« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

We Can Now Afford One of the Two Americas, But Not Both

Redstate Colleague Moe Lane gives us an exquisitely humorous explanation of how Democrat Peter Welch got exactly the vote he wrote Speaker Boehner and requested in the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives voted 318-97 against adding $2.3Tr to the US debt ceiling without offsetting reductions in Federal expenditures. Rhetorical idiocy soon ensued.

President Obama’s Baghdad Bob, Jay Carney, issued the following officially sanctioned malarkey.

“We understand the views that are being expressed” by the vote, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters before the vote. “We share the concerns that drive those views. (But) in the end, the debt ceiling has to be raised.”

(HT: CNN)

Let us now deconstruct this officious and disingenuous claptrap. The debt ceiling has to be raised or else what. Mayhem ensues? To a certain extent, in the present tense, it does. Would raising the debt ceiling forever avoid said mayhem? I would argue “No way!”

We have been attempting to fund two unique, separate and incompatible national missions. With only one finite source of revenue; that can’t continue. We can now have one of those two Americas- but not both. The debt ceiling has to be raised so that we can pretend to do the impossible a little while longer and not face the inevitable consequences.

The so-called “Alternate Right” recently did what the so-called “Alternative Right” typically does. They made an absolutely brilliant point regarding the finances and future of America, and then buried it under a turd-heap of racial pandering. In a post entitled “Whitey Lost The Moon”, Brett Stevens wages the argument that the American entitlement state has squandered trillions in national treasure and produced no tangible improvement in the plight of America’s poor. Take race out his argument, and he makes prescient point.

It keeps our failing population in a suspending animation where they are under no requirement to adapt and improve. They are patronized and told to take their hand-outs. “They”, whether white, Black, Hispanic or Comanche Indian, understand well that they are considered “Poor Dearies” who just can’t help themselves.

We see the predictable backlash against this societal hatred in the poetry below.

A rat done bit my sister Nell. (with Whitey on the moon)
Her face an’ arm began to swell. (but Whitey’s on the moon)
Was all that money I made las’ year (for Whitey on the moon?)
How come there ain’t no money here? (Hmm! Whitey’s on the moon)
Y’know I jus’ ’bout had my fill (of Whitey on the moon)
I think I’ll sen’ these doctor bills, Airmail special (to Whitey on the moon) (HT: Gill Scott Heron)

Nothing fills a person with more hatred than being “helped” by someone out of an obvious, in-your-face sense of petty and deliberately insulting noblesse oblige. Pity is a very poor mask which usually hides a combination of hatred and contempt. Poor Americans are smart enough to know that the compassionate wealthy of American high society detest them as human beings.

Not only does the American Welfare state utterly alienate and destroy the values of the people it purports to help, it also prevents America from being able to accomplish great things. We are obviously not as militarily powerful and technologically advanced as we could and should be. We see that in striking bas relief as brilliant Chinese Engineer Dr. Chiang Mianheng earns his doctorate at Drexel University.

He has a passion to build and perfect the Molten Thorium Salt Nuclear Reactor. But, even though his academic training took place in Philadelphia, PA, Dr. Mianheng will build all of his reactors in China. In another generation, brilliant Chinese Engineers will no longer require the American universities to excel in their chosen trade.

And of course, as Brett Stevens mentioned, NASA won’t be doing much in the near future beyond boosting Islamic self-esteem here on Earth. If cable TV and chirping cell-phones didn’t demand a high density of functional satellites, I seriously doubt our government would even continue to bother with a space program. We have so many voters with open hands down here on Earth.

Fortunately, God has blessed us with a Speaker of The House mean and nasty enough to tie myriad strings around any rising of the debt ceiling. Right now, Americans don’t fly to the moon, build safer nuclear reactors, or accomplish much beyond subsidizing our society’s lowest common denominator. By slamming this debt ceiling down hard, Speaker Boehner forces America’s feckless and enstupidated leadership to actually make necessary hard decisions.

