A Complete Waste of Space

I'm wondering if I am the only one here who both wonders and worries where this whole trend in the Middle East is headed.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41288746/ns ... tn_africa/


comments?

On a related note, I was listening last night(before shovelling snow AGAIN) to Rand Paul. I don't agree with his approach, but appreciate his long-term concerns. I was sort of surprised for his call to end ALL foreign aid, notably to Egypt AND Israel completely. His rationale is that we simply can't afford to spend the money, and those two are at the top of the receipt list. I wonder how that will play with his fellow Senators, from either party. Further, I wonder if bailing out of the Middle East altogether would prove beneficial for the US in the long run.
Once again, any thoughts appreciated.

I agree and disagree, with Paul. on one hand we MUST cut spending and trim our deficit. that alone would be a HUGE boost to the economy. I know personally when I pay my CC debit down I have more to spend every month. On the other hand in the short term making those budget cuts could and probably would hurt the economy and force more people out of work (mostly government employee's which we have far too many of IMHO) so we need to deciede. do we hurt the ecomony in the short term? or do we take a long term outlook and not bankrupt a nation which will hurt far worse and far longer?

I was watching the news this morning. they were reporting some statistics that are quite shocking.
the bailout that was supposedly going to keep unemployment to below 8% failed to do so with unemployment currently standing at 9.4%
and the long term out look on getting unemployment down to the 2008 level of 5%, they predict will not happen until 2016. can we sustain that kind of unemployment within our economy for another 5 years. and can we sustain the current levels of spending with a reduced tax base?

I know in my own personal finances much like everyone in the sane world. when my income wnet down I stoped spending. I made cuts that were painfull. no vacation, no Cable TV. dropped my life insurance. sold my car and bought a $300 POS to drive, no more dinner out with the wife. I applaude Paul, he knows that WE need to do the same thing. is it painfull? YES. is it necessary? YES. the only question that remains is how drastic do we make those cust and how quick do we make them. unfortunatelly those in congress are a bunch of women who think about 1 thing RE-ELECTION, and I'll put every Democrat at the forefront of that list and many Republicans on the list also. I do believe that many on the right realise that this cannot be sustained. hence the Tea Party and the lateste election results. but on the left, with people like Pelosi and Reid thinking they can take care of you better then you can.
Pelosi and Reid and the far left are like drug dealers who use the Government programs as their crack supply. handing it out in free samples so lazy people will become dependent on it. which in-turn keeps them in power. and thus staring the cycle all over again. those people need to be disposed of.

CUDA wrote:I was watching the news this morning. they were reporting some statistics that are quite shocking.
the bailout that was supposedly going to keep unemployment to below 8% failed to do so with unemployment currently standing at 9.4%
and the long term out look on getting unemployment down to the 2008 level of 5%, they predict will not happen until 2016. can we sustain that kind of unemployment within our economy for another 5 years. and can we sustain the current levels of spending with a reduced tax base?

actually, CUDA, I think that 2016 business is overly-rosy, unless our economy changes fundamentally. I see no way, nor any reason why, the unemployment rate goes far below 7.5% as things are set up now. Domestic demand stays muted, even when it spikes most things aren't made here. More workers enter the workforce and every company downsizes(partly out of technological advances, party due to outsourcing).
I don't see 5% or less EVER unless we start into some new technological breakthrough or innovative production methodologies.

Pelosi and Reid and the far left are like drug dealers who use the Government programs as their crack supply. handing it out in free samples so lazy people will become dependent on it. which in-turn keeps them in power. and thus staring the cycle all over again. those people need to be disposed of.

some(much) of what you say I agree with, but this last bit? I disagree that Medicare, Social Security and at present, extended unemployment benefits are for the lazy or dependent. They are but a social safety net, and given the vast level of wealth in the population as a whole, the LEAST that can or should be done for folks. What we have to do, as a nation, is figure out how to run an economic system that benefits the many instead of the few. We had one, once, and it came about through government investment and very tight regulation of commerce and finance. Then, a group of pinheads came to power selling the inane concept of deregulation and that government involvement in anything is bad. And, guess what, CUDA, those folks did NOT include Pelosi or Reid.

