Who is the person that stated the Republicans will bankrupt us with the "no new taxes bit", WHY would we want new taxes for the Democraps to continue to create another new great society and a welfare state. This most recent time the Dems have controlled both houses of congress they have damn near doubled our national debt and bankrupted this country. Both parties have allowed spending to get out of control....JJ

speaking of y2k.... I was a young kid at the time but why didn't someone just, ahead of time, like in '98 set their vcr/computer clock to be ahead of time and see what happens when the clock struck 0000 that date... seems like an easy proof test to see if it would roll over to 2000+ ... right??

ps economic break down and or degression of massive civil liberties... either way I think each is not likely too far down the road

first and immediate problem is the financial debt - ie what happens when the super wealthy (people and nations) stop buying bonds to keep the country afloat? - then our treasury buys the bonds thus monotizing the debt - CRAZY

second problem is OIL - USA has peaked in annual production in mid-1970's - Saudi Arabia et al will peak in the 2020's or 2030's - then oil will bet more $$ due to shortage - SO WHAT TO DO - our Govt needs to get started SERIOUSLY on alternatives - energy for our cars - tractor-trailer semi's are just too big and need diesel fuel and not matter what cost /can you imagine the usa going back to trains - even electric trains to get a lot of the trucks off the road?

we need massive nuclear power plants building program and intense research for electric cars - they still aren't reliable as of now -
we will have to get off oil
its the transition that will be painfull if the govt doesn't get serious

last big problem is WATER - CLEAN WATER that issue is more serious than i thought until recent research on it

Originally Posted by Gunners_Mate

speaking of y2k.... I was a young kid at the time but why didn't someone just, ahead of time, like in '98 set their vcr/computer clock to be ahead of time and see what happens when the clock struck 0000 that date... seems like an easy proof test to see if it would roll over to 2000+ ... right??

LOL! I wish it was that easy. I was in IT at that time for one of the auto makers. Our financial software wouldnt handle the new date so it "could have" prevented payments, delayed shipping, stopped production, etc - however, we implemented the fix that was available. But, a big problem also was embedded controllers like in the VCR or heart pacemakers or aircraft or locomotives. In many instances if the internal clock stopped, certain functions would cease or lock.

People like to laugh and call Y2K a hoax, but many of us worked 3000+ hrs per year ahead of time to make sure that nothing bad did happen.

As for my original question - I am leaning toward the economic collapse of Europe, the relative strength of Asia and our own budget/deficit issues as being the precursors to bad things. Add in a weakened military, embedded terrorists on US soil, Iran and North Korea's nuclear capabilities and it just gets worse.

Hard to say what, if anything, would happen here. If GM went under would it affect you? If greece went under would that? How?

How bad does it get before folks revolt? I"m not talking occupy this or that, but a serious melt down of society? At what point would you need to use your gun(s)? What would make you do that? And in what way? Hold up the local gas station for fuel? Walmart for food? Seriously - what do you envision happening that would make things 'so bad' as to have civil unrest?

A friend went through DHL leaving wilmington ohio DHL Cuts 9,500 Jobs in U.S., and an Ohio Town Takes the Brunt - NYTimes.com and nobody went 'postal' or took over the local anything.
I lived in Pittsburgh PA when the steel mills collapsed - some areas have never returned to what they once were, but the J&L Aliquippa works went from some 8,000 union workers to 700 in under 2 years. Across the river in Ambridge it was nearly as bad. In the early 80s unemployment in this area makes today's crisis look mild. And I'm not exaggerating in the least. And no civil unrest ensued.

So the US isn't #1 in many ways - or are we? Our economic output still is tops in the world with germany second I believe. China is coming on strong and the perception is certainly they're 'king' but alas, they are not (yet anyway). And if they do become number one, then what? Will they be like the US and force the world to be like them, so we'll be 'economically encouraged' to become communists or something? (Hasn't that pretty much been the US policy since WW2 - everyone should be a democracy like us?)

I feel safer as more countries are economically dependent on eachother - we need china (cause we make nothing) and they need us (to buy what they make). Safety from each other like never before!