We currently spend 60% of our national budget on entitlement programs. Another 17-20% (depending on how you classify expenditures) goes to national defense. This leaves another 1/5 of the pie to better the American nation. It’s small wonder that we soon won’t have a prayer keeping up with more ambitious, more patriotic and more intelligent nations.

We spend 60% of our national budget subsidizing our ongoing failure as a society and as a nation. We get what we pay and borrow for. This magical thinking, like our untenable national debt, our total inability to pass an annual budget and our complete unwillingness to face economic reality cannot continue. Yesterday, Speaker John Boehner took a good first step towards manning up and facing down bad trouble now. Support this man’s courage, and elect many more Conservative Republicans in the 2012 Elections. Or, we may well have to go back to the moon in order to escape a socialist hell-on-earth known as America.

COMMENTS

  • izoneguy

    Nope…..

    In the end when your credit card company cuts you off, you sell stuff to buy food.

    Let America go back to work.

    Stop the Obama job killing regulation and taxation policies.

    We WILL overcome this Marxist assault on America.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      and getting told every year that eventually the costs of entitlements would grow so high that austerity would have to be put in place throughout DoD to pay for our ongoing obligations. Increasingly, we will have to choose one set of priorities or the other. Room for both no longer exists.

    • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

        It does not have to be raised and it would be best if we don’t raise it. We cannot escape the consequences of our personal and national debt and its best that we administer the medicine to ourselves and share the suffering as a people, and actually, if we go ahead and let housing prices hit bottom and go ahead and deal with a balanced budget, we will hasten the day that jobs get created. Otherwise, we continue this FDR-BHO redux for many years.

        FTR, Mike DeVine has not had the option to print money or borrow from China. We truly can’t afford Le Seuer peas now! And yes, I’m pissed…

        • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

          http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/10/20/17216/time-for-the-darwinian-flush/

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            we were going to be tested as a people by the depths of this recession. Now I finally connected the testing to the debt ceiling and with the natural law of letting all hit bottom quickly so the healing can begin sooner.

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    So now our seniors are “our ongoing failure”? The vast majority of that 60% of entitlement spending goes for seniors. Also, we do have to remember that since we have payroll taxes (now about 47% of the total revenue take) that a fair amount of that 60% (not all of course, especially the medicaid stuff and medicare part d) is paid for without borrowing. The question we are facing as a nation is “do we want medical technology to determine the lifespans (and quality thereof) of seniors/the poor/disabled or do we want the ability to pay to make that determination” This isn’t a pushing grandma off the cliff argument, but the unspoken reality of the situation.

    As for the debt ceiling, it has to be raised or we will very quickly find ourselves in a Greece situation, as the current gap between revenues and expenditures is simply too large to cut without making immediate and large cuts to social security, medicare, and/or defense (non-defense discretionary is too small to do more than dent the problem). And yes, we do have a revenue problem (running at 16% of GDP vs historical 18-19%).

    • rowdydfw

      Now we have a quoted national debt of what? $14.6 TRILLION. (and feel free to correct my thinking here, I’m ad libbing)….

      We know that about $8 TRILLION of that is foreign debt we owe to other countries. However approximatley $6 TRILLION is owed to We The People in the Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid Trust Funds. Both of those funds are full of I.O.U’s. Are we paying interest to ourselves on the money owed to We The People by borrowing from China and other countries?

      You’re saying that 47% of the 60% in these entitlements is being paid by payroll taxes that should be going into those trust accounts. So that means only 13% is being charged back to the government against INCOME TAXES.

      So somebody tell me how great that 13% is. Is that 13% considered as the payback into those trust accounts?

      And so, this 13% is the extra that is being spent on the Seniors? That’s IT? And it’s breaking the US back? And it’s all our seniors fault that all our surpluses have been robbed…so we should all just lay down and die because the people in Washington DC don’t want to pay us back to the tune of 13% of the cost?

      I’m about to become one of those seniors here in a couple of years, and I want to know why I need to just lay down and die because nobody wants to chuck in that 13% terrible expense.