Both of you, Slick and Cuda...have points...I am in general agreement with them...
When Obama said "innovation" the other night in the speech, I turned to my wife and
said..."substitute the word "miracle" and that's what he means.....cuz that's what it's
gonna take...even if we manage some sort of fiscal change....

I am not a person whose see's violence as the absolute solution to everything.....
I am just saying this....Some folks (In Government) might find it easier in the future,
to fight China as opposed to paying them....and when you add "overpopulation" to the
mix? The temptation to kill two birds with one stone? Is frighteningly doable....and it
has been done before, historically speaking.

When folks take a look at the multiple facets of U.S. involvement in the world?
The realization that we have totally and financially taken on the world's responsibility
towards prosperity and the pursuit of peace. Funded solely out of our pockets?
With no "return"....I just shake my head in disbelief, that we have paid in dollars and
lives...so China can have an uninterrupted oil supply from the Mideast at no additional
expense to them.....This is just one example of our national stupidity.

Old Pudfark sez: " A respectful golf clap for the folks who are making an effort to be civil on these forums.... "

callmeslick wrote:some(much) of what you say I agree with, but this last bit? I disagree that Medicare, Social Security and at present, extended unemployment benefits are for the lazy or dependent. They are but a social safety net, and given the vast level of wealth in the population as a whole, the LEAST that can or should be done for folks. What we have to do, as a nation, is figure out how to run an economic system that benefits the many instead of the few. We had one, once, and it came about through government investment and very tight regulation of commerce and finance. Then, a group of pinheads came to power selling the inane concept of deregulation and that government involvement in anything is bad. And, guess what, CUDA, those folks did NOT include Pelosi or Reid.

I'm not saying that ALL government aid is bad, I agree with medicare. SS comes out of mine and my employers pocket so it's not a "Government" program in a true sense. if the Government hadn't raided it for their own spending whims, it "MIGHT" have been close to self supporting. as far as the unemployment bennie's I have mixed feelings. it is necessary for those in need. but I personally know several people that are just riding it because they are "tired" of looking for work and have stopped looking.

Then, a group of pinheads came to power selling the inane concept of deregulation and that government involvement in anything is bad. And, guess what, CUDA, those folks did NOT include Pelosi or Reid

I'm aware of that. BUT it was Braney Frank who was Chair of the House Financial Services Committee and his buddy Chris Dodd both Democrats that wanted everyone to own a house regardless of their ability to pay, and mandated that banks loan to those people with little to no collateral OR financial backround,(which they were all too happy to do) which was largely responsible for inflated housing prices and a major contributor to the collapse of the economy.

agree, CUDA, that what Frank and Dodd(along with G. Bush) was unrealistic. Some folks just don't have the wherewithal to buy a home. However, had the GOP not pushed through financial deregulation during Clinton's time(and had Clinton not gone along with it) then no one could have traded in such dubious mortgage backed securities. Without being able to sell the bad paper easily, no bank would have underwritten those bad mortgages and left themselves exposed. And therein lies the explanation for the most recent downturn/recession. However, the core issue that plagues the US economy goes far beyond one recession. What I'm talking about is a systematic, wholesale change in the emphasis of the US economy. We now value income from investment by far over income from one's own labor. Government has made this even more pronounced through tax code changes such as lowering cap gains taxes. The result has been decades of offshore outplacement of manufacturing and services, companies seeking short-term profitablity with no long-term gameplan, etc. This setup virtually ensures high unemployment, long term loss of US competetiveness
(which doesn't really concern the wealthy, who can spread investments over the whole world) and ultimately puts pressure on government to eliminate the safety nets due to shrinking numbers of taxpaying earners(because, we have seen, the wealthy have sold the rubes on the idea that keeping their taxes LOW is a good thing). Trust me, this trend will not end well. History dictates as much.

