Putin calls USA a parasite on the world economy!

[Gylden]

   What do you all make of this?
 
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gZsFx4eqAwFygD-IedNnVa4GvenA?docId=CNG.e15ed612097d222fbb45807658240414.7c1
 

[Boethius]

Russia has long wanted an alternate reserve currency. 

[Gylden]

I think he is reaching with such a comment. He doesn't explain his statement.

[Boethius]

I think what he means is that the effect the debt crisis has had on foreign markets means this crisis goes beyond US borders.  But even little Greece had a deleterious effect on markets.

The real parasites in this are the super rich, who are not paying their fair share and have managed to manipulate idiots, such as the "Tea Partiers" with the mantra of "tax=bad".
 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-news/us/us-in-state-of-denial-over-taxes/article2114872/
 
http://theweek.com/article/index/206405/the-billionaire-koch-brothers-tea-party-puppetmasters

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer

[Muzh]

I think what he means is that the effect the debt crisis has had on foreign markets means this crisis goes beyond US borders.  But even little Greece had a deleterious effect on markets.

The real parasite in this is the super rich, who are not paying their fair share and have managed to manipulate idiots, such as the "Tea Partiers" with the mantra of "tax=bad".
 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-news/us/us-in-state-of-denial-over-taxes/article2114872/
 
http://theweek.com/article/index/206405/the-billionaire-koch-brothers-tea-party-puppetmasters

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer

 
Careful, you may be called a witch and burned at the stake for heresy.

[Boethius]

LOL.  That would be mild, compared to some of the names I've been called here.   Fortunately, never by anyone I respect.

You can't fund government, or wars, without revenue.  No voodoo in that.

Years ago, I used to think the introduction to the below website was just tongue in cheek.  Now, I'm not so sure  -

http://www.evilgopbastards.com

[possum]

It sure seemed like they were about to skin me alive today at the other place for speaking out against the super rich and the puppet masters..

[Faux Pas]

Putin alone making such statements mean nothing. The Chinese don't want any part of it for the time being. If India or Brazil join him in the chant things could get hairy

[CanadaMan]

Much as I'm loathe to, I have to agree with the mouse this time.
The politicians are also nasty procrastinators.
Waiting until the very last minute to strike a deal, thereby causing turmoil in all of the world markets...
Completely unnecessary. That's not very nice.

[Vincenzo]

Not only Putin calls the USA a parasite, he actually orders to dump worthless US Debt papers:
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/after-dumping-30-its-treasury-holdings-half-year-russia-warns-it-will-continue-selling-us-de

Just in time for the end of QE2, when the US needs every possible foreign buyer of US debt to step up to the plate, we get confirmation that yet another major foreign central bank has decided to not only not add to its US debt holdings, but to actively sell US Treasurys. The WSJ reports that "Russia will likely continue lowering its U.S. debt holdings as Washington struggles to contain a budget deficit and bolster a tepid economic recovery, a top aide to President Dmitry Medvedev said Saturday.

And next, presenting the monthly status update of the second cold war, which is now held entirely between central bank trading accounts. Russia has now cut 30% of its Treasury holdings in the past 7 months.

[Boethius]

It sure seemed like they were about to skin me alive today at the other place for speaking out against the super rich and the puppet masters..

Well, tell them Warren Buffet and George Soros also believe they are undertaxed.

The theory is that the wealthy will invest their capital, the benefits of which will trickle down to the "plebians".  But how much "wealth" does a hedge fund manager create? 

[I/O]

For whatever reason, Russians react well to Putins crudities. IMO, this is far more about domestic "wedge politics" than about international economics.

Russia has now cut 30% of its Treasury holdings in the past 7 months.

Nothing to do with generating cash because of oil prices being down from the $120 level and Russia needing to operate on a cash only basis? Russias credit standing isn't exactly..........so borrowing might be tough unless Iceland can return a tad of Putins personal 'savings'.

[Gator]

Much as I'm loathe to, I have to agree with the mouse this time.
The politicians are also nasty procrastinators.
Waiting until the very last minute to strike a deal, thereby causing turmoil in all of the world markets...
Completely unnecessary. That's not very nice.

Alcoholics don't give up alcohol readily.  The same with Big Government.   The liberal democrats could never imagine a future with no tax increases yet government is reduced.  I would like to know what deals were cut.  Obama seemd interested only in not revisiting this until 2013 so as to not impair his Presidential reelection plans.
 
I have not read the bill.  Yet, those who should know say the bill falls short of the minimum cuts needed.  It relies on a commission to name most of the future cuts, yet the history of such commissions is weak.  As an example, it has a max cut of 2% for Medicare. 
 
This is just the beginning.  There will be more.
 
 

[Gator]

The real parasites in this are the super rich, who are not paying their fair share and have managed to manipulate idiots, such as the "Tea Partiers" with the mantra of "tax=bad".
 

You act as if taxing the super rich and their private jets would balance the budget.  It would not make a dent. 
 
You sound like Obama, scolding people rather than leading.  It smacks of class warfare.  America has never been about class warfare.  Our tradition has been to make the pie larger. 
 
You call the Tea Party idiots.  You sound like someone who has sucked the government teat all your life.  The teat was going to dry up.  If the Tea Party are idiots, the people who elected them would be idiots.   They were elected on the platform of reduced spending and no more taxes this past November.  They are speaking for their voters.  If they agreed to more spending and more taxes, they would betray their voters.  Supposedly they are not interested in reelection.   The problem it seems is that our debt will still increase to several trillion.
 
The important point I take from this is that for the first time the budget has been increased without new taxes.  This could be a watershed event
 
If someone doesn't like it, they can campaign for someone with their ideals. 

[Boethius]

I have always worked and paid my own way.  I also pay for those who can't work, and I don't begrudge that.  Some are incapable of working, and society should take care of them.  I would like to see better programmes for the working poor.

No, Gator, when you have an accumulated debt as out of control as that of the US, everyone has to make sacrifices, and that includes the rich.  The American middle class pays a disproportionate share of the US tax burden.  Tea Partiers are firm believers in "trickle down" economics, which does not work.  Tax cuts for the poor and the middle class, or even those in the upper middle class are one thing.  Tax cuts for Wall Street bankers and managers making a billion dollars a year manipulating markets is completely another.  It has nothing to do with "socialism" or "punishing success".

Throughout most of my work life, Canada's personal tax rates were very high, among the highest in the world, and that was the result of its huge debt.  In the 1990's, those high tax rates were coupled with government cuts.  All of the pain that Canadians went through in the 1990's resulted in a sound economy by the mid 2000's, and tax cuts.

My province has a flat tax.  During recessionary times, this is a disaster.

Read the Globe and Mail article I linked.

[Faux Pas]

Much as I'm loathe to, I have to agree with the mouse this time.
The politicians are also nasty procrastinators.

Actually, they are elitists and don't give one rats ass what they're constituents think

Waiting until the very last minute to strike a deal, thereby causing turmoil in all of the world markets...
Completely unnecessary. That's not very nice.

The world markets, Canada or any other country doesn't get any consideration and quite frankly they shouldn't. Canadian Parliament or any other government in the world doesn't give the US that consideration. Why would you expect it return?

[I/O]

The world markets, Canada or any other country doesn't get any consideration and quite frankly they shouldn't. Canadian Parliament or any other government in the world doesn't give the US that consideration. Why would you expect it return?

That's a bit conveniently secessionist isn't it?

[Faux Pas]

That's a bit conveniently secessionist isn't it?

Perhaps but, please let me understand that clearly. Our government should take into consideration and pass legislation based on how it might effect world markets, Canada or Australia? Yet, world markets, Canada or Australia doesn't consider our economy when passing their own legislation?


I don't think so 


Even though we do, we shouldn't. Our legislators should consider their constituents first and formost IMHO

[Gator]

Boethius,
 
I read the Globe article.  It says "Unlike Greece, which is broke, the United States is rich and has the fiscal capacity to tax its way out of its debt mess."  Barf!
 
Where will these tax revenues come from?  Drastically increasing taxes from the super rich would not put a dent in the debt.  [Hey, I said that before, but you ignored it because you do not examine issues comprehensively and instead stay focused on your preconceived ideals.]
 
For Obama to focus on the super rich diverts our attention from the difficult task facing us.   The poor can not pay more taxes, and the rich are not that many in number.  Thus, the middle class pays (and you  stated that the middle class pays disproportionately too much already).
 
