Discussion:If I can't get my way,

From TaxAlmanac, A Free Online Resource for Tax Professionals
Note: You are using this website at your own risk, subject to our Disclaimer and Website Use and Contribution Terms.

From TaxAlmanac

Jump to: navigation, search

Discussion Forum Index --> General Chat --> If I can't get my way,

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

13 November 2012
I'll take my football and go home!!


Is their goal a form of Romney's 'self-deportation?'

Ukbones (talk|edits) said:

13 November 2012
Fingers crossed!

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

13 November 2012
The Republicans are great individualists and lovers of freedom (for themselves). That's why they all line up behind each other with their noses in the arse of the one ahead of them. These "individualists" have frankly become a cult. Let's call it what it is. They have lost touch with reality.

The endless circle jerk* in which their "conservative" media engages, with the regurgitated and repeated lies and half truths they perpetuate, over and over again, through the cable wires, the air waves and the old fashioned TV have totally brainwashed the Republican Team (TM). Endless propaganda. All bullsh*t. Let's call it what it is.

They need to draft Tom Cruise over from the Scientologist crowd to speak at their next convention instead of Clint Eastwood (the gun toter).

I would call it the white man's last pathetic stand in America, but that's not totally fair to the white man because some have not fallen for this crap.

Send these white robots off to live in Liberia if they want to secede.

.* Please excuse any language inappropriate to the forum.

PollyAdler (talk|edits) said:

13 November 2012
Strong words Crow, considering they glide off the pen of a genuine Southern Colonel.

It sounds like you are throwing your lot in with the Union this time around.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

13 November 2012
As a a genuine Southern Colonel I can only hope to learn from the mistakes of my forebears. Yes, I'm throwing in with the Yanks.

If you'll note, Romney got a ringing endorsement from the South in the election; always a bad sign (Florida doesn't count).

MP-JD-LLM (talk|edits) said:

13 November 2012
Crow, when you pass Polly while addling around in that empty skull, do you actually converse, or is your only discourse effected in this public forum? Just curious.

Snowbird (talk|edits) said:

13 November 2012
Crow , I see you started your own petition Strip the Citizenship from Everyone who Signed a Petition to Secede and Exile Them

Sorry Crow, you can't join us Yankees. We have enough demented colonels of our own. However, we may be related ... my ancestor did march with Sherman. One of them there liberals did accuse me of being a southern, I had to tell her that we northwoods boys like our "guns and religion" too.

MP-JD-LLM (talk|edits) said:

13 November 2012
For those of you residing on the left side of the bell curve, I have compiled a simple table.
           GDP/Debt  ----   GDP Growth

Italy 120% Recession last three quarters.

Spain 70% Recession last four quarters.

Portugal 108% Recession last seven quarters.

Ireland 106% Negative growth last two of three quarters.

Greece 170% Severe recession last eight quarters.

UK 85% Negative last three of four quarters, 1% in last quarter.

France 86% Zero growth last two quarters.

Germany 81% Less than .5% average growth last five quarters.

The Debt to GDP ratio of the United States has gone from 69% to 103% under Obama.

GDP Growth this year is anemic. Each year the U.S. government spends more than $1 trillion more than it receives. It issues new debt, which it sells on the market and then repurchases by printing money. This third world economic policy is euphemistically referred to a quantitative easing. Our government artificially suppresses interest rates by creating a false demand for U.S. debt which has been downgraded by at least two agencies and is on negative watch.

We are now at $16 trillion of national debt. Under Obama, it will grow to at least $20 trillion by 2016. That will equal 125% of GDP. This will put us above where Spain, Italy, Portugal, Ireland, and Italy sit today. Look at the chart above, do a bit of extrapolation if your limited cerebral capacity enables you and estimate where that will put the U.S. in terms of GDP growth.

I realize that by definition 50% of the population resides on the left side of the bell curve. However, how is it that even the most intellectually challenged among us cannot see the looming train wreck?

