I agree with Don here. There have been way too many entitlements and for way too long. No, I don’t mean the amount spent for social services etc. I mean the money earmarked for the Corporations responsible for the maintenance of the Military-Industrial Complex. Those who survive by war profiteering.
For way too long they have been lining up at the trough and assuming that their product should come before the general welfare and good. Yes, we need to provide for the common defense. However, the rate of such a provision is very out of balance and threatens to destroy our great nation. Yes, using public money (tax payer money) to keep the CEOs, employees and stockholders of companies like GE, Bowing, Halliburton, Xe Services, Lockheed-Martin, Honeywell, General Dynamics, Colt’s Manufacturing Company, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Pratt and Whitney, Smith and Wesson, Sikorsky Aircraft, THOR Global Defense Group, AAI Technologies, BAE Systems Inc., Alliant Technologies, Bushmaster Firearms International, General Atomics etc. employed helps to keep them off of other welfare rolls. However, since their products are in no way associated with being renewable, the continued overuse of this largest segment of the private sector and public funds will continue to not only drain our coffers but will continue to pollute our environment and destroy valuable resources that could much better be used elsewhere. Yes, I know that it might take some additional welfare to retrain these people but it would be well worth it. On Aug 6, 2:48 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > Hm. I disagree with describing the times as febrile. Stagnate is more like > it. Perhaps the day traders are febrile but I have no respect or sympathy > for them. The 500 pt. drop on the DOW represents a run to cash. Motivated > less by fear, I think, then exasperation with a President and a Congress > that fail to see the gravity of the situation and have the guts to do > something about it. A government unwilling to even take half-measures to > begin a recovery. In short, a response to cowardice and ineptitude. The > deficit most trying us now isn't that of GDP to revenue it's lack of > competent leadership. Instead we have a 'leader' completely blaming one > branch of the government for all the problems as if 6 straight years of > Democratic control of Congress had nothing to do with our current problems. > It shouldn't be that hard to admit there's plenty of blame to share between > all the branches including the Federal Reserve. Less partisanship and more > focus please. > > Unfortunately for us too much attention has been on deliberately increasing > the role of government in people's lives. It's expensive and it's > inefficient. I understand TARP. I understand spending your way out of a > recession. Perhaps it would be a good time to step up road repair and bridge > building and whatever infrastructure we might need in the next few years and > just borrow and get it done NOW. More importantly though we need a clear and > honest effort to reign in the reckless spending on entitlements. Our future > depends on it. Too much has been promised and the hard decisions on how to > break those promises have to be made but clearly they won't be by Barack > Obama or this Congress. Hard times are coming; ya'll ain't seen nothing yet. > > Vote change in 2012. > > dj > > > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 12:10 PM, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > > I hear you, rigsy. > > > Considering markets are often way ahead of the economic cycle, caution > > might have best described the market lethargy prior to the fear driven > > "correction" of the past week, all considered. The global economy has > > gradually but steadily been absorbing higher commodities pricing, re- > > configuring economic value space, and re-balancing global growth. It's > > curious and unusual to see the markets well behind the curve, and > > thats the work of naked fear, and opportunistic speculation (no > > criticism, just observation). > > > The S&P action, unfortunate in its timing, is more a political rebuke > > than a meaningful statement of financial "risk"; and yes, it's > > significance is disproportionate; these are febrile times. > > > On Aug 6, 2:10 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I would correct the term fear to caution which is a natural component > > > of foresight. Some might call it a sizing up. For some reason, I am > > > thinking of Ulysses- Homer's, not Grant. Perhaps the purpose of the > > > Boy Scout motto, "Be Prepared"? Of course we cannot control all the > > > factors that affect us in life but that brings to mind the over- > > > controlled life versus one that adapts and is flexible- the extremes > > > of being set in one's ways and the dewy naif who trusts all- > > > everything and everybody. > > > > I find it troubling that the lead headline is S&P's rating versus the > > > loss of our Special Forces. > > > > I have long thought that many survival/social instincts begin in the > > > nursery among siblings as they vie for attention, position within the > > > family- like children seem to hop on their own branch on the family > > > tree in order to be unique or special. Those "skills" carry forward > > > into school cliques and later work and social roles. > > > > Some have commented that S&P has no business rating anything since it > > > is a private company or that the USA can carry any debt it pleases > > > since it is the SuperPower above and beyond ordinary rules and > > > policies. > > > > On Aug 5, 6:43 pm, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I recall an earlier post in which rigsy suggested an enduring adaptive > > > > value to the emotion of Fear; i was thinking about this today in the > > > > context of the global market gymnastics this week, akin to a neurotic > > > > on steroids; nothing fundamental or new in global economic terms has > > > > changed this week, no new notable insights of structurally significant > > > > proportions; in short, nothing new. Yet, we're 10%+ and 3 trillion > > > > dollars worse of on Friday than we were this time last week. Was this > > > > not essentially what we developed Foresight to counterbalance, i > > > > wonder?- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -
