Bin Ladin beats me to the punch: George Bush bankrupting America?
I had planned on making one final appeal to voters leaning towards voting for Bush based on the financial implications it would have towards our country. I was going to ask you if you would re-elect Jimmy Carter. In the 1970's the US had out of control inflation with a stagnant economy. Gas prices were out of control. Critics argued that he had the country in very difficult financial waters.
Today George Bush has our military overextended and we are pumping money into an extended effort to enforce democracy on people who aren't all that keen on being what we want them to be. He delayed turning the Iraqi government over to the Iraqi people because he wanted to privatize the Iraqi oil fields first. In delaying, Iraq's military and police disbanded as they weren't being paid creating voids we have had to fill. This decision CREATED the hideously expensive quagmire we find ourselves in today. (Don't take my word for it---take the words of General Garner, the general initally in charge in Iraq.) They have cut taxes to a point where our debt is growing. He saw a projected budget surplus and used it to buy votes (Come on, a "rebate" check?). Now because that money wasn't used for Social securtity, Social Security is about to jump on the American worker's back like a 300 lb. gorilla. Gas prices are out of control. Critics today argue that Bush has the country in very difficult financial waters.
I was prepared to draw the obvious compairisons between the Bush and Carter regimes and ask would you have given Carter a second term, but then Osama Bin Ladin brings the issue to the forefront pretty clearly. And makes my parallel a less interesting take.
That Fucker.
Anyway, consider this excerpt from the coverage, "In reality, spending in the war against terror and other factors have resulted in an expected $377 billion shortfall for 2003 - the highest deficit since World War II accounting for inflation. The total U.S. national debt is near the $7.4 trillion statutory limit. "
OK, let that sink in.
We are nowhere near leaving Iraq. At the end of the year we will have spent 200 billion dollars on Iraq. How many more years of this are we looking at? The BBC reports that the Bush government sees Iraq as our PERMANENT outpost in the middle East. Make no doubt about it, we will have heavy presence there for the next 4 years if they stay in office.
(This analysis doesn't even deal with the people costs. There are too few soldiers in Iraq. This makes them constantly vulnerable to attack. They know it isn't an optimal situation. They tell their loved ones and the media. American kids are not rushing out to join up and fight this stupid war. General Wesley Clark said that on our current course we will probably have to institute a draft just to MAINTAIN our presence in Iraq, let alone fight other conflicts that arise.)
Now add in the fact that Iran, which was actually somewhat sympathetic and (comparitively) friendly towards the US after September 11th, (That would be before George Bush called them part of "The Axis of Evil".) is on the verge of developing nuclear weapons and has the missles to deliver those weapons against Isreal AND --- at least based on their statements --- appears willing to use them.
Is there any way we stay out of that war with the tactless Bush Administration in office? Hell no.
How much more is that going to cost financially?
The average American doesn't realize that we only a couple of years away from a major financial crush already! Over the next 30 years, the number of Americans over 65 years will more than double as the baby boom generation retires. Our population has not grown to match that. In very simple terms, about 3 workers used to pay for 1 retiree's social security. Now 2 workers will have to do it. If the money that was used for the rebate check was instead applied to Social Security, the interest off that money would cover a LOT of that increased burden. The costs could be spread out over years and would not be nearly as significant. By the Bush administration giving away the "projected" budgetary surplus a few years ago in the form of a government rebate check rather than responsibly applying it to Social Security, Social Security is approaching insolvency---meaning for retirees to get paid, we have to match that money from our paychecks.
"At the beginning of the twentieth century, the average American lifespan was 46 years; now it is 77 years. A 1928 government study forecast that the 'natural' lifespan would ultimately rise to the unbelievable level of 65 years. When Social Security was enacted, this estimate was used as the basis for setting the federal retirement age at 65. Lawmakers assumed Social Security would be economical because most people would die without ever receiving a benefit check. Instead, today Americans average an extra decade of life beyond what experts thought would be the biological maximum."
Suggestions have been made that perhaps the dollar value of social security checks should be cut in half to not overburden the economy.
Senior citizens are a huge voting block and vote religiously. They WILL get their money. So that too will be lumped on the backs of the American economy.
You can take the approach that the Bush Administration took in the first term and continue to cut taxes, but eventually you reach a point where the interest on the National Debt takes on a life of its own. (If any of you have ever had out of control crdit card debt, you know what I am talking about.) Eventually it becomes very difficult for the government to get the loans to make the neccessary corrections that are needed fom time to time to spur on the economy or defend our borders. Take a look at Germany after World War I to look at how a country with issues getting reasonable loans will struggle.
The Bush Administration may not realize it, but they are fucking with the integrity of America as a superpower long term and possibly as a viable institution (Interest takes on a life of its own...Although admittedly that is just me looking at the worst case scenario as a businessman, I am not an governmental economist).
Do not think that America cannot fall into deep financial difficulties because we are the world's superpower. The world has changed. Russia has fallen into the background. The European Community is thriving. Will they replace America as the world's superpower? Will they dictate the world's policies?
When Bin Ladin compairs the US to Russia, he is right to do so. A country can only overextend itself to a point before major unpleasant corrections have to be made.
...
Quite simply, we cannot afford to occupy a hostile country the size of Iraq while "fighting the global war on terror"...by ourselves. While I agree that keeping a couple of bases in Iraq near the Iranian border is wise, our day to day enforcement of democracy in Iraq is too freaking expensive and severely limits our ability to defend ourselves.
"Bin Laden boasted in his first appearance in more than a year that for every $1 al-Qaida has spent on terrorist strikes, it has cost the United States $1 million in economic fallout and military spending, including emergency funding for Iraq and Afghanistan."
This kind of spending is what the future amounts to under Bush. What you see is what you get. Where he is taking the country is very predictable if you look at what he has done in the last 4 years.