      Now I want to ask you something else. About the rest of our INCOME TAXES–WHY are we providing food stamps for perfectly able-bodied Americans under the age of 62? Why are paying for housing subsidies for perfectly able-bodied Americans under the age of 62? And why are we also feeding those perfectly able-bodied Americans children at school? Why are we subsidizing every god-awful piece of garbage programs that the democrats dream up? Like the Endowment for the Arts, a humongous EPA operating on junk science that is not only sucking off government $’s but also private sector $’s? A Department of Education when every state has a dirth of education experts on their own payrolls? And the many many more programs like the Department of Energy…BILLIONS of dollars, no harvest of our own resources, no grand alternative energy developed that can support the needs of a piss ant?l. So what are we paying the Department of Energy for as more $BILLIONS of our dollars leave the country to buy somebody else’s oil?

      • Death_of_the_Donkey

        roughly 47% of ALL revenue comes from payroll taxes (that is total revenue collected by the US). For right now social security and medicare (the original hospital fund only) are essentially covered fully by either collections or collections + trust fund. The problem is that once we subtract the payroll taxes from revenues we are left with only (approximately) $1.4 trillion in receipts to cover defense, the wars, interest on the debt, and any non-defense discretionary.

        • rowdydfw

          We’re speaking two incomes here….

          PAYROLL TAXES—$864.7 BILLION in 2010–specifically collected for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid (which you’re saying 47% is coverred by current payroll taxes, and 13% which is having to be covered by other funds aka Federal Income and other Taxes

          FEDERAL INCOME TAXES—$1.9 TRILLION in 2010

          So you’re telling me that that 13% of Social Security/Medicare/Medicaid cost represents approximately a half a trillion dollars?? That covers Medicare for seniors and Medicaid for non-senior able bodied Americans?

          • Death_of_the_Donkey

            you cannot take entitlement spending at 60% of spending and subtract the 47% of revenues since we know revenues don’t equal spending (hence the deficit). Also, I have tax contributions for social insurance (that covers everything) at $985 billion last year.

          • rowdydfw

            So you’re lumping both payroll and income taxes together instead of separating them out.

            This chart shows them separately:

            http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/yearrev2010_0.html

            Payroll: $864.8 billion
            Income: $1.9 trillion

            Then we have some other miscl income: $207.9 billion

            It’s hard to imagine that those entitlements are that big a drain, when the average SS payment is $800.00/mo. I know the hue and cry about the baby boomers, but the many aren’t having so great longivity like our healthy hardworking parents did. Out of my class of 31 graduates, we’ve already lost 8.And between those 8 that are dead, they produced 20 children now paying very well into system themselves. And the 23 of us left aren’t even using SS/Medicare yet. And we already have about 50 kids among us paying into the system, as well as ourselves. And none of those 73 kids are using Welfare or Medicaid.

            I’m just having a hard time with the whining, moaning and gritching over the expense of the seniors. When there is so much total useless spending going on.

            Thanks.

          • aesthete

            in any meaningful sense, so no, we shouldn’t seperate them. Also, 14% is a hell of a lot of money: ~80% of our budget is made up of military, Medicare, Medicaid and SS spending, and some of the discretionary spending is Constitutional and necessary. There isn’t nearly enough waste to allow us to fully fund the rest of government, considering that we’re pulling in ~16% of GDP and spending ~40%. 60% is more than half — seniors will have to sacrifice. If you don’t like that, then just console yourself with the fact that you don’t have to deal with the fallout of your elders having been too cowardly to deal with the problem before today: I assure you, the future generation will be much worse off than you will be, largely thanks to the choices of your peers to keep spending high.

  • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

    have to be very quickly raised or else armmageddon ensues. It had to be very quickly raised in 1979, 1983, in the 2000′s and now it has to be very quickly raised in 2012. And in each of those four situations, the tax rates and revenue levels varied.

    Eventually, when a major process fails in the same way on four different occasions, you need to stop with “the sky is falling” crap and take a very serious look at what is wrong with the process. Look at what it is trying to accomplish. Ask yourself why you continue to do it, if it guaruntees an average on one major emergency every decade.

    The question we are facing as a nation is ?do we want medical technology to determine the lifespans (and quality thereof) of seniors/the poor/disabled or do we want the ability to pay to make that determination?

