What happens when you oppose Bu$hCo too vigorously

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

Do you police your own borders, pave your roads, run a library &/or museum, have your own military, ect... Governments are necessary. Human nature demands it. Otherwise people would only care about their immediate environs instead of the entire country.
I didn't say the government wasn't necessary. You implied that my tax deductions were equivalent to welfare, etc. which is ridiculous, because the money in question is mine.

No one polices our borders, apparently, or their wouldn't be a gazillion illegals here. As for the military, that is a constitutionally proscripted function of the government. Roads are fine, but they tie the money to whatever shit program they want to force down our throats.

Libertarians have described the government as being like fire. It is necessary to survive, and can even make you more comfortable, but it has to be controlled and watched or the minute you turn your back it will burn your house down and kill your family.

................so why has your country got historically high budget deficits now?

And if Liberals like spending, Clinton handed Bush a budget surplus.




....that explains the budget deficit - all those hospitals and schools he's building must be damn expensive.
That "budget surplus" was bullshit. That was a "projected" surplus, based on the tech bubble continuing, which everyone knew it wouldn't. More games politicians play. At the time, I think John McCain was one of the only big name politicians willing to say so. Both parties wanted to "party" on that imaginary money. The government was going into recession as of March 2001. I don't think even GWB could have ruined everything in 3 months.

If you sold it today :confused:Duh.

... your level of personal debt (zero) is an exception.
The current level of personal debt (credit card debt/unsecured loans) is at an all time high in the USA.

Even secured debt ie secured on property, is in danger as the property values fall.
The only region in the US where house values have been maintained is Florida,
currently.





Agreed - no group of rich people are interested in the ordinary joe soap.
Well then, we can agree on something.

And I will admit that having no credit card debt is not "normal" here in America, but I really don't have any. Remember, I save money to buy things ;) . I'm not worried about my property value either, because I live in an old city neighborhood that actually took a long time to catch up with the housing increases, and because it is in a prime location that doesn't involve a long and expensive commute, and because it is almost paid off, so I will always be able to sell it for more than owe.

However, I have watched people buy a lot more than they can afford, who are irresponsible really, who live paycheck to paycheck even though they make a lot of money. And if their house value tanks they are in big trouble. Living beyond one's means is a national pasttime.

Sadly..both sides share a lot of blame.

Why do you guys pay more attention to our country than your own?

THAT is odd.

Simple : Because the USA is causing the most Ruckus. Furthermore our Primeminister seems to spend more time listening to Bush than he does listening to his Electorate. As I see it there is no point in wasting time on an overpaid civil servant with zero decision making capacity (Tony Blair), you may as well go for the top (which is GWB in this case).

Job Exportation. Thanks Bill.....yet you blame Bush for it.


The jobs are being exported faster under Bush than they were under Bill. Bush is running the country, all Bill can do is sign books, shake hands, and crack lame jokes at the moment.

FWIW I happen to have a number of contacts within the US VLSI design community (and I pay close attention to it). What struck me over the past 5 years or so is that a very large proportion of these *extremely* highly skilled and dedicated people have struggled to find work under Bush.

That is happening because their jobs are being off-shored faster than they can get them... I saw the same thing happen to the VLSI design community here in the UK about a decade ago (many of those folks actually moved to the US and in some cases they are experiencing the off-shoring nonsense for a second time).

[QUOTE=nns1400 I come from a long line of people who are too proud (Scottish Highlanders)[/QUOTE]Me too.They were all cattle and horse thieves.My English ancestors probably hanged a few of them.
:D

[QUOTE=nns1400 I come from a long line of people who are too proud (Scottish Highlanders)Me too.They were all cattle and horse thieves.My English ancestors probably hanged a few of them.
:D[/QUOTE]


What's so bad about being a cattle or horse thief, a man needs companionship once in a while.
late they figure out they could steal two sheep in the same amount of time.
One under each arm.

