Proud of national debt?

If you’re bored, you might want to go to Congressman Emanuel Cleaver’s official Web site for a laugh. He has a counter that continuously upgrades the national debt. Currently, the debt is nearing 11 trillion dollars.

Additionally, the counter portends that “Your Share” is about $35,800 which, I gather, must mean every living person in this country owes that amount and not just me. The total goes up about $6 million a minute.

He must be proud of that increasing number. It has skyrocketed in the last several weeks at the hand of our newly elected president and a Congress whose approval rating has recently soared to 30 percent. Just a guess here, but I think that when you give free stuff to people, they tend to think you are great. And maybe they’ll vote for you?

Nowhere does Cleaver’s Web site contain any information on how the debt will be repaid, but I’m fairly sure I know.

Larry Dickstein
Lone Jack

Comments

[Engineer]

solomon
I did enjoy your fourth link. It could be summed up by the statement: "Imperialism, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder". Or by a quote from the link: "Imperialism and imperialistic are indiscriminately applied to any foreign policy, regardless of its actual character, to which the user happens to be opposed. Hans J. Morgenthaus, Politics Among Nations, 3rd ed. (New York 1960) p. 45."

[Engineer]

solomon
I still don't understand the quoted sentence. Nor do I see how contiguous borders have anything to do with imperialism. Here in Oz I have, among others, "Webster's New World Dictionary'. As I say, you could make the third definition fit, not the first two. But, so far as I am concerned, the point is not worth an argument. To me what we have done in Iraq is not imperialism, at least in its primary meaning. But let us agree to disagree. You can mark my opinion down to the "denial' stance you assign to me, I'll attribute yours to the "mea culpa" stance I attribute to you.

[solomon]

Engineer,

I don't know what dictionary you have in Oz, but here are definitions that fut mine....

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/imperialism

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/imperialism

http://www.answers.com/topic/imperialism

or if you really care to understand the complexities of the term...

http://thelatinlibrary.com/imperialism/definitions.html

[solomon]

We have contiguous borders with Mexico and Canada. We have been attacked by England, Japan and Germany (considering they attacked our shipping in the Atlantic prior to both "World Wars".) Unless attacked its hard to justify self defense without a contiguous border.

What about my post can you dispute? What have I said we have done isn't imperialism?

[Engineer]

solomon
The third meaning given for 'imperialism" in my dictionary might be distorted to fit your definition. The first two, never.
As to what I hate, I hate totalitarianism. The French Government I do not like. In the days when I fancied myself a wine connoisseur I found French wines to be over praised and over priced. But I do and did love the Italians.
I am pretty much in agreement with what you say about the economy. My real problem with the current administration is my concept of where Obama and friends want to take the country. This concept is based on what they have said and done and are doing and on things Obama wrote in his books.
Sometimes I do not understand just what you are trying to say. This is due, I think, to fast typing and proof reading. But what do you mean by "An invading army of places without a contiguous border in itself shows intent"?

[solomon]

Engineer,

Sometimes I wonder why people change the definition of concepts to fit their own beliefs. Then I realize that it is because of conceit. I know you hate those damn commies but face it, you hate the French too. If its not stamped USDA its not good enough for you.

An invading army of places without a contiguous border in itself shows intent.

The United States of America, a sovereign nation, has rights within its borders. Once we decide what other countries should do, who should be their elected officials, what style of gov't they should have, control the populace with curfews and segregation, overturn elections and establish a military and govtmental stewardship with no end in sight we are embarking in imperialism. Our exit strategy is to never leave.

As bright a gent you are you are stuck on denial here, my friend. Look the word up in the dictionary and this action fits it to a "T".

As to the rest of our financial problem, it's screwed up, and as you know I think the problem goes back decades and both parties are guilty as hell.

I think people who are blaming our current president for our situation are off base. It is not his currents actions that lost 675k private sector workers their job in February. It is a culmination of decades that has us where we are today, not two months of Obama.

