Worldwide ramifications of Economic mismanagement?

Yeah, that's why it's projected to be bankrupt anywhere between 2017 and 2041. And that's just the beginning. That doesn't take into account that welfare and medicare are both part of Social Security.

And for the record, I said no fraud and waste, not less then investment or insurance industry.

Regardless, I"ll only count that as one strike Frank.

Keep trying.

Yeah, that's why it's projected to be bankrupt anywhere between 2017 and 2041.

When were AIG and Penn Central Railroad and Chrysler and a zillion Savings and Loan companies and a bunch of others "projected to be bankrupt"?

Get a grip, man. For nearly forty years the government has been the Bank of Last Resort for all kinds of failed, bankrupt capitalist enterprises.

And for 75 years (not 40 man) of government intervention where they have no business, the only result is the impending brink of financial ruin for what was once richest country in the world.

Yeah, you guys have done a wiz bang job. Thanks.

The only thing more pathetic then that is that people like you can't see it.

But if you actually believe socialism works, perhaps in addition to finding even one government program that works, you can cite one country where socialism has worked as well.

You have homework. Hop to it man!!!

howbout sweden?

sodbuster wrote:howbout sweden?

I've heard it's a beautiful country. I'd love to go someday. As to the government though, socialist it is not.

Sweden is a constitutional monarchy, in which King Carl XVI Gustaf is head of state, but royal power has long been limited to official and ceremonial functions. The Economist Intelligence Unit, while acknowledging that democracy is difficult to measure, listed Sweden in first place in its index of democracy assessing 167 countries. The nation's legislative body is the Riksdag (Swedish Parliament), with 349 members, which chooses the Prime Minister. Parliamentary elections are held every four years, on the third Sunday of September.

Sweden

Or Finland.

http://www.gadling.com/2007/10/08/finland-names-best-place-to-live/print/

Just because they have a democracy does not mean it is not socialist, Aaron.

The people there choose socialism.

http://www.essortment.com/all/governmentswede_rbfh.htm

"Every time Swedes have voted in a nonsocialist prime minister, they seem regret it, and in only a few years revert to the socialist system that most have been raised in..."

Aaron,

I pointed out the fact that it is my belief the CRA caused many of the troubles we're facing today. I wish I knew what thread that was in because when I stated that program (and mentioned it was Carter's baby) Sherm made jabs at me.

I think part of what Sherm fails to understand is that the rules and regulations governing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are very different from those governing other financial institutions. He fails to realize that as director of HUD, Andrew Cuomo (Clinton's appointee) wrote many of the regulations and changed many of the rules unilaterally because as the director of HUD he was the sole person with the authority to do so.

I really wish somebody other than me would do a bit of research on the YSP's, the role they played in the housing bubble & the subsequent crisis, and just who's baby that was. The trouble is, Sherm doesn't want to know and no matter what any conservative posts, and no matter what sources we link to, he just dismisses it all. Hell, I'm going to go look for this now because it's worth my time and effort for you all to see what a JUDGE had to say about the YSP's.

We have something Sweeden or Finland doesn't Sherm and that's a military that provides for our national defense, which by the way is covered in out constitution. Socialist programs are not.

And I might add that many countries that carry socialist programs such as free healthcare (NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT), when needed, come running to the United States for their defense.

I would suggest (and not in a love it or leave it tone but in a 'it makes perfect sense to me tone') that if someone truly wanted to live in a socialist country then they are more then free to leave this one.

As it is and based on the fact that we are SPEEDING out of control towards that very type of government, I am considering a change of living arrangements myself.

see what I mean Aaron.?

It must be "Clinton's baby".

Or if not Clinton then Carter.

sodbuster wrote:Just because they have a democracy does not mean it is not socialist, Aaron.

The people there choose socialism.

http://www.essortment.com/all/governmentswede_rbfh.htm

"Every time Swedes have voted in a nonsocialist prime minister, they seem regret it, and in only a few years revert to the socialist system that most have been raised in..."

From your link Sherm.

Yet many Swedes complain that their health care system is a bureaucratic nightmare, with long waits for doctors’ appointments and even surgeries, and little choice for patients when it comes to things like choice of doctor. Every time Swedes have voted in a nonsocialist prime minister, they seem regret it, and in only a few years revert to the socialist system that most have been raised in.

And

As Sweden’s government keeps growing, and Sweden’s citizens continue to expect it to do more and more, the rest of the world will be watching to see if it means a Utopia or an economic disaster.

And for the record, we're talking about a country of less then 10 million people. I don't think you can compare that to a country the size of the United States.

And I've changed my mind. I don't think I want to visit Sweeden. I doubt I could afford it.

Taxation in Sweden
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Taxation in Sweden may involve payments to three different levels of government: the municipality, the county council, and the central government. The payments are collected by the Swedish National Tax Board (Skatteverket). In addition the Swedish National Tax Board collects a church tax from members of the Church of Sweden. The tax rates in Sweden are commonly cited as among the highest in the world.

Sweden has a taxation system that combines a direct tax (paid by the employee) with an indirect tax (paid by the employer). In practice, the employer provides the state with both means of taxation, but the employee only sees the direct tax on his declaration form. The compilation of taxes that compose the final income tax (2003): tax on gross income from the employer: 32.82% (indirect, fixed), pension fee on gross income: 6.95% (indirect, fixed), municipal tax on gross income less pension tax and a base deduction: ~32% (direct, varies by municipality), state tax on gross income less pension tax and a base deduction: 0%, 20%, or 25% (direct, progressive).

