doublegunshop.com - home Forums AN OPEN DISCUSSION OF RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE

Yeah Ed, I had a slight oversight and meant to qualify my statement with term 'socialist negroe'. Certainly I did not intend to appear a bigot. In terms of King, I really do like the old boy. I'm just growing weary of too much left wing liberal poppycock and would rather reminisce about how America used to be, like when my hero President Reagan was running the show. Sorry about being too vague.

Reading here the dimensions of American sorrow surrounding political paralysis, social breakdown and economic decline, mention of the national debt seems spurious, a red herring to divert attention.

With so many aspiring to the American dream of being rich and doing as they please---that's why so many vote to cut taxes of the rich and carry a greater burden themselves---are they really concerned about national debt?

You're onto something, Ed. Does the national debt really matter at this critical juncture of nine out of 10 Americans disapproving of their governance, of a country that built a world empire and now can't find consensus on anything.

Setting aside the value of its surpassing intellectual, creative and spiritual (doctrine) capacity, the US national debt is a gnat's eyelash of what the country is worth, and Americans are holding a lot of that debt themselves.

Debt is serious but making it a political issue now is mowing the lawn while the roof is on fire.

The rich are already carrying the lions share of the burden....the poor carry none of it....and the middle class pick up whats left. Fair would be making everyone share the burden....if everyone paid their fair share..then more of them would actually care about the waste and abuse.

The tax burden can be looked up, it's fact, but King doesn't care. His response is only based on feelings. What is note worthy though is his fiscal feelings do not consider cuts in government spending, only increases in taxing, borrowing and printing. Sure, Americans hold some of their debt particularly in a ponzi type portfolio, but so do enemies of America and King sounds like he would have us sell off more of the country to...? Not political, huh.

The color of a mans skin means nothing.

The difference is Allen West is a man....

Al Sharpton is a bigoted racist [censored] that will spend his eternity in a fiery hell if there is one..

guess you guys don't wana talk about religious doctrine...so its back to politics we go...how boring...so redundant.

anyway, gimmie five guesses as to who is going to be our next pres after ob...winner gets a prize.

Didn't you just scold someone for taking King's religious ball and running with it. I thought the love and tolerance of Christianity brought us all this racial kubaya based on nothing more than the election of color of skin.

Debt is least of your problems, Craig. The British Empire and American Empire were built on ever-expanding national debt. Borrowing paid for Wellington to defeat Napoleon, the Royal Navy to rule the seven seas, Halsey's fleet, Kaiser's Liberty ships, US financing of the Red Army and reconstruction of post-war Europe. Read the history of origin of national debt in England in 1692. Macaulay's History Volume IV page 259.

"The power of a society to pay debt is proportioned to the progress that society has made in industry, in commerce, and in all the arts and sciences which flourish under the benignant influence of freedom and of equal law. The inclination of a society to pay debt is proportioned to the degree in which that society respects the obligations of plighted faith." Page 265

Elites sucked the middle class into the notion that tax cuts stimulate capital spending by businesses, driving a wedge between the middle class and the poor. Spending is primarily influenced by GDP growth trends, interest and exchange rates and oil prices. Big business and finance is sitting on bags of money. In Canada business investment spending since the 80s has declined despite repeated tax cuts, while cash flow has increased. Most economists now are concluding that austerity is the wrong way to ending the recession.

The US is still the powerhouse of the world.

seems like our economy has been based on funny money since we started shippin our smoke stack jobs overseas...

we gotta come up wid somethin tangible to sell to the rest o de world, like maybe gas, coal an food?

Not sure what kind of crazy economics course you fell for but I sure hope you get your money back !

BTW austerity WORKS and that was PROVEN in Canada and the FACTS prove it

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/07/macroeconomic_austerity_works.html

"How did these 1993-to-2006 austerity measures affect Canada's economic performance? During the high-spending period between 1980 and 1992, per capita GDP-PPP in constant dollars rose by only 12.4%. During the corresponding austerity interval from 1993 through 2006, constant-dollar per-capita GDP-PPP rose by 27.4%. A clear win for austerity"

"After a massive increase (over fourfold as a percentage of the economy) in Canada's net debt between 1980 and 1992, the austerity period saw the debt reduced from 64% of GDP in 1993 to only 26% in 2006. Similarly, after gross debt doubled between 1980 and 1992, austerity reduced it from 96% of GDP in 1993 to 70% in 2006.

In 1980, Canada's unemployment rate was 7.5%. After years of excessive government spending, by 1992, it was 11.2%. Along comes austerity, and the unemployment rate falls from 11.4% in 1993 to only 6.3% in 2006.

Macroeconomic austerity doesn't work? Absolute nonsense. During its austerity period, Canada's per capita government expenditures fell, its per capita GDP increased far more rapidly than during the prior period of rapid spending growth, its large deficits turned into large surpluses, its debt was dramatically reduced, and its unemployment rate fell like a rock. This is a lesson that not only the rest of the world needs to heed, but apparently also Canadian economists who have recently advised a faux conservative administration.