If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Jerusalem Post)   Iranian president: U.S. empire will fall due to massive debt. U ahmad, bro?   (jpost.com) divider line 75
    More: Unlikely, President of Iran, United States, Iranians, Iran, foreign debts, Zionist entity, superpowers, space power  
•       •       •

584 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Oct 2012 at 2:29 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



75 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-18 11:35:05 AM
It's funny because the Iranian economy has collapsed due to sanctions imposed on it by the US and partner countries. It's gotten so bad that people are rioting because their Iranian rial currency is worth less every day and that they can no longer afford food.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-10-18 11:37:12 AM
Iran will go first judging by the effect the sanctions are having.
 
2012-10-18 11:40:56 AM
No, it won't.
 
2012-10-18 11:57:13 AM
Yes, it will.

/all empires collapse under their own weight
//END THE FED
/legalizing drugs would destroy Wall Street
..where white men used to rent out slaves by the day or week
/now they gamble your future and that of your unborn great-grandchildren
 
2012-10-18 12:04:49 PM
Incorrect, Iranian president. If the US falls, it will be because of ninjas.

i76.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-18 12:16:42 PM
That may be. And if that happens, then the economy of China also implodes, due to the loss of its primary trading partner. The EU and major SE Asian nations are caught up in the collapse, which leads to, among many other things, the global demand- well, ability to pay for- oil cratering. And Iran, which isn't doing too hot economically at the moment anyway, suddenly becomes a post-apocalyptic, distopian society.

That, or the Fed prints a bit more money and we deal with the mild heartburn of inflation. One or the other.
 
2012-10-18 12:20:34 PM
Iranian Presient Mittmoud Romninajhad.
 
2012-10-18 12:40:14 PM
Yeah, so what of it?
 
2012-10-18 12:43:31 PM
Isn't Iran undergoing borderline hyperinflation right now?
 
2012-10-18 12:55:39 PM

DamnYankees: Isn't Iran undergoing borderline hyperinflation right now?


Not really, just bad inflation. What he is doing is using the same talking points the Republicans around here use, projecting their weaknesses onto us to hide their own.
 
2012-10-18 12:56:32 PM

GAT_00: DamnYankees: Isn't Iran undergoing borderline hyperinflation right now?

Not really, just bad inflation. What he is doing is using the same talking points the Republicans around here use, projecting their weaknesses onto us to hide their own.


What the difference between "bad inflation" and hyperinflation?

Not a joke, serious question. Is there some generally acceptable economic principle about how to differentiate the two?
 
2012-10-18 01:06:31 PM

urban.derelict: Yes, it will.

/all empires collapse under their own weight
//END THE FED
/legalizing drugs would destroy Wall Street


Did your fedora pop off while you typed that?
 
2012-10-18 01:08:14 PM

DamnYankees: GAT_00: DamnYankees: Isn't Iran undergoing borderline hyperinflation right now?

Not really, just bad inflation. What he is doing is using the same talking points the Republicans around here use, projecting their weaknesses onto us to hide their own.

What the difference between "bad inflation" and hyperinflation?

Not a joke, serious question. Is there some generally acceptable economic principle about how to differentiate the two?


Hyperinflation I think should refer to conditions where prices double within a one week period or less. That's my rough definition anyway.
 
2012-10-18 01:13:27 PM

GAT_00: DamnYankees: GAT_00: DamnYankees: Isn't Iran undergoing borderline hyperinflation right now?

Not really, just bad inflation. What he is doing is using the same talking points the Republicans around here use, projecting their weaknesses onto us to hide their own.

What the difference between "bad inflation" and hyperinflation?

Not a joke, serious question. Is there some generally acceptable economic principle about how to differentiate the two?

Hyperinflation I think should refer to conditions where prices double within a one week period or less. That's my rough definition anyway.


If my math is right, that would be an inflation rate of approximately 450,000,000,000,000,000%.

I think you're being a little too strict in the definition.
 
2012-10-18 01:13:33 PM
That asshole has been listening to Glenn Beck.
 
2012-10-18 01:24:30 PM

sweetmelissa31: urban.derelict: Yes, it will.

/all empires collapse under their own weight
//END THE FED
/legalizing drugs would destroy Wall Street

Did your fedora pop off while you typed that?


IT IS NOT A FEDORA IT IS A TRILBY AND FURTHERMORE COMMA
 
2012-10-18 01:24:49 PM

Gonz: That may be. And if that happens, then the economy of China also implodes, due to the loss of its primary trading partner. The EU and major SE Asian nations are caught up in the collapse, which leads to, among many other things, the global demand- well, ability to pay for- oil cratering. And Iran, which isn't doing too hot economically at the moment anyway, suddenly becomes a post-apocalyptic, distopian society.