callmeslick wrote:agree, CUDA, that what Frank and Dodd(along with G. Bush) was unrealistic. Some folks just don't have the wherewithal to buy a home. However, had the GOP not pushed through financial deregulation during Clinton's time(and had Clinton not gone along with it) then no one could have traded in such dubious mortgage backed securities. Without being able to sell the bad paper easily, no bank would have underwritten those bad mortgages and left themselves exposed. And therein lies the explanation for the most recent downturn/recession. However, the core issue that plagues the US economy goes far beyond one recession. What I'm talking about is a systematic, wholesale change in the emphasis of the US economy. We now value income from investment by far over income from one's own labor. Government has made this even more pronounced through tax code changes such as lowering cap gains taxes. The result has been decades of offshore outplacement of manufacturing and services, companies seeking short-term profitablity with no long-term gameplan, etc. This setup virtually ensures high unemployment, long term loss of US competetiveness
(which doesn't really concern the wealthy, who can spread investments over the whole world) and ultimately puts pressure on government to eliminate the safety nets due to shrinking numbers of taxpaying earners(because, we have seen, the wealthy have sold the rubes on the idea that keeping their taxes LOW is a good thing). Trust me, this trend will not end well. History dictates as much.

I completly Agree. This nation will need to do two drastic things to correct this problem

1. Dry up the Government tit that FAR too many people suck on. (sans primarily Medicare and SS, any one or any Nation that doesnt take care of it's seniors is desipcable)
2. Change the Tax code. Flat tax. NO LOOP HOLES OR SHELTERS. everyone pays. own up. if you want Government programs help pay for the damn things, dont expect someone else to give you a free ride

well, we've had a nice discussion about my Rand Paul observations, but still, no one weighed in over the Middle East. It would seem that the entire region is on the verge of wholesale revolution. First Tunisia, now Egypt and Yemen. Seriously, doesn't any think that the UAE and Saudi Arabia(along with Jordan, maybe Lebanon and Syria) won't be far behind? Right now, everyone I read in the press is yelling, "democracy, fuck yeah!", but not considering the endpoint. What happens when the inevitable democratization leads to power for the largest organized group, Islamists? And, starting with Egypt(who controls quite a bit of the shipping lanes) what does this say about oil supplies to the Western world?

callmeslick wrote:well, we've had a nice discussion about my Rand Paul observations, but still, no one weighed in over the Middle East. It would seem that the entire region is on the verge of wholesale revolution. First Tunisia, now Egypt and Yemen. Seriously, doesn't any think that the UAE and Saudi Arabia(along with Jordan, maybe Lebanon and Syria) won't be far behind? Right now, everyone I read in the press is yelling, "democracy, fuck yeah!", but not considering the endpoint. What happens when the inevitable democratization leads to power for the largest organized group, Islamists? And, starting with Egypt(who controls quite a bit of the shipping lanes) what does this say about oil supplies to the Western world?

I dont see Democracy taking a hold in the Middle east for 2 reasons Iran and fudamentalist Islam. Iran is looking to build a second Persian Empire, this instability will just expedite that. and Fundamentalists just want to consume everything. the fundamentalists will either comsume themselves or each other.

but the Big thing is just wait until the Oil is discovered under Israel's soil.

Good points.

Speaking of oil in the same sentence with our POTUS that "get's it", why is that son of a bitch NOT letting us drill? What is his logic in that? What kind of game is he playing other than fuck the Gulf Coast, the Alaskan oilfield, and pretty much anywhere that we can get oil enough to run this place for decades? There are shitload of jobs to be made if he'll get off his skinny ass and turn 'em loose so those boys can get the kelly down!

Trying to use up all "their" oil so we can sell ours at a later date? Doubt it. The fucking Mid-East is geared for producing oil rather than consuming it.