There is no way that any state is going to vote to secede. However, certainly the most myopic among you can see why the economically informed have gone ballistic.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
You are barking up the wrong tree with that MP-JP

You need to go back to Saint Reagan and HIS 600 ship navy and a younger Navy Secretary Lehman and their trip down Nostalgia Road.

Saint Reagan quadrupled the national debt during his time in office.

Then come forward with your Republicans since Reagan, and you will find exactly one president who tried to do something about it, and it was George I. Reviver of even the luxury tax (which flopped and hurt the yacht industry, lol). You know, in America every man wants a yacht. After he can afford to buy bread he goes looking for a yacht to float.

I pay more for my liquor and wine today because of that rascal, but he was as good a man as you'll find in a modern Republican. It's not saying much, but at least he put the fiscal health of our country even above his promise not to raise taxes.

So he was actually a real patriot and the Republicans thought so much of his debt fighting ability they abandoned him and he served just one term.

Now because of the work of Bush 1 and Bill Clinton, they handed Bush II and Hermann Goring Cheney a debt free nation. Greenspan owed the Bush family a big favor for refusing to make money easy during Bush I's term, AND Greenspan knew he could dismantle the Welfare State if he could bankrupt our nation.

So Greenspan testified to Congress in 2001 that it was ok to cut taxes. This was AFTER the dot.bomb. There were plenty a reasons not to trust the continued prosperity we had enjoyed in the 90's.

Nevertheless, Greenspan owed a favor to the Bush family and he sanctified Bush II's disastrous tax cuts for the wealthy.

Later on, we find the Republicans in Congress wanting to help the seniors by providing prescription drug coverage. Politics makes strange bedfellows and the Republicans were anxious to climb in bed with the liberal Democrats and actually help people.

WRONG. What really happened was that the Republicans saw the opportunity to bankrupt Medicare and the free market Republicans put a provision in the law that prohibited Medicare from bargaining for volume discounts on prescription drugs.

Don't tell me what to look at. The American people know that Bush II raped the Treasury of this country. And recently the American people showed their appreciation for the yeoman's job that Obama has done taking over a shipwreck from the Bush Administration and doing his best, under constant assault by Republicans, to right our country.

You go on youtube and look at old vids and you'll see the outright lies these great Christian Republicans told about this man Obama. Shame on all of you for being apart of it if you were apart of it.

Some Republicans want more than anything else to see Reagan's picture on the back of our dime. The significance of that would be enormous. It's what it's all about. Koch's wetdream. Social Darwinism in action, writ large. Survival of the fittest in a world that needs cooperation more than ever before.

The only man standing on the podium in the Republican primary debates I had any respect for this year was Ron Paul because at least he was honest about his program. The man wasn't a liar, and of course that dooms him as a modern Republican candidate.

Snowbird, you are a worthy opponent but I think you're on the wrong team. Get out before these people besmirch your integrity. You don't have to be a Democrat, but for God's sake leave this bunch behind. The "McCarthy moment" is getting closer every day. And this McCarthy moment will get full internet coverage and it will be a lot harder to sweep under the carpet than the first one.

Spell, I'll fix the spelling and grammar mistakes later. Feel free to fix the grammar which I don't understand anyway, just don't take out any good parts if you decide to edit. lol. There's bound to be a few words up there worth something.

PollyAdler (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
Crow, Greenspan redeemed himself a little. At least for a little while, he did redeem himself.

After the banking meltdown and the collapse of modern super-rational capitalism in America and Europe 2007, Greenspan testified:


Greenspan had based his personal and economic philosophy on the dime store gutter philosophy of Ayn Rand. It almost chokes me to use the word "philosopher" in connection with her name.

What was he wrong about? That the mere self-interest of the financial institutions and their desire for self-preservation would prevent these institutions from undertaking unacceptable risks and crashing the world economy.

A man's character and a business's character is about more than mere self-interest, however. You can't learn character in business school. The proper attitude is enlightened self-interest. A concept alien to Ayn Rand.

It's the realization that we share this world with billions of other people who also have hopes and dreams. What goes around comes around. It's not how much money I can make this quarter but how I can keep my enterprise open for the long haul by giving people value for their money. All of that. Integrity. Character. And boy did the banks and investment houses screw that up. The kings of capitalism flopped, but since these same people own the Congress, they managed to get their butts out of a sling and we the people are still paying the price of deleveraging today.

We decided on the Chinese water torture cure so rich bankers could keep their homes.

Again, Greenspan: I WAS WRONG.

PollyAdler (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
Even Reagan doesn't deserve the Republican of 2012. I do believe that he believed. I don't think he was acting his part; but the people behind him were pure evil. I don't know if Reagan would want to be put on the back of a dime by the modern Republicans.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
If I have to get ready for the trial of the above mentioned secessionists, I'll enter just one exhibit.

Exhibit "A" Louie Gohmert merges GOD with his idol, the dollar bill. This is rank idolatry, Republican style, all in the name of a God they claim they own. Notice how he skilfully merges his real God (the dollar) with his professed God. A professed God he can only see as a tool to be used for manipulation. Louie Gohmert may sound like a dumb hick, but he knew exactly what he was doing.


I'll make a prediction. There are Republicans here today who will deny one day that they ever were Republicans if the Party keeps on the way it's going. Well meaning people who just got in with the wrong group. Again, you don't have to be a Democrat, but don't associate yourself with this trash. Found a new Party or something, or throw the trash out at least.

I remember going to Germany in past years, and I could never find a Nazi. I'd be sitting in a bar, and the old feller next to me assured me he had nothing to do with it. I didn't bring it up, they would go out of their way to bring it up. If we keep silent in the face of evil, we are culpable. It happens a little at a time. Evil works that way.

P.S. By the way. Louie is all wrong on his symbols too. Are you surprised?

MP-JD-LLM (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
Crow, thanks for your post. You epitomize my point. Do you have any idea as to the difference between the meanings of "national debt" and "national deficit"? No? I didn't think so. You stated that Clinton handed Bush II a nation that was debt free. You've been drinking too much koolaid. What Clinton handed to Bush II was a balanced budget. Clinton did not add to the national debt in his last year. However, a debt free nation? Far from it!

Below is a table of the national debt at the beginning and ending of each presidents term since Reagan.

Reagan ---- 984 billion --- $2.867 trillion.

Bush I ---- $2.867 trillion --- $4.357 trillion.

Clinton --- $4.357 trillion --- $5.769 trillion.

Bush II --- $5.769 trillion --- $10.413 trillion.

Obama --- $10.413 trillon --- $16.4 trillion.

Please allow me to point out a couple salient points that even you can get you mind around. First, contrary to the koolaid that you are drinking, Clinton handed Bush II a country that was indebted to the tune of over $5.7 trillion. Bush II raised the debt by almost $5 trillion in eight years. However, Obama raised it by $6 trillion is less than four years. In just eight years, Obama will have more than doubled the national debt, including more than $10 trillion in his two terms.

An increase of the interest rate on our debt is ineluctable. When those chickens come home to roost (to put it in terms of Jeramiah Wright) the effect will be devastating to our economy.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
I think you need to go back and listen to the testimony. I lived through it all. I'm not ignorant. I have a good memory. So YOU read the above.

By the way, the American people know that Obama took over a shipwreck from the Bush Administration, and he did a yeoman's job of trying to right the ship in the face of the lowest form of invective from some Republicans. Lies of the worse kind. And the people took a look at the guy, and they saw how he plodded away at his work. They saw that Obama was basically a moderate, and they voted him a second term.

And trust me, the people of America remember all the lies that were told by many Republicans to literally hound this man through his first term. Good, "Christian" Republican liars. The people remember, and they showed it on election day. Even Judge Louie Gohmert can't fool the people all the time.

Any Republican who voted for Bush II twice has zero credibility on the debt issue. The Republicans never worry about the debt when they are in control. Now, all of the sudden the Republicans have "got religion" over the debt.

It's just a new cause celebre they've taken up to destroy the Welfare State. Starve the federal government and destroy it.

