Why We Left The Gold Standard

On 7/28/2011 10:39 AM, Frank Galikanokus wrote:
Bremick wrote:

"Frank wrote in message
...
Jud wrote:

On Jul 22, 4:13 pm, Frank
wrote:


What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999 and
2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.


Despite your perpetual liberal slant and Bush-bashing, the real
problem is runaway spending. Republicans and Democrats alike feel that
it's their job to spend our money, especially if it is beneficial to
their constituency, regardless of what it means to the country as a
whole. I would love to hear your take on the Carter administration
economic policies. Can't blame Bush for them! Oh, and can you also let
me know at what point in time the current administration will accept
responsibility for their own unpopular and failed policies?

How's that stimulus package working out for you?

Actually, all reports have said that the stimulus helped, but not enough.

JAM

Those hundreds of billions helped who and what?

Look around. In the cities and small towns I frequent streets and highways are being
repaired. New sewer and water systems are being installed. Stimulus money was partially
responsible for improvements where I work.

I'm sure I'm not the only one that has noticed this.

Agreed. Here in the Maryland city where I live, a major East-West Road
which was in terrible shape was repaired and repaved in the last two
years specifically with stimulus money, as evidenced by the "ARRA" signs
describing the work that were posted on the side of the road during that
time.


At least the money wasn't spent on killing tens of thousands of innocent people.

Democrats and republicans will spend all our money and then some. The difference is that
democrats spend the money on people, the republicans spend the money on killing people.

JAM

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Bremick wrote:

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Jud wrote:

On Jul 22, 4:13 pm, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:


What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999
and
2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.


Despite your perpetual liberal slant and Bush-bashing, the real
problem is runaway spending. Republicans and Democrats alike feel that
it's their job to spend our money, especially if it is beneficial to
their constituency, regardless of what it means to the country as a
whole. I would love to hear your take on the Carter administration
economic policies. Can't blame Bush for them! Oh, and can you also let
me know at what point in time the current administration will accept
responsibility for their own unpopular and failed policies?

How's that stimulus package working out for you?

Actually, all reports have said that the stimulus helped, but not
enough.

JAM

Those hundreds of billions helped who and what?

Look around. In the cities and small towns I frequent streets and highways
are being
repaired. New sewer and water systems are being installed. Stimulus money
was partially
responsible for improvements where I work.

Streets and highways had always been repaired along with other
infrastructure long before the stimulus arrived. How many out of work folks
are qualified to repair roads and sewers?


I'm sure I'm not the only one that has noticed this.

At least the money wasn't spent on killing tens of thousands of innocent
people.

Care to document where stimulus money was used this way?


Democrats and republicans will spend all our money and then some. The
difference is that
democrats spend the money on people, the republicans spend the money on
killing people.

Have you ever seen war where people aren't killed? Ideally, all those
killed would be ememy combatants. I haven't seen stimulus money earmarked
for killing people (your agenda is showing), and "killing people" has
occurred during both Dem and Rep administrations. Both sides do keep
spending more and more money on "people bailouts" to the point where many
people become comfortable with it as an entitlement and become indignant
when govt realizes it may no longer be able to continue the freebies. What
ever happened to families providing support for each other? Out of work for
up to two years and still getting paid by the govt? Maybe time to relearn
a skill that someone needs.

Bremick wrote:

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Bremick wrote:

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Jud wrote:

On Jul 22, 4:13 pm, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:


What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999
and
2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.


Despite your perpetual liberal slant and Bush-bashing, the real
problem is runaway spending. Republicans and Democrats alike feel that
it's their job to spend our money, especially if it is beneficial to
their constituency, regardless of what it means to the country as a
whole. I would love to hear your take on the Carter administration
economic policies. Can't blame Bush for them! Oh, and can you also let
me know at what point in time the current administration will accept
responsibility for their own unpopular and failed policies?

How's that stimulus package working out for you?

Actually, all reports have said that the stimulus helped, but not
enough.

JAM

Those hundreds of billions helped who and what?

Look around. In the cities and small towns I frequent streets and highways
are being
repaired. New sewer and water systems are being installed. Stimulus money
was partially
responsible for improvements where I work.

Streets and highways had always been repaired along with other
infrastructure long before the stimulus arrived. How many out of work folks
are qualified to repair roads and sewers?


I'm sure I'm not the only one that has noticed this.

At least the money wasn't spent on killing tens of thousands of innocent
people.

Care to document where stimulus money was used this way?


