Originally Posted by Lucy - CSC (Post 18453785)

What the Greeks were actually pissed off about was that the people who were actually responsible for the crash of their economy, The Walls Street Bankers Goldman Sachs inparticular, are now the owners of the Greek State assets which had keep unemployment levels low, energy prices low etc. With the assetts now being run for profit which will line the pockets of Goldman Sachs it isnt fair.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18453776)

Outside of bankers and politicians, I haven't heard anyone (for sure here) claim the bailout would work.

Nice rant though, it shows how very little you know about the entire Greece situation.

Greece is the result of bad banking business and massive deregulation, which removed some good and working social programs, and taxes - most of which benefited only the ultra rich classes, ie: America / Republican / TeaParty policy - which has 100% failed. At that, the "people" aren't much in the hole, it is the corps/banks and gov... the people protested because they're country was being ripped out from under them, the wealth stolen, some of which included the top corps in the country, 10,000's of business owners, and other rabble.

Originally Posted by Bill8 (Post 18453779)

Congrats on writing more than one line.

Technically, he doesn't say any of that, altho I would agree that there is an unstated subtext which is that Greece will default, followed by at least a few of the other mediterreanean countries.

I personally woudl say the guy is right, and we have been warned - by many, not just this guy.

----

Now, the question is, should I bother to debate with you the editorial stuff you added? You probably wont actually debate, you rarely have in the past.

Lets pick one item.

With money as cheap as it is right now, why shouldn't the government borrow as much as they can, and spend it? In a cheap money environment, borrowing money makes sense, not borrowing it (and spending it) makes less sense.

The private sector is not spending money inside the country. The private sector is not building new infrastucture inside the country. The private sector relies (and has relied in the past) on government spending for infrstructure, and government assumption of infrastructure costs.

So, why shouldn't the government borrow more of teh cheapest money any of us has ever seen in our lifetime to build infrastructure that the private sector can then use "for free"?

But - more to the point - what's your plan to get the private sector re-investing in america again? Why should it?

Originally Posted by lucy - csc (Post 18453807)

thing that i dont understand about conservatives is how they love socialism to pay off the bills when their profits fail.

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18453799)

LoL at a guy moving to Canada for the handouts explaining
Anything to anyone about money or an economy

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18453796)

Incorrect

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18453816)

Cool, I had no idea I was moving back to Canada.

Still doesn't change the fact that you have no idea what happened with Greece's economy.

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18453811)

Do a search on my plan. I spelled it out sometime this week.
As far as "why doesn't the government borrow as much as they can" question goes, we already have.
Anything else?

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18453820)

:1orglaugh

Originally Posted by Lucy - CSC (Post 18453807)

Thing that I dont understand about conservatives is how they love socialism to pay off the bills when their profits fail.

Originally Posted by Caligari (Post 18453832)

what ol' 12clicks will tell you is that righteous and successful people hate welfare.

unless its corporate;)

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18453835)

Corps are worth it. The bottom of society isn't.

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18453835)

Corps are worth it. The bottom of society isn't.

Originally Posted by Caligari (Post 18453838)

tada! i knew that you would;)

so then you do approve of Obama's bailout to the corporations?

Originally Posted by Caligari (Post 18453846)

thats it good night everyone!

sleep tight 12clicks!

Originally Posted by Caligari (Post 18453844)

I do what i can;)

and if he tries to batter obama on the bailout his ass should be reminded that it was Bush who got the whole bailout ball rolling-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/1..._n_783342.html

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18453857)

The uneducated among us always excuse continued deficit spending on a scale never before seen because some deficit spending was done before.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18453860)

Actually, it's not being done a scale like never before... the difference between spending and earning is closer together than it has been under 'almost' every other president during bailout times.

And in case you forgot, we had 3 bailouts in the 70's, 4 in the 80's for 85+ billion just on banks, the Airlines in the 90's and 01, then 1.4 trillion to banks and lenders under Bush.

The largest spending ever is Bush, the largest deficit ratio is Reagan. Obama doesn't even come close to these guys - at that, he alone hasn't really spent that much, over what was already in place (but hidden from us)... what he can for sure be blamed for is not reducing it.

Originally Posted by Bill8 (Post 18453674)

Some time ago we moved from a civilizational economy based on primary wealth, like extracted metals fuels and food, or secondary wealth like manufactured items, to tertiary wealth based on symbolic manipulation of money, ownership, information and unequal access to information, that kind of thing.

In an economy based on symbolic manipulation rather than natural wealth or manufacturing, this kind of manipulation by the investing and trading class is how the economy works.

It's essentially a cyclical harvest of the wealth of the general population by the small percentage licensed to be the harvesters.

This is the world we live in. It's quite new tho - only a few hundred years old - who knows if it's a rugged enough complex system to last long.

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18453871)

Link?
:1orglaugh

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 18455811)

Nothing is real. Believe no one...

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2011...ust_reloaded=1

Originally Posted by nation-x (Post 18453620)

The people who keep pushing unregulated free markets are empowering that 100%.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 18453860)

Actually, it's not being done a scale like never before... the difference between spending and earning is closer together than it has been under 'almost' every other president during bailout times.

And in case you forgot, we had 3 bailouts in the 70's, 4 in the 80's for 85+ billion just on banks, the Airlines in the 90's and 01, then 1.4 trillion to banks and lenders under Bush.

The largest spending ever is Bush, the largest deficit ratio is Reagan. Obama doesn't even come close to these guys - at that, he alone hasn't really spent that much, over what was already in place (but hidden from us)... what he can for sure be blamed for is not reducing it.

Originally Posted by Minte (Post 18455861)

Obama has been president for 33 months and he has spent close to 4 TRILLION dollars.

Originally Posted by Minte (Post 18455861)

Obama has been president for 33 months and he has spent close to 4 TRILLION dollars.

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18455865)

Don't confuse him with reality.:1orglaugh

Originally Posted by 12clicks (Post 18453857)

The uneducated among us always excuse continued deficit spending on a scale never before seen because some deficit spending was done before.

Originally Posted by DudeRick (Post 18453577)

He's probably right, you socialists have bankrupt Europe and there is likely to be a crash as a result.