Oh you're far too generous. The teabaggers (who seem to embrace the label) have done more to marginalize themselves than anyone else has. When your leader has the IQ of a Palin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrzXLYA_e6E

Where were they when republican spending went totally nuts from 2001-2006? Oh that's right I forgot to apply the old GOP double standard; pub spending good, other spending bad.

And the solutions they offer? Cut spending? Yeah right, but just spending on other people. Oh, people spending bad; corporate welfare good!

you fail to understand the concept of scale.

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/02/05/pas ... -pictures/

i have look for "in pictures", because numbers simply wont do it for you. you have seen the numbers, but cant comprehend them because they're not in pretty pictures.

Anybody who blames the deficit and the accumulated debt on President Obama is forgetting history.

Reagan was the first president to rack up debt in a crazy way! His debt was more than ALL of the debt before that PUT TOGETHER, and then some. Then, the debt went back down under Clinton -- he even had the surplus!

Then Bush The Younger outdid Reagan by a whole lot. And of course, the economy went away under Bush -- what with all the lawless markets! And he took us into TWO unfunded wars.

So the starting point for Obama was still the majority of the current debt and deficit. Bush saddled us with the largest deficit and debt -- and Obama has started to clean up the mess. You do not turn around the economy by stopping spending (as we learned in the Depression). You have to get the economy going again, and then the tax income starts to flow enough to pay down the debt.

So let's review: Carter and Clinton brought down the debt with balanced budgets and/or surpluses. Reagan and W. Bush together are responsible for added something like 10X the total debt OF ALL THE OTHER PRESIDENTS COMBINED! And now, we are being impatient with another responsible (Democratic) president for not turning the ship of state quickly enough?

Exactly Neil, but the scary hate mongering is mostly because he's dark skinned, not cause he's a democrat.
and thats precisely why teabaggers (and the other conservatives) want uptight citizens carrying big guns around... to scare those 'uppity' 'boys' back into 'their' place.

what a ridiculous assumption.

NeilBlanchard: obama is not being a responsible president, when his spending per fiscal year is 2x what the previous "irresponsible" president did.

the debt didnt go down under clinton, he just didnt have a deficit. for what...1 fiscal year? at the height of the .com bubble?

massive spending in a recession is dumb. people (not government) will ultimately make the best decision of WHERE to spend their money, in the way that is the most efficient to them.

by massively taxing them and then spending that money on stupid shit (like we're currently doing), you deprive the market movers of the ability to make jobs and get an economy going.

someone needs to remind obama's economic advisors that the Simple Keynesian model DOES NOT WORK in the way he is trying to push it. "Tax and spend your way to success" is not a viable plan.

In a recession unemployment rises therefore tax revenue goes down and government spending on social security/benefits spending goes up - unless you want to let the unemployed starve.

If a government borrows money and invests in infrastructure projects this creates more employment therefore tax revenue goes up and social security spending goes down so the government revenue increases and the debt can be paid back - with the added benefit of renewed infrastructure.
Even spending on defence creates employment but the net result is arguably less beneficial to the country.

This approach has generally worked in the past (with the exception of Japan) and seems logical enough to me.

The people generally do NOT spend in a recession because they have lost their jobs or they are worried about losing their jobs and instinctively stop spending and start saving or more likely try to pay off their personal debt. This does not help to create more jobs.

Once the national debt becomes more manageable, the causes need to be addressed.
There is no point putting more money in peoples pockets if they are going to spend it on goods made in Chinese sweat shops or Japanese car factories. Far too much cash flows out of the US (and the UK).
Peoples expectations and attitudes need to change. Easy credit needs to stop. If not, the West will continue it's decline into poverty with disastrous consequences - civil unrest, rioting, anarchy and the collapse of the "Western Empire"; except that I imagine the US government would nuke China rather than let that happen.

Regarding the "Teabaggers":
I am sure that there is a section of the American people that are still very racist - look at the history for fucks sake! How recently did equal rights come in? How much opposition to it was there? Do you really think peoples opinions will change so quickly?
Two things I would like to say -
1) Being a Conservative does not make a person a racist. (Or a Palin fan!)
2) Being opposed to immigration does not make a person a racist.
Please, people, do not get these issues confused.

How did we come out of the Depression?

The debt did go down under Clinton -- that's what a surplus is! And Carter had a balanced budget, or two. How is it that the "conservatives" Reagan, Bush I and Bush II have bigger deficits that the "big spending" Democrats?

If we do not spend now, then the recession will become a depression. If the economy can recover faster, then we can pay down the deficit.

Where were you when Bush was spending all this money (and for what?), and where were you when the bankers and insurance speculators were breaking the economy? Obama is starting the process of fixing the myriad problems that Bush left us. At least there is a purpose for spending now -- do get jobs and the economy back on track.

Why don't whitdrawing from Afghanistan more or less in the way it has been done in Iraq? It has been proven that Bush Jr really used too much of the total US budget for those wars, and I can't actually see great improvements in countries stability but thousands of us dead. It could cause a let's say "reputation" drop, but that would probably save a lot of money that could be used for health care, research and lower taxation.

1) it sure would help US all, if those conservatives that are truly antiracist (and antihate), did a much better job of calling out the bigots in their party and infotainment machine.
2) "Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free..." -being opposed to immigration basically makes you unamerican...


'teabaggers' is aprapo due to it being the party of the Murdoch movement, that's doing everything it can, trying to continue slapping US in the face with their foul greed sack, like they have since Reagan.

I can only comment from a UK perspective, racism here is just as prevalent amongst the left wing working class as it is amongst the right wing Conservatives. Until the 1950's this country was 99.99% white. We don't have the slavery isssue to get over like you guys.
I'll bet that most over here that claim to be non-racist would still be horrified if their daughter came home with a black boyfriend (or Arab/Indian/Pakistani for that matter). So how honest are we really being?

The US was colonised by immigrants from many different countries - perhaps you have the space for more. The UK is overcrowded already, we don't need more immigrants from anywhere.

I would call Murdoch a scumbag rather than a teabag. Or worse.

Guns dont kill people,

People who buy guns kill people.

I actually like guns, I actually think it's fine to nail people too. Some people need to get nailed. They are obvious and in obvious situations. That is why guns are created. Your italian/british/whatever the hell country you live has

NO BILL OF RIGHTS

so the only psycho freak morons who carry guns are your police or military. They kill people and you cannot. So, you also think killing people if fine, you just assume that you yourself are of too little a brain power to know when you should, or feel unworthy to defend yourself against attackers.

Think more for yourself and for your own ethics and brain power. DO you think it was cool to go into Iraq and support that war? Well? Yup, you guys did! So, killing people who never attacked you is really awesome and buying of those guns was sooooo freakin cool, but defending yourself from a home invasion and wife rape, well, that's just too crazy of an idea.

that's about it.

Sorry, that's nonsense from my POV.
We just have a different story->different way to define the word "right".
You talk about "attackers", wth, we're not in a videogame, I've never seen an "attacker", nor my friends have always been robbed or raped in their homes, maybe we just don't need guns, and that's the third biggest city with a metro area of almost 4 million ppl, not a quiet rural community. Do you guys really have so many house robbery episodes? As I wrote days ago, use armour-plated (and not the thin wooden doors I saw in most cities) doors, window fences that you can close or open whenever you want/feel so unsafe, an infrared alarm connected with your local police station (it has been said that they are far from houses, I don't think so at least for you in NYC), that's all.
And no, it wasn't cool to go in Iraq, as I stated above. It was cool for people who wanted to gain control over local resources and for people who gained the right to reconstruct all the destroied iraqi buildings. It wasn't really cool for us and for your soldiers... ask one of their moms, while crying on her son's coffin... ask her what does she think.

You've probably never seen a rusted out Alfa Romeo, but I assure you the planet is covered with them. Well, that is, until they vaporize.

What you see in your backyard ends in value at your fence. You are also under the mistaken assumption your opinion is of greater value, accuracy, or whatever you care to call it.

It is, but clearly, only to you.

That's rather severe thing to do to this category. I think you owe scumbags everywhere an apology.

Over here, our economy depends on an abundance of migrant labor to keep US fed, sheltered and clean...

I can only suppose that you're being sarcastic... almost 10% unemployment in the US - that's worse than the UK.

I suppose some of the unemployed are actually making a living from selling drugs and robbing corner shops; using guns of course...
hey - back on topic!

What valuable stuff can you leave in your backyard and what are the threats for a woman out there? I suppose that thieves/rapers come out in the night, and I don't think your son/wife will stay in the backyard in the middle of the night. By the way, let's start to protect our home, then we'll try to see what can we do for our backyard/garden (if we have one...).

It is my opinion, what should make yours greater or lesser value than mine or vice-versa? It's only my opinion, and noone wanted to assume it as "the truth". As you said, it is only to me, and the same happens for the other users. That's why forum and communities exist: they are places to excange POVs, and every opinion has the same value, even if one doesn't agree on something.




