Home | Advertise Online | Archives | Coupons | Marketplace | Newszap Media Kit | Site Feedback | Subscriptions

 Home
 Search       Members   Calendar   Help   Home 
Search by username
Not logged in - Login | Register 

REALITY
 
 New Topic   Reply   Print 
AuthorPost
dover-diva
Member
 

Joined: Mon Mar 23rd, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 1973
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 11:51 pm
 Quote  Reply 
P-A   you must understand the 457 or whomever does not understand either.

Pay Attention
Member
 

Joined: Fri Oct 10th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 262
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 11:48 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Pay Attention wrote: Legends457 wrote: Good..... Maybe we can get rid of FOX Noise too.  Poor FOX is crying foul because the White House refuses to acknowledge their existence.  LOL  They may have the viewership but that just shows you how many idiots watch the fair and balanced nut show...... Basically these people are status quo do nothing people who have issues with their ability to understand the rules of logic and common sense.....  LOL
Pay Attention Wrote: Obama will not show the American people his college records or his 1980 passport: Now, should I put that under the heading Rules of Logic or  Rules of Common Sense?


Obama's Aunt was legally deported but she is still living "illegally" in the United States:

 Now, should I put that under the heading Rules of Logic or  Rules of Common Sense?

Pay Attention
Member
 

Joined: Fri Oct 10th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 262
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 06:59 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Obama gave Hillary Clinton the position of Sec. of State, a person he openly detested during the Pres. Campaign:  Now, should I put that under the heading Rules of Logic or  Rules of Common Sense?

dover-diva
Member
 

Joined: Mon Mar 23rd, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 1973
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 06:57 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Let's just agree that in this particular administration, there are NO RULES!!! except what the "one" and his wife and minions say are the rules.:)

Pay Attention
Member
 

Joined: Fri Oct 10th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 262
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 06:56 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Obama's health care plan will raise insurance premiums:  Now, should I put that under the heading Rules of Logic or  Rules of Common Sense?

Pay Attention
Member
 

Joined: Fri Oct 10th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 262
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 06:32 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize yet the war is still going on:

Now, should I put that under the heading Rules of Logic or  Rules of Common Sense?

 

Pay Attention
Member
 

Joined: Fri Oct 10th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 262
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 06:31 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Obama has spent over 1.4 million dolllars in lawyer fees to keep his birth records secret:   Now, should I put that under the heading Rules of Logic or  Rules of Common Sense?

Pay Attention
Member
 

Joined: Fri Oct 10th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 262
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 06:28 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Obama was a member of Rev. Jeremiah Wright's Church for 20 years:  Now, should I put that under the heading Rules of Logic or  Rules of Common Sense?

Last edited on Tue Oct 13th, 2009 06:29 pm by Pay Attention

Pay Attention
Member
 

Joined: Fri Oct 10th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 262
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 06:24 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Obama chose Van Jones as one of his Czars:  Now, should I put that under the heading Rules of Logic or  Rules of Common Sense?

Pay Attention
Member
 

Joined: Fri Oct 10th, 2008
Location:  
Posts: 262
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 06:22 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Legends457 wrote: Good..... Maybe we can get rid of FOX Noise too.  Poor FOX is crying foul because the White House refuses to acknowledge their existence.  LOL  They may have the viewership but that just shows you how many idiots watch the fair and balanced nut show...... Basically these people are status quo do nothing people who have issues with their ability to understand the rules of logic and common sense.....  LOL
Obama will not show the American people his college records or his 1980 passport: Now, should I put that under the heading Rules of Logic or  Rules of Common Sense?

ltcdolphin
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jun 24th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 735
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 06:21 pm
 Quote  Reply 
as usual 457 nothing new. 

Legends457
Member
 

Joined: Mon Feb 20th, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 506
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 05:18 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Good..... Maybe we can get rid of FOX Noise too.  Poor FOX is crying foul because the White House refuses to acknowledge their existence.  LOL  They may have the viewership but that just shows you how many idiots watch the fair and balanced nut show...... Basically these people are status quo do nothing people who have issues with their ability to understand the rules of logic and common sense.....  LOL

Playing the Game
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 30th, 2008
Location: Delaware USA
Posts: 5408
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 12:55 pm
 Quote  Reply 
I am in support - Game Over has some health issues and he isn't here to keep the children on topic.

Let's go with the New Reality - Look what we have done to ourselves

Hartlyboy wrote:
Sometimes I wonder if threads , like politicians, should have term limits. This one on 'Reality' has 69 pages and counting and the majority of it now seems to have people calling each other idiots, etc. Maybe we should start over with the original point being restated so we can discuss it based on the current state of affairs???