Democrats and republicans will spend all our money and then some. The
difference is that
democrats spend the money on people, the republicans spend the money on
killing people.

Have you ever seen war where people aren't killed? Ideally, all those
killed would be ememy combatants. I haven't seen stimulus money earmarked
for killing people (your agenda is showing), and "killing people" has
occurred during both Dem and Rep administrations. Both sides do keep
spending more and more money on "people bailouts" to the point where many
people become comfortable with it as an entitlement and become indignant
when govt realizes it may no longer be able to continue the freebies. What
ever happened to families providing support for each other? Out of work for
up to two years and still getting paid by the govt? Maybe time to relearn
a skill that someone needs.


I never said that stimulus money was used to kill people.

Social Security hasn't cost us a dime. Medicare is not the cause of our finical crisis.
Unemployment Insurance did not cause this crisis.

Twelve years of republican leadership is responsible for laying this country low.


This is the legislation that created to big to fail.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm–Leach–Bliley_Act

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/...ct-of-1999.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodi...on_Act_of_2000



The is the legislation that made credit default swaps legal and derivatives unregulated.

http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2...rnization-act/

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cfma.asp



Here is where the responsibility lies.

http://www.time.com/time/specials/pa...877331,00.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Gramm

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/bu...y/17gramm.html

http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feat...8/wendy_gramm/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/0...nd-Wendy-Gramm

http://www.apfn.org/enron/gramm.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_default_swap

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_(finance)


And, Bill Clinton signed this legislation into law.

We haven't yet discussed the effects of two ruinous wars, the Bush tax cuts and their
contribution to this mess.

More of the same is not the answer.

JAM

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...

Twelve years of republican leadership is responsible for laying this country
low.
JAM

Dubya was only POTUS for 8 years.
As I like to recall, he was left a budget surplus by the Clinton administration,
which he blew on 2 pointless wars and tax breaks for the ultra-rich.

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Bremick wrote:

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Bremick wrote:

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Jud wrote:

On Jul 22, 4:13 pm, Frank Galikanokus
wrote:


What has laid this country low is republican deregulation in 1999
and
2000 and the Bush
tax cuts.


Despite your perpetual liberal slant and Bush-bashing, the real
problem is runaway spending. Republicans and Democrats alike feel
that
it's their job to spend our money, especially if it is beneficial
to
their constituency, regardless of what it means to the country as a
whole. I would love to hear your take on the Carter administration
economic policies. Can't blame Bush for them! Oh, and can you also
let
me know at what point in time the current administration will
accept
responsibility for their own unpopular and failed policies?

How's that stimulus package working out for you?

Actually, all reports have said that the stimulus helped, but not
enough.

JAM

Those hundreds of billions helped who and what?

Look around. In the cities and small towns I frequent streets and
highways
are being
repaired. New sewer and water systems are being installed. Stimulus
money
was partially
responsible for improvements where I work.

Streets and highways had always been repaired along with other
infrastructure long before the stimulus arrived. How many out of work
folks
are qualified to repair roads and sewers?


I'm sure I'm not the only one that has noticed this.

At least the money wasn't spent on killing tens of thousands of
innocent
people.

Care to document where stimulus money was used this way?


Democrats and republicans will spend all our money and then some. The
difference is that
democrats spend the money on people, the republicans spend the money on
killing people.

Have you ever seen war where people aren't killed? Ideally, all those
killed would be ememy combatants. I haven't seen stimulus money
earmarked
for killing people (your agenda is showing), and "killing people" has
occurred during both Dem and Rep administrations. Both sides do keep
spending more and more money on "people bailouts" to the point where many
people become comfortable with it as an entitlement and become indignant
when govt realizes it may no longer be able to continue the freebies.
What
ever happened to families providing support for each other? Out of work
for
up to two years and still getting paid by the govt? Maybe time to
relearn
a skill that someone needs.


I never said that stimulus money was used to kill people.

Considering your tone, I read your comment to suggest that at least
Democrats didn't use stimulus money to kill people, as if Republicans did.
Sorry if I read you wrong. One of the downsides of this type of
communication.


Social Security hasn't cost us a dime. Medicare is not the cause of our
finical crisis.
Unemployment Insurance did not cause this crisis.


I agree with the first two, and that no one type of handout caused the
crisis by itself. One could simply say that Congress has caused it.

Some Guy wrote:

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...