That, or the Fed prints a bit more money and we deal with the mild heartburn of inflation. One or the other.


Basically, yeah.

It's in the interests of the world economy that the US not fall, because, quite literally, if we fall, everyone falls.
 
2012-10-18 01:35:44 PM

urban.derelict: Yes, it will.

/all empires collapse under their own weight
//END THE FED
/legalizing drugs would destroy Wall Street
..where white men used to rent out slaves by the day or week
/now they gamble your future and that of your unborn great-grandchildren


Shouldn't you be throwing a bag of your own feces at a police officer right now?
 
2012-10-18 01:36:53 PM
Somewhere, George Kennan is laughing at you, Ahmadinejad.
 
2012-10-18 01:37:09 PM

DamnYankees: GAT_00: DamnYankees: Isn't Iran undergoing borderline hyperinflation right now?

Not really, just bad inflation. What he is doing is using the same talking points the Republicans around here use, projecting their weaknesses onto us to hide their own.

What the difference between "bad inflation" and hyperinflation?

Not a joke, serious question. Is there some generally acceptable economic principle about how to differentiate the two?


Usually, hyperinflation means 50% monthly inflation, as a ballpark figure. If a nation'shiatting, say, 45% monthly, there aren't many economists who will come out and say "Quit calling that hyperinflation! It doesn't meet the textbook definition!"

I'd say NO economist would say that, but as politicized as that field has become, if some economist thought he could discredit an idealogical adversary by making that argument, they might. Hell, why am I qualifying that? They would.
 
2012-10-18 01:44:02 PM
Trilby ⊂ Fedoras. Therefore, it is a fedora. QED.
 
2012-10-18 01:47:53 PM

sweetmelissa31: Trilby ⊂ Fedoras. Therefore, it is a fedora. QED.


Wake up, sheepulace. The truth is out there. And it is wearing a fedora.
 
2012-10-18 02:05:55 PM
So Paul Ryan is president of Iran?
 
2012-10-18 02:10:15 PM
He's just bitter about getting his lay-off notice
 
2012-10-18 02:33:12 PM
He is a religious conservative, after all.
 
2012-10-18 02:37:27 PM

urban.derelict: //END THE FED


Yeah, destroy the thing that's prevented us from being destroyed. And replace it with the exact thing the fed was created to save us from. farking history, how does it work?
 
2012-10-18 02:39:32 PM
A fellow social conservative
 
2012-10-18 02:39:43 PM

RexTalionis: It's funny because the Iranian economy has collapsed due to sanctions imposed on it by the US and partner countries. It's gotten so bad that people are rioting because their Iranian rial currency is worth less every day and that they can no longer afford food.


That's not all that funny.
 
2012-10-18 02:41:40 PM
Oh you islamic Republicans! Always projecting
 
2012-10-18 02:42:38 PM

DamnYankees: GAT_00: DamnYankees: Isn't Iran undergoing borderline hyperinflation right now?

Not really, just bad inflation. What he is doing is using the same talking points the Republicans around here use, projecting their weaknesses onto us to hide their own.

What the difference between "bad inflation" and hyperinflation?

Not a joke, serious question. Is there some generally acceptable economic principle about how to differentiate the two?


This is what hyperinflation looks like:

encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com
 
2012-10-18 02:47:13 PM

sweetmelissa31: Trilby ⊂ Fedoras. Therefore, it is a fedora. QED.


Your Mother ∴ Combat Boots. BOOM!
 
2012-10-18 02:54:20 PM

SN1987a goes boom: DamnYankees: GAT_00: DamnYankees: Isn't Iran undergoing borderline hyperinflation right now?

Not really, just bad inflation. What he is doing is using the same talking points the Republicans around here use, projecting their weaknesses onto us to hide their own.

What the difference between "bad inflation" and hyperinflation?

Not a joke, serious question. Is there some generally acceptable economic principle about how to differentiate the two?

This is what hyperinflation looks like:

[encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com image 240x120]


I so need to buy some of those off ebay.
 
2012-10-18 02:57:06 PM

TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Gonz: That may be. And if that happens, then the economy of China also implodes, due to the loss of its primary trading partner. The EU and major SE Asian nations are caught up in the collapse, which leads to, among many other things, the global demand- well, ability to pay for- oil cratering. And Iran, which isn't doing too hot economically at the moment anyway, suddenly becomes a post-apocalyptic, distopian society.

That, or the Fed prints a bit more money and we deal with the mild heartburn of inflation. One or the other.

Basically, yeah.

It's in the interests of the world economy that the US not fall, because, quite literally, if we fall, everyone falls.