Have at it. Sow the wind and reap the whirlwind. I'll enjoy the fun and games when you do destroy it. Put Reagan on the dime. I hope I can prevent harm to my country through speaking out early; but if I can't, I'll sit back and enjoy the show. Let's see, we can save a little money if we get rid of FEMA. We all know that there is no global warming, right? We can start there.

Snowbird (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
Crow, I do find your grand conspiracy theories humorous ... I don't give the Republicans that much credit for being so organized and coherent in their goals.

You really do need to read Schumpeter on the decline of Capitalism. He says essentially capitalism will failure due to it's success. Capitalism produces enough surplus to support it's critics. These critics would build the case that capitalism is based on exploitation and therefore should be replaced by a managed economy ... Polly says as much above. Only problem, managed economies have not produced the prosperity of capitalism. Recently, someone published what was found in a poor household in the US, it was roundly belittled by critics, yet probably 50% or more of the world would aspire to that level. I like to apply Churchill's quote on democracy to capitalism: No one pretends that capitalism is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that capitalism is the worst form of economy except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

PollyAdler (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
First let me say, I gladly smoke the peace pipe and I'm through with my election commentary. We all know that they will work out a deal to cut the debt. The Republicans will trick the Democrats into permanent cuts to entitlements in exchange for a tax increase from the Right, which the Republicans can easily reverse in the future. The millionaire Dems would love this too.

I don't think it's a grand conspiracy theory I spoke of above. No one thought a group of has-beens meeting in the back of a bar in Munich would amount to anything either.

I understand now we have Sovereign Sheriffs running around our country. Now I see Sovereign Citizens reported today. Is it just temporary anger? Could be. The Republicans are routinely misled and puffed up by their media outlets so every Republican in America predicted a sure victory on election day. No wonder they are angry. The political scientists knew Obama was going to win back in June, and of course Team Romney probably knew as well, though they deny it.

Basically, modern capitalism failed in 2007. If the governments of the world had not begun the bailouts and managed deleveraging we would have had a world wide economic collapse.

We are still paying as the debt unwinds today.

Again, I'll smoke the peace pipe around here and we'll try to calm down. I am well aware that I'd be the first to go in a Right Wing revolution. I'm worried now that I might be ambushed any day now.

In case I am ambushed, I bought a Kevlar vest with matching cup, Made in France. It's cut a little tight so it's stylish. I've also had my wife put on an extra 40 pounds so I can take a defensive position behind her in case of a firefight. I bought an Elephant Gun but I don't have any bullets for it. More later on the trouble I went through trying to find a genuine, old style Elephant Gun.


Jrochestercpa (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
MP............again.............facts just get in the way. Reminds me of my grandmother before she died. The dementia was sad and funny at the same time. While I sat with her one day, she was claiming to be 20 years old. She knew me and that I was her grandson. I even went so far as to have her do the math.......2005 - 1922 = 83. She knew the current year and her year of birth, and on that piece of paper, she did the math in her own handwriting. But she was still 20...........and no, I did not want to see her naked, although she asked. The owner of the assisted living facility where grandma resided was rolling on the floor in laughter. Today, I laugh, and cherish the memory.

Ukbones (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
More *facts*

Some data

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
Did you guys see what I said above?

Quote: We all know that they will work out a deal to cut the debt. The Republicans will trick the Democrats into permanent cuts to entitlements in exchange for a tax increase from the Right, which the Republicans can easily reverse in the future. The millionaire Dems would love this too.

The multimillionaires and billionaires of both parties will screw the poor and the middle class and roll their wealth upwards. And when they are through with the middle class, they will go after the upper middle class.

There won't be any "sacrifice" paid by the multimillionaires and the billionaires with this proposed tax increase. That part of the deal is a farce. They can easily reverse a tax increase in a few years. And let's not forget, SS and Medicare is not free to the workers or to business. It's not welfare. But the tax increases will be temporary and the cuts to so-called entitlement programs will permanent; and the cuts will continue until they are gone.

Once they begin the process of pulling the wealth upwards, the bell will toll for a lot idiots here too. It won't stop after the middle class is gone.

Put your Boy Scout manuals down and pay attention to what's staring you in the face.

This is a different game gentlemen. Or as I heard a young French fellow say on the internet: Let's get serieux boyz-a. Let's get serous.

Again, peace.

Jrochestercpa (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
CBO........Close But Off........Of course the 2001 CBO "projection" was an accurate crystal ball, taking into account all future events. How did the CBO account for the coming 2002/2003 recession in their "projection"? 9/11? Of course the dot com burst in March 2000 was the fault of Bush, as was the GDP slowing in the 3rd quarter of 2000. Bush took office in January 2001 and by March 2001 he had already caused a recession (according to the National Bureau of Economic Research). What other President can say they turned the economy around that fast?

In early 2004, NBER President Martin Feldstein said:

"It is clear that the revised data have made our original March date for the start of the recession much too late. We are still waiting for additional monthly data before making a final judgment. Until we have the additional data, we cannot make a decision."  From 2000 to 2001, the Federal Reserve in a move to quell the stock market, made successive interest rate increases, credited in part for "plunging the country into a recession." Using the stock market as an unofficial benchmark, a recession would have begun in March 2000 when the NASDAQ crashed following the collapse of the Dot-com bubble. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was relatively unscathed by the NASDAQ's crash until the September 11, 2001 attacks, after which the DJIA suffered its worst one-day point loss and biggest one-week losses in history up to that point. The market rebounded, only to crash once more in the final two quarters of 2002. In the final three quarters of 2003, the market finally rebounded permanently, agreeing with the unemployment statistics that a recession defined in this way would have lasted from 2001 through 2003.

Where is that in the CBO "projection"?

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
I think the older practitioners here will be ok. But the younger professionals here will be fighting for crumbs off the rich man's table. You won't be setting the price for your services, they will.

It's hell to pay when the middle class drops out as a client pool. You fellahs see where the "rich worship" of the Republican Party gets you. Young Republicans here please remember what Gazoo said as you go down the road.

I shouldn't put it all on the older Rebublicans. The billion dollar Democrats are just as bad. They have the same interests as the Republican elite.

I get a kick out of people who come on the business opportunity page and inquire how they can attract wealthy clients. Oh boy. Be careful what you wish for.

The new project for America works like this: first you want to shop at Walmart, then you have to shop at Walmart. They have a plan for you, friends.

@ rochester

I don't blame the dot.bomb on Bush.

I blame the Bush tax cuts for the real rape that was done to our Treasury and our financial standing as a nation. The Iraq war wasn't cheap. It was a fraud.

The meltdown of the free market loving banks? Cost between 3 and 7 Trillion (much of the cost was hidden away). Republicans say there is no need for regulation. Barf.

I remember like it was yesterday when Greenspan went in front of Congress and gave his papal approval for those tax cuts. They have been an absolute disaster for our country's finances.

What people may not remember is that Greenspan was blamed for costing George I his re-election bid in the early '90s, and Greenspan thought he owed a favor to the Bush family so he approved and sanctified the tax cuts for Bush II.

Oh, and I also remember that things looked pretty good at that time because George I and Clinton had done a good job with our national finances.

Bush II squandered it, and many of you voted for him not once, but twice. Thank God the American people have not lost their common sense. They remember.

Ok, I've said enough. I've leave some of you to fiddle around with numbers. To some people, that's like Linus and his blanket.

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
Rather sorry to see my post turn into another discussion of fault.

I suspect that many of the signers of these petitions did not want Romney as the GOP nominee, either. Several times in this forum I have mentioned the similarity between France of 1936-37 and our current times. These secessionists are so like the pre-war French right wingers with their slogan, "Better Hitler than Blum."

"Blum's plans to establish effective state controls over private industry and finance aroused bitter hostility among French business leaders, who refused to cooperate with his government, and it was at this time that sections of the right wing adopted the ominous slogan, "Better Hitler than Blum." http://worldatwar.net/biography/b/blum/ Alas for them, Fascist are long gone from the scene.

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

14 November 2012
"Fascist are long gone from the scene."

I dunno. The current economic picture in Europe is a prime fascist opportunity. Then too, the European philosopher Slavoj Žižek has invented a new form of communism. It's rather "hazy". He seems to mean "cooperation", but he's strangely hard to pin down. I don't know exactly what he's up to.

In America, I worry about some of the young officers in our military academies more than I do the Sovereign Sheriffs and Individuals.

Some of these young officers see themselves as latter day Charles Martels or Crusaders. The Pentagon has been forced to take on too many duties (particularly in intelligence), and a rouge group could get embedded in the Pentagon and fly under the radar for some time.

I am very wary of the DIA or covert action units in the DOD, or both. I would move them back over to the CIA, and leave the Defense Dept. with just a modest intelligence and covert operation capability.

The logic of Revolution in mature counties is the logic of "purity". For example: First it's to purify America from foreign religions. After that bloodletting, it's to purify America from the gays and perhaps various people of color. Then the purifiers turn on each other as they continue to define and redefine "purity". It ends in depravity.

You can never be quite pure enough to satisfy the next round of political cleansing....

The above is highly, highly unlikely in America. I'm not predicting it. I'm not saying it's probable. I'm merely saying that it's more of a possibility that I would have imagined in my younger days.

A good book, highly readable, on the subject of revolution in a mature nation is Citizens, a Chronicle of the French Revolution, by Simon Schama, 1989, Knopf. You won't be able to put it down. I got it from the local library.

I have no taste for any kind of political revolutions after reading this book.

Jrochestercpa (talk|edits) said:

15 November 2012
Gazoo......my comments were in respect to the "facts" presented in the youtube video posted by Ukbones. Clinton's "projected surplus" ran into real events.

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

15 November 2012
'Real events' were a President, assisted ably by a majority of Congress, choosing to fight a costly war based on lies, and because the President's father was 'dissed.'

Ukbones (talk|edits) said:

15 November 2012
Citizens, a Chronicle of the French Revolution is a fine book:

The costs of modernity

"In her winning memoirs, Mme de Genlis remembers dressing up with her sister-in-law as peasant girls. Thus disguised, they collected all the milk they could from farms on their estate and carried it home on the backs of donkeys. It was then dumped into their bath – a locally famous tub that could comfortably accommodate four–where the girls wallowed for two hours in a milky pool strewn with rose petals..."

...beyond this dreamy, toyland France, historians are quick to remind us, lay Reality: armies of emaciated beggars dying on the roads; Paris streets slopping with ordure and butchers’ offal; relentless feudistes screwing the last sou out of peasants barely subsisting on chestnut gruel; prisoners rotting in the hulks for stealing a loaf of sugar or smuggling a box of salt; horse and hound laying waste to standing crops in the name of the lord’s droit de chasse; filthy bundles of rags deposited every morning on the steps of Paris churches containing newborn babies with pathetic notes claiming baptism; four to a bed in the Hôtel-Dieu, expiring in companionable dysentery. To many of those who became revolutionaries, these opposites not only co-existed; they made each other possible. Great opulence and folly were fed by great wretchedness and despair."

- another I might offer is from Niall Ferguson: Civilization - The West and the Rest.

Snowbird (talk|edits) said:

15 November 2012
D&T ... OP ... I have now heard there are petitions from all 50 states.link lol!

Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said:

15 November 2012
Nullification by petition! John C Calhoun is alive and well!

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

16 November 2012
50 States! What was the name of that company owned by the Amway heir? Black Foot? I think it went on to be X2 or something like that.

The special OPs and the 82nd Airborne types (top notch people) would get out of the military and then go to work for Black Foot. The USA Mercinary Army. I think the pay was good too.

It makes me nervous when men like this get bored. God forbid they start up a Facebook page.

These men could blow me clean off my motor scooter at 5 miles... with a rifle! They wouldn't even have to bring out the heavy weapons. Frankly, I'd rather see them leave the military with honor and sit down on their couches and drink beer on the weekends for the rest of their lives. Play golf or something.

If the mainstream church would let me preach a series of sermons on ALL the evils of the modern world to these men, I guarantee I could have them so fired up at the end of it they could take over Luxembourg in an afternoon armed only with handguns. But I withhold my tongue out of my respect for humanity. On the other hand, some preachers don't have the ethics that I do.