If you ever listened to Am...iranian president...way back when he was first 'elected' he brought up many points that we as 'big brother' don't seem to get - we fear nobody. Canada isn't a problem and mexico isn't likely to invade even though they've done it in the past. However, if you're Iran and are surrounded by similar sized countries, many with unstable leaders and border skirmishes are common not to mention a seriously strong religious faction your issues are not at all like ours or france or great britain. Nobody is telling greece or finland or spain they can't have nuclear power but many of them have it and I doubt any fear their neighbors.

If you were told you couldn't own a gun more powerful than a 22 how would you feel? Especially if the guy down the street has a 45 and a bad attitude? I suspect you'd be rather peeved at those telling you to no, you can't do that. Especially if was Canada - who are they to you? Not your govt, not your parents, not your employer.

I'm not saying Iran should have nukes, I'm just saying we as a country go around the world trying to force our lifestyle, morals, ideals and political system on everyone and guess what? Some don't like that! It's also not so great, especially from their perspective, how we flip flop all over the place. We are responsible for a lot of the way Iran views us and the west. 1953 Iranian coup d'état - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia We've put a few gov'ts in place there and changed them when we didn't like what they wanted to do, in their democratic-ish govt's.

As for budget issues...the federal govt doesn't work on the same rules as the rest of us - we (individuals, companies, states) have to balance our budgets or borrow money. The Federal govt makes money - literally prints it. They do the same when they 'borrow' - they make up TBills and sell them with the promise they'll pay interest on them and the holder can cash themin some day - like savings bonds only bigger denominations. They can be debt free in a few weeks, or less if you'll take a check. The only risk is inflation - the devaluing of the dollar. But it's not backed up by gold anymore, just the 'trust' that is has value. If they sent you, me and everyone else a check for $5,000 they just 'printed money' for all intents and purposes. No debt need be created at all. But if we all run to the store to buy stuff prices will rise - only so many 1911s coming out of the colt factory. But then they'll hire folks and things get moving again - the concern is next week when your paycheck hasn't changed but milk is $7 a gallon now. A night out lasts 4 hours and is great but the hangover the next day lasts longer and can be worse.

Originally Posted by Dynamik1

LOL! I wish it was that easy. I was in IT at that time for one of the auto makers. Our financial software wouldnt handle the new date so it "could have" prevented payments, delayed shipping, stopped production, etc - however, we implemented the fix that was available. But, a big problem also was embedded controllers like in the VCR or heart pacemakers or aircraft or locomotives. In many instances if the internal clock stopped, certain functions would cease or lock.

People like to laugh and call Y2K a hoax, but many of us worked 3000+ hrs per year ahead of time to make sure that nothing bad did happen.

i also was managing an IT department and got into the Y2K item and yea - it was not a hoax -

very good points - mind if i add 0.02

"The Federal govt makes money - literally prints it. They do the same when they 'borrow' - they make up TBills and sell them... "
THAT IS A RISK WE ARE FACING - NOBODY WILL BUY THEM

"...with the promise they'll pay interest on them and the holder can cash them in some day - like savings bonds only bigger denominations.
THIS IS ANOTHER BIG RISK - IF CHINA DOESN'T LIKE THE WAY THE USA RESPONDS TO SOMETHING THEY WANT THEN THEY CAN DUMP THEIR TBILLS ALL AT ONCE AND FORCE A CRISIS

"They can be debt free in a few weeks, or less if you'll take a check. The only risk is inflation - the devaluing of the dollar."
THIS IS THE OBAMA PLAN - THIS WILL HAPPEN IF HE IS ELECTED AGAIN AND ESPECIALLY IF THE LIBERALS HOLD ALL THREE HOUSES IN D.C.

"But it's not backed up by gold anymore, just the 'trust' that is has value. If they sent you, me and everyone else a check for $5,000 they just 'printed money' for all intents and purposes. No debt need be created at all. But if we all run to the store to buy stuff prices will rise..."
AND THAT'S THE START OF INFLATION

I'm not as sure how the big money markets and tbills work...if everyone in the US decided to selltheir 1911s next week they'd sit for sale fora long time...perhaps the price would drop or perhaps gun shops would just not take them on trade. KInd of like houses in many areas of the country. It's only a problem if you want/need to sell your house though. Being 'underwater' on your mortgage sorta sucks, but if you pay you stay. If you choose to default and walk away that hurts us all, but as long as I pay I stay and I'll worry about resale value in a few decades, or never if I die living here.

Do tbills pay interest like a loan or are they like a savings bond where you pay $15 for a $25 bond but you can't get the $25 for 10 years? If china had to 'cash them in' with the treasury then we have control, if they just sell/trade them to some other country then that may be a bit different, but I doubt they do that - why wouldn't russia have bought a ton of them and 'foreclosed' on the USA? And it's not like china can foreclose on the USA either...

I remember back in the 80s when japan was coming on strong and japanese were investing the profits they made off of us buy buying up US companies and skyscrapers. My college economic professor said that was fine - they can't come and take the Sears tower back to japan, so we'll take their money and go do something else with it - maybe create silicon valley or the iphone or something.

I can't say there's a lot of difference between dems and republicans anymore. While I doubt any of us want to pay higher taxes politicians have been lowering them and giving breaks for a long time now - heck, your FICA is 2% points lower because of Obama for the past year and they've managed to extend that for at least a couple of months - what does this do to Social Security though? Shorts it some 20% of it's income is what it does. Gonna have to borrow that money to make up the difference.

Part of the checks and balances is supposed to be the 'two party' system - great idea until we get gridlock like now. Can we blame Grover Norquist, or should we blame the republicans (and a few dems) that signed his no tax pledge. I'm sorry, I didn't vote for Norquist - not did anyone. This isn't the way the system is supposed to work!
Will having dems in all three houses be better or worse? Well, Clinton left the white house with a balanced budget and strong economy. Bush started some wars that cost a fortune that caused the cost of gasoline to more than triple and lowered taxes to get reelected...then reduced oversight of wall street and BAM! Things fall apart. Were the republicans to blame? To a great extent yes.

The best thing Ive heard lately is the Pres is supposed to manage and perhaps lead. But it's congress' job to make laws - to come up with solutions to problems (as opposed to create problems...). The office of the president has changed - did congress declare war? No, not since 1941. So Korea, Vietnam, Gulf I and II, irag and afghanistan are basically wars that one guy decided we needed. So The POTUS is trying to be essentially a worldwide dictator and bully. He takes advice and congress has to give him the money, but I don't think anyone has had a say in any of these 'wars' - voting wise. We are a democracy in name only.

Obama can't make inflation - the fed does that and they are not answerable to congress or the president. And it was set up that way for the very reason you mention.

I've been around 50 years and have a college education and have talked with older folks. Was the gold stardard better? Probably not. Folks tried to manipulate it too - that's part of the reason americans were not allowed to own gold for some 45 years of the last century. Free markets can work - be that guns, butter or money not on a gold standard. I remember the 70s and 20% interest rates and inflation so high you could watch prices on food rise week to week when you shopped. I've had my business for 6 years now - I pay the same now for lab prints and services as I did in 2005. Exactly the same. I'm shocked by that as I know other costs have gone up. I've not seen a price in wedding albums in 3 years and then it was only an increase in leather prices, not on the books themselves. My phone bill hasn't changed in all that time either.

This is the first recession my wife's experienced as an adult - she graduated college in 1992. The norm is a recession every 7 years or so going back over a century, most of that time we were on the gold standard.

So will handing out money (lower taxes or mail out checks, it's the same thing) improve the economy or create inflation? I'm not sure it will do either. I don't think the problem is money in consumers hands. It's more a matter of predictability - what's the 'plan' for the next 5 years and if i know that I'll know what I can do.
Simply put - if you have job security you will borrow money to buy that new car or house. If not...then you won't.
If as a business owner I see more customers or know what the tax rules will be, or healthcare system, etc then I can plan on hiring, opening new stores, developing new products, etc.

I think it's more of a confidence thing than an economic one and that's purely atti\tude - yours and mine and the people we see on the street. I've got a good friend that is very upset over the state of the economy but he has no proof of it...he decided at age 45 to change careers and now is complaining that the only job he can get is entry level and that won't pay enough since he has a mortgage, kid in college, etc. That is NOT the fault of obama or the economy. Be a newbie in a career and you will only get entry level jobs, be you 18 or 75 or a former CEO. THe flip side is folks that work at a job for 10 years and want to make twice what they made when they started....in most jobs that makes no sense from management's perspective. The guy on the job a few months at mcdonalds is just about as good as the one with 10 years on the job there. Same for being an accountant or truck driver or congressman.

A big factor in the economy is the internet. Used to be you'd go to the local store for what you needed. Now? Look it up on the internet and use that price locally to get a better deal or order online, often right from hong kong for 10% of what it costs locally. This is killing local business. I can run a $10m mail order business out of the same size building, in a cheaper location, for what it costs to run a $1m local retail business. My prices are cheaper. But I'm not in your town and the one next door- so all those jobs are gone and are not coming back. Look round for music stores or video rental places or book stores - few and far between. Go visit some hobby shops - few of hte local mom and pop ones are left and I bet it won't be 5 years before the chain ones fold up too.

I have to buy guns locally. Reloading supplies not so much - I'll go to where it's the cheapest. the XD I just bought could be had online for $75 less, but shipping and local FFL transfer fees would be nearly that. But then MSRP is $795 I believe - the internet forced the local dealer to be cheaper (great for me) but 15 years ago he'd likely have gotten full retail price, or been able to give me some ammo or other incentive.

It's changing times, for better or worse. I don't know if this is part of what's got congress and our political system locked up or not. If all three houses/POTUS were the same party majority would that allow things to move forward? Maybe...it's obvious you fear the dems (or liberals to more accurately quote you) would take us in the wrong direction and I fear the republicans of the past decade have done that and haven't 'reformed' yet so they'll keep down that same, equally wrong, road.

We need reform of all kinds but unfortunately the only ones that can do the reform (be that the tax code, healthcare, wall street, lobbyists, etc) are the ones that benefit from it - the fox is in the hen house and it turns out he's really a rooster and we're all getting screwed!

Wow. No doubt due to "help" from the liberal media, someone seems to have a rather convenient memory.

Will having dems in all three houses be better or worse? Well, Clinton left the white house with a balanced budget and strong economy. Bush started some wars that cost a fortune that caused the cost of gasoline to more than triple and lowered taxes to get reelected...then reduced oversight of wall street and BAM! Things fall apart. Were the republicans to blame? To a great extent yes.

If all three houses/POTUS were the same party majority would that allow things to move forward? Maybe...

As I recall, the balanced budget was FORCED on Clinton by the Republican congress that was elected in 1994 (taking office in 1995), in response to the Democrat party's failures and the Republican "Contract With America".

And we really don't have to wonder whether having Dems "in all three houses" would be better or worse; that's exactly what we had just a couple of years ago, in 2009 and 2010! We sure don't hear much about that in the news nowadays; the only so-called "gridlock" that existed for the first two years of Obama's presidency was completely contained in one party! Purely coincidental that we began measuring our annual deficits in Trillions (instead of Billions) during this time-frame, right?

Some recommended reading for those who might be interested:

Party Control of Congress and the Presidency

Balanced budget amendment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(especially the chart titled "Recent additions to U.S. public debt", about two-thirds of the way down the page)

If you intend to compare the two charts, remember that there is a year or two of "lag" between when the budget is passed, and the effects are seen/felt. For instance, the 2007 budget was actually passed in 2006, and the surpluses/deficits are not seen until the end of, or the year after, 2007.

DJ niner: you hit some of his mistakes but he has so many there isn't enought time and space to properly correct them

prof_fate admitted he doesn't know how tbills and bonds work so i suggest he start his education with that

Originally Posted by TedDeBearFrmHell

if you wish to see "displeased", look no further than my avatar

I couldn't agree more with Ya'!! Open your eyes America!!!!

Financial calamity leading to an economic breakdown = SHTF (S#*t Hits The Fan)
Large-scale foreign aggression on US soil = TEOWAWKI (The End of The World As We Know It)
Uncontainable biohazard = Zombies???