 

This is a fallacy. If China has enough energy/food and labor to sustain itself it will be fine. Why does China need to trade with anybody? Instead of selling goods to the US, they can just use them for themselves.
 
2012-10-18 02:59:13 PM

TheLalagah: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Gonz: That may be. And if that happens, then the economy of China also implodes, due to the loss of its primary trading partner. The EU and major SE Asian nations are caught up in the collapse, which leads to, among many other things, the global demand- well, ability to pay for- oil cratering. And Iran, which isn't doing too hot economically at the moment anyway, suddenly becomes a post-apocalyptic, distopian society.

That, or the Fed prints a bit more money and we deal with the mild heartburn of inflation. One or the other.

Basically, yeah.

It's in the interests of the world economy that the US not fall, because, quite literally, if we fall, everyone falls. 

This is a fallacy. If China has enough energy/food and labor to sustain itself it will be fine. Why does China need to trade with anybody? Instead of selling goods to the US, they can just use them for themselves.


Okay
 
2012-10-18 03:00:49 PM

TheLalagah: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Gonz: That may be. And if that happens, then the economy of China also implodes, due to the loss of its primary trading partner. The EU and major SE Asian nations are caught up in the collapse, which leads to, among many other things, the global demand- well, ability to pay for- oil cratering. And Iran, which isn't doing too hot economically at the moment anyway, suddenly becomes a post-apocalyptic, distopian society.

That, or the Fed prints a bit more money and we deal with the mild heartburn of inflation. One or the other.

Basically, yeah.

It's in the interests of the world economy that the US not fall, because, quite literally, if we fall, everyone falls. 

This is a fallacy. If China has enough energy/food and labor to sustain itself it will be fine. Why does China need to trade with anybody? Instead of selling goods to the US, they can just use them for themselves.


China's population isn't wealthy enough to consume what they produce at a price high enough to keep things afloat.
 
2012-10-18 03:03:39 PM

RexTalionis: It's funny because the Iranian economy has collapsed due to sanctions imposed on it by the US and partner countries. It's gotten so bad that people are rioting because their Iranian rial currency is worth less every day and that they can no longer afford food.


1. The Iranian president is right.
2. It's not really funny. We're committing acts of war and aggression against a country that has not directly attacked us. We've also manipulated the politics and leadership of that country in the past. If you really wish that sort of thing on other people then @#$% you.
 
2012-10-18 03:04:50 PM
Actually, on that point of his speech, he's completely right.

/even a broken clock ...
 
2012-10-18 03:11:08 PM

kid_icarus: Incorrect, Iranian president. If the US falls, it will be because of ninjas.

[i76.photobucket.com image 204x179]


We have a bad dude deficit.
 
2012-10-18 03:11:44 PM

beta_plus: Actually, on that point of his speech, he's completely right.

/even a broken clock ...


Just like how the US collapsed after WWII?
 
2012-10-18 03:14:08 PM

PC LOAD LETTER: urban.derelict: //END THE FED

Yeah, destroy the thing that's prevented us from being destroyed. And replace it with the exact thing the fed was created to save us from. farking history, how does it work?


I want these people to find one world power in history that did not control their currency through either policymakers or a central bank through either by fiat or manipulation of the supply and demand of the commodity backing the currency.

Whatever you choose to do, the government will still want the power to control the currency because the alternative is so much worse for everyone. Do you prefer it be a bunch of retired bankers who are semi-accountable for the economy chugging ahead or do you want to obscure it so that anyone with significant enough wealth can manipulate our currency by cornering the market?
 
2012-10-18 03:25:53 PM
Oh wow, we should spend a ton of money invading Iran to shut him up. Romney 2012!
 
2012-10-18 03:28:51 PM

TheLalagah: This is a fallacy. If China has enough energy/food and labor to sustain itself it will be fine. Why does China need to trade with anybody? Instead of selling goods to the US, they can just use them for themselves.


This is the "there are levels of existence that we are prepared to accept".

Yes, physically, most countries will survive. Politically and economically, however, they will suffer great setbacks. You can't sustain a first world economy without trade.
 
2012-10-18 03:31:07 PM

Arkanaut: beta_plus: Actually, on that point of his speech, he's completely right.

/even a broken clock ...

Just like how the US collapsed after WWII?


More like how Yugoslavia collapsed after the fall of the Warsaw Pact and Soviet Union.
 
2012-10-18 03:38:16 PM

RexTalionis: It's funny because the Iranian economy has collapsed due to sanctions imposed on it by the US and partner countries. It's gotten so bad that people are rioting because their Iranian rial currency is worth less every day and that they can no longer afford food.


and his citizens are doing all they can to get their hands on US dollars so they must not be buying into our eminent crash
 
2012-10-18 03:40:38 PM

TheLalagah: RexTalionis: It's funny because the Iranian economy has collapsed due to sanctions imposed on it by the US and partner countries. It's gotten so bad that people are rioting because their Iranian rial currency is worth less every day and that they can no longer afford food.

1. The Iranian president is right.
2. It's not really funny. We're committing acts of war and aggression against a country that has not directly attacked us. We've also manipulated the politics and leadership of that country in the past. If you really wish that sort of thing on other people then @#$% you.



It's not just the United States acting alone, and I find your definition of an "Act of War" a bit off. When most of the world decides it doesn't want to trade with you anymore because of your actions then MAYBE ... just maybe ... that country is acting like a jackass.

I mean, are you really going to stand up for Iran right now? A country that stones gay, treats women as 2nd class citizens and wants to "wipe Israel off the map".
 
2012-10-18 03:42:14 PM
First we go into a nationwide panic from the fiscal cliff, then the Iranians break out the stolen Russian nukes and then they clean up with boots on the ground. Excellent plan.
 
2012-10-18 03:51:38 PM

chasd00: TheLalagah: TheBeastOfYuccaFlats: Gonz: That may be. And if that happens, then the economy of China also implodes, due to the loss of its primary trading partner. The EU and major SE Asian nations are caught up in the collapse, which leads to, among many other things, the global demand- well, ability to pay for- oil cratering. And Iran, which isn't doing too hot economically at the moment anyway, suddenly becomes a post-apocalyptic, distopian society.

That, or the Fed prints a bit more money and we deal with the mild heartburn of inflation. One or the other.

Basically, yeah.

It's in the interests of the world economy that the US not fall, because, quite literally, if we fall, everyone falls. 

This is a fallacy. If China has enough energy/food and labor to sustain itself it will be fine. Why does China need to trade with anybody? Instead of selling goods to the US, they can just use them for themselves.

China's population isn't wealthy enough to consume what they produce at a price high enough to keep things afloat.


Not to mention the fact their industrial base would collapse from a sheer lack of raw materials. Part of China's trade equation is using the proceeds from manufacturing to bring in raw materials from overseas. They rely on the outside for oil, steel, and plastic.
 
2012-10-18 04:06:48 PM

HellRaisingHoosier: TheLalagah: RexTalionis: It's funny because the Iranian economy has collapsed due to sanctions imposed on it by the US and partner countries. It's gotten so bad that people are rioting because their Iranian rial currency is worth less every day and that they can no longer afford food.

1. The Iranian president is right.
2. It's not really funny. We're committing acts of war and aggression against a country that has not directly attacked us. We've also manipulated the politics and leadership of that country in the past. If you really wish that sort of thing on other people then @#$% you.


It's not just the United States acting alone, and I find your definition of an "Act of War" a bit off. When most of the world decides it doesn't want to trade with you anymore because of your actions then MAYBE ... just maybe ... that country is acting like a jackass.

I mean, are you really going to stand up for Iran right now? A country that stones gay, treats women as 2nd class citizens and wants to "wipe Israel off the map".


Yes I am, because what we're doing to them is wrong. ..and yes, it is an act of war. If country relies on trade for certain goods and your a country is actively denying those goods through intimidation or force, it's an act of war... not to mention sabotaging their nuclear program, killing civilians with drones, or bombing scientists. I ask you, what has Iran done to us to deserve this? Anyone?
 
2012-10-18 04:14:39 PM
Has.
 
2012-10-18 04:15:43 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-10-18 04:17:01 PM
Shvetz
Oh wow, we should spend a ton of money invading Iran to shut him up. Romney 2012!

"Months, not weeks"
-Barack Obama on the idea that Israel should attack Iran, back in May (slightly paraphrased)
 
2012-10-18 04:36:38 PM
Wow, he seems to have made a lot of people kind of nervous.
 
2012-10-18 04:44:48 PM

TheLalagah:
Yes I am, because what we're doing to them is wrong. ..and yes, it is an act of war. If country relies on trade for certain goods and your a country is actively denying those goods through intimidation or force, it's an act of war... not to mention sabotaging their nuclear program, killing civilians with drones, or bombing scientists. I ask you, what has Iran done to us to deserve this? Anyone?



Iran signed an agreement that they would not attempt to develop nuclear weapons and would allow inspectors to check. For several years now they have denied access by the inspectors, and there has been intelligence (by more then just the United States) that they are indeed attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Not to mention pouring weapons and money into terrorist groups in Iraq and Lebanon in an attempt to destabilize the region.

For years now Iran has funded terrorist organizations, backed plane hijackers and has repeatedly threatened to hurt Israel (a United States ally in the Middle East). Not to mention their horrifying stance against homosexuals and women.

The last thing I want is the United States to go into a conventional war with Iran. However, sanctions and digital attacks on nuclear R&D infrastructure is fine by me.
 
2012-10-18 05:26:00 PM

Arkanaut: beta_plus: Actually, on that point of his speech, he's completely right.

/even a broken clock ...

Just like how the US collapsed after WWII?


The nature of the high debt during WWII was a result of the accelerated spending which we were able to curtail at a certain point. Our spending obligations are no where the same now. Even with a recovering economy, we are still looking at adding 8 or so Trillion in additional debt during the next decade.

Eventually, the interest obligation is going to start kicking the hell out of us. This is a problem we do need to address.
 
2012-10-18 05:30:37 PM
Attention, wingnuts!

Are you outraged at the deficit? At the national debt?

GOOD!

NOW WHY WEREN'T YOU OUTRAGED WHEN THAT IDIOT BUSH WAS BEATING THE WAR DRUMS?

/Vote for Romney, so deficits won't matter anymore.
 
2012-10-18 05:34:50 PM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: NOW WHY WEREN'T YOU OUTRAGED WHEN THAT IDIOT BUSH WAS BEATING THE WAR DRUMS?


Bush's deficts were about $350 Billion or so when he was 'beating the war drums'. For the last four years, the deficit has average about an additional trillion on top of that.
 
2012-10-18 05:43:55 PM

Gonz: That, or the Fed prints a bit more money and we deal with the mild heartburn of inflation.


Inflation may help with the debt relief some, but remember that interest rates are typically very much influenced by inflation. If we get into a debt spiral, there is likely a limit to what inflationary policies can help with.
 
2012-10-18 06:05:41 PM

HellRaisingHoosier: TheLalagah:
Yes I am, because what we're doing to them is wrong. ..and yes, it is an act of war. If country relies on trade for certain goods and your a country is actively denying those goods through intimidation or force, it's an act of war... not to mention sabotaging their nuclear program, killing civilians with drones, or bombing scientists. I ask you, what has Iran done to us to deserve this? Anyone?


Iran signed an agreement that they would not attempt to develop nuclear weapons and would allow inspectors to check. For several years now they have denied access by the inspectors, and there has been intelligence (by more then just the United States) that they are indeed attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Not to mention pouring weapons and money into terrorist groups in Iraq and Lebanon in an attempt to destabilize the region.

For years now Iran has funded terrorist organizations, backed plane hijackers and has repeatedly threatened to hurt Israel (a United States ally in the Middle East). Not to mention their horrifying stance against homosexuals and women.

The last thing I want is the United States to go into a conventional war with Iran. However, sanctions and digital attacks on nuclear R&D infrastructure is fine by me.


Sure, signed after the United States helped orchestrate a coup of a democratically elected government in order to implement a dictatorship favorable to the United States, unfavorable to the people of Iran. It doesn't really count. Also, we have nukes in the United States, and we're the only county to EVER use them to kill innocent people.
We overthrew their democratically elected government, which make us the douchebags. Think about it. Barring some deserved retaliation for everything we've done over there, they really haven't done anything to us. Also, Israel can take care of their own problems. Can we leave them alone now, please?
 
2012-10-18 06:28:21 PM

HeadLever: Lee Jackson Beauregard: NOW WHY WEREN'T YOU OUTRAGED WHEN THAT IDIOT BUSH WAS BEATING THE WAR DRUMS?

Bush's deficts were about $350 Billion or so when he was 'beating the war drums'. For the last four years, the deficit has average about an additional trillion on top of that.


1) Obama: "Let the tax cuts expire above $250,000 and keep them for ev..
Publicans: "If that dagburn Dimmycrat varmint is FER it, AAAAAAAHHHHHM AGIN it!"

2) Mitt's plan for the deficit: (a) Defund Planned Parenthood. (b) Defund PBS. (c) Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran! (d) ??? (e) Balanced budget!
 
2012-10-18 07:22:48 PM

TheLalagah: HellRaisingHoosier: TheLalagah:
Yes I am, because what we're doing to them is wrong. ..and yes, it is an act of war. If country relies on trade for certain goods and your a country is actively denying those goods through intimidation or force, it's an act of war... not to mention sabotaging their nuclear program, killing civilians with drones, or bombing scientists. I ask you, what has Iran done to us to deserve this? Anyone?


Iran signed an agreement that they would not attempt to develop nuclear weapons and would allow inspectors to check. For several years now they have denied access by the inspectors, and there has been intelligence (by more then just the United States) that they are indeed attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Not to mention pouring weapons and money into terrorist groups in Iraq and Lebanon in an attempt to destabilize the region.

For years now Iran has funded terrorist organizations, backed plane hijackers and has repeatedly threatened to hurt Israel (a United States ally in the Middle East). Not to mention their horrifying stance against homosexuals and women.

The last thing I want is the United States to go into a conventional war with Iran. However, sanctions and digital attacks on nuclear R&D infrastructure is fine by me.

Sure, signed after the United States helped orchestrate a coup of a democratically elected government in order to implement a dictatorship favorable to the United States, unfavorable to the people of Iran. It doesn't really count. Also, we have nukes in the United States, and we're the only county to EVER use them to kill innocent people.
We overthrew their democratically elected government, which make us the douchebags. Think about it. Barring some deserved retaliation for everything we've done over there, they really haven't done anything to us. Also, Israel can take care of their own problems. Can we leave them alone now, please?



I'm sorry ... how many decades ago was the coup?
And the United States has followed and helped implement nuclear weapon reduction world-wide.

Also, the point of allies is that you don't turn your back on them. Should we also turn our back on South Korea if they ever get attacked by North Korea? No. We, the people of the United States, have said that if you attack our friends you are attacking us. It's part of why we area super power. Because when the shiat hits the fan, we have your back.
 
2012-10-18 07:44:11 PM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: 1) Democratic Derp!

2)Democratic Herp!


Which has nothing to do with the argument I presented. Personally, I am not a fan of Mitten's overall plan either. Doesn't mean that the deficit is any less of a problem. Just pointing out the obvious flaw in your argument.
 
2012-10-18 07:53:04 PM

urban.derelict: Yes, it will.

/all empires collapse under their own weight
//END THE FED
/legalizing drugs would destroy Wall Street
..where white men used to rent out slaves by the day or week
/now they gamble your future and that of your unborn great-grandchildren


The US is not so likely to fall as it is to be eclipsed by the economies of more populous countries as they industrialize.

Iran on the other hand is likely to go the way of other repressive countries in their region lately. It;s just a matter of when.
 
2012-10-18 09:10:29 PM

HeadLever: Lee Jackson Beauregard: NOW WHY WEREN'T YOU OUTRAGED WHEN THAT IDIOT BUSH WAS BEATING THE WAR DRUMS?

Bush's deficts were about $350 Billion or so when he was 'beating the war drums'. For the last four years, the deficit has average about an additional trillion on top of that.


Bush didn't count the $80b per year in war spending or the billions spent on cleaning up after Katrina in the deficit calculations. The majority of Obama's deficit is the result of higher payments for unemployment benefits and lower tax collections.

Romney's plan to balance the budget is to spend another $100b per year on defense, slash tax collection and pay for it all by cutting a few million for PBS. It doesn't add up, but I have little doubt that if Mitt gets elected Republicans will trot out dick Cheney to revive his "deficits don't matter" speech again.
 
2012-10-18 09:28:33 PM

bill_01915: Bush didn't count the $80b per year in war spending or the billions spent on cleaning up after Katrina in the deficit calculations


Wrong. The total deficit is a combination of both on budget items and off-budget items. Even with the $80b added to Shrub's budget deficits, the average pales in comparison to the average we have under Obama.

The majority of Obama's deficit is the result of higher payments for unemployment benefits and lower tax collections.

I would agree that this is a big chunk. Also, don't forget the stimulus spending that added hundreds of billions. I'll agree that Romney's plan does little to really help. One side pretends the issue does not exist, while the other complains about it but all actions aggravate the situation. Where is Ike/JKF when you really need them?
 
2012-10-18 10:10:19 PM

HellRaisingHoosier: TheLalagah: HellRaisingHoosier: TheLalagah:
Yes I am, because what we're doing to them is wrong. ..and yes, it is an act of war. If country relies on trade for certain goods and your a country is actively denying those goods through intimidation or force, it's an act of war... not to mention sabotaging their nuclear program, killing civilians with drones, or bombing scientists. I ask you, what has Iran done to us to deserve this? Anyone?


Iran signed an agreement that they would not attempt to develop nuclear weapons and would allow inspectors to check. For several years now they have denied access by the inspectors, and there has been intelligence (by more then just the United States) that they are indeed attempting to develop nuclear weapons. Not to mention pouring weapons and money into terrorist groups in Iraq and Lebanon in an attempt to destabilize the region.

For years now Iran has funded terrorist organizations, backed plane hijackers and has repeatedly threatened to hurt Israel (a United States ally in the Middle East). Not to mention their horrifying stance against homosexuals and women.

The last thing I want is the United States to go into a conventional war with Iran. However, sanctions and digital attacks on nuclear R&D infrastructure is fine by me.

Sure, signed after the United States helped orchestrate a coup of a democratically elected government in order to implement a dictatorship favorable to the United States, unfavorable to the people of Iran. It doesn't really count. Also, we have nukes in the United States, and we're the only county to EVER use them to kill innocent people.
We overthrew their democratically elected government, which make us the douchebags. Think about it. Barring some deserved retaliation for everything we've done over there, they really haven't done anything to us. Also, Israel can take care of their own problems. Can we leave them alone now, please?


I'm sorry ... how many decades ago was the coup?
And the United States has followed and helped implement nuclear weapon reduction world-wide.

Also, the point of allies is that you don't turn your back on them. Should we also turn our back on South Korea if they ever get attacked by North Korea? No. We, the people of the United States, have said that if you attack our friends you are attacking us. It's part of why we area super power. Because when the shiat hits the fan, we have your back.


Sure, we are definitely against OTHER countries having nukes, considering we have already shown that we will use them.

And why should it matter how long ago we toppled their govt? Is there some kind of shelf-life for holding a grudge like that?

The whole back and forth argument can be beat to death, but our problems in the Middle East are of our own making.
 
2012-10-18 10:14:37 PM

Gonz: That may be. And if that happens, then the economy of China also implodes, due to the loss of its primary trading partner. The EU and major SE Asian nations are caught up in the collapse, which leads to, among many other things, the global demand- well, ability to pay for- oil cratering. And Iran, which isn't doing too hot economically at the moment anyway, suddenly becomes a post-apocalyptic, distopian society.

That, or the Fed prints a bit more money and we deal with the mild heartburn of inflation. One or the other.


First the liberals said thered never be talk of raising taxes. That was before stimuli and trillion dollar deficits forced them to admit they were wrong, so now they want new taxes.

Then they said thered never be inflation, because the Fed controlled that and interest rates would stay low.
NOW, both inflation and taxes are wonderful things, because they are the nevessary tools to keep debt low enough to allow the welfare state to continue limping along in the red.

Thank you, Democratic Party (along with GW Bush...).
 
2012-10-18 11:37:56 PM

HeadLever: bill_01915: Bush didn't count the $80b per year in war spending or the billions spent on cleaning up after Katrina in the deficit calculations

Wrong. The total deficit is a combination of both on budget items and off-budget items. Even with the $80b added to Shrub's budget deficits, the average pales in comparison to the average we have under Obama.

The majority of Obama's deficit is the result of higher payments for unemployment benefits and lower tax collections.

I would agree that this is a big chunk. Also, don't forget the stimulus spending that added hundreds of billions. I'll agree that Romney's plan does little to really help. One side pretends the issue does not exist, while the other complains about it but all actions aggravate the situation. Where is Ike/JKF when you really need them?


As I understand it, the wars were funded as emergency spending measures not as part of the regular budget which means they weren't counted in the annual deficit calculations. They still count toward the national debt. It's an accounting gimmick that provides a fig leaf for the Bush administration to say the deficit wasn't all that bad.

The stimulus was a 2 year spending program for FY 2009 and FY 2010. Republicans are beating that dead horse as if we were still spending that money every year.
 
2012-10-19 01:07:20 AM

TheLalagah: HellRaisingHoosier: TheLalagah: RexTalionis: It's funny because the Iranian economy has collapsed due to sanctions imposed on it by the US and partner countries. It's gotten so bad that people are rioting because their Iranian rial currency is worth less every day and that they can no longer afford food.

1. The Iranian president is right.
2. It's not really funny. We're committing acts of war and aggression against a country that has not directly attacked us. We've also manipulated the politics and leadership of that country in the past. If you really wish that sort of thing on other people then @#$% you.


It's not just the United States acting alone, and I find your definition of an "Act of War" a bit off. When most of the world decides it doesn't want to trade with you anymore because of your actions then MAYBE ... just maybe ... that country is acting like a jackass.

I mean, are you really going to stand up for Iran right now? A country that stones gay, treats women as 2nd class citizens and wants to "wipe Israel off the map".

Yes I am, because what we're doing to them is wrong. ..and yes, it is an act of war. If country relies on trade for certain goods and your a country is actively denying those goods through intimidation or force, it's an act of war... not to mention sabotaging their nuclear program, killing civilians with drones, or bombing scientists. I ask you, what has Iran done to us to deserve this? Anyone?


In general I'm a pacifist but this (below) warranted a full scale invasion of Iran.

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-10-19 01:40:52 AM

HeadLever: Lee Jackson Beauregard: NOW WHY WEREN'T YOU OUTRAGED WHEN THAT IDIOT BUSH WAS BEATING THE WAR DRUMS?

Bush's deficts were about $350 Billion or so when he was 'beating the war drums'. For the last four years, the deficit has average about an additional trillion on top of that.


Yeah but why? Because of the ongoing costs of wars that Bush started and a recession that Bush caused.
 
2012-10-19 01:43:05 AM

Animatronik: Gonz: That may be. And if that happens, then the economy of China also implodes, due to the loss of its primary trading partner. The EU and major SE Asian nations are caught up in the collapse, which leads to, among many other things, the global demand- well, ability to pay for- oil cratering. And Iran, which isn't doing too hot economically at the moment anyway, suddenly becomes a post-apocalyptic, distopian society.

That, or the Fed prints a bit more money and we deal with the mild heartburn of inflation. One or the other.

First the liberals said thered never be talk of raising taxes. That was before stimuli and trillion dollar deficits forced them to admit they were wrong, so now they want new taxes.

Then they said thered never be inflation, because the Fed controlled that and interest rates would stay low.
NOW, both inflation and taxes are wonderful things, because they are the nevessary tools to keep debt low enough to allow the welfare state to continue limping along in the red.

Thank you, Democratic Party (along with GW Bush...).


There was a budget surplus under Clinton which George W Bush pissed away. Obama didn't do that. Bush did.
 
2012-10-19 10:01:32 AM

kg2095: TheLalagah: HellRaisingHoosier: TheLalagah: RexTalionis: It's funny because the Iranian economy has collapsed due to sanctions imposed on it by the US and partner countries. It's gotten so bad that people are rioting because their Iranian rial currency is worth less every day and that they can no longer afford food.

1. The Iranian president is right.
2. It's not really funny. We're committing acts of war and aggression against a country that has not directly attacked us. We've also manipulated the politics and leadership of that country in the past. If you really wish that sort of thing on other people then @#$% you.


It's not just the United States acting alone, and I find your definition of an "Act of War" a bit off. When most of the world decides it doesn't want to trade with you anymore because of your actions then MAYBE ... just maybe ... that country is acting like a jackass.

I mean, are you really going to stand up for Iran right now? A country that stones gay, treats women as 2nd class citizens and wants to "wipe Israel off the map".

Yes I am, because what we're doing to them is wrong. ..and yes, it is an act of war. If country relies on trade for certain goods and your a country is actively denying those goods through intimidation or force, it's an act of war... not to mention sabotaging their nuclear program, killing civilians with drones, or bombing scientists. I ask you, what has Iran done to us to deserve this? Anyone?

In general I'm a pacifist but this (below) warranted a full scale invasion of Iran.

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 606x388]


No, it warranted the return the Shah to Iran. We installed a dictator in their own country, then we harbored that what you might call a "terrorist" in the United States. If you think other countries shouldn't have been harboring Bin Laden then you are one hell of a hypocrite.
 
2012-10-19 10:52:01 AM
kg2095
In general I'm a pacifist but this (below) warranted a full scale invasion of Iran.

Good thing the Iranians were more forgiving about the US's support for the Shah.

Sorry, sorry; I keep forgetting that humiliating 52 Americans is worse than killing, imprisoning, and/or exiling thousands of dissidents, the exchange rate between Americans and other people being infinite.
 
2012-10-19 11:43:45 AM

bill_01915: As I understand it, the wars were funded as emergency spending measures not as part of the regular budget which means they weren't counted in the annual deficit calculations.


Just because they are not in the 'regular budget', does not mean that they are not included in the deficit calculations. "Off-Budget" items are still included in both the deficit and debt..
 
2012-10-19 11:59:55 AM

bill_01915: The stimulus was a 2 year spending program for FY 2009 and FY 2010. Republicans are beating that dead horse as if we were still spending that money every year.


Spending by Year (inflation adjusted, in Billions):

2009: $3,696
2010: $3,590
2011: $3,666
2012: $3,563
2013 (Est): $3,690

There is really no significant difference between the federal spending for FY 2009 and 2010 when compared to FY 2011, 2012 and the estimate of 2013. Furthermore,when you compare this speding to the 8 years previous (average of about $2,775B), you can see why this is a problem.

Here is some more information on this problem if you care to do a little additional research
 
2012-10-19 12:05:33 PM

kg2095: Yeah but why? Because of the ongoing costs of wars that Bush started and a recession that Bush caused.


That is definatly part of it. That is all in the past and we cannot change it. What we need to do is to figure out how we are going to get out of this mess from this point forward. Pointing fingers to the other side of the asile and assigning blame is not going to help get any meaningful changes enacted. All it is going to do is entrench the other side and ensure more gridlock.

I am looking voting for someone that will actually do something about this mess. Unfortuantly, Ike isn't running during this election. Instead we have one canidate with his head in the sand and the other giving lip service but will likely will make the problem worse.
 
Displayed 75 of 75 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report