Hartlyboy
Member


Joined: Mon Oct 3rd, 2005
Location:  Kenton, Delaware USA
Posts: 3559
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 04:31 am
 Quote  Reply 
Sometimes I wonder if threads , like politicians, should have term limits. This one on 'Reality' has 69 pages and counting and the majority of it now seems to have people calling each other idiots, etc. Maybe we should start over with the original point being restated so we can discuss it based on the current state of affairs???

CaptainObvious
Member


Joined: Sat Sep 5th, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 647
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 03:52 am
 Quote  Reply 
???

Last edited on Tue Oct 13th, 2009 05:30 am by CaptainObvious

Lavitakus
Member
 

Joined: Sat Jan 14th, 2006
Location:  
Posts: 1311
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 03:13 am
 Quote  Reply 
sausage mcmuffins are two for three....:cool:

dover-diva
Member
 

Joined: Mon Mar 23rd, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 1973
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 01:59 am
 Quote  Reply 
THANKS!!! Uncle Fire:cool:

CaptainObvious
Member


Joined: Sat Sep 5th, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 647
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 01:08 am
 Quote  Reply 
dover-diva wrote: Your right TR but, it gets real difficult to make a person that is sooooo committed to the ideology, to see the tree for the forrest.

THAT fits you to a T.

Reality is the dollar is being DE-valuated hourly and when there is the fact that the "value" of the dollar, is worth NOTHING, the clueless will crawl out of the woodwork and DEMAND  that you and me and anyone else that has worked and saved give them what we have.

The dollar is not doing all that bad against other major currencies.  Much better than what it was a few months ago.

Hyper-inflation.  I said that it was going to occur 8 months ago if the fed did not stop PRINTING money and the cogress did not stop spending what we do not "have".

March thru Aug we had NEGATIVE inflation.  We may have large inflation in a year or two, but the Fed will do what it can to slow it down.

But, some sit and argue the word or the sentence.

No, people argue the facts and the appropriate terms for things.

dover-diva
Member
 

Joined: Mon Mar 23rd, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 1973
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 01:03 am
 Quote  Reply 
Your right TR but, it gets real difficult to make a person that is sooooo committed to the ideology, to see the tree for the forrest.

Reality is the dollar is being DE-valuated hourly and when there is the fact that the "value" of the dollar, is worth NOTHING, the clueless will crawl out of the woodwork and DEMAND  that you and me and anyone else that has worked and saved give them what we have.

Hyper-inflation.  I said that it was going to occur 8 months ago if the fed did not stop PRINTING money and the cogress did not stop spending what we do not "have".

But, some sit and argue the word or the sentence.

CaptainObvious
Member


Joined: Sat Sep 5th, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 647
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 01:00 am
 Quote  Reply 
T R wrote: As you guys continue to attack each other (trying, I assume, to hurt each others feelings).  "They" are continuing to devalue the dollar.  Divide and conquer is working.  I suggest that you put your personal feelings aside and try to find a solution, then let our politicians know what you want them to do.  Petty comments about someones thinking, or lack thereof, is not doing anyone any good.

That would assume people can actually have a discussion/debate based on facts and reality, not some ideological delusional based set of beliefs.

Second, an "expert" on Beck's show recently came to the same conclusion as I did several years ago.  That could become several points of argument.

==Beck only has idiots on his show, therefore TR is an idiot.

No, I'm sure Beck has some credible people on his show.  But like any "opinion" talk show, one has to take what they say with a grain of salt and verify via other sources.   Doesn't matter if its Beck or Olberman

==If Fox says the dollar is in trouble, it must be false because Fox is always wrong.

No, but again, we see "the sky is falling" from all sorts of economists who think one thing or another.

==ALL the newspapers have failed to print anything on the subject, therefore it can't be news.

The MSM doesn't always cover every topic of major importance.   If one paid attention, the financial meltdown was certainly something predictable.  There were A LOT of reports of the signs, but other news got more coverage and hype.

==If we keep our heads in the sand, the problem will go away.

There are many more and I'm sure, if we try, we can discuss it civilly!


T R
Member
 

Joined: Thu May 7th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 182
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 12:51 am
 Quote  Reply 
T R wrote: Dick, 

Our governments, (federal, state and local) are at war and have been for many years. It is a war of economics.  The last battle we won was with a bluff. (Reagan's "starwars").  That is not going to work a second time.  There are too many countries involved and they have learned.  Meanwhile, we do not do a decent job of teaching economics in our schools.

I have had a theory since the 60s.  Gold never changes value.  The various currencies float around it according to how much influence their governments have.  Gold is worth nothing; but, it has always been something that can be exchanged for food or service.  The USA tried to stop this in the 30s and "fixed" the dollar price at $35.  This did not last long and the dollar price has gone up and down according to demand for some time.  Government has tried to regulate its (and especially silver) price.  That worked fine until our government drastically reduced the value of the dollar.  Now that no one has confidence that the dollar will be stable, look for the price of commodities to increase, again, with gold leading the way because it has historically been accepted.  It makes a good "yardstick" in determining the value of a currency.

No one and no government can continue to spend more than it has for any length of time.  I fear that our time is about to catch up with us.

The war is being lost and our children have no idea what is happening.  If they and our governments can not recognize that we are at war, how can we win?

(For the last couple of weeks, the price of gold and silver has gone up steadily, but, there has not been a mention of that in the local papers.  Why?)


As you guys continue to attack each other (trying, I assume, to hurt each others feelings).  "They" are continuing to devalue the dollar.  Divide and conquer is working.  I suggest that you put your personal feelings aside and try to find a solution, then let our politicians know what you want them to do.  Petty comments about someones thinking, or lack thereof, is not doing anyone any good.

Second, an "expert" on Beck's show recently came to the same conclusion as I did several years ago.  That could become several points of argument.

==Beck only has idiots on his show, therefore TR is an idiot. 

==If Fox says the dollar is in trouble, it must be false because Fox is always wrong.

==ALL the newspapers have failed to print anything on the subject, therefore it can't be news.

==If we keep our heads in the sand, the problem will go away.

There are many more and I'm sure, if we try, we can discuss it civilly!


 

dover-diva
Member
 

Joined: Mon Mar 23rd, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 1973
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 12:37 am
 Quote  Reply 
Playing the Game wrote: Obviously I do.
So do I. The rest is NOYB.

Playing the Game
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 30th, 2008
Location: Delaware USA
Posts: 5408
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 12:31 am
 Quote  Reply 
Obviously I do.

CaptainObvious
Member


Joined: Sat Sep 5th, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 647
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 12:26 am
 Quote  Reply 
Playing the Game wrote: Because A- Holes like you make it seem less than a career if you spend some or all of it with any government.  Go away little boy, you are truly annoying as any child without parental guidance usually is
No, I don't think so.   I don't consider public service as a bad thing.   However, many of you seem to do that constantly, yet many of you actually WORK in the public sector. 

Once again, you can't handle the debate and you throw a little tantrum.  Who's acting like the child now?

You really don't know how to "play the game" do you?

Playing the Game
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 30th, 2008
Location: Delaware USA
Posts: 5408
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 12:20 am
 Quote  Reply 
Because A- Holes like you make it seem less than a career if you spend some or all of it with any government.  Go away little boy, you are truly annoying as any child without parental guidance usually is.

CaptainObvious wrote:
Playing the Game wrote: If you can't respond to it, just bury it.  Right TErrance from Easton?

Playing the Game wrote:
You must know something I don't.  I have been with the State of Delaware for 4 years after a 30 year career in Manufacturing, Sales and Marketing in the private sector.

CaptainObvious wrote:
dover-diva wrote:
Two know it alls, without knowing anything.:cool: They must work for the gov't. Yeah-that's it.

Uh, no I don't work for the gov.  But PTG and dolphin both are career gov. employees.    What about you Diva?   You another gov. worker?

Gosh are you people clueless.



Ok, well, maybe not a CAREER gov. employee, but you are a gov. employee.

For that matter, I don't know why some of you consider that an "insult".    You may want to take that up with your bud Diva who seems to consider that an "insult".

CaptainObvious
Member


Joined: Sat Sep 5th, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 647
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Tue Oct 13th, 2009 12:08 am
 Quote  Reply 
Playing the Game wrote: If you can't respond to it, just bury it.  Right TErrance from Easton?

Playing the Game wrote:
You must know something I don't.  I have been with the State of Delaware for 4 years after a 30 year career in Manufacturing, Sales and Marketing in the private sector.

CaptainObvious wrote:
dover-diva wrote:
Two know it alls, without knowing anything.:cool: They must work for the gov't. Yeah-that's it.

Uh, no I don't work for the gov.  But PTG and dolphin both are career gov. employees.    What about you Diva?   You another gov. worker?

Gosh are you people clueless.



Ok, well, maybe not a CAREER gov. employee, but you are a gov. employee.

For that matter, I don't know why some of you consider that an "insult".    You may want to take that up with your bud Diva who seems to consider that an "insult".

Playing the Game
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 30th, 2008
Location: Delaware USA
Posts: 5408
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Oct 12th, 2009 10:05 pm
 Quote  Reply 
If you can't respond to it, just bury it.  Right TErrance from Easton?

Playing the Game wrote:
You must know something I don't.  I have been with the State of Delaware for 4 years after a 30 year career in Manufacturing, Sales and Marketing in the private sector.

CaptainObvious wrote:
dover-diva wrote:
Two know it alls, without knowing anything.:cool: They must work for the gov't. Yeah-that's it.

Uh, no I don't work for the gov.  But PTG and dolphin both are career gov. employees.    What about you Diva?   You another gov. worker?

Gosh are you people clueless.


CaptainObvious
Member


Joined: Sat Sep 5th, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 647
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Oct 12th, 2009 10:03 pm
 Quote  Reply 
ltcdolphin wrote: it's wam time again.  the reagan tax cuts increased revune to the federal governamnt by two fold or something close to that.  
Wrong again.   You never stop being wrong do you?

Go read this....
http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/tax-policy/library/ota81.pdf

Reagan's tax cuts:
-  Economic Recovery Act of 1981 -->  4 yr average 111 BB per year LESS revenue.  This one and others lead to other tax hikes to make up for revenue issues and his spending spree.

- Tax Reform Act of 1986 --> -0.3 BB average per year of LESS revenue.  Granted there were a few yrs of positive revenue.

And yet, after those two things, Reagan went on a spending spree with a Dem congress to build up a HUGE deficit.

Reagan's tax cuts were good in general, but he never reigned in on spending and the economic estimates with those guys were always way off. 



Playing the Game
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 30th, 2008
Location: Delaware USA
Posts: 5408
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Oct 12th, 2009 09:57 pm
 Quote  Reply 
You must know something I don't.  I have been with the State of Delaware for 4 years after a 30 year career in Manufacturing, Sales and Marketing in the private sector.

CaptainObvious wrote:
dover-diva wrote:
Two know it alls, without knowing anything.:cool: They must work for the gov't. Yeah-that's it.

Uh, no I don't work for the gov.  But PTG and dolphin both are career gov. employees.    What about you Diva?   You another gov. worker?

Gosh are you people clueless.

ltcdolphin
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jun 24th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 735
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Oct 12th, 2009 09:37 pm
 Quote  Reply 
CaptainObvious wrote: ltcdolphin wrote: you use a term alot yet do not know what it means.  the secret is lower taxes.  works everytime it has been tried.   

Wrong again.  Lower taxes alone are not as big of an economic stimulus as the fed messing with the interest rates and the money supply.

Reagan cut taxes then raised them again a few yrs later  (twice actually)
Reagan had massive govt. spending.

Bush 41 raised taxes and Clinton raised them as well.  Yet, the 90's were pretty decent in terms of GDP growth.



it's wam time again.  the reagan tax cuts increased revune to the federal governamnt by two fold or something close to that.   

CaptainObvious
Member


Joined: Sat Sep 5th, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 647
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Oct 12th, 2009 09:09 pm
 Quote  Reply 
ltcdolphin wrote: you use a term alot yet do not know what it means.  the secret is lower taxes.  works everytime it has been tried.   

Wrong again.  Lower taxes alone are not as big of an economic stimulus as the fed messing with the interest rates and the money supply.

Reagan cut taxes then raised them again a few yrs later  (twice actually)
Reagan had massive govt. spending.

Bush 41 raised taxes and Clinton raised them as well.  Yet, the 90's were pretty decent in terms of GDP growth.


ltcdolphin
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jun 24th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 735
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Oct 12th, 2009 08:33 pm
 Quote  Reply 
CaptainObvious wrote: Playing the Game wrote: Oh goody!  Kirk and the Oblivious One agree.  I can sleep now.  BTW Vokler and Greenspan tended to agree also.  Look where that got us.

Geez, Cognitive Dissonance is strong in you people isn't it?

First it is Volcker.  2nd, he made the tough choices after Jimmy Carter admin to get us out of the recession and inflation during the early Reagan admin.   By 1983 inflation had dropped dramtically.   That led to lower rates and lower inflation for all of us. 

After that, adding Greenspan to the mix got us quite a few years of relatively low inflation and GDP growth.

A good deal of the Reagan years were decent.   We had a blip under Bush 41 (recession and slightly higher inflation, but still not all that bad), and the Clinton years were pretty good too.

 

you use a term alot yet do not know what it means.  the secret is lower taxes.  works everytime it has been tried.   

CaptainObvious
Member


Joined: Sat Sep 5th, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 647
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Oct 12th, 2009 07:14 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Playing the Game wrote: Oh goody!  Kirk and the Oblivious One agree.  I can sleep now.  BTW Vokler and Greenspan tended to agree also.  Look where that got us.

Geez, Cognitive Dissonance is strong in you people isn't it?

First it is Volcker.  2nd, he made the tough choices after Jimmy Carter admin to get us out of the recession and inflation during the early Reagan admin.   By 1983 inflation had dropped dramtically.   That led to lower rates and lower inflation for all of us. 

After that, adding Greenspan to the mix got us quite a few years of relatively low inflation and GDP growth.

A good deal of the Reagan years were decent.   We had a blip under Bush 41 (recession and slightly higher inflation, but still not all that bad), and the Clinton years were pretty good too.

CaptainObvious
Member


Joined: Sat Sep 5th, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 647
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Oct 12th, 2009 07:02 pm
 Quote  Reply 
dover-diva wrote:
Two know it alls, without knowing anything.:cool: They must work for the gov't. Yeah-that's it.

Uh, no I don't work for the gov.  But PTG and dolphin both are career gov. employees.    What about you Diva?   You another gov. worker?

Gosh are you people clueless.

Angel1965
Member


Joined: Sat Aug 18th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 224
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Mon Oct 12th, 2009 02:00 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Just a sign of the times with more foreclosures on the horizon...

Kent County Sheriff Foreclosures:

http://www.co.kent.de.us/Departments/RowOffices/Sheriff/

The U.S. dollar?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iTDLbuQm_4aPE3XRNxr3R2buVNbA

Last edited on Mon Oct 12th, 2009 02:03 pm by Angel1965

dover-diva
Member
 

Joined: Mon Mar 23rd, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 1973
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sun Oct 11th, 2009 11:28 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Playing the Game wrote: Oh goody!  Kirk and the Oblivious One agree.  I can sleep now.  BTW Vokler and Greenspan tended to agree also.  Look where that got us.

CaptainObvious wrote:
Kirk wrote: ltc: I am not sure I would go so far as to say that government is "not a major player".  They are very large.  The federal government spends (excluding the odd stimulus year) near 20% of GDP.  Add in the state and local governments and you do get something over 25% (likely near 30% though I do not have numbers handy) of total expenditures.  The other two approaches will still yield percentages in that range.
Thank you for confirming the REALITY I've posted.   Geez, some people wouldn't know the back of their hand if somebody shoved it in their face.

Your fed number is right.   The number I quoted was gov. spending at all levels of gov.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_20th_century_chart.html




Two know it alls, without knowing anything.:cool: They must work for the gov't. Yeah-that's it.

Playing the Game
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 30th, 2008
Location: Delaware USA
Posts: 5408
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sun Oct 11th, 2009 09:06 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Oh goody!  Kirk and the Oblivious One agree.  I can sleep now.  BTW Vokler and Greenspan tended to agree also.  Look where that got us.

CaptainObvious wrote:
Kirk wrote: ltc: I am not sure I would go so far as to say that government is "not a major player".  They are very large.  The federal government spends (excluding the odd stimulus year) near 20% of GDP.  Add in the state and local governments and you do get something over 25% (likely near 30% though I do not have numbers handy) of total expenditures.  The other two approaches will still yield percentages in that range.
Thank you for confirming the REALITY I've posted.   Geez, some people wouldn't know the back of their hand if somebody shoved it in their face.

Your fed number is right.   The number I quoted was gov. spending at all levels of gov.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_20th_century_chart.html



ltcdolphin
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jun 24th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 735
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sun Oct 11th, 2009 07:14 pm
 Quote  Reply 
CaptainObvious wrote: Kirk wrote: ltc: I am not sure I would go so far as to say that government is "not a major player".  They are very large.  The federal government spends (excluding the odd stimulus year) near 20% of GDP.  Add in the state and local governments and you do get something over 25% (likely near 30% though I do not have numbers handy) of total expenditures.  The other two approaches will still yield percentages in that range.
Thank you for confirming the REALITY I've posted.   Geez, some people wouldn't know the back of their hand if somebody shoved it in their face.

Your fed number is right.   The number I quoted was gov. spending at all levels of gov.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_20th_century_chart.html



 

only oblivious would take so one sided thinking process.  the point still remians that governemnt has no business in economics, and that is what the formulas say.  but then again its easy to wam.   

CaptainObvious
Member


Joined: Sat Sep 5th, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 647
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sun Oct 11th, 2009 06:06 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Kirk wrote: ltc: I am not sure I would go so far as to say that government is "not a major player".  They are very large.  The federal government spends (excluding the odd stimulus year) near 20% of GDP.  Add in the state and local governments and you do get something over 25% (likely near 30% though I do not have numbers handy) of total expenditures.  The other two approaches will still yield percentages in that range.
Thank you for confirming the REALITY I've posted.   Geez, some people wouldn't know the back of their hand if somebody shoved it in their face.

