GenSeneca
Well-Known Member
I was looking at some of the numbers today, and it seems there is in fact no solution at all.
Welcome to the club.
I was looking at some of the numbers today, and it seems there is in fact no solution at all.
Why does the right keep insisting on this myth that America is broke? Why does the right continue this rant about fiscal disaster? "If a family were in this shape they would be in bankruptcy Court." Bull!
Show me a family with a million dollar house, a quarter million dollar income, and a $100,000 mortgage who is in bankruptcy court. Then we'll talk.
A very apt analogy... If history is any guide, the politicians will simply kick the can of fiscal insolvency down the road for future generations to deal with. Meanwhile the can gets larger the farther down the road it goes and, will eventually, become to large to kick any further. Talk about leaving someone else holding the tab...Our debt equals our GDP. It's like a family with credit card debt that equals its annual income.
Along with the occasional non-partisan, simplistic, unrealistic and unworkable nonsense:So far, the only thing coming from Washington is unrealistic, simplistic and unworkable partisan nonsense.
Why does the right keep insisting on this myth that America is broke? Why does the right continue this rant about fiscal disaster? "If a family were in this shape they would be in bankruptcy Court." Bull!
Show me a family with a million dollar house, a quarter million dollar income, and a $100,000 mortgage who is in bankruptcy court. Then we'll talk.
Why does the right keep insisting on this myth that America is broke?
Denial is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence.
The entitlement state can't be reformed by one house of Congress in one year against a determined President and Senate held by the other party. It requires more than one election. The Obama Democrats have staged a spending blowout to 24% of GDP and rising, and now they want to find a way to finance it to make it permanent. Those are the real stakes of 2012.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303678704576442231815463502.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read
It is even worse than denial. Not only do they NOT believe there is a big problem, but they think we can get out of this predicament easily. We just need to raise taxes on the wealthy.
At all costs, the welfare state must be protected and expanded. Cuts in entitlements are completely unacceptable.
From a WSJ editorial today...
Right. Two wars, the gift to pharma named Medicare Part D, and huge tax cuts with no efforts what so ever to rein in spending had nothing to do with the problem. Its all Obama's fault.
By the way, who owns the Wall Street Journal now? Rudolf Murdoch you say? Ah yes, Rupert Murdoch. Wall Street Journal wouldn't be one-sided, would they? Not with Rupert Murdoch in charge. Of course not.
Denial: projection - admit both the fact and seriousness but deny responsibility.
- Red Herring: an argument, given in response to another argument, which does not address the original issue.
- Ad hominem: attacking the arguer instead of the argument.
- Appeal to motive: where a premise is dismissed by calling into question the motives of its proposer
Right. Two wars, the gift to pharma named Medicare Part D, and huge tax cuts with no efforts what so ever to rein in spending had nothing to do with the problem. Its all Obama's fault.
Sure.
By the way, who owns the Wall Street Journal now? Rudolf Murdoch you say? Ah yes, Rupert Murdoch. Wall Street Journal wouldn't be one-sided, would they? Not with Rupert Murdoch in charge. Of course not.
Should our government give supreme court powers over the president?
Does your Seeking of Truth have any "dimension", or does it just sit there for infinity. Just curious.Does your HYPOCRISY have any "dimensions", or does it just go on for infinity. Just curious.
Denial: projection - admit both the fact and seriousness but deny responsibility.
Well, it seems that Obama's predecessor admitted responsibility, but denied the fact (of how we got involved), and the seriousness of that involvement on the American economy and on "our children's future!"