@Ukbones. Citizens had me so scared and sick and disgusted that by the time I got to the end of it I actually felt sorry for the royals and the clerics.

At the end, the Jacobins turned the blade against themselves. and finally to Robespierre...

"he was thrust onto the plank by Sanson, blood smeared over his coat and blotching his nan-keen breeches. To give the blade ...an unobstructed fall, the executioner tore away the paper bandage that had been holding his jaw together. Animal screams of pain escaped, silenced only by the falling blade."

Sanson was the Chief Executioner. I think you could probably call him the Michelangelo of executioners. The paradigm of the trade.

He lived on to exchange jocular barbs with Napoleon during the Empire.

Civilization - The West and the Rest. Thanks for the recommendation UK, I'll check it out. You guys stay out of trouble. :)

PollyAdler (talk|edits) said:

16 November 2012
Crow, I suspect that what with the secessionists, and your concern over a potential of a small group of young rouge Academy officers, and Black Foot storm troopers, your file cabinet system has been tested to the limit lately.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

16 November 2012
Let me just say a couple of things.

First, Note to General Petreaus: the head of the CIA ought to know better than to think any computer could be secure.

And Second: Yes, I have been very busy filing lately to the point I've had to put new wheels on my desk chair to move from one cabinet to the next.

I am satisfied regarding the security of my system. The only people who might have a chance at cracking into my file cabinets would be some of the (now ancient) plumbers from the Nixon Dirty Trick squad. They do worry me.

However, I have taken precautions by taping photographs of a young Hillary Clinton (taken during her stint at the Justice Dept.) on each of my file cabinets. I understand that this is the only thing the old Dirty Tricks Squad is afraid of: photographs of a young Hillary Clinton wearing glasses.

Now, if everyone here will excuse me, I've got to go out and find a pay phone, and that's not so easy to do as it once was.

EasternPA (talk|edits) said:

16 November 2012
A Modest Proposal:

Since carving out the middle of the country is a bit awkward, how's about we instead set aside a 25 mile strip just north the US-Mexican border. Since this border is 1952 miles long, the area would be about 50,000 square miles or roughly the size of Arkansas.

This would create a new state where the secessionistas could self-deport to. The secessionistas will stand ever vigilant against the moocheristas from the north or south, who will be trying to find jobs and opportunities in the unrestrained economy of this new state of El Dorado.

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

16 November 2012
[Edit: incendiary paragraphs removed in light of the current national revolutionary foment]

Ugh...that could be interesting Eastern.

JAD (talk|edits) said:

16 November 2012

Thank you for the time that you took to accumulate the facts that you posted.

I have been horrified at the responses that I've encountered as I've attempted to talk to people about these issues. Some people have absolutely no financial sense at all. Worse yet, some people just don't care. Others seems to believe that the issues will work themselves out by some magical process. I feel like the whole house is on fire, and I'm calling for everyone to get out, and everyone is just standing around and telling me that the fire is only a candle on the kitchen counter.

Anyway, you seem to have a good understanding of the facts, so I will ask you if you have an answer to these questions:

1. What in the world are they thinking? Does Obama et al really think that it's ok to accumulate $16,000,000,000 or $20,000,000,000 + of debt? Because I'm not sensing any kind of urgency from the Democratic Party regarding this issue. They are absolutely focused upon the small issue of extracting money from the rich, but it's such a small amount compared to what is accumulating quickly. So again, do you know what they are thinking?

2. I don't understand what Bernanke is doing. Do you have any idea if he thinks that printing money like we're playing Monopoly and keeping interest rates so low - a major manipulation of our economy - is going to be good for the US in the long run? I can't understand what he is thinking. I cannot envision any scenario where this is going to turn out well.