Don't be a pawn of extremists in the religous right. Republicans in this election are not the conservatives. Don't be a Republican Tool.
Today George Bush has our military overextended and we are pumping money into an extended effort to enforce democracy on people who aren't all that keen on being what we want them to be. He delayed turning the Iraqi government over to the Iraqi people because he wanted to privatize the Iraqi oil fields first. In delaying, Iraq's military and police disbanded as they weren't being paid creating voids we have had to fill. This decision CREATED the hideously expensive quagmire we find ourselves in today. (Don't take my word for it---take the words of General Garner, the general initally in charge in Iraq.) They have cut taxes to a point where our debt is growing. He saw a projected budget surplus and used it to buy votes (Come on, a "rebate" check?). Now because that money wasn't used for Social securtity, Social Security is about to jump on the American worker's back like a 300 lb. gorilla. Gas prices are out of control. Critics today argue that Bush has the country in very difficult financial waters.
I was prepared to draw the obvious compairisons between the Bush and Carter regimes and ask would you have given Carter a second term, but then Osama Bin Ladin brings the issue to the forefront pretty clearly. And makes my parallel a less interesting take.
That Fucker.
Anyway, consider this excerpt from the coverage, "In reality, spending in the war against terror and other factors have resulted in an expected $377 billion shortfall for 2003 - the highest deficit since World War II accounting for inflation. The total U.S. national debt is near the $7.4 trillion statutory limit. "
OK, let that sink in.
We are nowhere near leaving Iraq. At the end of the year we will have spent 200 billion dollars on Iraq. How many more years of this are we looking at? The BBC reports that the Bush government sees Iraq as our PERMANENT outpost in the middle East. Make no doubt about it, we will have heavy presence there for the next 4 years if they stay in office.
(This analysis doesn't even deal with the people costs. There are too few soldiers in Iraq. This makes them constantly vulnerable to attack. They know it isn't an optimal situation. They tell their loved ones and the media. American kids are not rushing out to join up and fight this stupid war. General Wesley Clark said that on our current course we will probably have to institute a draft just to MAINTAIN our presence in Iraq, let alone fight other conflicts that arise.)
Now add in the fact that Iran, which was actually somewhat sympathetic and (comparitively) friendly towards the US after September 11th, (That would be before George Bush called them part of "The Axis of Evil".) is on the verge of developing nuclear weapons and has the missles to deliver those weapons against Isreal AND --- at least based on their statements --- appears willing to use them.
Is there any way we stay out of that war with the tactless Bush Administration in office? Hell no.
How much more is that going to cost financially?
The average American doesn't realize that we only a couple of years away from a major financial crush already! Over the next 30 years, the number of Americans over 65 years will more than double as the baby boom generation retires. Our population has not grown to match that. In very simple terms, about 3 workers used to pay for 1 retiree's social security. Now 2 workers will have to do it. If the money that was used for the rebate check was instead applied to Social Security, the interest off that money would cover a LOT of that increased burden. The costs could be spread out over years and would not be nearly as significant. By the Bush administration giving away the "projected" budgetary surplus a few years ago in the form of a government rebate check rather than responsibly applying it to Social Security, Social Security is approaching insolvency---meaning for retirees to get paid, we have to match that money from our paychecks.
"At the beginning of the twentieth century, the average American lifespan was 46 years; now it is 77 years. A 1928 government study forecast that the 'natural' lifespan would ultimately rise to the unbelievable level of 65 years. When Social Security was enacted, this estimate was used as the basis for setting the federal retirement age at 65. Lawmakers assumed Social Security would be economical because most people would die without ever receiving a benefit check. Instead, today Americans average an extra decade of life beyond what experts thought would be the biological maximum."
Suggestions have been made that perhaps the dollar value of social security checks should be cut in half to not overburden the economy.
Senior citizens are a huge voting block and vote religiously. They WILL get their money. So that too will be lumped on the backs of the American economy.
You can take the approach that the Bush Administration took in the first term and continue to cut taxes, but eventually you reach a point where the interest on the National Debt takes on a life of its own. (If any of you have ever had out of control crdit card debt, you know what I am talking about.) Eventually it becomes very difficult for the government to get the loans to make the neccessary corrections that are needed fom time to time to spur on the economy or defend our borders. Take a look at Germany after World War I to look at how a country with issues getting reasonable loans will struggle.
The Bush Administration may not realize it, but they are fucking with the integrity of America as a superpower long term and possibly as a viable institution (Interest takes on a life of its own...Although admittedly that is just me looking at the worst case scenario as a businessman, I am not an governmental economist).
Do not think that America cannot fall into deep financial difficulties because we are the world's superpower. The world has changed. Russia has fallen into the background. The European Community is thriving. Will they replace America as the world's superpower? Will they dictate the world's policies?
When Bin Ladin compairs the US to Russia, he is right to do so. A country can only overextend itself to a point before major unpleasant corrections have to be made.
...
Quite simply, we cannot afford to occupy a hostile country the size of Iraq while "fighting the global war on terror"...by ourselves. While I agree that keeping a couple of bases in Iraq near the Iranian border is wise, our day to day enforcement of democracy in Iraq is too freaking expensive and severely limits our ability to defend ourselves.
"Bin Laden boasted in his first appearance in more than a year that for every $1 al-Qaida has spent on terrorist strikes, it has cost the United States $1 million in economic fallout and military spending, including emergency funding for Iraq and Afghanistan."
This kind of spending is what the future amounts to under Bush. What you see is what you get. Where he is taking the country is very predictable if you look at what he has done in the last 4 years.
Don't be a pawn of extremists in the religous right. Republicans in this election are not the conservatives. Don't be a Republican Tool.
posted by The Tobidian at 9:39 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home