HELP AGAINST ASSHOLE REPUBLICAN...please!
- Thread starter A1Yola06
- Start date
I'm just being high and throwing some crazy ideas out there. I doubt it would ever happen. But I think the government will continue to do what it wants as long as someone elects them. The American people like to complain about the state of the economy, but they don't want to give up their standard of living to get there.
Maybe one day, in a perfect world, we would vote people into office who wouldn't spend their way into debt. Prob not though.
Maybe one day, in a perfect world, we would vote people into office who wouldn't spend their way into debt. Prob not though.
Then what do you think the government should do with ASSETS that exceed $250,000 in value? For example, a lot of houses in San Jose are worth at LEAST half a million dollars. Should the government be able to take those and leave the families with only $250,000? It's not the debt of our parents, it's the debt of the government. Our parents did not go out and carelessly spend trillions of dollars in taxpayer money...the government did.
It's bad enough that the government taxes us when we are alive, taxes us when we die, and taxes the family on the actual inheritance. It's not the fault of the people that the government prints money it does not have. People earn money, and when they die, that money should stay in the family...not go to the government. They already take money they don't earn.
You want to get rid of the debt? Start voting for people that don't use taxpayer money to go on vacation, or to drive around in SUV's and other expensive, gas guzzling vehicles. Because really, who do you think pays for these government officials to drive? US! Who do you think paid $50,000 for Nancy Pelosi to stop in Italy for a little vacation? US! Who pays for her private jet to fly her back to San Francisco every 2 weeks? US! They use our tax dollars for shit they can pay for out of their own pockets. So instead of putting our money towards the country's debt, they are using it for recreational purposes and printing more money to pay off a debt that increases when they do so.
It's bad enough that the government taxes us when we are alive, taxes us when we die, and taxes the family on the actual inheritance. It's not the fault of the people that the government prints money it does not have. People earn money, and when they die, that money should stay in the family...not go to the government. They already take money they don't earn.
You want to get rid of the debt? Start voting for people that don't use taxpayer money to go on vacation, or to drive around in SUV's and other expensive, gas guzzling vehicles. Because really, who do you think pays for these government officials to drive? US! Who do you think paid $50,000 for Nancy Pelosi to stop in Italy for a little vacation? US! Who pays for her private jet to fly her back to San Francisco every 2 weeks? US! They use our tax dollars for shit they can pay for out of their own pockets. So instead of putting our money towards the country's debt, they are using it for recreational purposes and printing more money to pay off a debt that increases when they do so.
I was actually on my back porch smoking a cig thinking of the exact same thing ^^^
Not sure what I'd do. My first response would be to take the land and sell it to a buyer, and then use the money towards the estate. But that would be pretty damn communistic. Not sure how I'd get around it, because estate planners are always one step ahead and they'd figure out some other way to hide a rich man's money.
But I disagree about it not being the debt of our parents. The debt of our parents and the debt of our government are the same thing IMO. They got to choose how to run shit from like 1965-2009. That's what they decided to do with it. Taking out loans and mortgages they couldn't afford, buying huge cars, huge houses, wasteful spending. The current state of the economy is a reflection of our parents, and I hold them and the government equally accountable.
Unfortunately, the majority of America is too uninvolved and lazy to do anything so they just let the government fuck us in the ass while they watch Michael Jackson's funeral on TV.
Not sure what I'd do. My first response would be to take the land and sell it to a buyer, and then use the money towards the estate. But that would be pretty damn communistic. Not sure how I'd get around it, because estate planners are always one step ahead and they'd figure out some other way to hide a rich man's money.
But I disagree about it not being the debt of our parents. The debt of our parents and the debt of our government are the same thing IMO. They got to choose how to run shit from like 1965-2009. That's what they decided to do with it. Taking out loans and mortgages they couldn't afford, buying huge cars, huge houses, wasteful spending. The current state of the economy is a reflection of our parents, and I hold them and the government equally accountable.
Unfortunately, the majority of America is too uninvolved and lazy to do anything so they just let the government fuck us in the ass while they watch Michael Jackson's funeral on TV.
Actually, it's fairly young people that were taking out loans and mortgages they could not afford. It was Barney Frank that wanted to give EVERYBODY the chance to buy homes, which is when the banks started giving out those bullshit mortgages to people with no means to pay them back. It was the 30 somethings creating dot com companies that were spending beyond their means, not the 40 and 50 somethings. Before the new plan, people got loans and shit because they could afford to do so. Loans were not being handed to people that could not afford them.
What pisses me off is, Barney Frank is back at it. Even though his first idea failed miserably and helped send this country into a downward spiral, he wants to take MORE MONEY and put it towards his new housing project. This man had the audacity to go on national television and blame everybody but himself for the housing crisis. Had this never happened in the first place, the economy would be in a somewhat better place.
What pisses me off is, Barney Frank is back at it. Even though his first idea failed miserably and helped send this country into a downward spiral, he wants to take MORE MONEY and put it towards his new housing project. This man had the audacity to go on national television and blame everybody but himself for the housing crisis. Had this never happened in the first place, the economy would be in a somewhat better place.
Yeah Barney Frank isn't the most intelligent man economically. Socially I think he's the man. Calling Scalia a homophobe was classic.
It'd be kind of nice if we could vote for someone who would run the country's economy well and someone who would run the country's social issues well. Seems like we always get one or the other or George Bush.
It'd be kind of nice if we could vote for someone who would run the country's economy well and someone who would run the country's social issues well. Seems like we always get one or the other or George Bush.