What's so bad about being a cattle or horse thief, a man needs companionship once in a while.
late they figure out they could steal two sheep in the same amount of time.
One under each arm.My Scottish ancestors didn't stop at two sheep.They stole thousands of them.The English wouldn't allow them to take their cattle across the border to market.They used to sell their own,then on the way home they would steal everyone else's livestock.
It gets veeeerry cold in the Highlands.....and sometimes a dram isn't enough.
Most of the early cattle rustlers in the US were Scots or Irish immigrants.
It wasn't really a crime (unless you were caught).It was part sport,part tradition and partly a way of introducing genetic diversity into your herds.
One of my Scottish rels was the last man hanged in Scotland for stealing horses.
For the record...I have never stolen a horse.
:D

[QUOTE=nns1400 I come from a long line of people who are too proud (Scottish Highlanders)Me too.They were all cattle and horse thieves.My English ancestors probably hanged a few of them.
:D[/QUOTE]
My point exactly. My ancestry is irish. nns1400 may think differently had she gone through Andrew or Katrina and rec'd the brunt of what those storms had to offer :)

That "budget surplus" was bullshit. That was a "projected" surplus, based on the tech bubble continuing, which everyone knew it wouldn't.


nns1400,

The Federal Budget Surplus at the end of 2000 was $250 billion.
That figure isn't a projection - the figure was published by your own State agency, US Treasury, in 2001 for the year 2000 and represents the difference between goverment income and goverment expenditure, dear.

The US treasury is not a political entity and is not partisan.


The government was going into recession as of March 2001. I don't think even GWB could have ruined everything in 3 months.

Was your economy going in to recession?

That's funny because the US Treasury reported a suplus for 2001 of $94 billion.
2001 was the year Bush came in to office.

But Bush managed to squander that legacy : let's look at the Treasury stats :

It's interesting to note that the US Federal Budget deficit for

2002 = $230 billion (that's a further deficit of $126 billion in one year).
2003 = $396 billion ( that's another further deficit in one year of $166 billion)

Oh dear.

Yes he raised taxes....and much of the tax revenue generated came from inflated and falsified corporate income reports.

Bill, extra tax that was generated through income taxes between 1993-1995 : not through corporate taxation.

Increasing taxes in themselves is ineffective - unless it's accompanied by good fiscal control, Bill.
That's why the goverment went on strike, Bill in 1994/1995, 'cause Clinton ringfenced taxation to clear down GH Bush's deficit from 1988-1992.




The Fed was headed by Greenspan until very recently too. Same economic policies.


Actually different economic policies, Bill.

If you look at deficits from 1980-1992 : America was in debt throughout.
Ne'er a surplus in sight, Bill, for any of those years.

1991 deficit was $266 billion.

Clinton made it policy to wipe out Bush's deficit : and did so by 1997.
Greenspan backed Clintons policy.






Can you say 9/11? Do you think that and a war might have had an affect?



Sept 11th : was what 5 years ago now.

5 years Bill.







Job Exportation. Thanks Bill.....yet you blame Bush for it.




Bill - wrong end of the stick, I'm afraid.

GATT opened up markets in to which the USA could gain access - markets the USA could export to, without tariffs.
That's not exporting jobs - it's creating jobs for US workers based in the USA.
That's why your economy did so well from 1995-2000 : lots of work for US based workers.





Limerick...you really don't understand our country do you? Where do you get your stuff...Wikipedia?

Bill, I find Financial Times/Economist/Moody's/Bloomberg/Sunday Times, WSJ,
all excellent references for economic and corporate data, as well as my own professions monthly/annual publications.

My point exactly. My ancestry is irish. nns1400 may think differently had she gone through Andrew or Katrina and rec'd the brunt of what those storms had to offer :)
If you had read my post you would have seen that I did. At least my parents did. And my aunt and uncle and scores of other people I know very well, most of whom lost everything but the shirts on their backs. :( My folks had quite a bit of damage but could save their house; they still had to get out because their town was wiped out and they are too old to live in those conditions. My uncle died a few months after the Hurricane, mostly due to the stress they were under after their house was gutted and will probably have to be torn down, and they lost everything. So your smiley face is a bit inappropriate. Everything for miles and miles of coast line is completely gone. I have been through the mud and the debris and the tears. The line about the government and the bear is a direct quote from someone living in the FEMA trailer park in Long Beach, Mississippi, which has been a debacle. You need to do whatever it takes to avoid government assistance in an emergency. The "free" stuff does come at a price.

[QUOTE=nns1400 I come from a long line of people who are too proud (Scottish Highlanders)Me too.They were all cattle and horse thieves.My English ancestors probably hanged a few of them.
:D[/QUOTE]
I didn't say they weren't too proud to steal :p .

