Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If this had passed in the House it would be placed on the pile of bills Dirty Harry has not allowed action on in the Senate. What the hell, it might require the Democrat Senate to pass something in the way of a budget and they are out of the habit with 3 consecutive years of no budgets.
What they also don't understand is money's real value is in the amount of goods and services it can buy.
If there is inflation (expanding the supply of money relative to goods) Money buys less. If there is deflation (decreasing money relative to goods) Money buys more. It works opposite with debt the more inflation it is easier to pay off debt. With deflation debt become near impossible to pay off, because you are making less money and your debt is getting larger day after day and if you cannot pay of debt you default, and if everyone defaults people get terrified and hide there money rather then invest it and when that happens the economy dies.
Except for now there is not enough money to meet interest obligations in the goods and services economy. If they had written down principle and allowed defaults, then we wouldn't be here.
Oh and one more thing. If you have massive unemployment and time = money. Then why not build good infrastructure. You lose when people stand around and collect food stamps.
Thats what they do now isnt it? They create IOU's for Social Security then create IOU's to the US Treasury, taxing the revenues to pay it back.
That's what the commercial banks do. Why don't you complain about the 60 trillion in credit they created? And now you want them to give us all our money at rent?
If this had passed in the House it would be placed on the pile of bills Dirty Harry has not allowed action on in the Senate. What the hell, it might require the Democrat Senate to pass something in the way of a budget and they are out of the habit with 3 consecutive years of no budgets.
It's such a shame the GOP has never controlled the House and the Senate at the same time!
Oh, wait... they did, from 2003 to 2006... and no balanced budget amendment was so much as introduced in either house of Congress...
Oh, that's right, the President was a Republican who routinely submitted budgets full of massive deficits to Congress, that were subsequently routinely rubber-stamped by both housed, including by John Boehner and Eric Cantor, the leadership that now expects you to think they care about balancing the budgets!
And just like Pavlov's dogs, you go nuts when they ring the bell, just like you're supposed to...
First they accuse you of being long winded, and then that you have no substance. I keep pointing it out but whenever I explain it with any of the needed complexity, there is no response.
Here is plenty of substance to what is exactly going on.
One cannot discuss the roles of finance and government without the concept of economic rent, because rent seeking is the largest category of bank lending – and also of tax favoritism. Today’s academic mainstream rejects the classical idea of unearned income, defined as that which has no counterpart in socially necessary costs of production. But economic historians will recognize the concept of a free lunch as the centuries-long description of rentiers – bankers and landlords in the private sector. It is to this class that Keynes referred to when he spoke of “euthanasia of the rentier” as the wave of social reform to avert future depressions.
It's such a shame the GOP has never controlled the House and the Senate at the same time!
Oh, wait... they did, from 2003 to 2006... and no balanced budget amendment was so much as introduced in either house of Congress...
Oh, that's right, the President was a Republican who routinely submitted budgets full of massive deficits to Congress, that were subsequently routinely rubber-stamped by both housed, including by John Boehner and Eric Cantor, the leadership that now expects you to think they care about balancing the budgets!
And just like Pavlov's dogs, you go nuts when they ring the bell, just like you're supposed to...
Roy already as an excuse for their failure, the Dems threatened to fillibuster so Bush and the Repubs just gave up. In otherwords, they were not willing to stand up fight for what they thought was right and it is all the fault of the.......................wait for it.....................Democrats
Moral of the story? Best way to balance the budget is end Bush's wars, his tax cuts, and his Medicare part d garbage.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