Your fed number is right.   The number I quoted was gov. spending at all levels of gov.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_20th_century_chart.html


Playing the Game
Member


Joined: Wed Jan 30th, 2008
Location: Delaware USA
Posts: 5408
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Oct 10th, 2009 09:14 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Isn't it sad that you are arguing what percentage of taxpayer money that has been stolen from Americans by their government, represents total expenditures.  It should more realistically be less than 5%, which is the standard for any reputable charity.

Kirk
Member
 

Joined: Tue Oct 11th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 482
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Oct 10th, 2009 07:45 pm
 Quote  Reply 
ltc: I am not sure I would go so far as to say that government is "not a major player".  They are very large.  The federal government spends (excluding the odd stimulus year) near 20% of GDP.  Add in the state and local governments and you do get something over 25% (likely near 30% though I do not have numbers handy) of total expenditures.  The other two approaches will still yield percentages in that range.

ltcdolphin
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jun 24th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 735
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Oct 10th, 2009 06:40 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Kirk wrote: ltc: in case you forgot...

In the income approach to measuring GDP, those working for the government (including military personnel, police, fire, and educational employees... among others) are also included in that GDP measure.  Just because there is no "G" in the equation does not mean that the income derived from those sources are not there. Interest earnings on Treasury bills also appears in this measure.

In the value added approach, value of final goods and services sold includes those sold to the government.  If a desk is sold to government, at whatever level, it is recorded in the value added approach even though the equation does not specify a variable called "G".

Therefore, Government expenditures is in all three measures of GDP.  One explicitly (expenditures approach), and the other two implicitly through the receipts of households and businesses.

capt: government purchases of GDP measured goods and services, while large, is not 40% of GDP.

well said but the point to oblivious is that government is not a major player in gdp and thanks for pointing  that out to him.  it will go over his head and he will try and put more fictitious numbers out to try and prove his falsehoods. 

Kirk
Member
 

Joined: Tue Oct 11th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 482
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Oct 10th, 2009 06:25 pm
 Quote  Reply 
ltc: in case you forgot...

In the income approach to measuring GDP, those working for the government (including military personnel, police, fire, and educational employees... among others) are also included in that GDP measure.  Just because there is no "G" in the equation does not mean that the income derived from those sources are not there. Interest earnings on Treasury bills also appears in this measure.

In the value added approach, value of final goods and services sold includes those sold to the government.  If a desk is sold to government, at whatever level, it is recorded in the value added approach even though the equation does not specify a variable called "G".

Therefore, Government expenditures is in all three measures of GDP.  One explicitly (expenditures approach), and the other two implicitly through the receipts of households and businesses.

capt: government purchases of GDP measured goods and services, while large, is not 40% of GDP.

Last edited on Sat Oct 10th, 2009 06:30 pm by Kirk

ltcdolphin
Member
 

Joined: Wed Jun 24th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 735
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Oct 10th, 2009 03:43 pm
 Quote  Reply 
CaptainObvious wrote: ltcdolphin wrote: another wonderful waim moment that oblivious presents.  there are three different ways to look at gdp, of which oblivious presents only one, wonder why.  now my intent and it seemed clear to most except for waim oblivious was that government does nothing to create wealth.  government in itself just shuffles money around, very poorly at that, and for the most part is a drag on creating wealth and growing the economy.  granted it plays a role, a very small one, and is only in one of three formulas.  so what does that say about oblivious, again not presenting the whole picture to make himself look good to himself.  if oblivious owns a company, it can't be very successful.  probably feeds off of government largess.

You have no clue and no room to talk.  Your career was spent in the government, mine is in the private sector.  I never took a dime of gov. money unlike you who spent a career in government.
 

Three approaches to measuring GDP (macroeconomics)

1. Expenditures approach:

The total spending on all final goods and services (Consumption goods and services (C) + Gross Investments (I) + Government Purchases (G) + (Exports (X) - Imports (M))

GDP = C + I + G + (X-M)

2. Income approach (NI = National Income)

Using the income approach, GDP is calculated by adding up the factor incomes to the factors of production in the society. These include

Employee compensation + Corporate profits + Proprietor's Income + Rental income + Net Interest

3. Value added approach:

The value of sales of goods - purchase of intermediate goods to produce the goods sold.

Once again, you have no clue.  In any one of those methods, government spending plays a part.

Spending across all levels of government makes up about 40% of GDP.  That's not a small part.