    In every human society that has ever existed, ability to pay has ultimately played a major role in determining all of those things you mentioned above. It would be a genuine pleasure if that weren’t the case, but then again, I wish I had a pony too. There is eventually a hard constraint against resources. Continuing to spend the vast abundance of them on social welfare will only continue to make them completely unavailable for anything else.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack
    • Death_of_the_Donkey

      I think it is stupid to have a debt ceiling in the first place (I don’t believe many other countries do), as you already made those spending choices when you enacted a budget/policy.

      As for the second point, the problem is that neither side is willing to admit that this is the case. And because they won’t admit it, we cannot address it as a society.

      • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

        Given the obvious amd well-taken point you concluded you response with, than the system will have to eventually crash. What we’re doing now is only forestalling a pre-ordained failure. Face the consequences now. Clean up after them now.

        Forestalling a pre-ordained day of reckoning only makes it a worse process. It’s like knowing you have a bunch of cavities in your mouth and then putting off going to the dentist until you get a jaw infection. This system will have to fail and be redesigned.

        • Death_of_the_Donkey

          one, I believe a crash of the system from this WILL get pinned on the Republicans and could easily lead to a 1932 style electoral route.

          two, the fallout would be so bad, that we could literally end up with an economy like Greece (and nearly overnight). Just imagine what happens to the job/investment picture if interest rates spike (10 year) to 6-7%, let alone double digits. And couple that with doctors and defense contractors not getting paid.

          • YnotNOW

            #1 – if the system does crash, the people who have been warning about it and proposing actual solutions will be the ones trusted to rebuild after the predicted disaster happens (see Churchill, Winston, circa 1937).

            #2 – The crash will have actual, very bad impacts on all Americans – us included. We actually care about them (and ourselves, and American success) and want to head off that crash if at all possible. So we’ll keep trying even if the outlook is not so rosy right now.

          • acat

            I would like to see all those who think Cloward-Piven is a nifty idea forced to eat the fruit of their labors…

            Mew

          • YnotNOW

            for wishing ill on such well-meaning people. (wink)

          • acat

            nt

          • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

            In fact, if BHO lost in 2012, and if the GOP captured the US Senate, it would worse for the GOP to have this happen. Remember, part of why the GD got hung around Hoover’s neck is that he had 3 years of it on his watch and things weren’t improving.

          • acat

            Reagan, IMO, took the right lesson from Hoover – highlight the improvements!

            Mew

          • Death_of_the_Donkey

            could eliminate (or at least greatly reduce) the possibility of a future default/collapse, but neither party is willing to compromise at all (on any issue).

          • rightwingmom52

            compromises by the GOP? Seems to me that it’s the Democrats who are not willing to compromise which is par for the course. And I think you’re going to have a difficult time convincing most here at redstate that “neither party is willing to compromise at all (on any issue)” when we’ve been screaming at the top of our lungs to the GOP to stop compromising on just about everything.

          • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

            Just how does the House of Representatives compromise with the null set?

          • acat

            i

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            I bought my first house in 1990 at an interest rate of 10.5% (had to pay points to get it that low, and my credit score was immaculate), and thought it was a bargain after the 14-15% mortgage interest during the Carter years. Believe me when I say that America would survive interest rates in the 6-7% range–easily!

        • acat

          The State ran out of money over a decade ago .. they’ve had a structural deficit in place for something like a decade. Credit rating is turning to {excrement}, and even the Quin move to jack the income tax up won’t help enough…

          My vote, for what it’s worth… Pull. The. Plug.

          Mew

          • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

            the Illinois movers and shakers will shake and move to Texas. It’s the age-old liberal formula: raise taxes and lower revenues.

  • juumanistra

    I suspect if you laid it on any thicker we’ll all have to start singing in German. Or look at a title-card that says, “IN THE FUTURE, THERE IS ONLY WAR.” As I’m sure others will comment on the wider thrust of things, I’ll confine myself to my two favorite hobby-horses: Nuclear power and space policy.

    On the former: Why is it a bad thing if the Chinese build MSFRs and spend a generation establishing the infrastructure to train those to build and operate them? It’s certainly better for the Chinese people were that to come to pass, given that it means that many fewer coal-fired plants would be built. And given the nature of modern technical literature, it is not as if what the Chinese are doing will be a secret: English is the lingua franca of the technical community and those involved with MSFR development will invariably publish about what they’re up to. (There aren’t exactly many breakthroughs to be had in the area beyond very high temperature applications, given that it’s been proven feasible since we did it at Oak Ridge in the Sixties.) True, it’s titanically stupid on our part not to be enthusiastically pursuing MSFRs in light of our nominal interest in energy independence, but radiophobia is what it is.

    As for NASA…NASA will continue to be what it has been for the past two-and-a-half decades: An agency tasked with undertaking basic research into what lays beyond Earth’s orbit with an annual budget of $15-20bn. Cheekiness about the stupidity of Islamic outreach aside, there is still much good work for it to do, work that will be able to be better pursued now that a third of its annual budget isn’t being devoured by providing ferry service for seven to LEO.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      It’s not a question of whether it’s being done in secret, it’s a question of whether it will ever be done in the US. If you spend all your money on one thing, you don’t have it around to spend on anything else.

      And I posit that against a leafy, green background of our current cohort of students being behind nearly every industrialized in the world on standardized tests of mathematical and scientific aptitude.

      • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack
        • acat

          and I’ve always wondered why, if it really is, some private outfit hasn’t built one yet….

          Thorium is a lot safer than uranium or plutonium. You wouldn’t want to build your house on top of it (google “west chicago thorium kerr-mcgee” sometime) but it’s not nearly as nasty.

          Mew

          • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack
          • juumanistra

            By the Atomic Energy Commission, under the rather conveniently named Molten Salt Reactor Experiment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten-Salt_Reactor_Experiment

            Ran for four years without failure and was an effective proof-of-concept design that validated that MSFRs were viable. Private firms haven’t developed it due to technical inertia: Following the freeze in American reactor-building following Three Mile Island, Westinghouse and GE were reduced to essentially keeping the doors open by selling fuel rod assemblies. Such an enervation of the reactor builders doesn’t lend itself well to adopting reactor paradigms that would shut the doors to your only remaining revenue source.

            And it wasn’t until recently that there was sufficient interest to justify in trying to develop a commercial MSFR. Still really isn’t, given NRC’s regulatory posture and the conservatism of the financial community vis-a-vis nuclear power. I know there’re a couple of outfits working on modular MSFRs, though I’m not sure how many of them are actually serious about trying to bring a product to market.

          • ehosterman

            in commercial service. One of the issues with molten salt or liquid metal cooling loops is that they soidify when they get cold. That could be a real operational pain in the butt. Also, I suspect in long term commercial service there could be significant corosion issues. We already have huge costs to repair corrosion damage. While the thought of using thorium as fuel is attractive (because it’s relatively plentiful), the industry has a lot of experience with light water reactors and knows how to handle the current maintenance issues.

          • juumanistra

            As is the the chemistry of inline reprocessing, which is one of its major benefits. Anything that requires usage of vast amounts of fluorine-bearing compounds is just asking for an impressive industrial accident sooner or later. The solidification of the coolant, from what I understand, has never been a particularly big problem for fast reactors. (As all of the commercial molten metal-cooled systems being pondered are fast reactors) Most of the mark-ups make provision for in-line refueling, so you should only have to shut down the reactor for your scheduled maintenance: Sure, it’s an engineering problem to design around, but there’s no reason you can’t just keep a natgas-fired boiler hooked to the storage tanks you pump the coolant to when you power the reactor down so as to keep the coolant molten. (The real threat with molten metal systems is if the coolant catches fire. Which is why I’m eternally mind-boggled that folks push molten sodium-cooled systems, given the number of near disasters that’ve been had with such reactors and their coolant spontaneously combusting when exposed to open air.)

            And really, there’s no technical reason why one cannot run LWRs on the thorium fuel cycle: Shippingport, after all, spent a fair amount of its lifespan using it. Mostly technical inertia again, I suspect, as to why it hasn’t been more thoroughly explored.

