Showing posts with label deficit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label deficit. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 24, 2013
Quote of the day: We do not have grown-ups in Washington
Watch "The Economic Argument is Over – And Paul Krugman Won", Daily Ticker, Henry Blodget.
Labels:
Aaron Task,
Congress,
Daily Ticker,
debt,
deficit,
economics,
GDP,
Henry Blodget,
Keynesian,
Paul Krugman,
stimulus
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Having your cake and eating it too!
"For example, 53% of Americans believe the debt and deficits should be cut significantly... but the same percentage agrees that taxes should not be raised on anyone.
Similarly, 53% of Americans think that the influence of banks and corporations should be reined in... but that regulations on businesses should be pared back."
- "New Poll: Americans Now Think Economy Favors Super-Rich", Henry Blodget, Daily Ticker, 2011-11-08
Similarly, 53% of Americans think that the influence of banks and corporations should be reined in... but that regulations on businesses should be pared back."
- "New Poll: Americans Now Think Economy Favors Super-Rich", Henry Blodget, Daily Ticker, 2011-11-08
Labels:
big banks,
business,
contradiction,
debt,
deficit,
economy,
poll,
regulations,
super-rich,
taxes
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Quote of the day
"The stock market is as emotional as a hockey fan during a game-seven triple overtime of the Stanley Cup finals."
- Motley Fool Email update
- Motley Fool Email update
Thursday, September 02, 2010
Why do we have "out-of-control" government spending?
One reason is our state of permanent war. Wars as envisioned by the bright minds of the Pentagon bureaucracy and the best Congress money can buy don't come cheap.
In 2009, The Washington Post reported that the war in Afghanistan was costing two billion dollars a month ("Obama Plans More Funding For Afghan War", Karen DeYoung, 2009-03-27http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/26/AR2009032602135.html). Gosh, if Afghanistan has a population of 28.4 million, that means the U.S. could just give every man, woman, and child in Afghanistan $70/month or $840/year. That's pretty damn good for a country with a gross national per capita income of $250/year (http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/afghanistan_statistics.html).
Ironically, many of the deficit hawks are for a "strong defense", but against foreign aid and taxes.
A second reason is that we vote for Congressional candidates who will "bring home the bacon" to our districts. Alaska is home to a large number of anti-tax people, but Alaskans get more per capita in federal money than in any other state. Isn't bacon another form of pork?
Or maybe it is that not enough of us vote. If 25-40% of the registered (or eligible) voters don't bother to show up, we are going to have candidates elected by a plurality rather than a majority. And we are going to be left with candidates who either want to spend a gazillion on wars and pork or want to spend a gazillion on social programs and pork.
In 2009, The Washington Post reported that the war in Afghanistan was costing two billion dollars a month ("Obama Plans More Funding For Afghan War", Karen DeYoung, 2009-03-27http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/26/AR2009032602135.html). Gosh, if Afghanistan has a population of 28.4 million, that means the U.S. could just give every man, woman, and child in Afghanistan $70/month or $840/year. That's pretty damn good for a country with a gross national per capita income of $250/year (http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/afghanistan_statistics.html).
Ironically, many of the deficit hawks are for a "strong defense", but against foreign aid and taxes.
A second reason is that we vote for Congressional candidates who will "bring home the bacon" to our districts. Alaska is home to a large number of anti-tax people, but Alaskans get more per capita in federal money than in any other state. Isn't bacon another form of pork?
Or maybe it is that not enough of us vote. If 25-40% of the registered (or eligible) voters don't bother to show up, we are going to have candidates elected by a plurality rather than a majority. And we are going to be left with candidates who either want to spend a gazillion on wars and pork or want to spend a gazillion on social programs and pork.
Labels:
Afghanistan,
anti-tax,
deficit,
Federal Government,
spending,
strong defense,
taxes,
war
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)