.
Feedback

Elected Leaders Destroying the Wealth of the Nation

Cash for clunkers was a huge financial disaster!

"We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt."
 
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Samuel Kercheval, 1816                                       

Doesn’t that make you feel all warm and fuzzy now that our nation is in debt for $16 trillion we can never pay? We could rephrase that statement and ask the question today: “How do we keep our rulers from burdening us with additional irreconcilable debt?” It is apparent they, the elected, are incapable of doing it themselves so the only choice is that we vote them out of office and give them the opportunity to manage their personal budgets, not ours. They have shown no will to exercise good judgment over the taxpayer’s dollars. 

They are also destroying the wealth of the nation. Cash for clunkers immediately comes to mind. That one act single handedly destroyed billions upon billions of dollars. Those billions were assets of our nation and almost destroyed the used car industry. All thrown away as if it was yesterday's newspaper. If you couldn't afford a new car...you were simply out of luck. Hyperinflation will eventually settle in devaluing the dollar even more and making it virtually impossible to sustain any semblance of the life we have now. You cannot divest trillions of dollars into the economy and not expect these repercussions; it is inevitable. Those dollars will become worthless pieces of paper.  

Come November you should know what to do. When it comes to those in office: Keep angry! Keep watch! Keep score! Keep involved! Keep voting, just not for them. 

Steve Ramey
-- 
American, USMC Vietnam veteran and Freedom lover             
10 October 2012                                                                                           Semper Fidelis et Vigilo! 