Do some research before you stick your foot in your mouth again.



it's fun to watch you flop like a fish on the deck.  those are the three economic ways to measure GDP.  government is in the formula only in one.  guess you did not do your research once again or intentionally tried to leave out 2/3rds of the ways. 

you have no idea where my career was or was not.  there you go trying to be clairvoyant again.  if you are like that in your company, hate to see the results.   

dover-diva
Member
 

Joined: Mon Mar 23rd, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 1973
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Oct 10th, 2009 02:52 pm
 Quote  Reply 
While the cognoscenti of the Western financial world is attempting to spin the recent fall in the dollar as a stylish financial mystery play with a journalist based in the Middle East as its star, the Whodunit spin is a red herring: the facts are that the dollar is weak, and getting weaker.

The world is awash in dollars. There is a massive oversupply. We are electronically creating (printing in another era) hundreds of billions of dollars to buy our own T-Bill. Our deficit and spending has soared.

Kudlow, in his column, “Save the Greenback, Mr. President” explains that solution is to remove the excess dollars from the market and to stop “printing so much debt:”

for therapy, the Fed should begin moving excess cash from the economy….And they need to stop printing so much debt from Congress. All this massive spending and borrowing is killing us.
Instead, the Democrats in Congress and the White House are planning more spending: a second spending bill is on the table — ironically tagged as the second stimulus bill, which ought to stimulate the dollar tanking — and of course, President Obama’s $1 trillion health care spending boondoggle.

When town hall meetings are interrupted with shouts of “stop printing money” the jig is up. Note to the White House: in the age of the internet, you cannot hide printing $600 Billion a year from the world.

Until the Federal Reserve stops printing money to buy our own T-Bills, and the Democrats in Congress stop spending on new programs and we lower our deficit the dollar will continue to drop. End of story, no other outcome possible.

Simply put, the Dems are killing the dollar.

Last edited on Sat Oct 10th, 2009 03:01 pm by dover-diva

Angel1965
Member


Joined: Sat Aug 18th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 224
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Sat Oct 10th, 2009 12:16 pm
 Quote  Reply 
dover-diva wrote: go back to the rock that you crawled from under. DF (dis functional a**):D
You go girlfriend.  LOL.

dover-diva
Member
 

Joined: Mon Mar 23rd, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 1973
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri Oct 9th, 2009 11:47 pm
 Quote  Reply 
go back to the rock that you crawled from under. DF (dis functional a**):D

CaptainObvious
Member


Joined: Sat Sep 5th, 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 647
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri Oct 9th, 2009 11:43 pm
 Quote  Reply 
ltcdolphin wrote: another wonderful waim moment that oblivious presents.  there are three different ways to look at gdp, of which oblivious presents only one, wonder why.  now my intent and it seemed clear to most except for waim oblivious was that government does nothing to create wealth.  government in itself just shuffles money around, very poorly at that, and for the most part is a drag on creating wealth and growing the economy.  granted it plays a role, a very small one, and is only in one of three formulas.  so what does that say about oblivious, again not presenting the whole picture to make himself look good to himself.  if oblivious owns a company, it can't be very successful.  probably feeds off of government largess.

You have no clue and no room to talk.  Your career was spent in the government, mine is in the private sector.  I never took a dime of gov. money unlike you who spent a career in government.
 

Three approaches to measuring GDP (macroeconomics)

1. Expenditures approach:

The total spending on all final goods and services (Consumption goods and services (C) + Gross Investments (I) + Government Purchases (G) + (Exports (X) - Imports (M))

GDP = C + I + G + (X-M)

2. Income approach (NI = National Income)

Using the income approach, GDP is calculated by adding up the factor incomes to the factors of production in the society. These include

Employee compensation + Corporate profits + Proprietor's Income + Rental income + Net Interest

3. Value added approach:

The value of sales of goods - purchase of intermediate goods to produce the goods sold.

Once again, you have no clue.  In any one of those methods, government spending plays a part.

Spending across all levels of government makes up about 40% of GDP.  That's not a small part.

Do some research before you stick your foot in your mouth again.

T R
Member
 

Joined: Thu May 7th, 2009
Location:  
Posts: 182
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri Oct 9th, 2009 09:33 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Dick, 

Our governments, (federal, state and local) are at war and have been for many years. It is a war of economics.  The last battle we won was with a bluff. (Reagan's "starwars").  That is not going to work a second time.  There are too many countries involved and they have learned.  Meanwhile, we do not do a decent job of teaching economics in our schools.