Clinton was responsible for much of the troubles we face today as a result of his policies, namely in lowering down payments to 3% and providing down payment and closing cost assistance. GWB made it that much worse by reducing down payments to nothing.

But I do have one question. If you purchase a house that requires a 3% down payment but the government loans you the down payment money and the closing cost money, how is that not a zero down payment policy?

And for the record, I don't think Stephanie is trying to place ALL of the blame on Clinton, just what he is responsible for.

Well I know we can get all caught up in the verbal battle and overstate something.

I suspect that is what happened.

If she would just admit she said it our discussion would be over and we could move on.

Do you see what I mean, Aaron?

Cuomo's ruling on YSP's had nothing to do with. Neither did his decision to dramatically increase the amount people could borrow, nor did lowering the amount of down payments, nor did his loosening of income verification standards. The CRA had no impact on this.

Barney Frank & Maxine Waters & Gregory Meeks & Co. insisting there was nothing wrong at Fannie or Freddie had nothing to do with it either.

It is all Boosh and those other dirty Republicans.

The Democrats are as pure as the driven snow.

Silly me.

And I might add that many countries that carry socialist programs such as free healthcare (NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT), when needed, come running to the United States for their defense.

For their defense of what? Of their healthcare system?

I would suggest (and not in a love it or leave it tone but in a 'it makes perfect sense to me tone') that if someone truly wanted to live in a socialist country then they are more then free to leave this one.

Or how about, since this is a republic, just staying and working to make it what we'd want it to be?

You are trying to have it both ways. You complain that this counrty is too "socialist" for your liking. Yet you suggest that "if someone truly wanted to live in a socialist country" that they can leave this one.

Some people are never satisfied.

ziggy wrote:

I would suggest (and not in a love it or leave it tone but in a 'it makes perfect sense to me tone') that if someone truly wanted to live in a socialist country then they are more then free to leave this one.

You are trying to have it both ways. You complain that this counrty is too "socialist" for your liking. Yet you suggest that "if someone truly wanted to live in a socialist country" that they can leave this one.

Socialism and the constitution are in conflict. That is a fact. If someone wants to live in a socialist country, they need to move.

And for the record any socialism is too socialist for my liking.

Socialism and the constitution are in conflict.

Not according to the Courts- which the Constitution recognizes to decide disputes involving the law and of the Constitution.

Anyway, socialism is an economic system, not a form of government.

ziggy wrote:

I would suggest (and not in a love it or leave it tone but in a 'it makes perfect sense to me tone') that if someone truly wanted to live in a socialist country then they are more then free to leave this one.

Or how about, since this is a republic, just staying and working to make it what we'd want it to be?

You are trying to have it both ways. You complain that this counrty is too "socialist" for your liking. Yet you suggest that "if someone truly wanted to live in a socialist country" that they can leave this one.

Some people are never satisfied.

If you want to change the country to make it a socialist nation you need to amend the Constitution, and there are plenty of us here who would fight you tooth and nail on that.

ziggy wrote:

Socialism and the constitution are in conflict.

Not according to the Courts-

Once again you would be wrong. Recent court decisions have halted and in some cases reversed the ever expanding role of government in busing, abortion and 2nd Amendment rights decisions and these cases are only the beginning.

Obama will gain no ground on the court as anyone he appoints will most likely replace a liberal judge so his liberal presidency won’t swing the court. And as Republicans, unlike democrats, know how to govern from the minority and can certainly filibuster a liberal nominee, we very well could see another justice like Roberts or Alito, both whom shared very liberal support.

And as history has a way of repeating itself and 2008-2012 is a repeat of 1976 to 1980 and Obama’s liberal presidency goes down in flames as Carter’s liberal presidency did, I see conservatives re-taking the WH in 2012 for another 8 to 12 year period, which will give them plenty of time and the right court to reverse the liberalism that began in the 30's and continued unabated for 70+ years.

As the good book says, to everything there is a season, and in the case of the court, it's going back to the right. Too bad you won’t see the end results.

ziggy wrote:

Or how about, since this is a republic, just staying and working to make it what we'd want it to be?

And just how much more screwed up do you and Shermmy want it to be, Zigster?

If, of today, the Stock Market has lost almost 50% of its equity, ..... then all the money in the Retirement Accounts being controlled by the State Investment Board will also have lost 50% of their equity.

Now tallk about UNFUNDED LIABILITIES of the Teacher's Retirement, State Police Retirement, Judge's Retirement and State Employees' Retirement ......... there won't be enough money to pay the Board Members their salaries and expenses.



.

The DOW closed down another 679 points today.

That is another 1 1/2 TRILLION $$$ in equity that has evaporated.

If you think the ENRON mess wiped out a lot of Retirement Accounts of individuals ....... then you ain't heard the really bad news yet.



.

Well, Sherm tried to tell us a year ago that the stock market was headed down and that that did not bode well. But you all insisted that the was crying wolfe.

An economy based on the hype of confidence men is bound to take a tailspin some time.

No, we did not insist he was crying "wolfe" just that he was citing economics for political points, his standard modus operandi. Many of us "naysayers" see no point in enabling him.