          • http://www.oldewatches.com psykryph

            While the thought of using thorium as fuel is attractive (because it?s relatively plentiful), the industry has a lot of experience with light water reactors and knows how to handle the current maintenance issues.

            I agree wholeheartedly.

      • juumanistra

        I agree that incomprehensibly vast sums of money have been wasted through the New Deal and Great Society entitlement programs. But I also think you overstate your case and downplay just how wealthy the U.S. remains, despite the size of its public debt. I have no doubt that, even were it to come to pass that the Democrats got their wish-list and the budget was brought into balance only via tax increases, that the capital could and would be found to roll out MSFRs en masse. The problems preventing its commercialization are political, due to NRC’s regulatory capriciousness and rampant radiophobia, and technical, due to the fact that nobody’s ever built a commercial scale one and that there’re serious metallurgical issues to address if we want to exploit its very high temperature applications. They will not be built Stateside so long as we choose not to, not due to lack of financing.

        We trail behind the rest of the industrialized world in terms of math scores due not to deficiencies in education but the vagaries of the respective standardized tests: Control for the mongrel nature of the American population and you find that white students consistently place in the top quarter of scores. It’s really more an indictment of the utter failures of black culture and the educational establishment’s multicultural pieties than anything else.

        • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

          Most people don’t hate to disagree with me.

          • juumanistra

            One whose emotional resonance needs to be fought, no matter how alluring it is. Alas, I detest having to play the role of intellectual wet blanket at times like this. Far funner to join in the chest-beating and fist-shaking about FDR, LBJ, and the entitlement politics of the past four decades.

            More broadly, you’re a generally thoughtful and even-keeled front-page diarist on a site that’s, at times, been prone to bouts of histrionics. Best to be kind to those who one agrees with more often than not, isn’t it?

        • aesthete

          to not note the selection bias inherent in these tests: for example, the high-school and college-educated populaces of China are 1) in the minority, 2) extremely urbanized, and 3) in large part still migrating to the developed world and/or languishing in the public sector (though this last stat is slowly beginning to change). Most countries, especially in the developing world, weed out the dull and the miscreants early on (K-6), and the competition to get into the high school and college track is extremely intense as a result. Though it can certainly stand improvement, the US doesn’t do as dismally as is generally reported: considering that its average student is not far behind the cream of the crop of other countries, it does very well, in fact. US colleges are particularly unrivalled, and will probably stay that way for a good long while.

          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            everyone knows that Asians are just genetically better at the maths. White men can’t jump, Jews are good with money, Blacks are good at sports. And the Irish are a bunch of drunks.

            /well that last part is true anyway.

    • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8
  • izoneguy

    to take care of me….

    The government won’t be able to support everyone in their retirement.

    • acat

      (yes, I’m kidding.. mostly..)

      • earlgrey

        dependent on my babies is heartbreaking.

        I feel guilty enough for being a passive fool for 20 years of my voting age eligabilty. I really struggle with guilt over what this country will be like for my kids.

        I just hope I live long enough to see some common sense return to this great land.

        • acat

          although the quote is variously attributed.

          If you’re not a liberal at 18, you have no heart.
          If you’re not a conservatve at 28, you have no brain.

          Mew

          • earlgrey

            that went nuts over Obama].

            I’ve always been conservative and voted R, but as Cold Warrior reminds us that is not enough.

          • acat

            The part that amazed me wasn’t the kids – they’ve never been all that good at picking candidates, one reason “if I were in charge” the voting age would be 21 with an exception for armed services and ROTC.

            Same with the drinking age. If you’re old enough to be in the army you’re old enough to buy and consume alcohol.. and at that age, you’ve probably got a sergeant who will kick your {ahem} more consistently and effectively than any parent…

            Anyway, what amazed me were the number of moderates whose major motivation was “doing something historic”. Like voting for Obama was akin to pulling down the Berlin Wall. Evidently, they forgot the building of the Berlin Wall was also historic, eh?

            Mew

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            The recession is the main factor.

          • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

            sorry, just could not help myself.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            himself with evanagelicals in the 70s and 80s

          • izoneguy

            On the night before election day.

            Call it “Hangover 2012″ the Day Obama lost…….

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • izoneguy

            I have been having far too many “we lost to a Marxist” parties.

          • earlgrey
          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
          • izoneguy

            http://www.jackdaniels.com

      • swvapatriot

        that they would probably be taking care of me, when I could no longer work myself.

        Before the New Deal & Soc Sec it was how all but the wealthy lived out the latter part of their lives, and I for one see no joy in retiring and doing nothing productive ’till I die.

        • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

          farming out charity and taking care of our families and that natural law is exacting a price.

          • earlgrey

            didn’t know how to express it. Unfortunately most people still don’t realize this. For all the squawking about the arrogance of GWB, I find it ironic that so many people still think we can spend all this money without facing the consequences.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            The pure financial facts of so many dollars and so much debt and the inevitable inflation and creditor loss of confidence; but also what we have turned ourselves into spiritually. Let me give a personal example from the mid-90s when I was making boo-coos of money. Someone came by for some charity and it was worthy. I told them I gave at the “office”, meaning that I paid taxes. Later, I felt quite ashamed of that statement, but I think a lot of us drift into that mindset of “well I give so much for the poor thru the fed govt”…

          • earlgrey

            people give much less to charity than in the states. The thing about giving to charity is that it is gvien by chioice, which for those that are religious is how The Bible meant for giving to be. There is more satisfaction for the giver to give by choice to a cause they support.

            Of course there is no way we can contribute to every worthy cause. Sometimes you just have to say no.

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

            The Tragedy of American Compassion which recounts how charity was handled in the 19th century and before the massive welfare state.

          • acat

            …mostly the various churches and religious organizations… can pick up the slack when we break the welfare state – as we must to survive – that I’m “being unreasonable” or “being unrealistic”…

            Thank you again, DeVine one, for pointing out truth.

            Mew

          • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine
  • http://www.ArchitecturalShots.com mdyou

    Seriously, folks, first it was the banking crisis, and by extension the auto bailouts, then porkulus, then QE 1, 2, and soonly 3. Now it’s the debt ceiling.

    I don’t discount the expected or unexpected horrors in front of us. But they are there no matter what. We are only delaying the inevitable, and making the climb back worse and more perilous. NO ONE CAN SANELY ARGUE THIS POINT.

    Let’s get started, do it as humanely as possible, but let no one doubt – people are going to get hurt.

    • http://theminorityreportblog.com Repair_Man_Jack

      We’ve now had this debt ceiling crisis 4 times out of the past 50. If you were an industrial engineer and had to run a large process, if it failed once in every 12.5 iterations, that would be either a wake-up call or a ticket to the local unemployment line if you didn’t get it fixed.

      • swvapatriot

        Thanks for your thoughtful treatment of the one thing that causes me the most concern for my kids’ and grandkids’ future. I read almost everything on RS every day, and this one , I think, is what all else hangs on.

        The liberal approach is simply blind lunacy which will bring this once great republic to utter ruin. any so-called moderate approach could only delay this ruin for a few years.

        The only sane, the only possible solution would be a conservative government instituting a program of severe austerity, with free enterprise growing tax laws (cuts), drastically cutting back on intrusive, business-killing regulation, and painful cutbacks on entitlements, leading to an system like that done in Chile years ago.
        I think history shows that it is possible to grow out of the mess we’re in, if we don’t turn right around and throw the increased revenue down the same rat-hole as has been done in the past.

        Many have shed precious blood to preserve our nation and its Constitutional system, and it may be that I, at 62 years, may be called upon to make a far lesser sacrifice of not getting much Social Security, if any at all, to prevent the coming collapse. I am OK with that if the America we have known can be recovered and preserved for my offspring. I have been carpentering all my life, and am willing to keep on doing so until I am no longer able, trusting the promises of my children that they will take care of me while I finish out what life remains when I can no longer work.

        C Baker
        Christian, Patriot, Veteran

      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine