(10-07-2013 11:46 AM)thedude3737 Wrote:  What I've never understood is why chicken little comes out when there's even a remote threat of the market crashing, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

There have been doomsday prophets for centuries.

Okay, there's a massive U.S. Dollar drop. Okay, there's a Treasury bond crisis. So what?

Okay, unemployment rates skyrocket. Okay, crime rates go up. So what?

Does anyone really think, "Oh, the U.S. is done." I might feel that way about this country culturally, but certainly not financially. I look at it as opportunity. I look at it as a time to stack cash and buy in.

A LOT of people got filthy rich right after the great depression. They also got filthy rich in 2001 and in 2009 as well. Buy in when shit hits the fan and then sit back and watch the reconstruction process. What's the problem here? I'm not as market-savvy as some posters here so what am I missing?

The Debt to GDP ratio under Bush got out of control. To the point by the 2008 election we needed someone who was extremely fiscally conservative to save the country.

Instead we got the most feminist liberal president in the history of the country. So our debt to GDP is probably beyond the point of no return.

If magically the American people woke up and realized we cannot borrow at this rate and voted in the most fiscal conservative politicians in the last 70 years to run the govt. we might be able to save it.

That isn't happening. And the number of takers and those looking for a hand outs continues to grow and vote in line step.

It is only a matter of time, I am hoping they can starve it off long enough that I can get out before it collapses.

(10-07-2013 11:46 AM)thedude3737 Wrote:  What I've never understood is why chicken little comes out when there's even a remote threat of the market crashing, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

There have been doomsday prophets for centuries.

Okay, there's a massive U.S. Dollar drop. Okay, there's a Treasury bond crisis. So what?

Okay, unemployment rates skyrocket. Okay, crime rates go up. So what?

Does anyone really think, "Oh, the U.S. is done." I might feel that way about this country culturally, but certainly not financially. I look at it as opportunity. I look at it as a time to stack cash and buy in.

A LOT of people got filthy rich right after the great depression. They also got filthy rich in 2001 and in 2009 as well. Buy in when shit hits the fan and then sit back and watch the reconstruction process. What's the problem here? I'm not as market-savvy as some posters here so what am I missing?

Nice post.

Honestly, I would love to see another stock market crash? Why I am 100% cash right now and would love to pick up quality stocks, real estate, etc at rock bottom prices since I missed out on the 2008/2009 crash.

There is a lot of self-interest at play. Some people want the party to keep going because they are over-leveraged on their mortgage or (too) heavily invested in the market, etc.

That and the corporations have their hands deep in the pockets of BOTH political parties, so you know that no serious change will happen to end corporate welfare (bailouts, QE, subsidies, etc).

(10-07-2013 11:49 AM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 11:46 AM)thedude3737 Wrote:  What I've never understood is why chicken little comes out when there's even a remote threat of the market crashing, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

There have been doomsday prophets for centuries.

Okay, there's a massive U.S. Dollar drop. Okay, there's a Treasury bond crisis. So what?

Okay, unemployment rates skyrocket. Okay, crime rates go up. So what?

Does anyone really think, "Oh, the U.S. is done." I might feel that way about this country culturally, but certainly not financially. I look at it as opportunity. I look at it as a time to stack cash and buy in.

A LOT of people got filthy rich right after the great depression. They also got filthy rich in 2001 and in 2009 as well. Buy in when shit hits the fan and then sit back and watch the reconstruction process. What's the problem here? I'm not as market-savvy as some posters here so what am I missing?

The Debt to GDP ratio under Bush got out of control. To the point by the 2008 election we needed someone who was extremely fiscally conservative to save the country.

Instead we got the most feminist liberal president in the history of the country. So our debt to GDP is probably beyond the point of no return.

If magically the American people woke up and realized we cannot borrow at this rate and voted in the most fiscal conservative politicians in the last 70 years to run the govt. we might be able to save it.

That isn't happening. And the number of takers and those looking for a hand outs continues to grow and vote in line step.

It is only a matter of time, I am hoping they can starve it off long enough that I can get out before it collapses.

I understand all that, but then what?

Look, not to get all conspiracy theory here but governments have been in bed with private bankers for centuries now. The U.S. and European governments have been funding wars, railroads, and god knows how many industries through the Rothschild family for centuries. Being indebted to foreign bankers is absolutely not something new.

Do you really think this is an accident?

So we're budgeted at a defecit. Great. Does anyone REALLY think that the U.S. will default? We still have, by FAR, the highest GDP in the world. So if our GDP/debt ratio is that far off the cliff, obviously there are austerity measures which can take place, which some people think will tank the market.

But again, so what? Okay spending drops and the market drops and chicken little comes out again and says, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

As we can see, we can easily cut 800,000 govt jobs and NOTHING HAPPENS. I would guess you can cut 2-3x that amount and NOTHING HAPPENS. Grats on the bureaucracy, America. Every armchair economist on here can say what the solution is. There are millions of solutions. Take jobs out of government sector bureaucracy and put them into commodities, tech, energy, whatever.

But again, think about the money flow.
U.S. is in debt because some very powerful people want the U.S. to be in debt.

If you were a banker, who is your best client? The one with the biggest salary and most assets. That's us. The GDP:debt is irrelevant. That's like a banker chastising his client for hitting the strip club too often. It's irrelevant.

There is no crisis. This situation could get turned around in a matter of years with some austerity measures and restructuring of the job market. But that will only happen when a very select few, very powerful people WANT it to happen.

(10-07-2013 12:08 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 11:49 AM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 11:46 AM)thedude3737 Wrote:  What I've never understood is why chicken little comes out when there's even a remote threat of the market crashing, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

There have been doomsday prophets for centuries.

Okay, there's a massive U.S. Dollar drop. Okay, there's a Treasury bond crisis. So what?

Okay, unemployment rates skyrocket. Okay, crime rates go up. So what?

Does anyone really think, "Oh, the U.S. is done." I might feel that way about this country culturally, but certainly not financially. I look at it as opportunity. I look at it as a time to stack cash and buy in.

A LOT of people got filthy rich right after the great depression. They also got filthy rich in 2001 and in 2009 as well. Buy in when shit hits the fan and then sit back and watch the reconstruction process. What's the problem here? I'm not as market-savvy as some posters here so what am I missing?

The Debt to GDP ratio under Bush got out of control. To the point by the 2008 election we needed someone who was extremely fiscally conservative to save the country.

Instead we got the most feminist liberal president in the history of the country. So our debt to GDP is probably beyond the point of no return.

If magically the American people woke up and realized we cannot borrow at this rate and voted in the most fiscal conservative politicians in the last 70 years to run the govt. we might be able to save it.

That isn't happening. And the number of takers and those looking for a hand outs continues to grow and vote in line step.

It is only a matter of time, I am hoping they can starve it off long enough that I can get out before it collapses.

I understand all that, but then what?

Look, not to get all conspiracy theory here but governments have been in bed with private bankers for centuries now. The U.S. and European governments have been funding wars, railroads, and god knows how many industries through the Rothschild family for centuries. Being indebted to foreign bankers is absolutely not something new.

Do you really think this is an accident?

So we're budgeted at a defecit. Great. Does anyone REALLY think that the U.S. will default? We still have, by FAR, the highest GDP in the world. So if our GDP/debt ratio is that far off the cliff, obviously there are austerity measures which can take place, which some people think will tank the market.

But again, so what? Okay spending drops and the market drops and chicken little comes out again and says, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

As we can see, we can easily cut 800,000 govt jobs and NOTHING HAPPENS. I would guess you can cut 2-3x that amount and NOTHING HAPPENS. Grats on the bureaucracy, America. Every armchair economist on here can say what the solution is. There are millions of solutions. Take jobs out of government sector bureaucracy and put them into commodities, tech, energy, whatever.

But again, think about the money flow.
U.S. is in debt because some very powerful people want the U.S. to be in debt.

If you were a banker, who is your best client? The one with the biggest salary and most assets. That's us. The GDP:debt is irrelevant. That's like a banker chastising his client for hitting the strip club too often. It's irrelevant.

There is no crisis. This situation could get turned around in a matter of years with some austerity measures and restructuring of the job market. But that will only happen when a very select few, very powerful people WANT it to happen.

True, and good post.

The problem is that it will probably take austerity measures to get the govt. spending under control.

The USA is a country on the edge of violence. Remove those resources along with the handouts that keep the takers quiet and happy and TBH I don't want to know what it will look like.

At that point we are probably looking at a true police state to control things.

So will the USA completely collapse? Probably not. Will there be lots of great economic freedoms or just general civil liberties? Unlikely as well. I believe there are some very dark days ahead. I hope I am wrong.

(10-07-2013 12:17 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  The USA is a country on the edge of violence. Remove those resources along with the handouts that keep the takers quiet and happy and TBH I don't want to know what it will look like.

At that point we are probably looking at a true police state to control things.

So will the USA completely collapse? Probably not. Will there be lots of great economic freedoms or just general civil liberties? Unlikely as well. I believe there are some very dark days ahead. I hope I am wrong.

I don't necessarily disagree, but I still think it's an irrational fear. The U.S. has been down that road before and like I said, people got extremely wealthy during the rebuild.

I'd consider myself a newbie when it comes to economics, especially when it comes to terminology jargon, but what I've observed in economic discussions is that there are 3 types:

-Alarmists. Chicken little. Sorry, but you'll be the first to go.

-Preservationists. People with a stake in the game, something to lose, who are reluctant to adapt to an upcoming change or shift.

-Opportunists. People who follow trends, formulate potential outcomes, and adapt in anticipation to yield the maximum reward possible.

I look at everything through lens number 3 for obvious reasons. I don't like thinking in terms of "Crashes", why? Because someone got rich off of it! In every single high and low throughout economic history, someone got rich off of it.

If you've got everything tied up in dividend-yielding assets and retirement accounts, yeah, life will probably suck for you, and bad.

But if you're sitting on a pile of cash, you are STOKED!

(10-07-2013 11:49 AM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 11:46 AM)thedude3737 Wrote:  What I've never understood is why chicken little comes out when there's even a remote threat of the market crashing, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

There have been doomsday prophets for centuries.

Okay, there's a massive U.S. Dollar drop. Okay, there's a Treasury bond crisis. So what?

Okay, unemployment rates skyrocket. Okay, crime rates go up. So what?

Does anyone really think, "Oh, the U.S. is done." I might feel that way about this country culturally, but certainly not financially. I look at it as opportunity. I look at it as a time to stack cash and buy in.

A LOT of people got filthy rich right after the great depression. They also got filthy rich in 2001 and in 2009 as well. Buy in when shit hits the fan and then sit back and watch the reconstruction process. What's the problem here? I'm not as market-savvy as some posters here so what am I missing?

The Debt to GDP ratio under Bush got out of control. To the point by the 2008 election we needed someone who was extremely fiscally conservative to save the country.

Instead we got the most feminist liberal president in the history of the country. So our debt to GDP is probably beyond the point of no return.

If magically the American people woke up and realized we cannot borrow at this rate and voted in the most fiscal conservative politicians in the last 70 years to run the govt. we might be able to save it.

That isn't happening. And the number of takers and those looking for a hand outs continues to grow and vote in line step.

It is only a matter of time, I am hoping they can starve it off long enough that I can get out before it collapses.

thedude737 - Great post. I totally agree. Lots of fear mongers out there.

According to former Congressman Pete Stark (the only one who had the balls to openly admit he was an Atheist while in office), the larger the national debt, the wealthier we are. Other nations still view the US government as a creditworthy borrower.

(10-07-2013 12:28 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 11:49 AM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 11:46 AM)thedude3737 Wrote:  What I've never understood is why chicken little comes out when there's even a remote threat of the market crashing, "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

There have been doomsday prophets for centuries.

Okay, there's a massive U.S. Dollar drop. Okay, there's a Treasury bond crisis. So what?

Okay, unemployment rates skyrocket. Okay, crime rates go up. So what?

Does anyone really think, "Oh, the U.S. is done." I might feel that way about this country culturally, but certainly not financially. I look at it as opportunity. I look at it as a time to stack cash and buy in.

A LOT of people got filthy rich right after the great depression. They also got filthy rich in 2001 and in 2009 as well. Buy in when shit hits the fan and then sit back and watch the reconstruction process. What's the problem here? I'm not as market-savvy as some posters here so what am I missing?

The Debt to GDP ratio under Bush got out of control. To the point by the 2008 election we needed someone who was extremely fiscally conservative to save the country.

Instead we got the most feminist liberal president in the history of the country. So our debt to GDP is probably beyond the point of no return.

If magically the American people woke up and realized we cannot borrow at this rate and voted in the most fiscal conservative politicians in the last 70 years to run the govt. we might be able to save it.

That isn't happening. And the number of takers and those looking for a hand outs continues to grow and vote in line step.

It is only a matter of time, I am hoping they can starve it off long enough that I can get out before it collapses.

thedude737 - Great post. I totally agree. Lots of fear mongers out there.

According to former Congressman Pete Stark (the only one who had the balls to openly admit he was an Atheist while in office), the larger the national debt, the wealthier we are. Other nations still view the US government as a creditworthy borrower.

How old is that video. We do need national debt to grow. But there is a tipping point and we passed it in probably about 2005 or 2006.

(10-07-2013 12:17 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  Instead we got the most feminist liberal president in the history of the country. So our debt to GDP is probably beyond the point of no return.

Just so I follow, you are talking about that male cheerleader George Bush's second term here, correct?

(10-07-2013 12:27 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 12:17 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  The USA is a country on the edge of violence. Remove those resources along with the handouts that keep the takers quiet and happy and TBH I don't want to know what it will look like.

At that point we are probably looking at a true police state to control things.

So will the USA completely collapse? Probably not. Will there be lots of great economic freedoms or just general civil liberties? Unlikely as well. I believe there are some very dark days ahead. I hope I am wrong.

I don't necessarily disagree, but I still think it's an irrational fear. The U.S. has been down that road before and like I said, people got extremely wealthy during the rebuild.

Not true. The average man gets clobbered during depressions/recessions. In particular during the Great Depression of the 1930's no one was making any money except for a lucky few.

The only reason the USA got out of the Great Depression was being the victor of WW2; otherwise the USA would have remained the dump it was during the 1930's.

The truth about America's prosperity isn't capitalism or New Deal policies, but instead a massive war that took us to prosperity.

I'd try posting some stats on this subject but all the government sites are shut down right now so I cannot look anything up.

(10-07-2013 12:58 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 12:27 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 12:17 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  The USA is a country on the edge of violence. Remove those resources along with the handouts that keep the takers quiet and happy and TBH I don't want to know what it will look like.

At that point we are probably looking at a true police state to control things.

So will the USA completely collapse? Probably not. Will there be lots of great economic freedoms or just general civil liberties? Unlikely as well. I believe there are some very dark days ahead. I hope I am wrong.

I don't necessarily disagree, but I still think it's an irrational fear. The U.S. has been down that road before and like I said, people got extremely wealthy during the rebuild.

Not true. The average man gets clobbered during depressions/recessions. In particular during the Great Depression of the 1930's no one was making any money except for a lucky few.

The only reason the USA got out of the Great Depression was being the victor of WW2; otherwise the USA would have remained the dump it was during the 1930's.

The truth about America's prosperity isn't capitalism or New Deal policies, but instead a massive war that took us to prosperity.

I'd try posting some stats on this subject but all the government sites are shut down right now so I cannot look anything up.

It took 3 HUGE things to get us out of FDR's socialist great depression...

#1) WWII, the likes we will never see again. Technology has replaced manufacturing war materials, so we will never have such a huge war economy again. Add to that, the war was not fought on our soil, so our competition was destroyed and we came out smelling like a rose. This will not happen again.

#2) Strong family units. All of us red pill males know this is long gone.

#3) Self reliability. My grandparents had farm land at that time. They could easily feed themselves. It was normal back then to be smart enough and tough enough to not need to govt. to do everything for you. Go hunt for some meat, can some veggies, cut fire wood, ration gas, things most Americans could never do today.

We are in some big trouble.

(10-07-2013 12:32 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 12:17 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  Instead we got the most feminist liberal president in the history of the country. So our debt to GDP is probably beyond the point of no return.

Just so I follow, you are talking about that male cheerleader George Bush's second term here, correct?

Nah, Bush sucked, but he has been out of office almost 5 years.

I am talking about a president that...

Proudly claimed he was a feminist.

Who ran on the premise that women make less than men for the very same job and the very same work.

Who ran a campaign of stopping the "war on women" while men are being crushed by this economy and the anti-male laws.

Who passed a 1,200 page healthcare bill that targets young and middle aged men and saves women even more money.

What a disaster for any true red pill male.

(10-07-2013 10:06 AM)klosck Wrote:  The truth of the matter is, (and the much larger issue) is that it can’t be passed because we are broke, broke, broke….

This assertion that “we are broke, broke, broke” is so much a fiction that has been created. As soon as we see a new war that we “have to” fight, money magically comes up for that, and those kinds of war endeavors can cost billions or trillions of dollars. Surely, some of those wars can be justified as necessary, and even beneficial in many ways.
I don’t disagree with Samseau’s later post that WWII was central in moving the USA economy in the 40s and 50s; however, to only attribute WWII spending as the solution to USA economic woes and prosperity is oversimplification of many dynamics in order to attempt to denigrate and negate FDR policies. Maybe in the end, FDR policies is not the solution to gaming or even a man’s ability to be a man in society, but to negate its impact on wealth and prosperity in America is merely skewed thinking.

On the other hand, if there is some demand for social spending (such as Obamacare) that is pretty much self-funded – at least shifts around already existing costs rather than creating new costs, there are a multitude of claims that we cannot afford it. The “we are broke, broke, broke” claim is a fictitious creation in order to NOT spend money on social and welfare programs, and this fiction is created in order to falsely justify that we need to go into austerity in order to solve supposed financial problems.

(10-07-2013 12:27 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  ……. there are 3 types:

-Alarmists. Chicken little. Sorry, but you'll be the first to go.

-Preservationists. People with a stake in the game, something to lose, who are reluctant to adapt to an upcoming change or shift.

-Opportunists. People who follow trends, formulate potential outcomes, and adapt in anticipation to yield the maximum reward possible.

I look at everything through lens number 3 for obvious reasons. I don't like thinking in terms of "Crashes", why? Because someone got rich off of it! In every single high and low throughout economic history, someone got rich off of it.

I think that these are decent categories for considering issues, but in the end, we all have somewhat of a stake in the outcome of the role of govt in the US – but to varying degrees.

I do appreciate your description of the opportunist, because as guys generally who are interested in gaming girls, each of us is an opportunist to some extent. We attempt to calculate our environment in order to obtain the best advantage out of that, and our actions will depend upon the extent to which we are already invested in certain directions and our resources and assets in certain directions. These assets and resources that we have at our disposal will affect our strategy in game and in other areas of life and even the view of the stake that we have in the system.

(10-07-2013 12:27 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  If you've got everything tied up in dividend-yielding assets and retirement accounts, yeah, life will probably suck for you, and bad.

But if you're sitting on a pile of cash, you are STOKED!

Regular people may not have the ability to hedge too much in their investments; however, after several years of being in the job market (20 years or so), a guy will likely have accumulated assets in real estate, the stock market and cash, and yes, these ratios will vary depending on life choices.

Even a guy who is sitting on a pile of cash, has a lot to lose if the US Govt and economic system tanks, and the dollar tanks, especially if the guy plans to travel or to benefit from imports. In those situations of travel and importing goods for consumption, a guy is greatly advantaged by a strong dollar and confidence in the US govt and economy. On the other hand, if the guy is an exporter and does not plan to travel then he is gonna do better with a weak dollar…. And if the guy is in his early 20s and frustrated because he cannot get a decent job because of various two tiered systems in place in which he is receiving less than 1/3 the wages of baby boomers, then yes, these guys are gonna be frustrated and want to overturn this whole system because they perceive that they are being negatively affected by it.

(10-07-2013 12:08 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  So we're budgeted at a defecit. Great. Does anyone REALLY think that the U.S. will default? We still have, by FAR, the highest GDP in the world. So if our GDP/debt ratio is that far off the cliff, obviously there are austerity measures which can take place, which some people think will tank the market.

Definitely TheDude you are correct about the historical existence of a lot of debt in the US system over time, and that debt has always been a part of the way that the US govt has operated. These days, the US government is looked at as such a secure debt that it can borrow at nearly 0% interest; accordingly, it costs nearly nothing to fund the debt…. even when extra trillions are borrowed or printed. Surely this 0% interest and continued confidence in the USA cannot go on forever, and that is what scares a lot of people, including the very wealthy who want to continue to suck money out of the system, while it still exists. At this time, the US can continue to borrow money and to spend on whatever it wants so long as the US continues to inspire credit confidence. If you screw up that credit confidence, then the USA has to start paying interest, just like everybody else in the world does. In that regard, the chickens will have come home to roost.. and that would not be as good, if it were to occur.
A false assertion is that Austerity is the solution these problems of debt… well debt is not the problem and austerity is not the solution. One solution is to inspire and maintain confidence in the US govt and economic system, and I am not so optimistic as you that this confidence is a given that we can take for granted about it continuing……..surely, for me, I would like the dollar to remain strong for another 30-40 years – so I can travel the world; however, for guys who do not have any dollars.. then they can travel the world and earn foreign currency.
Now, if creating conflicts and the appearances of crises is ultimately a back door mechanism in keeping and maintaining USA credit confidence, I AM ALL FOR IT, but I believe the real goal, in the current situation, is not the creation of USA credit confidence, but rather a vehicle for the wealthy to attempt to steal a little bit more from the American people because they are of the belief that the SHIP IS GOING DOWN, and they WANT TO GET A LITTLE MORE TO TAKE ON THEIR LIFE RAFT WITH THEM BEFORE THE SHIP GOES DOWN.

(10-07-2013 12:08 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  As we can see, we can easily cut 800,000 govt jobs and NOTHING HAPPENS. I would guess you can cut 2-3x that amount and NOTHING HAPPENS.

True, in the short term nothing appears to have happened, and the balancing of the damage is precarious. We are on a sort of house of cards.

I don’t necessarily disagree with a goal to shrink govt, but THERE SHOULD BE SOME KIND OF A PLAN for such, rather than just outright cutting the govt by 40% by shutting down that portion of the govt. There is a lot of input into the economy and systems that are built around the existence of the 40% of the govt that currently is shut down. Accordingly, we cannot just shut off those various systems abruptly without major negative consequences.. including a major negative consequence in which the rest of the world loses confidence in the US’s ability to organize and to govern itself.

(10-07-2013 12:08 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  If you were a banker, who is your best client? The one with the biggest salary and most assets. That's us. The GDP:debt is irrelevant. That's like a banker chastising his client for hitting the strip club too often. It's irrelevant.

There is no crisis. This situation could get turned around in a matter of years with some austerity measures and restructuring of the job market. But that will only happen when a very select few, very powerful people WANT it to happen.

I agree with you totally, here, except I BELIEVE THAT AUSTERITY IS NOT THE SOLUTION; however, you may be correct that some kind of restructuring may be in order. And, in that regard, I am of the opinion that planned restructuring needs to be ordered in order to maintain confidence in the US dominated system.

(10-07-2013 12:28 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  According to former Congressman Pete Stark (the only one who had the balls to openly admit he was an Atheist while in office), the larger the national debt, the wealthier we are. Other nations still view the US government as a creditworthy borrower.

This video appears to have been shot during the Bush era, and a funny thing about this video is that Republican Pete Stark is pretty much arguing that debt is not a problem because he likes the way that the Republicans are using that debt to bring benefits to the American people. However, once the Democrats are in charge, the Republicans change their tunes, and begin to say that debt is a major problem. They do this in order to attempt to get concessions from democrats to buy into austerity measures and to attempt to cut social programs… and frequently the democrats go along with this mythical austerity framework.

I think that even though Stark is being a bit of a jerk in this video, he is ultimately correct in what he is saying, and Jan Helfeld is asking stupid ass and annoying questions – possibly because Helfeld is not adequately prepared.. or maybe he is purposefully trying to annoy Stark. In the end, Stark declares the interview is over and tells Helfeld to get the fuck out of his office.. .that is hilarious.

(10-07-2013 01:15 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 12:32 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 12:17 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  Instead we got the most feminist liberal president in the history of the country. So our debt to GDP is probably beyond the point of no return.

Just so I follow, you are talking about that male cheerleader George Bush's second term here, correct?

Nah, Bush sucked, but he has been out of office almost 5 years.

I am talking about a president that...

Proudly claimed he was a feminist.

Who ran on the premise that women make less than men for the very same job and the very same work.

Who ran a campaign of stopping the "war on women" while men are being crushed by this economy and the anti-male laws.

Who passed a 1,200 page healthcare bill that targets young and middle aged men and saves women even more money.

What a disaster for any true red pill male.

So do something productive about this "problem" if you're so convinced rather than complaining ad inifinitum on an anonymous forum. How many iterations do we need to hear about the POTUS being a "feminist?" You've said that a million times now. You are clearly failing in persuading anyone over to your pov so this is largely a rudderless exercise on your part. If you were able to accurately predict the future you wouldn't be on this forum to begin with. Why don't you run for office or launch a movement if you're so convinced about your beliefs? Not so easy, is it? Now you tell me what's "beta" or "red pill."

(10-07-2013 02:20 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  This video appears to have been shot during the Bush era, and a funny thing about this video is that Republican Pete Stark is pretty much arguing that debt is not a problem because he likes the way that the Republicans are using that debt to bring benefits to the American people.

Pete Stark is a Democrat. He represented one of the most liberal and solidly blue districts in the US (East Bay communities in the San Francisco metro area). That's largely the reason he was able to publicly proclaim his atheism without suffering political consequences.

