cedarcomm.com— Second Graph down on page but whole page is good information. Are the naysayers right in saying not to be concerned?
Apr 26, 2007View in Crawl 4
wikipedia: Gulf War 1: "The war developed out of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait on August 2, 1990, following Iraqi contentions that Kuwait was illegally slant-drilling petroleum across Iraq’s border."If you think the US has a military presence in the Middle east for any other purpose than securing oil, you are deluding yourself.
@geronimo Read my post again, as I stated before, all the numbers are stated in 2004 dollars ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION! What say you now Geronimo? How do you describe the increase in money now.I know you're desperate to wail on tax cuts but come on!
Thank you, you make good points that help educate people like me. The article mushes lowering tax rates and profligate spending. You point out that lowering tax rates can be good. But the problems with profligate spending remain, correct?1) Historical: Spend 150, Tax rate 30%, revenue 100 ==> 50 debt2) Optimal tax cut: Spend 150, Tax rate 20%, revenue 150 ==> better.3) Bush spending: Spend 250, Tax rate 20%, revenue 150 ==> 100 debt.Revenue requirements grow due to servicing the larger debt. Even though we maxed revenue per the Laffer curve with tax cuts, we're in deeper trouble due to massive spending that's not covered.Just asking, I'm not an economist.
"Socialism doesn't work, capitalism does until you get monopolies"Monopolies cannot occur under capitalism; they only result from socialism (either of the left or right (fascist) variety)
is this where the yahoo news comment section went? "liberal", "conservative", "blue", "red", etc.... Bulls**t terminology. you can't interpret anyone's political leaning in a short statement for or against a current president by using those terms. The article is simplistic and uses poor indicators (GDP and non inflation adjusted dollars) as it's basis. Especially true if you consider that the US dollar has been completely devalued as our gov prints money as fast as it can, without appropriate backing in reserve to match it...If GDP was everything, then why are countries like Switzerland/Japan/Luxembourg et al considered better to live in?The "Oil war" terminology is as just like any other moniker, used to make a point. What will we call them in the distant future? That will be up to the historians. Since historians are typically ignorant completely upon economic theory, and usually fall back upon "the idea of the day" rather than basing their interpretations upon good analysis. Read any "history book" and see how weak the "economic situation" becomes, it is usually the shortest chapter.
Loot at the point where FDR entered office. Don't say that that is because of WWII. Bush had 2 wars going on and Reagan had a cold war. Plus, FDR created that New Deal crap.
swrostmoreApr 27, 2007
wikipedia: Gulf War 1: "The war developed out of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait on August 2, 1990, following Iraqi contentions that Kuwait was illegally slant-drilling petroleum across Iraq’s border."If you think the US has a military presence in the Middle east for any other purpose than securing oil, you are deluding yourself.
kindpastorApr 27, 2007
@geronimo Read my post again, as I stated before, all the numbers are stated in 2004 dollars ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION! What say you now Geronimo? How do you describe the increase in money now.I know you're desperate to wail on tax cuts but come on!
kingmosesApr 27, 2007
No wonder liberals are liberals; you don't know dick about economics.
jj2meApr 28, 2007
Thank you, you make good points that help educate people like me. The article mushes lowering tax rates and profligate spending. You point out that lowering tax rates can be good. But the problems with profligate spending remain, correct?1) Historical: Spend 150, Tax rate 30%, revenue 100 ==> 50 debt2) Optimal tax cut: Spend 150, Tax rate 20%, revenue 150 ==> better.3) Bush spending: Spend 250, Tax rate 20%, revenue 150 ==> 100 debt.Revenue requirements grow due to servicing the larger debt. Even though we maxed revenue per the Laffer curve with tax cuts, we're in deeper trouble due to massive spending that's not covered.Just asking, I'm not an economist.
ispeedatnightApr 28, 2007
85% of Canadian exports go to the US. Take that away and see how your economy does. You'd be a big, cold, white Nicaragua with annoying flags posted everywhere.<a class="user" href="http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/US_Canada_Mexico_1005.pdf">http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/US_Canada_Mexico_1005.pdf</a>
miseseanApr 28, 2007
"Socialism doesn't work, capitalism does until you get monopolies"Monopolies cannot occur under capitalism; they only result from socialism (either of the left or right (fascist) variety)
woknbluesApr 28, 2007
is this where the yahoo news comment section went? "liberal", "conservative", "blue", "red", etc.... Bulls**t terminology. you can't interpret anyone's political leaning in a short statement for or against a current president by using those terms. The article is simplistic and uses poor indicators (GDP and non inflation adjusted dollars) as it's basis. Especially true if you consider that the US dollar has been completely devalued as our gov prints money as fast as it can, without appropriate backing in reserve to match it...If GDP was everything, then why are countries like Switzerland/Japan/Luxembourg et al considered better to live in?The "Oil war" terminology is as just like any other moniker, used to make a point. What will we call them in the distant future? That will be up to the historians. Since historians are typically ignorant completely upon economic theory, and usually fall back upon "the idea of the day" rather than basing their interpretations upon good analysis. Read any "history book" and see how weak the "economic situation" becomes, it is usually the shortest chapter.
capitalistpig1Oct 13, 2008
Loot at the point where FDR entered office. Don't say that that is because of WWII. Bush had 2 wars going on and Reagan had a cold war. Plus, FDR created that New Deal crap.
Closed AccountDec 15, 2008
ha ha lol. so americans are paying for medicine that australians are using, LOL. its called a government you idiot, just like we have one in Canada