Would you ever pick tomatoes, oranges and apples? Would you ever clean even the worst streets? Would you work a lot of hours a day for a few bucks doing a sh... work? Would you care after a 85 y.o grandpa cleaning his...bottom part?
Not me. Noone but them can do and they actually do. We'd slowly start having serious problems if we wouldn't have pakistans/mexicans/romanians. Of course the immigration HAS to be controlled, and who commits a crime MUST be expelled, but they are useful in our economy.

Can you do something noone wants/can do? You're welcome 'till you'll start to commit crimes.
That's more or less the same idea at the base of the US green card.

btw I second judge56988, we're slowly going OT

Sorry flapane but I totally disagree with this attitude.
If someone is fit to work and there is work available then they should have to work - how is it morally right to bring in migrant labour to do the shit work and pay them shit wages?
What should happen is that all jobs should be paid a decent wage.
It's just not right that lazy people should be able to sit on their arses all day receiving state support (paid for out of the taxes paid by working people) while imported foreign labour is used to do the work that is considered to be boring/dirty/menial.
BTW this subject has been covered in at least one previous topic and is OT here; however it is something that I feel strongly about and can't resist replying.

For what it's worth, I would rather do any of the jobs you mention than claim benefit - I have some self respect.

Don't get me wrong, it was in some (weak) way a provocation, you're totally right, but I didn't like being politically correct, at least not now.
That's the consequence of our western model of life, that's the truth for what I can see, I'm not saying it's fair because of course it ain't but it's sad. Can you wonder what does it mean picking tomatoes in southern Italy in summer for a few euros a day or a meal?

I'm one of the least "PC" people I know, actually. (Don't get me started on that one!)
I think of this as a moral issue as well as an economic one and an issue that I believe will have long term consequences for Western society. (Think decline and fall of the Roman Empire maybe?)
I really don't like the way the "Western model of life" is going; I think that it is unsustainable and will end badly. Especially in places where the majority of people are armed. (Vain attempt to keep slightly on-topic)

As for the tomato picking - yes it would be a shit gig for sure, but it's not that far away from using slaves to pick cotton is it?

I agree on everything.

Im not.

Come on out to the fruit/wine/lettuce belt of the US sometime and I will show you who still picks and cooks our food, and who cleans our hospitals, business and homes first hand. Plus on the drive to the central valley we can stop off in Oakland or Richmond and we can ask for some local opinions about those teabagger signs too.

Sure, I know who does that work - the question I have is whether you think that they should be, given that you have 10% unemployment and are exploiting these people as well. My point was that citizens should do the work themselves, for a fair wage.


That comment is directed at the wrong person - I have no disagreement with you on the racist nature of the signs, however they are a consequence of having the right to freedom of speech are they not? Or is Political Correctness more important? And there's another whole issue.

Exactly. I see this a a 2 part problem.

1,) The huge 10% unemployment rate could easily be flattened if those unemployed legal citizens of the US were paid a decent wage to do the menial manual labour that they dont want to do.

2,) Change the laws about payment for xxxx job like we have in the UK, a "minimum wage" per hour and other associated laws such as giving the employers of illegal workers huge fines.

This will cause some problems that we have already seen in the UK, such as the overall cost of producing goods goes up, and that some people/companies will flount the laws and hire illegals for a tiny price anyway.



As far as I am concerned political correctness is bollocks, its simply "anti-racism" laws gone mad. There is a very big difference between someone being "racist" by using a word such as "nigger", or "honky" vs calling someone "black", or "white" rather than than the PC variant, "African-American", or "German-American".

The vast majority of people of "black" and "white" people I am sure will agree that they dont mind people using such a term so long as it is within context and used in a non-offensive way.


Andy

100% with you on that one. Take a look here

Should be? none else will do the job, adn noone can pay the 10$ for a head of lettuce it would cost if it was picked by a citizen under fully safe/insured conditions. the way our economy has been set up, we have no choice. We are a country literally built and fed on exploiting cheap migrant labor.


the teabagger sign show and tell road trip was not directed at you, but if im taking a diversity road trip anyways, maybe some of this threads "teabagging gunnuts aren't racist bigots" will come along for the ride.

How true - and the British Empire was built by exploiting half the undeveloped world and robbing them of their natural resources.
What's the answer?
Communism didn't work, it is contrary to human instinct.
Fascism didn't work because people value their freedom.
Capitalism works extremely well for a few but relies on the exploitation of many.
Any ideas?

something with a strict set of guidelines enforcing long term social and environmental responsibility.
if a company beaks the rules, the whole board of directors must face the guillotine.

That would be awsome , your country would be fucked in no time, as you would have to change your government every couple of months - unless they are exempt, but that would be unfair wouldnt it.


Andy

Ha, around here they don't even face federal prison, which we refer to as "Club Fed."