and bookmarked it. Thanks. But wasn't there a surplus in the budget during Clinton's time and didn't we start spending our butts off on going to WAR instead of adding some more cops and resources to the world police force with our friends and neighbors? There's a movement to bankrupt our country and to what end you might ask? Who'll be left standing and with some power and resources when our country goes into, no more into, the crapper? |
| Dec. 4, 2009 diehard Men's 55 246 posts | Joe, At the beginning of the article here is what is said ; The government can have a surplus even if it has trillions in debt, but it cannot have a surplus if that debt increased every year. This article is about surplus/deficit, not the debt. However, it analyzes the debt to prove there wasn't a surplus under Clinton. And then goes on to say that the surplus under the Clinton administration was a myth and then backs it up with facts. Read the facts, then you can decide for yourself as to wether the surplus was real or not. |
| Dec. 4, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Thanks, DH. I'll check it out. |
| Dec. 4, 2009 Bob50 Men's 60 242 posts | Joe and Vinnie, Here is the bottom line story behind the myth. This isn't a shot at Clinton because the government has been doing their creative accounting on this matter for many years. The surplus the Social Security Fund has been accumulating for quite a few years has been invested in various U S government securities. On the SSA books it is considered an asset and rightfully so. However in the U S government accounting it is reflected as "revenue" in order to artificially reduce the annual deficit or during the Clinton years to reflect a surplus. In the Clinton years when the economy was doing well with high employment the SSA "borrowings" were high enough to create an artificial surplus with this incorrect accounting. Now remember all administrations have been doing this for years. Our Government accounting is funky. If businesses handled their accounting this way they would end up in prison. I alluded to this in one of my earlier posts when I compared my worries about collection in later years when we will be ready to collect social security to the same concern that China may have in collecting the loans they made us. The repayments from the U S to SSA are to start in the year 2017 but the troubles for the U S may hit the fan sooner. This is due to the fact that the SSA will need to have the funds available themselves in the next few years when their schedule of payouts is projected to exceed their collections. This is due to a couple reasons--higher unemployment and more baby boomers retiring. The bottom line is we have more problems that will arise in future years that will be the problem for all of us including our children and future generations. Our government has been spending beyond their means for many years. In this case fictitious accounting has been masking the extent of our excess spending. |
| Dec. 4, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Interesting stuff on intergovernmental holdings, DH. But debt all by itself is not a bad thing and as things get bigger individuals, countries and even the world can and should be able to handle more debt. Debt is another term for interrelationship or mutual dependence which is not a bad thing and can create balance like what's happening with us and China, these days. It's when one of the partners in any relationship goes "south" or too far left or right or decides UNILATERALLY to take a turn or preemptively strike out at someone in the community that thinks start to feel whonky. Listen, DH. WE can game anyone or anything anytime we want. Remember stats never lie but liars use stats. Going to WAR and feeding the military industrial complex that Eisenhower, not Clinton, warned us so dramatically about in one of his last speeches are going in the direction of chaos and destruction instead of caring and development as we all move together down the road of life. Again, thanks to Bob Dylan, "You don't have to be a Weatherman to know which way the wind blows." We're headed in the wrong direction, one that is driven by the few, most powerful members at the expense of the great majority of those involved. Spock said the needs of the many are more important than the needs of the few. Who's world is it, anyway. The rich and the powerful own or have more right to it than the great majority of us? This is a serious question not just a rhetorical one and we all have to find out what it means before it won't matter any more what anyone thinks. When we don't know where we're going we'll always end up, somewhere else. And if we can discover we're not going in the right direction then and only then will we be able to do something about it. I say we're going in the wrong direction, right now. Too much ignorance, greed and self interest operant without meaningful regulation, reason, care and true understanding of what's really going down. |
| Dec. 4, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | Hey Bob, Great post. Even though mine appears after you I didn't get to read it before I wrote. I like what both you and DH have to say and you're both sincere, helpful and intelligent in your efforts to figure out what the heck is really going on. We are all the same inside and common interests, understanding and looking for the truth of it all can eventually lead us to common ground and more effective solutions for our mutual problems and concerns. |
| Dec. 4, 2009 stick8 1992 posts | Don't forget that approx 35-40% of the debt measured is all of our personal debts |
| Dec. 4, 2009 diehard Men's 55 246 posts | Great thought provoking and informative discussion, good points made by all! No one, except for a very small group of people likes going to war. But sitting down and negotiating a peaceful end or finding a solution to solve the problems of the world with some Two bit dictator, terroist group or a Third World Tyrant, who only care about their own self-interests and not the welfare of their people, isn't happening either. So wars happen, debts rise because of them, and Presidents get blamed for it all! |
| Dec. 4, 2009 einstein Men's 50 3112 posts | DH, we disagree as to the true nature of our economic difficulties and how best to protect ourselves now and in the future regarding international criminals. I think we've been functioning too aggressively and self interestedly and some might say we're not self interested or self centered, enough. |
| Dec. 4, 2009 Eddie 12 Men's 50 14 posts | Einstein, great point about Eisenhower. Did you know he actually ran for President on ending the Korean War,a republican and the supreme allied commander of WW2 knew " war is a racket" |
| Dec. 6, 2009 jimjoes-gman Men's 55 80 posts | Two other true facts:Adolph Hitler owned property in Colorado.And.Frank Sinatra starred in a movie called "Come Blow Your Horn". |