(10-07-2013 02:26 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 02:20 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  This video appears to have been shot during the Bush era, and a funny thing about this video is that Republican Pete Stark is pretty much arguing that debt is not a problem because he likes the way that the Republicans are using that debt to bring benefits to the American people.

Pete Stark is a Democrat. He represented one of the most liberal and solidly blue districts in the US (East Bay communities in the San Francisco metro area). That's largely the reason he was able to publicly proclaim his atheism without suffering political consequences.

Thanks for pointing that out and the correction. That's funny that i assumed that Stark was a Republican. I guess i do not watch enough TV to know some of the personalities, including who is Jan Feldman.

Nonetheless, I stand by my assertion that Republicans do not seem to have a problem with fed govt debt when they are in charge and able to distribute various govt perks to their govt contractor buddies.

Part of the problem, as we have already gone over in this thread, is that our politicians are not having open political debates in the congress or other parts of govt in order to explore some of the ideas about distribution of wealth, and in that regard, i think all parties (Democrats and Republicans) are afraid to be too open about ideas about distribution of wealth stuff b/c we are on this house of cards of attempting to maintain the status quo (of the US of A being in a privileged and beneficial position) as long as possible.

I'm beginning to think the gov't wants a system failure. Doing so will clean the slate. We have way too many people milking the system, and the only way to get the them off the dole is for the guv to literally run out of money. There's no way to know how much the taxpayer would save by cutting out most of the entitlement/foreign aid policies.

I can promise you though, when they start axing out payments to those that have paid into the system and earned it, those that didn't will run scared. Like the ones that came here to seek "refuge", will be begging the gov't for a one way ticket back to wherever they came from.

(10-07-2013 02:22 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 01:15 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 12:32 PM)thegmanifesto Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 12:17 PM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  Instead we got the most feminist liberal president in the history of the country. So our debt to GDP is probably beyond the point of no return.

Just so I follow, you are talking about that male cheerleader George Bush's second term here, correct?

Nah, Bush sucked, but he has been out of office almost 5 years.

I am talking about a president that...

Proudly claimed he was a feminist.

Who ran on the premise that women make less than men for the very same job and the very same work.

Who ran a campaign of stopping the "war on women" while men are being crushed by this economy and the anti-male laws.

Who passed a 1,200 page healthcare bill that targets young and middle aged men and saves women even more money.

What a disaster for any true red pill male.

So do something productive about this "problem" if you're so convinced rather than complaining ad inifinitum on an anonymous forum. How many iterations do we need to hear about the POTUS being a "feminist?" You've said that a million times now. You are clearly failing in persuading anyone over to your pov so this is largely a rudderless exercise on your part. If you were able to accurately predict the future you wouldn't be on this forum to begin with. Why don't you run for office or launch a movement if you're so convinced about your beliefs? Not so easy, is it? Now you tell me what's "beta" or "red pill."

I am doing something. I am waking up the young men. The young men who are upset enough to want to improve themselves and their lives. The young men who are sick of this system and come to places like Roosh to better their lives.

But at the same time do not understand the importance of bond markets on their lives and how much feminist socialist like Obama make their lives far worse.

No true red pill male is a socialist. Socialism = feminism. It kicks the man out of the house, then uses the govt. guns stuck right in the backs of these men to give their hard earned money to women who wouldn't even acknowledge their existence.

I am on this forum to help men, predicting the failures of feminist socialist is simple. It has failed in every single country it has been attempted and will fail here too.

(10-07-2013 02:47 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  I'm beginning to think the gov't wants a system failure. Doing so will clean the slate. We have way too many people milking the system, and the only way to get the them off the dole is for the guv to literally run out of money. There's no way to know how much the taxpayer would save by cutting out most of the entitlement/foreign aid policies.

I can promise you though, when they start axing out payments to those that have paid into the system and earned it, those that didn't will run scared. Like the ones that came here to seek "refuge", will be begging the gov't for a one way ticket back to wherever they came from.

Austerity is coming. The national debt is too far out of control and it will take non-elected bankers to force cuts. The American people can do nothing about it.

So you will have 300,000,000 guns among a population that just lost their food stamps and Obama phones and other handouts.

It will be a very scary time.

(10-07-2013 12:58 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Not true. The average man gets clobbered during depressions/recessions. In particular during the Great Depression of the 1930's no one was making any money except for a lucky few.

Right but I'm not talking about being the average man.

The only reason the USA got out of the Great Depression was being the victor of WW2; otherwise the USA would have remained the dump it was during the 1930's.

The truth about America's prosperity isn't capitalism or New Deal policies, but instead a massive war that took us to prosperity.

I'd try posting some stats on this subject but all the government sites are shut down right now so I cannot look anything up.

[/quote]

It was basically a booming manufacturing industry, which as you pointed out doesn't exist nearly as much today. But what we do still have is a massive GDP and an incredibly diversified industry field.

I have no doubts that life for the average person during the Great Depression was pretty shitty. But I feel that life for the average person TODAY is pretty shitty. Being an opportunist isn't about being average.

Call it blind faith, but I feel like even a remotely above-average intelligence red-pill guy wouldn't fare so bad. Especially considering another Depression would be a bigger blow to Feminism and progressive social policies than anything else anyone could muster up.

(10-07-2013 03:03 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 12:58 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Not true. The average man gets clobbered during depressions/recessions. In particular during the Great Depression of the 1930's no one was making any money except for a lucky few.

Right but I'm not talking about being the average man.

The only reason the USA got out of the Great Depression was being the victor of WW2; otherwise the USA would have remained the dump it was during the 1930's.

The truth about America's prosperity isn't capitalism or New Deal policies, but instead a massive war that took us to prosperity.

I'd try posting some stats on this subject but all the government sites are shut down right now so I cannot look anything up.

It was basically a booming manufacturing industry, which as you pointed out doesn't exist nearly as much today. But what we do still have is a massive GDP and an incredibly diversified industry field.

I have no doubts that life for the average person during the Great Depression was pretty shitty. But I feel that life for the average person TODAY is pretty shitty. Being an opportunist isn't about being average.

Call it blind faith, but I feel like even a remotely above-average intelligence red-pill guy wouldn't fare so bad. Especially considering another Depression would be a bigger blow to Feminism and progressive social policies than anything else anyone could muster up.
[/quote]

Yeah a lot of people talk about this. Many of Roosevelt's policies were stopgaps and when he began to tone down the New Deal, the economy tanked again. It took WW2 and the massive demand for American produced goods to get the economy back on track.

I have my doubts as to whether the GOP has got the balls not to raise the debt ceiling. They say they stand firm now, but when the stock market drops hundreds of points the day after the debt ceiling is not raised, they will pass a rise in the debt ceiling like the lapdogs they are.

Either way, right now would be a good time to stock up on guns and ammo.

Edit:

The only thing that makes not raising the debt ceiling likely is if both sides are convinced they will win and thus both sides choose not to raise the debt ceiling (a classic prisoner's dilemma). The nash equilibrium in this case is actually for both sides not to cave, and thus not raise the debt ceiling.

(10-07-2013 04:56 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  Either way, right now would be a good time to stock up on guns and ammo.

For what? Genuine question.

Do you really think "the bad guy" is coming to your front porch?

Do you own a grocery store that you want to protect?

Do you plan on looting a grocery store and take everyone else out?

(10-07-2013 05:09 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 04:56 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  Either way, right now would be a good time to stock up on guns and ammo.

For what? Genuine question.

Do you really think "the bad guy" is coming to your front porch?

Do you own a grocery store that you want to protect?

Do you plan on looting a grocery store and take everyone else out?

My dad owns a small store. If things get really bad (government cheese gets cut off), then I will probably have to head back to Cali to hold watch like the Koreans did during the Rodney King riots.

(10-07-2013 05:09 PM)thedude3737 Wrote:  

(10-07-2013 04:56 PM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  Either way, right now would be a good time to stock up on guns and ammo.

For what? Genuine question.

Do you really think "the bad guy" is coming to your front porch?

Do you own a grocery store that you want to protect?

Do you plan on looting a grocery store and take everyone else out?

If we have austerity, and police are cut, and the ghetto had their foodstamps cut and their electricity cut off, where do you think they will to find resources?

(12-19-2013 11:42 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  Surely they pay more taxes than the poor (b/c the poor do NOT have much if anything to pay), but they pay far less than their fair share… and the poor need most of their income to survive... the rich can afford to pay higher taxes, b/c their income and their wealth already allow for them to live cushy lives. Also, many times they have the ability to pay high falutent accountants and attorneys to figure out ways to minimize their tax burden.

In essence, they are leeches that are taking disproportionately than they should.

The rich are leeches, even though that one percent of the population contributes forty percent of all tax revenues?

Are you an avowed socialist? I ask, because only a socialist could think that way. What do you consider your political affiliation?