Twelve years of republican leadership is responsible for laying this country
low.
JAM

Dubya was only POTUS for 8 years.
As I like to recall, he was left a budget surplus by the Clinton administration,
which he blew on 2 pointless wars and tax breaks for the ultra-rich.

Yes, and the republicans controlled congress for four years prior the Bush's questionable
election.

JAM

In article , Bremick wrote:


when govt realizes it may no longer be able to continue the freebies. What
ever happened to families providing support for each other? Out of work for

Kind of hard when the family members you might turn to for support are
out of work too.

up to two years and still getting paid by the govt? Maybe time to relearn
a skill that someone needs.

Are there skills that someone needs? Seriously, I think the problem is
that US businesses don't need American workers, only American consumers.
They want to have the latter without the former, but it doesn't work that
way. And the few places that are hiring only want to hire people who are
already employed, which does not reduce unemployment one iota.

--
"Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS
crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in
TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in
bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither."

"Paul Ciszek" wrote in message
...

In article , Bremick wrote:


when govt realizes it may no longer be able to continue the freebies.
What
ever happened to families providing support for each other? Out of work
for

Kind of hard when the family members you might turn to for support are
out of work too.

It was like that before Social Security and people learned to survive.


up to two years and still getting paid by the govt? Maybe time to
relearn
a skill that someone needs.

Are there skills that someone needs? Seriously, I think the problem is
that US businesses don't need American workers, only American consumers.
They want to have the latter without the former, but it doesn't work that
way. And the few places that are hiring only want to hire people who are
already employed, which does not reduce unemployment one iota.

Good points. Also, many laid off or fired employees are too reluctant to
relocate or to learn new skills. Or to accept a lower paying job. Why
bother when they can make more money for the next two years on the dole?
All the while using the same infrastructure and services the rest of us are
paying taxes for to keep going.


--
"Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS
crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in
TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in
bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither."

Bremick wrote:

"Paul Ciszek" wrote in message
...

In article , Bremick wrote:


when govt realizes it may no longer be able to continue the freebies.
What
ever happened to families providing support for each other? Out of work
for

Kind of hard when the family members you might turn to for support are
out of work too.

It was like that before Social Security and people learned to survive.

And what was average life expectancy before Social Security?



up to two years and still getting paid by the govt? Maybe time to
relearn
a skill that someone needs.

Are there skills that someone needs? Seriously, I think the problem is
that US businesses don't need American workers, only American consumers.
They want to have the latter without the former, but it doesn't work that
way. And the few places that are hiring only want to hire people who are
already employed, which does not reduce unemployment one iota.

Good points. Also, many laid off or fired employees are too reluctant to
relocate or to learn new skills. Or to accept a lower paying job. Why
bother when they can make more money for the next two years on the dole?

Really? People are living well on Unemployment Insurance? Unemployment Insurance is
something that people pay into, it's not the dole.

All the while using the same infrastructure and services the rest of us are
paying taxes for to keep going.

It's called a free society where people come together for the common good.



--
"Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS
crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in
TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in
bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither."

"Frank Galikanokus" wrote in message
...
Bremick wrote:

"Paul Ciszek" wrote in message
...

In article , Bremick
wrote:


when govt realizes it may no longer be able to continue the freebies.
What
ever happened to families providing support for each other? Out of
work
for

Kind of hard when the family members you might turn to for support are
out of work too.

It was like that before Social Security and people learned to survive.

And what was average life expectancy before Social Security?



up to two years and still getting paid by the govt? Maybe time to
relearn
a skill that someone needs.

Are there skills that someone needs? Seriously, I think the problem is
that US businesses don't need American workers, only American
consumers.
They want to have the latter without the former, but it doesn't work
that
way. And the few places that are hiring only want to hire people who
are
already employed, which does not reduce unemployment one iota.

Good points. Also, many laid off or fired employees are too reluctant to
relocate or to learn new skills. Or to accept a lower paying job. Why
bother when they can make more money for the next two years on the dole?

Really? People are living well on Unemployment Insurance? Unemployment
Insurance is
something that people pay into, it's not the dole.

I never said people were "living well", although many are receiving over
$500 a week. That's $26,000 a year. I sure could manage to live on that,
considering the alternatives. People don't pay into it. It comes from
taxing employers, but guess who ends up funding the cost in the long run.
Once that 99 weeks runs out people then can qualify for other types of
federal assistance. It never ends.


All the while using the same infrastructure and services the rest of us
are
paying taxes for to keep going.

It's called a free society where people come together for the common good.

You sound like someone from the flower child generation.