I have had a theory since the 60s.  Gold never changes value.  The various currencies float around it according to how much influence their governments have.  Gold is worth nothing; but, it has always been something that can be exchanged for food or service.  The USA tried to stop this in the 30s and "fixed" the dollar price at $35.  This did not last long and the dollar price has gone up and down according to demand for some time.  Government has tried to regulate its (and especially silver) price.  That worked fine until our government drastically reduced the value of the dollar.  Now that no one has confidence that the dollar will be stable, look for the price of commodities to increase, again, with gold leading the way because it has historically been accepted.  It makes a good "yardstick" in determining the value of a currency.

No one and no government can continue to spend more than it has for any length of time.  I fear that our time is about to catch up with us.

The war is being lost and our children have no idea what is happening.  If they and our governments can not recognize that we are at war, how can we win?

(For the last couple of weeks, the price of gold and silver has gone up steadily, but, there has not been a mention of that in the local papers.  Why?)

tspong
Member
 

Joined: Fri Aug 24th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 3357
Status:  Offline
 Posted: Fri Oct 9th, 2009 08:16 pm
 Quote  Reply 
Copied below is a letter to the editor submitted to the Delaware State News. You can post your opinions by clicking on "Reply."

 

Restore the dollar


My family and I have always believed in "If you can’t afford it, don’t buy it." Now I see my country going into a $1.5 billion deficit this year, which will be added to the $11 trillion national debt already owed. For those of you who don’t realize how much money this is, a trillion dollars is 1,000 times a billion (that’s a one followed by 12 zeros and we owe over 11 of them). A billion dollars (a one followed by 9 zeros) is 1000 times a million (a one followed by 6 zeros). Could the $750 billion "stimulus" (excuse me, I meant "safety net") plan have contributed? Let’s see, that looks like $750,000,000,000 in wasteful pork spending, doesn’t it? Maybe it was the additional, massive, multi-billion-dollar bailouts and buy-ups (excuse me again, I meant "rescue plans")? Wait until the upcoming Cap and Trade (there I go again, I mean "pollution reduction and reinvestment programs"), or the "healthcare reform" (no, it’s "health insurance reform") bills get passed. This latest one on "health insurance reform" (got it) won’t increase our deficit (right now); it just cuts current Medicare benefits for our elderly Americans, but what about when it really kicks in — and still fails to cover 24 million Americans? And if there is so much "fraud and waste" which can be retrieved from Medicare, why wait? Let’s go after it now. And how could we forget the increased costs to YOUR state for the increase in Medicaid, which the states are on the hook for? Watch your taxes (both federal and state) rise to new levels. And why isn’t tort reform included as part of this bill? Could it be that the Obama Administration does not want to take on the Trial Lawyers Association or because this addition was suggested by (gasp) a Republican? And why no proof of American citizenship required to get benefits (another suggestion by those darned obstructionist Republicans)? The Dems in Congress rejected both amendments. Hmm? Wonder why?


Face it. All of these programs are to benefit specific groups who are owed political favors, to further push an amnesty for illegals (it’s coming), and yes, to increase the size of government and solidify the future of one-sided Democrat rule in Congress. Wisdom says, you never bite the hand that feeds you. And these programs will sink America even deeper in debt — my America, whose dollar is being devalued daily, whose creditor countries are meeting in secret and talking about abandoning the dollar as a worldwide currency, and whose prices will soar to unprecedented levels because of inflation. The taxes on the few of us who pay them will have to rise drastically. Taxes are always paid by the consumer, so if you increase the business cost or tax of manufacturing a medical supply or piece of equipment, that increases its cost, and this increase in cost is always passed down to the consumer, yes, even the consumer making less than $250 thousand. That’s just business. (Doggone American Capitalism). What we need to do IMMEDIATELY is STOP SPENDING, including what is left unspent of the stimulus. STOP giving away tax dollars (like $2 million in aid to Libya). Cut all pork from the budget. Cut all government employment back to pre-Obama levels. Then, bring together smart business leaders (not just Obama’s union buddies — I said "smart" leaders) and both parties of Congress, and devise a plan to start paying down this enormous, out-of-control deficit, and RESTORE faith in the American dollar. And Mr. President and Congress, STOP TRYING TO BANKRUPT MY AMERICA. We have seen how the left works, and we true, tried and tested, red-blooded Americans don’t like it. We are taking America back, so either get on board or get out of the way! Patriots unite! God Bless the United State of America.


Richard "Dick" Hilliard


Lake Wales, Fla.


(formerly of Milford)


 Current time is 05:53 am
Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  ...  Next Page Last Page  



Click here to read our Policies & Disclaimers.
Click here to go to the Newszap.com home page

Powered by WowBB 1.7 - Copyright © 2003-2006 Aycan Gulez
Page processed in 0.5898 seconds (45% database + 55% PHP). 61 queries executed.