Osama Bin Laden’s Dream of US Economic Collapse

[Donnelly]

[quote=finity;122260]I don't understand. The Democrats have only been in charge since January of last year. Bush had 6 years of Republican complicity in his "war on...". The damage was already done when the Democrats came to power

Are you saying that the Democrats should give Bush whatever he wants (just like the Republicans? - look how well that worked) & if not then they are playing politics? Congress' approval rating was only a little above Bushes when the Democrats took over. It dropped further because people voted them in to change things then (due to the political process) nothing did. People fail to realize that without working together neither branch can accomplish anything. Bush's refusal to admit mistakes makes it very difficult to work with him on anything, so nothing changes.quote]

Wrong. The founding fathers made sure that the power lied with the people, or the ones most closely representing them, their elected congressmen. They pass the laws, and if the president doesn't like the law and vetos it, they can override. It makes it harder, but the power still lies with the congress.

[jeremy]

The problem a lot of people have is the money being spent on the war. What they fail to realize is the majority of that money would have already been budgeted towards the military, even during peace keeping years. It takes BILLIONS of dollars to keep a free standing military that can fight. Not to mention the R&D Programs the military community sponsers, that they don't happen to make money from that the civilian populace does.
The use of this issue by Dems is kinda like why a magician has a good looking girl on stage. It keeps you from actually seeing what they are doing.

[finity]

Originally Posted by jeremy

The problem a lot of people have is the money being spent on the war. What they fail to realize is the majority of that money would have already been budgeted towards the military, even during peace keeping years. It takes BILLIONS of dollars to keep a free standing military that can fight. Not to mention the R&D Programs the military community sponsers, that they don't happen to make money from that the civilian populace does.

The entire miltary budget for 2002 was $32 billion. In 2003 that spending doubled to $76 billion. by 2007 that had more than doubled again to $165 billion. This year the administration has asked for $188 billion. The total cost of the wars in afghanistan & Iraq is around 752 billion dollars.

In comparison in 2006 federal corporate welfare was $92 billion, HUD total - ~$40 billion, food stamps - $33 billion, TANF (cash) - $20 billion, WIC - $3 billion.

People complain about spending money to help feed & house the poor but have no problem spending this kind of money to kill thousands.

[finity]

Originally Posted by Donnelly

Wrong. The founding fathers made sure that the power lied with the people, or the ones most closely representing them, their elected congressmen. They pass the laws, and if the president doesn't like the law and vetos it, they can override. It makes it harder, but the power still lies with the congress.

Point taken. I should have said that unless you have a strong majority then nothing can be accomplished. You know my point was that, by design, one branch cannot run roughshod over another unless there is a great popular desire to do so.

[Donnelly]

That I will agree with.

[mar_2343]

Originally Posted by finity

People complain about spending money to help feed & house the poor but have no problem spending this kind of money to kill thousands.

People have a problem as you have pointed out above, but more people have a problem with people and politicians spending money that isn't their money, but the tax payers money. Giving giving it to people(to feed and house) the poor who won't work (and illegal foreigners ) it isn't just wrong, its socialism and the last time I checked we as a nation are a Democratic Republic.

[finity]

Originally Posted by mar_2343

People have a problem as you have pointed out above, but more people have a problem with people and politicians spending money that isn't their money, but the tax payers money. Giving giving it to people(to feed and house) the poor who won't work (and illegal foreigners ) it isn't just wrong, its socialism and the last time I checked we as a nation are a Democratic Republic.

I think sometimes there is a confusion as to the difference between a countries economic structure & its political structure.

Governments can be democracies (pure democracies, parliamentary, republics), authoritarian (dictators, monarchs, theocracies, plutocracies) or anarchies (libertarianism, tribalism).

Economies can be capitalist (pure free-market) or communist (each person is an equal owner & recieves equal benefit from all assets in society), with socialism a mixture of both.

While I can sort of see how people would be confused due to our country's recent cold-war history & our government telling us constantly we were fighting against the 'communist government', it is possible to have a purely democratic government & a communist economy (as a matter of fact communism lends itself well to pure democracy - everyone owns everything equally & everyone gets a say in how things are done). Or you could have a dictatorship (one person rule without the consent of those being ruled over) for a government & a capitalist society if the Dictator decides to stay out of the marketplace & only troubles himself with social policy.

While it's true that there are no pure large scale communist economies, there are also no pure large scale capitalist economies either.

So, to be correct we have a representive republican government & a mixed economy, IOW, a mainly market based economy with some government regulation.

I don't remember anything in our Constitution that declares what kind of economy we will have, only the type of government.