HAHA! Yea. Unfortunately, politicians just fuckin' lie, so it's hard to vote for the right ones. The only thing that really matters to them is their bottom line. If interest was focused on the welfare of the country, we'd be golden. But, it's not, so we're not. They seem to forget that the people are their employers.
A1Yola06....friend...you are a dumb ass. Plain and simple. You know you've taken an L when you can't even respond to the article right in front of you, and think that spouting off "He supported Bush" is an automatic Win. It doesn't work like that. "Bush" is the new "your mom"....step your game up.
Your best attempt at refuting what he said is the line about driving 6 year olds to soccer practice. Another person implies that only WSJ readers can afford to have kids that play soccer. Yes, go back...read the post. And this is coming from someone who i GUARANTEE YOU grew up with a whole hell of a lot more than I did (welfare, food stamps, section 8, single parent, free lunch, child support, DSHS.....everything), trying to speak on my level. Do me a favor and don't do that, unless you are that. None of this even speaks on the fact that 90% of soccer (and little league, etc.) leagues are FREE.
Now...
Our generation is full of shitheads. I can't say it any plainer than that. Anyone age 15-35 is a fuckin' asshole. You have people making 30K a year thinking they'll be able to afford a house in the next 5 years--and some young, stupid ass banker will probably give it to them, assuming prices (and more importantly, interest rates) will continue to rise and they'll turn a profit no matter what. Dictionary definition of Subprime Lending, and the REAL reason our economy is in the shitter. Not trickle down economics, whatever dolt said that. Put the Buzz Word dictionary down and do some research.
The madness has got to stop. If we don't start harnessing this new technology, and use it to expand classroom hours from 5-6 a day, up to 8-10 a day, our kids/teens/adolescents will continue to get stupider and lazier at ALL ages. It's one thing to care about the environment...its another to be a completely lazy fuck and just regurgitate whatever you hear from your professors. Not belonging to a party doesn't make you independent. Being independent makes you independent, and I see a lot of lemmings right now. Don't waste your years being that. It's not worth it.
Your best attempt at refuting what he said is the line about driving 6 year olds to soccer practice. Another person implies that only WSJ readers can afford to have kids that play soccer. Yes, go back...read the post. And this is coming from someone who i GUARANTEE YOU grew up with a whole hell of a lot more than I did (welfare, food stamps, section 8, single parent, free lunch, child support, DSHS.....everything), trying to speak on my level. Do me a favor and don't do that, unless you are that. None of this even speaks on the fact that 90% of soccer (and little league, etc.) leagues are FREE.
Now...
Our generation is full of shitheads. I can't say it any plainer than that. Anyone age 15-35 is a fuckin' asshole. You have people making 30K a year thinking they'll be able to afford a house in the next 5 years--and some young, stupid ass banker will probably give it to them, assuming prices (and more importantly, interest rates) will continue to rise and they'll turn a profit no matter what. Dictionary definition of Subprime Lending, and the REAL reason our economy is in the shitter. Not trickle down economics, whatever dolt said that. Put the Buzz Word dictionary down and do some research.
The madness has got to stop. If we don't start harnessing this new technology, and use it to expand classroom hours from 5-6 a day, up to 8-10 a day, our kids/teens/adolescents will continue to get stupider and lazier at ALL ages. It's one thing to care about the environment...its another to be a completely lazy fuck and just regurgitate whatever you hear from your professors. Not belonging to a party doesn't make you independent. Being independent makes you independent, and I see a lot of lemmings right now. Don't waste your years being that. It's not worth it.
From what i could tell from the article, the writer is complaining about the "younger" generation complaining (go figure). It sounds as if he's upset at the fact that they are focusing on current crisis *and ones to come* instead of reveling in the fact that we have it "easier" then he did in the past..
Now.. While i do agree that we have it much better now then our elders did (technology wise), when it comes to debt and developing a more violent generation, the baby boomers and our elders definately had a hand in that. how?
George W Bush increased the size and spending of government while in office (followed by clinton and Bush sr) by an enormous margin. Now that Barack is in office and the size and cost of government will CONTINUE to grow, we won't begin to see the consiquences in our lifetime, probably not even in our childrens lifetime. Its our grandchildren's children who will have to pay for all the spending we do today.
As for the generations growing violent and apathetic nature, I doubt that its a part of some kind of evolutionary track. Children are taught morals and ethics and today, the amount of broken homes in the United States is at its highest ever. Without parents fulfilling the "parent" role, our kids are plopped down in front of the TV for 5 to 6 hours out of the day and left to soak up the imagery to replace the voids in their life that their parents were supposed to fill..
So in my opinion, the writer would rather we ignore the train wreck thats approaching socially and economically and focus more so on how far we have come since.. which doesn't say much.
Now.. While i do agree that we have it much better now then our elders did (technology wise), when it comes to debt and developing a more violent generation, the baby boomers and our elders definately had a hand in that. how?
George W Bush increased the size and spending of government while in office (followed by clinton and Bush sr) by an enormous margin. Now that Barack is in office and the size and cost of government will CONTINUE to grow, we won't begin to see the consiquences in our lifetime, probably not even in our childrens lifetime. Its our grandchildren's children who will have to pay for all the spending we do today.
As for the generations growing violent and apathetic nature, I doubt that its a part of some kind of evolutionary track. Children are taught morals and ethics and today, the amount of broken homes in the United States is at its highest ever. Without parents fulfilling the "parent" role, our kids are plopped down in front of the TV for 5 to 6 hours out of the day and left to soak up the imagery to replace the voids in their life that their parents were supposed to fill..
So in my opinion, the writer would rather we ignore the train wreck thats approaching socially and economically and focus more so on how far we have come since.. which doesn't say much.
