Comments on: It’s not the economy, stupid! Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 By: Jstroobandt Tue, 09 Oct 2012 22:33:21 +0000 I have a major concern regarding the “American Financial State of Affairs”. In my opinion, the national economy and federal budget have reached the point of no return.

The Democrats take a position that mandatory entitlement programs are sacred and the Republicans take the position that there will be no increase in taxes. In my opinion they are both wrong if they want to solve the problem.

Information is from the CBO.


Security and Non-Security $1,289
Mandatory Programs $2,053
Net Interest $220

Total Expenditures $3,562


Individual Income Taxes $1,123
Corporate Income Taxes $235
Payroll Taxes $851
Other Income $225

Total Income $2,435

Deficit/Shortfall $1,192

Congressional Leadership and the Media need to explain to the American Citizens the above fiscal problem and politicians need to understand that kicking the can down the street will not put our fiscal house in order.

I believe the reason politicians do not explain this problem to American Citizens, is because if they did, they wouldn’t get elected.

To solve our fiscal problem, every American citizen needs to share in the pain, that includes the 47% and the 53%, and 99% and the 1%. This will take politicians that have the heart and skills to convince voters to support a plan that gets our house in order. It has taken us a long time to develop this problem; it will take a long time to solve it.

Jack Stroobandt

By: Crash866 Fri, 05 Oct 2012 18:28:23 +0000 No hunny it is

By: OneOfTheSheep Thu, 04 Oct 2012 23:39:40 +0000 @Gordon2352,

When the fundamentals of Capitalism harness the self interest in each American to the “national plow” the inevitable result is high productivity. High productivity makes a high AVERAGE standard of living economically possible. Capitalism is the only “economic system” that does not merely change the hand wielding the knife dividing a fixed economic pie.

Capitalism grows a bigger pie such that each with a “seat at the table” gets more. It’s promise: “If you work harder, longer, smarter than your peers and thus produce more, you can keep enough of the “extra” for yourself and yours to make your extra effort worthwhile.” One isn’t, in my opinion, entitled to a “seat at the table” just by being born. Like a good reputation, each seat must be earned again and again every day.

BOTH major American parties today have ideological “platform baggage” that has reduced voters’ “choice” to one of “bad” and “worse”. Speeches notwithstanding, I don’t believe either party seriously intends to reduce the size or grasp of a federal government whose various components judge “success” by their budget and number of bureaucrats on the payroll. Our elections process is but a series of illusions…mass entertainment without substance or predictable effect.

Few would disagree that the “road to fiscal reality and economic sustainability will require reducing the size and expense of government. It is no secret that current “entitlement obligations” need to be reduced and our tax code revised. But “the Devil is in the details” of whose “ox is being gored” in that process. Each party fights for the “special interests” of respective constituencies. Some are “strange bedfellows”, with the glue binding them little more than “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

When politicians duped the American public into paying them, a whole new privileged class of opportunists arose not unlike the priests between man and God(s) whose extended palm is always up. When a majority of elected officials at the federal, state and local level come from the legal field, is it any wonder that the interests of the politicians and the lawyers and the judges take precedence over those of “we, the people” who pay all the bills? If we judge by their actions and not by their words, the great majority of elected representatives of “we, the people” most certainly no NOT represent those whose taxes pay for posh offices, posh salaries, and staff.

So while “we, the people” are today duped into the game of “Don’t tax you, don’t tax me, tax that fellow under that tree”, there is no beginning and no end. What is needed, instead, is national dialog, debate and eventual consensus as to what kind of country we need. Notice I said “need”, not “want”.

America is a rich and prosperous country that can well afford it’s needs, but no country in the history of the world has been rich enough to give it’s people everything it’s people want (or think they “deserve”. We must, once and for all, replace the prevailing political and governmental mind set that “if we spend it they will pay” with acceptance that even America and Americans must adopt and live within their means.

Any society is shaped by that which is penalized or rewarded by the adopted tax system, and said tax system must generate sufficient revenue to pay society’s bills. America has not done this for a very long time, and THAT is “what has “brought us to this point”.

When we can not or do not define America’s needs, and prioritize AVAILABLE funds so as to properly meet said needs, there is NO LIMIT to the size of our government and NO LIMIT to the financial resources it will seek to control.

By: Freedom4A Thu, 04 Oct 2012 23:23:07 +0000 I know where Obama wants to head us to. Whether he can achieve it is depending on his management skills. On the other hand, I dont know exactly where Romney will lead us to. One day he wants to cut tax, another day he wants to raise tax. While the economy is still shaky, he wants to increase defense budget on the expense of cut on other programs serving American in need of help. One day he wants to wrap up Obamacare, another day he wants to keep it with some changes. The pattern keeps repeating on various issues that I think he is torn by conflicting advises. If he has a clear vision of where he wants to lead the country too, as Obama does, he would not behave as he did. Do you know where Mitt stands? I dont.

Probably Karl Rove’s advice of “being as vague as you can” is at its best — Another scam is at work.

By: Gordon2352 Thu, 04 Oct 2012 19:16:20 +0000 @ OneOfTheSheep —

Actually, in reading you comment on the state of the US economy over again, I have to admit it shows quite a perceptive grasp of what is wrong in terms of the symptoms you describe.

Care to take a stab at delving beneath the surface and being more explicit as to the underlying issues that brought us to this point?

I would be interested in hearing what you think we should do about it.

By: Gordon2352 Thu, 04 Oct 2012 19:06:25 +0000 @ OneOfTheSheep —

Well, I’m flabbergasted!

Your comments on the state of the US economy are (mostly) correct, which is quite a welcome change.

Now, if we could just get you and the other 99% to realize what must be done about it, we might be able to survive.

Otherwise, “It will (indeed) be a wild ride!”

I’m not holding my breath.

By: Caspary Thu, 04 Oct 2012 16:39:59 +0000 Paul Ryan is disadvantage for Romney because Paul Ryan cannot be trusted with “facts” and data. He lied about his marathon personal best time- a clear indicator that the man is deceptive. Romney is not any better with the truth as we saw last night during the debates.

By: bcrawf Thu, 04 Oct 2012 16:34:46 +0000 OneOfTheSheep thinks the Tea Party opposes “all the special interests whose “pork” will be at risk”, when, in fact, the Tea Party merely strengthens the manipulative hand of those big-money interests. By contributing to gridlock, the TP has followed the publicly declared marching orders of the Republicans to block anything that could look like a success for the administration. They are simple wreckers and have not put forward any constructive ideas.

By: OneOfTheSheep Wed, 03 Oct 2012 21:54:02 +0000 @flashrooster,

I remember that pro is the opposite of con, as in progress and Congress. We look at the same world through different perspectives. Congress is the machine. The Executive Branch is supposed to leadership and provide “big ideas” for the machine to chew on.

While I don’t agree with the entire “agenda” of the Tea Party freshmen, I must give these courageous and audacious people a lot of credit. When they saw no solutions for America’s “economic unsustainability on it’s current path” coming from the Executive Branch of government, they did what few have done before. They put on the brakes. That took guts, but benefitted all Americans.

Their refreshing collective solidarity has consistently, persistently and tenaciously to their last breath resisted any and all further growth in our federal government or it’s debt limit at a time when such “growth” had become accepted as unavoidable and “routine”. It’s just common sense to stop the train before trying to fix a major problem, isn’t it? But all the special interests whose “pork” will be at risk will vilify those who stopped a party long out of control that no one could pay for in the end.

I admit their actions have been crude, like the sledgehammer. Such action is extreme, appropriate only in emergency. Let us hope they possess the wisdom to know that, now that they have everyone’s attention.

By: flashrooster Wed, 03 Oct 2012 19:35:12 +0000 Bill Schneider: I couldn’t help but notice that nowhere in your entire op-ed do you mention Congress. Remember Congress? Remember that we have three branches of government? Remember Congress’s role with the federal purse strings?

America’s economic freefall had been stopped. It’s turned around, but it’s still struggling. No detailing of the reasons for the slow recovery is complete, or even accurate, without mentioning the Republican’s unprecedented determination to thwart every attempt by this President to accomplish anything that might benefit this country and, therefore, be construed as a victory for President Obama. You fail to even allude to this essential fact in understanding today’s burdened recovery. You’re too much a seasoned professional to conclude anything but partisan bias, guilt by omission. Or maybe just another example of today’s journalism’s ubiquitous false balance, though I don’t see much balance of any kind in this piece.