lee kellogg October 12, 2012 at 12:51 pm
Steve, you had a good point about more being done to recycle the clunkers. And I'll accept your math, but why did you stop mathing at there? Take the number of cars traded in, Brian's number is more accurate, but whatever. Multiply that number by say $18,000, which is an arbitrary guess on my part as to the price of a new car. That much money went to support the American, and to some degree, the world economy. You realize the world economy is interconnected? That number, far larger than the government expenditure, is economic growth. You might object to the government helping the American economy, which in real terms is the American people, but I don't. Do that math and see if you don't agree with me, car dealers, salespeople, the union workers, management workers, their families, their banks, their landlords, their tenants, the businesses in and around their vacation spots, who put that money to good use. Sadly, your posting that someone should shut up is the first time I've read such a thing on Patch. Most, but by no means all, of the insults and sophomoric snark comes from the conservatives who post here, but that seems unnecessary.
STEVE RAMEY October 12, 2012 at 02:12 pm
Brian, If you are a Georgian as I am, you remember the embarassment of Jimmy Carter. Actually, he still is. He had gutted our military, sent interest rates to 21% and most of the world was laughing at us. He also started that wonderful world call the Department of Energy with 16 people because he wanted to reduce the 40% of crude we were importing at the time. Today the Dept. of Energy has 16,000 employees and contract out to over 12,000 contractors and we import 70% of our oil. How does that work out for you? There was no question Reagan put people back to work and brought more money into the coffers. We still had to rebuild the military and regain our reputation as being THE world power. That was a must do spend for the life of our nation which broke the USSR's back.
If the economy was down and 27 million Americans were unemployed/underemployed there would have been great consternation as there is today. The only time in recent years was during the Clinton years when we had a Republican speaker (not squeaky clean) but strong on budget. We all know the house originates all spending or did until the last few terms ago when presidents began to circumvent the Constitution. Obama is not the only one but the major one and the current one that's causing the pain. In most cases it take both houses to either increase or decrease spending. We need a leader to guide these two into agreeing on deep cuts to Depts of Energy, Education and EPA. We can run our schools at state level.
Michael k October 12, 2012 at 04:43 pm
Steve,
I'm not going to critique all of the statements you've made throughout the posting and thread as there is not enough time. I'll focus on your business of selling recruitment advertising. If you've been doing this type of work for any length of time (cold calling/telesales any type of product or service) you know the effort can often be compared to pushing a rope. If you are trying to sell recruitment advertising during a period that is described as the greatest financial crisis since the great depression..... 1. If you were being honest you would admit that the causal factor of the decline was not the election of the President, instead it was the onset of the greatest financial crisis since the great depression. 2. If you want to blame someone besides yourself, how about Mitch McConnell saying in November 2010, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president". He wasn't real concerned with the struggles of your business.
Brian Crawford October 12, 2012 at 05:10 pm
I always thought Carter got somewhat of a bad rap but that's another conversation. The DOE however was one of Carter's better ideas. It helped streamline the federal government by consolidating parts of 11 different government agencies eliminating redundancies and simplifying regulations. I have no idea where you came up with "he started the DOE with 16 people", but that is not even close to reality. One of the primary functions of the DOE is maintaining our nuclear arsenal so I would say those 16,000 employees are doing some pretty important work.
I'm not sure where you were during Reagan's first term but the average monthly unemployment during his first 4 years was 8.7%, only slightly better than Obama's 9.06%. Reagan also had the benefit of a bi-partisan Congress that helped create nearly 1.4 million government jobs during his administration.
Karsten Torch October 12, 2012 at 05:18 pm
Chris, but there ARE less people looking for work now. Because they're getting frustrated at this slow-ass growth and giving up. But yeah, we're doing great right now.
Rex Smithers October 12, 2012 at 05:41 pm
Yea Brian. Carter got a bad rap. Laughable. The guy is a frickin moron just like Obama who you worship today. A couple of white flag waiving idiots that have no clue how to improve our economy.
George Wilson October 12, 2012 at 06:28 pm
@Steve Ramey
You could call it George W. Bush's and the Republicans' Solyndra, a company called Range Fuels. Instead of claiming to turn cylindrical solar cells into energy, Range Fuels said it would squeeze fuel out of woodchips. We learned the government has liquidated this failed, heavily subsidized undertaking. Range Fuels a cellulosic ethanol company backed by as much as $156 million in U.S. loans and grants from President George W. Bush’s administration, is being forced by the government to liquidate its only factory after failing to produce the fuel. To turn wood chips into ethanol fuel, George W. Bush's Department of Energy in February 2007 announced a $76 million grant to Range Fuels for a cutting-edge refinery. A few months later, the refinery opened in the piney woods of Treutlen County, Ga., as the taxpayers of Georgia piled on another $6 million. In 2008, the ethanol plant was the first beneficiary of the Biorefinery Assistance Program, pocketing a loan for $80 million guaranteed by the U.S. taxpayers. Republicans who have lathered the subsidies on Soperton and celebrated them -- Gov. Perdue, President Bush, Sens. Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss. "
George Wilson October 12, 2012 at 06:31 pm
@Steve Ramey
Those are just excuses a good saleman makes more calls and overcomes objections.You need to work harder.
STEVE RAMEY October 12, 2012 at 06:46 pm
George, I forgot more about work in my sleep last night than you will ever know!
Michael k. I'm still making a good living. I don't know anything about pushing ropes but it seems you do so push onward. By the way, I DID BUILD MY BUSINESS and Nobama didn't have a freaking thing with building it but did help slow it down. Don't question my honesty!!!!
Brian Crawford October 12, 2012 at 07:07 pm
I see you've justified Reagan's deficit spending as a means to build a stronger national defense. Wouldn't it have been wise to have a plan to pay for all of that defense spending? If your plan was to increase spending, why would you cut taxes at the same time? Where was your outrage at that? How about Bush's profligate deficit spending?
C.J. October 12, 2012 at 07:24 pm
I want to make something clear about conservatives that I don't think they even know about themselves. They don't care about deficits. I'll repeat. Conservatives do not care about deficits.
Actions speak louder than words, and deficits didn't bother conservatives when Reagan was running up the debt, Bush 41 was running up the debt, or when Bush 43 turned surpluses into deficits. Nor do they care about deficits (while saying they do) when supporting a presidential candidate who has posted promises on his website that will add nearly $7 trillion to the national debt over ten years (not including the hundreds of billions that would be added by making the Bush tax cuts permanent for people making over $250,000). There aren't enough deductions and loopholes to come anywhere close to filling that gap (unless you raise taxes on the middle class). Conservatives can say that they want lower taxes and increase defense spending, or they can say that they want to balance the budget...but they can't have both. And when push comes to shove, they'll take lower taxes, misbegotten wars, and wasteful defense spending over balanced budgets any day.
Michael k October 12, 2012 at 07:41 pm
Steve,
Isn't it a very un-conservative thing to do to blame your lot in life on someone besides yourself? You built that. So that must mean you also ran it into the ground by 60% over the last 4 years. Seems to me you are trying to have it both ways. Your success is all your own. Your failure is someone else's? Isn't that what the 47% are guilty of? Blaming their lot in life on external forces? Are you the 47%?
Brian Crawford October 12, 2012 at 08:06 pm
Nicely done.
George Wilson October 12, 2012 at 08:11 pm
Michael
Excellent comment. Steve did devote some time to run in the Republican primary against Senator Bob Balfour the guy who couldn't keep correct expense reports and tried to beat the state out of hundreds of dollars.Steve lost by a big margin running against a crook.Maybe because of Steves extremist views.The crook however, will probably be reelected in the general election which says something about the virtues of gerrymandering and Republicans.
George Wilson October 12, 2012 at 08:20 pm
Steves' comments remind me of a man who jumped on a horse and rode off in all directions.The term is "Gish Gallop".You might want to google.
C.J. October 12, 2012 at 08:37 pm
The Gish Gallop: The debating technique of drowning the opponent in such a torrent of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments that the opponent cannot possibly answer every falsehood in real time.
The gallop is often used as an indirect argument from authority, as it appears to paint the "galloper" as an expert in a broad range of subjects and the opponent as an incompetent bumbler who didn't do their homework before the debate. Such emphasis on style over substance is the reason many scientists disdain public debates as a forum for disseminating opinions. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop (Thanks George. I learned something new.)
George Wilson October 12, 2012 at 08:38 pm
@David
"In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion."
George Wilson October 12, 2012 at 08:44 pm
@C.J.
Thanks have enjoyed reading your factual and accurate post.We need more truth in these comments instead of rehashed remarks from right wing radio talk radio.
STEVE RAMEY October 12, 2012 at 09:17 pm
George, At least i had the courage to ride. You wouldn't know the front of a horse but you are quite familiar with rear end because it describes you to a "T".
George, Tell us of all the great things you have done to make a difference in this world! Michael k, Want to match incomes? At my worst I can do better than you! Brian Crawford, If you had any sense of economics you would realize that by reducing taxes more people go to work actually placing more money into the federal coffers. Don't let facts get in the way. If you know how look it up you will see the coffers did rise during that time.
Tammy Osier October 12, 2012 at 09:34 pm
Steve, let me break that down where the simplest among us can understnd it. If you are working, then you pay taxes to the government? If you aren't working, then taxes are raised on those who are working to pay your way, but those people will put less into the economy therefore , the economy suffers?
Roger that.
George Wilson October 12, 2012 at 09:46 pm
@Tammy Osier and Steve Ramey
I would suggest that you read the books (13) from the author Barbara Ehrenreich especially "Nickel and Dimed" to better understand the issues you both talk about.
Rex Smithers October 12, 2012 at 09:52 pm
Truth? You want truth? Here you go..
Romney Wins Georgia In 2012. Democrat votes make no difference. Bye Bye.
Brian Crawford October 12, 2012 at 09:59 pm
Really Steve? If your magical tax fairy theory were true then why did our national debt quadruple between Reagan and Bush 41 and then double again with Bush 43? They all cut taxes to some degree. I've presented you with nothing but facts. You don't seem to be the least bit interested in them.
Chris October 13, 2012 at 01:53 am
David, If George read these books, he read them twice. Does double vision count for twice? Mr. Boston Vodka is a terrible waste of $5.
Tammy Osier October 13, 2012 at 01:57 am
Yes, David, let's ask him to expound on those books and tell us just how the economics in them make any more sense than common basic tried ane true economics. If they shape your world view then it explains a lot.
R October 13, 2012 at 05:04 am
@ George
Please remember at least one of your "wars" above was started by people flying planes into buildings, so UNLESS you hold the position that BUSH did it - DROP that talking point. TOO many people have suffered and are still suffering today for THAT to be glossed over ANY more ANYWHERE...
Michael k October 13, 2012 at 01:49 pm
Tammy - perhaps you can explain how that some of world's economies that are ranked higher than the US (Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Netherlands) have higher effective corporate and personal tax rates, while another (Singapore) does not?
If it is a simple equation of: lower taxes = better economy why doesn't it apply to these economies?
Michael k October 13, 2012 at 01:56 pm
Steve,
Yours was an intellectually dim response to my last posting. Perhaps your business and political struggles can be explained after all. Don't assume that those who disagree with you are not high earners. I could be a limousine liberal.
STEVE RAMEY October 13, 2012 at 11:59 pm
At least i have a light burning.
Karsten Torch October 14, 2012 at 02:26 pm
Michael, on what scale are you coming up with the idea that these countries beat the US? In GDP, global competitiveness, we are the top of the heap....