I think these things are in the rules for this forum under Prohibited Topics, or am I wrong?

Originally Posted by ponzer04

Financial calamity leading to an economic breakdown = SHTF (S#*t Hits The Fan)
Large-scale foreign aggression on US soil = TEOWAWKI (The End of The World As We Know It)
Uncontainable biohazard = Zombies???


I think these things are in the rules for this forum under Prohibited Topics, or am I wrong?

Although they could be interpreted as such with a bit of stretching, I'd say no, they aren't, in the way they were presented here.

there was no stretching

Originally Posted by ponzer04

there was no stretching

depends. the way you described the topics is not how most would.

shtf would involve much more than economic instability, something more along the lines of all three things combined.

teowaki practically happens everyday, the world as we know it is constantly changing, but in a more literal sense (most) people view this as a terminator type scene, post nuclear war landscape style.

and uncontainable biohazard definitely does NOT mean zombies. just look at how retarded everything got over H1N1... and that wasn't even real

yeah swine flu wasn't a big deal, only about 1/3 our ship crew got it.

Originally Posted by TedDeBearFrmHell

really? a political groin shot? instead of the government its the republicans? it appears that as much research and thought went into the last sentance as went into all the rest.....

Ahhh tedDebear I do love it when someone with an IQ steps on the nads of a political moron......well done sir

Originally Posted by scooter

Ahhh tedDebear I do love it when someone with an IQ steps on the nads of a political moron......well done sir

thank you, but the original statement was misguided on all levels, not just political.... scientifically, medically, politically and every other ally..... but then again, i read and question and research and THEN i make up my mind after formulation my own opinions, not just regurgitating the opinions read by the nightly newsactor.

The economic calamity is the first and most likely. The problem isn't that Republicans won't raise taxes.

"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. ”From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship." Most commonly attributed to Alexander Fraser Tytler in 1787.

The problem is spending. That people vote greedy self interest. They don't care where the money comes from as long as they get their taste.

I don't discount the possibility of military action. Not an invasion, but I have considerable concerns about Iran. The Iranians have tested a system for launching the Shahab II medium range (they call it a long range) missile from the hold of a freighter. If they pair it with an EMP burst we could be in trouble. If they come up with a couple of nukes optimized for EMP, they could selectively flood a couple of freighters in international waters to roll the ship to one side and allow a low=trajectory launch with minimum flight time. Hit us with 2-3 bursts spaced along the eastern seaboard about 100-150 miles inland, then follow up with one over Chicago, maybe one launched from the Gulf of Mexico detonated over DFW.

I spent a few years in Uncle Sam's Canoe Club on a ballistic missile submarine. I've always been afraid not of large-scale nuclear war, but of contagion. Marburg and Ebola (among others) have not really been a big issue so far because they are not particularly easily transmitted and because they are so lethal that they are self limiting. They kill almost everyone they infect so quickly they don't travel. Influenza has a nice, contagious incubation period before you get so sick you aren't ambulatory and is much easier to pass along. The hemorrhagic fevers might be a problem if they mutate into a form not limited by their current issues, but there are LOTS of little nasty bugs to choose from.

John

I like (as in agree with, and/ or fear) your statement about democracy...me fears we be there. Will a dictatorship follow, or will am 'american spring' (ala arab spring?)

As for the iranians 'bombing' the US...doubtful. It's not in their best self interest. Terrorists might do it - a small group with a chip on their shoulder and nothing to lose. But should Iran do this you know, and they know, we'd level the country. It took Russia 10 years to take afganistan and we took the place in 30 days. Iraq had one of the largest standing armies in the world and those feared republican guards - again, 30 days and we were in charge (if not in compete control).

Now for iran to attack india or pakistan or israel? Sure, that I could see.

I would also fear our current administration......they are anti-gun, for sure, along with the last two Supreme court justices.......if things continue, we may start to have gun rights taken away..............

ah yes
the supreme court
i read that the next president will be nominating two more replacements
just another reason why we need a white house change

Most people faced financial calamity. It's too on this forum.