I need to understand these basic issues because I currently have no hope that we are going to come out of this well. At least several times a day, I wonder how our country is going to pay its bills, how my children are going to manage when the tax rate on all of us is at least 70% (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304911104576443893352153776.html) because of all this debt and the related interest costs, how we are going to defend ourselves against evil or mother nature when we have exhausted our borrowing capacity, etc etc. The Democrats must have some plan where these issues will work out, correct? Do you know? Because I can't see anything, and it's sort of driving me crazy. I am asking you because you clearly have a grasp of the facts.

CrowJD (talk|edits) said:

17 November 2012
Both Parties agree that this is a crisis, which is a sure sign that it's not a crisis.

Buffet said this week that it wouldn't even cause a recession if we let the dreaded "CLIFF" occur.

But as I mentioned above, we could just repeal this silly CLIFF compromise law, and go ahead and raise the debt ceiling again as we've always done, more or less automatically.

When you hear the word "crisis" or "emergency" in the kind of politics we have today, you can bet it's bullsh*t.

There is a time and a place to begin dealing with this debt. I don't think now is the time to adopt anything like "austerity" measures and/or debt cutting when many parts of the developed world are heading into recession. When you do that, it's like pulling the plug on a bathtub full of water. The water circles right down the drain.

EasternPA (talk|edits) said:

17 November 2012
MP, Obama's policies did not produce the additional debt - he inherited G W Bush's unfunded wars. It costs $1 trillion per year for the 11 years we have been at war - with Congress refusing to pay for it. Instead of going to the American public and saying we need to raise taxes to pay for these expensive oil wars, the GOP wants to blame the poor and elderly, calling them the moochers. Follow the money - defense contractor's are the real moochers. Congress having taken the defense contractors' bribes contributions, now finds that Obama will no longer play along.

JAD (talk|edits) said:

17 November 2012
Um Crow, that's exactly what I mean. I don't ever hear a plan for addressing this issue. It is not going to be easier to address in 4 years at 20,000,000,000 than it is at 16,000,000,000. Are we going to wait until 30,000,000,000? Until China says it won't lend to us anymore? Until the strength of the market outweighs the policies of Bernanke and interest rates are forced up? Exactly when is a good time to start addressing this issue? It is now in excess of $140,000 per taxpayer and as I watch the debt clock, the total debt looks like it's going up at about 10,000 per second. This is insanity.

PollyAdler (talk|edits) said:

17 November 2012

"MP, Obama's policies did not produce the additional debt - he inherited G W Bush's unfunded wars. It costs $1 trillion per year for the 11 years we have been at war - with Congress refusing to pay for it. Instead of going to the American public and saying we need to raise taxes to pay for these expensive oil wars, the GOP wants to blame the poor and elderly, calling them the moochers."

Exactly. Put all this debt on the back of the poor and middle class by taking away so called entitlements has long been the goal.

The CLIFF is a man made emergency made to manipulate the American people. Folks, wake up. Don't be lemmings. Both Parties are using "crisis" and "emergency" to manipulate you.

We don't need to make major decisions regarding the American financial and social structure "under the threat of a self-imposed gun".

Let's repeal this Cliff law, and raise the debt ceiling, and then have a reasoned discussion and investigation of the best way to solve it.

Our debt is a problem but it is not a crisis. We need to deal with it in a sane, reasonable manner and not act like chickens with our heads cut off. I'm sure that the intelligent people on this website will not fall for the bum's rush.

JAD (talk|edits) said:

17 November 2012
So I'm not intelligent because I understand it to be a crisis? I disagree with your characterization of both me and this country's fiscal issues.

Gazoo (talk|edits) said:

17 November 2012
Yes you are intelligent, and yes the debt is a serious problem. So I apologize if I took my post too far.

But I have absolutely no doubt that this is a false crisis and that it's being using to manipulate the public.

Our own Congress created this Cliff, they can repeal it, Obama sign it and then raise the debt ceiling as it was done (basically automatically) for years.

Then let's have a reasoned debate and investigation about how best to pay down our considerable debt, and make sure we don't put it all on the backs of the poor and middle class. That would be morally wrong when you consider the outrage of the 2001, 2003 tax cuts for the wealthy during a time of war.

To join in on this discussion, you must first log in.
Personal tools