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Dacula Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Dave June 18, 2013 at 10:43 pm
Packing peaches near the SC/NC border at $0.60 an hour and all the peaches you could eat. I stillRead More hate peaches to this day.
Kristi Reed (Editor) June 18, 2013 at 07:42 am
Indeed. I hope everyone will take some time to explore the site, check out the features and thenRead More look for the feedback button on the right side of the page. Click on that to let Patch know your thoughts on the new platform.
Dave June 18, 2013 at 08:46 am
It's pretty but I found lots of bugs. I'm sure these will be worked out over time. It's new soRead More we'll give it some time.
Kristi Reed (Editor) June 18, 2013 at 08:54 am
Yes, unfortunately I've found a lot too but the engineers are working on it and hopefully we'll haveRead More a much more stable site shortly. In the meantime, please report any issues using the feedback tab on the right side of the page. Thanks!
Robbi McCaig June 12, 2013 at 12:08 pm
"There are people in all levels of government office who would like nothing more than to beRead More able to conduct all the public business out of public view" The problem is, who's going to stop them? Certainly--no one from this justice department who is complicit in multiple overreaches and coverups.
Tammy Osier June 12, 2013 at 12:41 pm
I wrote this on another post but it so applies here and is worth repeating: James Madison wrote inRead More the federalist paper (no. 51) concerning the separation of powers and need for limited government , "“ It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government……” We need to have a "Madison moment"...
Tammy Osier June 12, 2013 at 12:41 pm
I remember when I opened up the news to see that Holder was going to investigate Holder. Ha! What'sRead More scary is that there are some who think that's just fine?
Linda Davis June 18, 2013 at 08:48 pm
Thanks Erin, we will know by the 30th of June who won the Bammy Award for my category. Keep meRead More lifted up in prayer. Linda