If you had read my post you would have seen that I did. At least my parents did. And my aunt and uncle and scores of other people I know very well, most of whom lost everything but the shirts on their backs. :( My folks had quite a bit of damage but could save their house; they still had to get out because their town was wiped out and they are too old to live in those conditions. My uncle died a few months after the Hurricane, mostly due to the stress they were under after their house was gutted and will probably have to be torn down, and they lost everything. So your smiley face is a bit inappropriate. Everything for miles and miles of coast line is completely gone. I have been through the mud and the debris and the tears. The line about the government and the bear is a direct quote from someone living in the FEMA trailer park in Long Beach, Mississippi, which has been a debacle. You need to do whatever it takes to avoid government assistance in an emergency. The "free" stuff does come at a price.
Do you know where the $ from government assistance originates :confused: Taxes that YOU have paid. Are you not entitled to some of it. You are not totally self sufficient as you utilize public resources such as roads, water supplies, electrical grids, ect... Do you despise the government to such an extent that you don't use any of the aforementioned :confused: You would of course, have to dig your own well for water, power your house w/ solar or wind energy, and walk or ideally ride a bike every where you go (not on publicly financed roads mind you). methinks you may own a SUV or three :confused:

Naw, Bill, - your goverment's statistics show that Clinton's management of your economy was superb.
Enron, MCI - don't figure in your goverment stat's.

Historical low unemployment (3.5%)
Historical budget surplus ($200 billion - leaving office)
Historical trade suplus ($30 billion suprlus of exports/imports).
Strong US currency (trading at parity with Euro and stronger than sterling and Yen).
Historical expansion in GDP/GNP.
Agreed & this was only realized because a 3rd party candidate ran on the unacceptability of our long-running debt/deficit. So, although Clinton raised taxes to get our financial house in order resulting in a quasi-conservative fiscal policy, which was admirable because the repubs couldn't or wouldn't it was to appease a segment of the population outraged by overspending (me being part of that constituency). This is what outrages me so much about Bush. He trumpets tax cuts during a time of a war (Iraq-voluntary war) of his own making essentially bankrupting our country :confused: :mad:
Do you remember who that candidate was that insisted on federal financial responsibility :confused: I do.

Still not gettin' the bank robber reference, but as to this comment, I believe the Dems want the disenfranchised to stay disenfranchised. It's their bread and butter, voter wise. You think they care about poor people? Their programs have not made anyone not be poor anymore; they enculturate it. They've wrecked the public school system, making it nearly impossible for anyone to rise out of it.

Yes, I would be too proud. I come from a long line of people who are too proud (Scottish Highlanders), who are related to a line of people who are government parasites. I know first hand how it works, and I would rather dig ditches than take money, or heaven help me, "assistance" from the government. Ask anyone who went through Hurricane Katrina how much government assistance is worth -- the saying is popular again that if you see me being attacked by a bear, please ask the government to help the bear! (Yes, my family members went through it).

Tax deductions allow me to keep MY OWN friggin' money, david, that I earned. They don't take it from another person's earnings and give it to me. I have to pay to send my kids to private school and still pay taxes on schools I don't use, because they are unsafe and incompetent. I don't take much from the govt. And I would have NO problem with getting rid of middle-class welfare like college loans because it isn't the govt's job to help me pay for college or anything else. They reel in everyone they can with some kind of program so that if anyone objects to high taxes, they can threaten their personal program. Works every time. Meanwhile they piss it all away!!!!!!! Government is the least efficient entity in the universe.As I said: self-absorbed and myopic.

President (King) Bush III :eek:

Do you know where the $ from government assistance originates :confused: Taxes that YOU have paid. Are you not entitled to some of it. You are not totally self sufficient as you utilize public resources such as roads, water supplies, electrical grids, ect... Do you despise the government to such an extent that you don't use any of the aforementioned :confused: You would of course, have to dig your own well for water, power your house w/ solar or wind energy, and walk or ideally ride a bike every where you go (not on publicly financed roads mind you). methinks you may own a SUV or three :confused:
You're awfully confused. I didn't SAY I was self-sufficient. I said the government wastes money. Their programs are inefficient. They blackmail you with things like roads, etc., because the only way they can continue their pork is to attach it to things that people have to have. Their "assistance" can be a burden in the end, as it has been for many who survived Katrina. What is confusing about that? :confused: :confused: :confused:

When the govt wants to "help", it f --ks everything up worse than before they started.

When the govt wants to "help", it f --ks everything up worse than before they started.
How would you characterize a gift of $110,000,000,000 to the gulf coast area :confused: Granted, a goodly portion of that will be eaten up for administrative costs & red tape but its better than nothing. Courtesy of the Good ol' U.S. of A. federal government.