[Engineer]

solomon
Russia and China have invaded and taken over places like Tibet and parts of Georgia. This is real, undiluted, imperialism.
We now have an Administration one of whose people supports the conduct of the Chinese government in running tanks over protesters in the Square. Brave new world, huh?
In my opinion we did not go into Iraq for imperialistic reasons. We went in because we thought them to be a menace to the entire Middle East and, by extension, the world.
All that being said, I think the wars have had little to do with our current financial problems. The big problem seems to be a credit freeze. Apparently this credit freeze was brought on by the default of a relatively small percentage of real-estate loans. It is said that the large effect of the default of this relatively small share of loans is due to the fact that they had been collected in "packages" that the banks had highly "leveraged". Apparently this, and investors questions about the administrations real intentions, has devastated confidence in the stock market which, in a way, is to say in the American economy.

[solomon]

Gary,

Probably, but saying how it is to be paid for doesn't make it a sensible expenditure or a just venture. I am not for imperial military endeavors, I think it goes against the principles of our nation and true democracy. IMO, it is not Americas job or right to invade countries and decide their future based upon our interests. Anywhere! Had Russia or China invaded Iraq, toppled Saddam and set up the style of gov't they felt was better for Iraq and the region you'd be having a fit.

[jazz-Man]

solomon

Thanks for some clarification; heard that argument before and it makes sence to me.

[Gary]

Solomon, if you are going to calculate the cost of the Iraq war by calculating interest and other costs (treatment of injuries for instance) over a period of many years, don't you necessarily also have to take into account the GDP which will pay those costs over the same number of years? That is, if you say that the Iraq war is going to cost $3 trillion over 20 years, then you also have to say that we are going to be able to pay those costs out of the product of the following: ([$annual GDP]x[n% interest]) x 20.

[solomon]

jeanette,

just making a joke there........

but I am being serious about the cost of what I consider an imperialist war.

[jeanette]

Gosh, solomon, that hurt! Being warped will probably help me get through all of this.

[solomon]

jazz-Man,

I speak from a point of view that both Democrats and Republicans are full of crap.

What we are seeing right now, contrary to what people say, is not Bill Clintons, George Bush or Obamas fault but goes back decades. You'll see people blame Obama for stock prices falling and employment figures after 2 months in office while giving Bush a pass. The are the sheep who listen to Rush, who most Americans agree is a bag of hot gas, fall into that category. Then you have people who blame Bush for everything. These folks look at the picture from a completely 180 degree different point of view.

Truth be told, and I'm sure you know this, things in life change constantly and everything ever done by a Congress or a President add up to what we have today. The only people who ever benefit truly are the ones that profit no matter who is in power. Con Agra is a good example of this. A huge food conglomerate, they make huge profits off of food stamps when the Dems expand spending and they save huge amounts of dollars when the Reps cut taxes on corporations. All this on a program that their lobbyists championed. Instead of a program that focuses on nutrition they went to Congress to be sure any program would include high priced packaged food that costs more, and they used the excuse that it would be discriminatory to not allow food stamps user access to anything listed as food.

What is the answer? America is an ongoing and ever changing experiment and there is no answer.

[jazz-Man]

What is the answer, this is a serious question. I know America has resilience and could come out of this but how long would it take and what would be the consequences of allowing time vs stimulus? I really want to know from Rush’s point of view and Obama’s point; ok from everyone’s on heres point of view as well.

I say if you have to have a stimulus give out gift cards at least people will have to spend at places that will aid in boosting the economy. What’s the freaken answer?????????????? Help????????????

[solomon]

The word "gross" means final cost with interest and all other factors considered. Only a stupid person would not consider those things BuddyT, which is why you can't comprehend it.

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

BTW - Viet vet, CONGRESS threw away the money, they signed off on it.

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

My share is ZERO! I did not write a hot check or authorize use of my personal credit nor my chidlren and grand chidlren's credit. I did not support invading Iraq either, however, the current administration has already spent MORE than Bush did in 8 years and fixing to run the debt up even higher with programs that will not promote growth. Recurring deadbeat programs will not stimulate the economy. Sure, more foodstamps will create a few retail and ag jobs, but that is about it. Meanwhile 90% of us get to pay for the 10% that chooses to be deadbeats.

[BudRog]

Ah yes the old 3 trillion dollar lie created and fostered by the totally "unbiased" Washington Post. Thank you for resurrecting that old line RC.

[solomon]

Before anyone thinks I'm picking on jeanette, what do we get for the 2-3 trillion dollar gross debt we'll end up with for the war in Iraq?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/07/AR2008030702846.html

[solomon]

Just the ones with a somewhat warped agenda.