Emotional reaction to the US electoral result

[Kidlicious]

It's getting to where there's too many poor people and not enough work. They just want us to die.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Geronimo
It's interesting that so many expressing shadenfreude are delighted that Bush will ruin the US economy.

Just what was Bush doing that they believe ruins the US economy? Greenspan, The primary economic guru of the US who the rest of the world seemed to respect in the clinton presidency, doesn't seem to have had much more criticism for Bush's policies with respect to the economy than he did for Clinton's.

actually I believe it was greenspan who said tax cuts are good if they are accompanied by cuts in goverment spending.

The problem is Bush has increased goverment spending. I fully support tax cuts. I love them. But you also must cut goverment spending. I suggest cutting education and the military. Yes cutting education sounds bad. But that is mostly locally funded. The money the feds put in is mostly to get voters attention.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Dissident


actually I believe it was greenspan who said tax cuts are good if they are accompanied by cuts in goverment spending.

The problem is Bush has increased goverment spending. I fully support tax cuts. I love them. But you also must cut goverment spending. I suggest cutting education and the military. Yes cutting education sounds bad. But that is mostly locally funded. The money the feds put in is mostly to get voters attention.

How about we axe social security? it's going to fail anyway and is far more expensive than even the military and education combined.

[Dis]

heh! yeah, it'd be good to do that if we ever had a president who didn't want to be re-relected

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Geronimo
It's interesting that so many expressing shadenfreude are delighted that Bush will ruin the US economy.

its not so much interesting as it is sick. These people are the ones who claim to be morally enlightened, yet they get sadistic satisfaction from the perceived downfall of the US
apolyton...

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Dissident
heh! yeah, it'd be good to do that if we ever had a president who didn't want to be re-relected

But that's what second terms are for!

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Dissident
we can't afford not to change [Social Security]

So you handle it like a grown up and instead of making a stupid change that makes the overall financial problem worse you either cut benefits or you increase payments into S.S. (or you find a way to invest the money better or fix the economy well enough elsewhere to cover S.S.)

Bush's plan is not a solution.

-Drachasor

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Dissident
heh! yeah, it'd be good to do that if we ever had a president who didn't want to be re-relected

You mean a President, Senate, and House.

Axing Social Security is a poor idea and I hope it never happens. There needs to be something to help the elderly out there. Delay benefits or work out some other solution to the problem.

-Drachasor

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Drachasor


You mean a President, Senate, and House.

Axing Social Security is a poor idea and I hope it never happens. There needs to be something to help the elderly out there. Delay benefits or work out some other solution to the problem.

-Drachasor

Gee, maybe the elederly would have more money if they hadn't had to sink huge fractions of every last paycheck into a bottemless blackhole like SS all of these years, ya think?

Anytime you break a pyramid scheme the pain hits but the sooner you break it the fewer the victims.

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Geronimo
Gee, maybe the elederly would have more money if they hadn't had to sink huge fractions of every last paycheck into a bottemless blackhole like SS all of these years, ya think?

Anytime you break a pyramid scheme the pain hits but the sooner you break it the fewer the victims.

It isn't a pyramid scheme. I am getting pretty annoyed with people trying to blow things out of proportion, so try not to be an idiot* and do that.

Secondly, you need to understand how the middle and lower class works and their function in society. They serve the role of keeping the economy going. They get money and then most of them spend the money; they are not good at saving it and spending it helps the economy a great deal. Since there will always be many people that don't save money for retirement, there must be a system to help those people. The only sensible and fair system is one that helps everyone since otherwise it opens itself for exploitation.

Proposing that people "just save their money" simply is an idea that will never work, and historically never has worked. As such I don't think it is a reasonable proposal, since it doesn't deal with the realities of the situation, just like advocating abstinence and only abstinence is a foolish policy.

-Drachasor

Edit: *I do not mean to offend, but my annoyance/anger with misrepresentation is getting the best of me.

[notyoueither]

Why? What was life expectancy when SS was started?

Do you think that they figured on a lot of people living past 90?

I think it's pchangs sig that says if SS was a private initiative, it would be prosecuted as a ponzi scheme. He's right.

Don't fret, our version is in the same boat.

[Drachasor]

So you make it so the benefits kick in later; problem solved.

Well, you need to make sure S.S. surpluses are saved and invested too.

-Drachasor

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Drachasor


It isn't a pyramid scheme. I am getting pretty annoyed with people trying to blow things out of proportion, so try not to be an idiot and do that.

Secondly, you need to understand how the middle and lower class works and their function in society. They serve the role of keeping the economy going. They get money and then most of them spend the money; they are not good at saving it and spending it helps the economy a great deal. Since there will always be many people that don't save money for retirement, there must be a system to help those people. The only sensible and fair system is one that helps everyone since otherwise it opens itself for exploitation.

Proposing that people "just save their money" simply is an idea that will never work, and historically never has worked. As such I don't think it is a reasonable proposal, since it doesn't deal with the realities of the situation, just like advocating abstinence and only abstinence is a foolish policy.

-Drachasor

Your argument is based upon the notion that the people do not know how to save money but that the government understands the value of saving money.



hoo boy, ...ok I can type now

I'm sorry but we are not going to solve the problem of irresponsible budgeting strategies used by some of the people by placing the future of all of the peoples retirements into the surreally fiscally incompetent and unsurpassed shortsightedness of the federal government! Talk about out of the frying pan and into the fire!

What fraction of the population of US federal governments has a negative value of assets and year after year ever increasing budgetary deficit? 100 percent of them! all one of the federal governments available manage to have no savings whatsoever and massive endlessly increasing debt.

What fraction of the population of citizens of the US has a negative value of assets and year after year ever increasing budgetary deficit? I daresay it is somewhat less than 100%.

[notyoueither]

Isn't it kind of late to be investing the surpluses?

The boomers start cashing cheques in a few years. Cha-CHING!

[The Mad Monk]

Quietly happy and relieved.

The number of bristling people around here -- on the web and IRL -- is really quite staggering. I do sympathize with them, I remember how I felt when Clinton won those two times.

...

Of course, I never ran around calling people stupid and threatening to flee the country.