So the Globe's answer and your answer to America's existing debt is taxation and not reduced spending.  This is naive.  America's current debt is huge, and while this is a concern the real concern is the future.   America's debt is growing rapidly.  The main culprit - unchecked entitlements and an aging population.  The unfunded obligations amount to about $60 trillion.  That is 400% of our GDP today!!!   IIRC Greece's debt::GDP is around 150% and Italy is 120%.  It won't work.  Change is needed.
 
This debate over the debt is just an indicator of what is to come.  Congress must also address tax reform and regulatory reform as these are inhibiting business.  Tort reform is another. 
 
Am I a Tea Party person?  No.  Actually I was very interested in the bipartisan plan by Obama's Simpson-Bowles Commission.
 
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/11/deficit-commission-co-chairs-simpson-and-bowles-release-eye-popping-recommendations.php
 
You may like their viewpoints because they did include additional tax revenues with drastic cuts in spending to include military spending cuts.  All seem necessary IMO.  Obama ignored it even though it was his commission.

[BC]

I work closely with the shipping industry.

The other day a friend and I were trying to figure out how big 15 Trillion dollars actually is.

Using http://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html as a basis, our calculations at 40 pallets per 40 ft shipping containers, 15 Trillion dollars would fill the 7500 TEU vessel below to capacity with 100 dollar bills..  We're talking 3750 40 foot containers.. the capacity of the Hanjin Baltimore.

[Voyager36]

I have always worked and paid my own way.  I also pay for those who can't work, and I don't begrudge that.  Some are incapable of working, and society should take care of them.  I would like to see better programmes for the working poor.

No, Gator, when you have an accumulated debt as out of control as that of the US, everyone has to make sacrifices, and that includes the rich.  The American middle class pays a disproportionate share of the US tax burden.  Tea Partiers are firm believers in "trickle down" economics, which does not work.  Tax cuts for the poor and the middle class, or even those in the upper middle class are one thing.  Tax cuts for Wall Street bankers and managers making a billion dollars a year manipulating markets is completely another.  It has nothing to do with "socialism" or "punishing success".

To be fair, BOTH sides are complicit in this mess, both under Bush & Obama
 
 

The world markets, Canada or any other country doesn't get any consideration and quite frankly they shouldn't. Canadian Parliament or any other government in the world doesn't give the US that consideration. Why would you expect it return?

How about the US just keeping it's debt managable?
 
Can it realistically be paid down within 50 years?
100? 

[Ade]

To get some sort of relative context here's a wiki on public debt vs GDP of most countries (for those who haven't seen this list before, it's quite surprising); http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_public_debt

My opinion is that firstly, at the very least, governments should cut spending on their war making infrastructures including their insanely expensive armaments. Take a look at this wiki; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures Of the total amount spent in the world on the military it's estimated that the US spent almost 43% of that in 2010. Seriously. 

Secondly, increase taxes. I heard an American politician on the news yesterday say that American's have some of the lowest personal taxes in the industrialised world. Seems like Wiki agrees; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_around_the_world . I'm sorry but you just can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want to live in an industrialized country with a government and which even remotely pretends to take care of its disadvantaged, you need to pay for it.

The problem is with you guys in the US is that it seems, at least to an outsider, that you want something for nothing and you want others to pay for that too. You talk a good talk about European "social welfare states" and that they breed a population with a sense of entitlement, but, duh, take a look at yourselves. You want to live in a safe, functioning, industrialized nation, with all the amenities but you don't want to pay for it. You want a military that has almost as much spent on it as the rest of the world combined but you don't want to pay for it. You pride yourselves into thinking that you are the world's "policemen" but you don't want to pay for it. You want there to be more police on your streets and less crime but you don't want to pay for that either. You think that if you cut social welfare, reduce the amounts going to the disadvantaged and "increase personal responsibility" that you will spend less, but all that will happen is that the disadvantaged will start to lose hope, feel more disenfranchised and become more disillusioned and that breeds more crime, your streets will become less safe and you will need to spend more money on law enforcement and damage control.

Sometimes you have to give a bit, yes, sometimes to those that don't deserve it, to gain a lot more. Quality of life is measured by more than the spare cash you have in your pocket.

[BC]

My opinion is that firstly, at the very least, governments should cut spending on their war making infrastructures including their insanely expensive armaments. Take a look at this wiki; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures Of the total amount spent in the world on the military it's estimated that the US spent almost 43% of that in 2010. Seriously. 

Secondly, increase taxes. I heard an American politician on the news yesterday say that American's have some of the lowest personal taxes in the industrialised world. Seems like Wiki agrees; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_around_the_world . I'm sorry but you just can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want to live in an industrialized country with a government and which even remotely pretends to take care of its disadvantaged, you need to pay for it.

Clearly defense spending is not in relation to actual need.  Entire segments of the US economy are hooked on it.  Expenditures top those during the cold war even if Iraq and Afghanistan costs are dropped. http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1967353,00.html

Healt costs are also totally overboard with wild spending and little positive 'bang for the buck'.  Two to three times per capita than the rest of the industrialized world where life expectancy is greater.

http://www.globalhealthfacts.org/data/topic/map.aspx?ind=66
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

With a projected 1 of every 5 dollars spent in the us going towards healthcare, certainly something needs to be done.

But the current political system is not going to let overhaul type changes happen.  This debt ceiling crisis is just the tip of the icebergs to come with obvious political resolve to overhaul the system lacking.  Any President of any political party has a ball and chain around both his legs.  That's the new balance of power that was never intended to be used as such by the Founding Fathers.  In fact it's probably a good time to address deep government overhauls that led to this systemic failure.

As for raising taxes, I think the 'elefant in the room' in the house and senate is whether or not the country can afford to extend Bush era tax decreases scheduled to end in 2012 or if both parties will have to resign themselves to doing nothing - which will effectively raise taxes without either party stipulating higher taxes.

[Gator]

To be fair, BOTH sides are complicit in this mess, both under Bush & Obama
 

True.  It goes back well before Bush Jr.  For example, Social Security is either the largest or second largest part of the Federal budget and was designed to be funded by a FICA tax.   When SS was created, FICA revenue was placed  into the independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the general operating fund.  As such, the FICA receipts would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other government program.
 
Under Johnson's  "Guns and Butter" program, the money was moved to the General Fund and spent.  Medicare was also added.   

[Muzh]

Boethius,
 
I read the Globe article.  It says "Unlike Greece, which is broke, the United States is rich and has the fiscal capacity to tax its way out of its debt mess."  Barf!
 
Where will these tax revenues come from?  Drastically increasing taxes from the super rich would not put a dent in the debt.  [Hey, I said that before, but you ignored it because you do not examine issues comprehensively and instead stay focused on your preconceived ideals.]
 
For Obama to focus on the super rich diverts our attention from the difficult task facing us.   The poor can not pay more taxes, and the rich are not that many in number.  Thus, the middle class pays (and you  stated that the middle class pays disproportionately too much already).
 
So the Globe's answer and your answer to America's existing debt is taxation and not reduced spending.  This is naive.  America's current debt is huge, and while this is a concern the real concern is the future.   America's debt is growing rapidly.  The main culprit - unchecked entitlements and an aging population.  The unfunded obligations amount to about $60 trillion.  That is 400% of our GDP today!!!   IIRC Greece's debt::GDP is around 150% and Italy is 120%.  It won't work.  Change is needed.
 
This debate over the debt is just an indicator of what is to come.  Congress must also address tax reform and regulatory reform as these are inhibiting business.  Tort reform is another. 
 
Am I a Tea Party person?  No.  Actually I was very interested in the bipartisan plan by Obama's Simpson-Bowles Commission.
 
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/11/deficit-commission-co-chairs-simpson-and-bowles-release-eye-popping-recommendations.php
 
You may like their viewpoints because they did include additional tax revenues with drastic cuts in spending to include military spending cuts.  All seem necessary IMO.  Obama ignored it even though it was his commission.

Gator, normally I agree with your advice but when you start talking politics you seem to take your data from Fox news.
 
Are you telling me that if the super rich who control more than half of the US wealth pay their fair share of taxes are not going to make a dent in the debt?
 
I'll ask again, why is it that the average joe will rabidly defend the super rich in maintaining their wealth over their fellow schmuck's bad fortune?
 
This I honestly don't get. I could understand it if I grew under a serfdom but not in America.