So are you saying the debt is a cause of the entitlements, or are they just being mis-managed?
Human Action, I mean social-democracy.
Polecat: I have no interest in getting into a debate with you in this thread about how debates are supposed to happen around here. If you are that interested, start another thread, and I’ll gladly participate. I’ll just point out that we are on page 5 of this thread, and you plucked a quote from me from page 1, before the OP had offered any evidence to back up his thesis. If you don’t think an OP has an obligation to offer supporting evidence before any of the rest of us are supposed to “disprove” it, then we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
The debt is a result of the government spending more money than it collects.
Sorry, John, that’s a cop out. I’ll risk incurring the wrath of the mods and say that you’re trying to weasel out of providing definite support for your views of the matter. (And if I’ve transgressed, I’ll take whatever’s coming to me like a big boy.)
I find Walmart kind of a mixed bag-they do have lower prices on lots of things, but many food items carry higher pricetags. The clothes they sell are mostly low end, but are good value for the money (I cannot see much difference between their “Faded Glory” jeans ($9.00) and Levis at $60.00.) Frankly, Sam Walton did nothing unique-his stores are a direct copy of F.W. Woolworths of 100 years ago. Does he have enormous buying power? yes-and his aggressive pricing has forced his suppliers to be super efficient. One could only wish that government could be as efficient as Walmart-we currently have the entire F-35 fighter fleet grounded-the planes are costly beyond belief, don’t work, and are almost impossible to fix.
:dubious: American (and not American alone) history is full to bursting with instances of demeaning paychecks-or-their-equivalents earned through honest labor. St. Peter, don’t you call me, 'cos I can’t go . . .
Please elaborate, with examples.
The nice thing about the free market is that people get to vote with their dollar for which services they really want. When you try to have government provide all the services, people tend to want all of them but don’t or can’t pay the taxes needed to cover the expense. That’s why half the Western world is in debt.
And governments spend more money than they collect because the voters punish any politician who tries to raise taxes or cut entitlements.
With this generation, I feel it’s any job short of a Director of Social Media making $90k a year.
You’re only addressing half of the balance sheet, and I’m not convinced this is even true. It is certainly true sometimes.
No he’s not - you dropped the word “entitlements”. (Granted, we could have a nitpicky argument over whether that actually encompasses all the myriad benefits governments showers on people, but let’s avoid having a semantic shouting match.) That pretty much covers it - income and outgo.
And while that’s certainly a simplification, it’s also a pretty accurate one insofar as it goes. Military spending hasn’t been exactly booming; it’s all civilian services, and not even the supposed “infrastructure investments”, that make up the vast bulk of the budget. You may believe these are utterly indespensable, but that does not make them any more affordable.
And one could certainly look straight at California, where a legacy of corrupt unions, deceitful politicians, and willfully ignorant populace are all happily lying to themselves and each other about the budget.
I have no idea what your first paragraph means. What are you talking about when you say I dropped the word entitlements? Are you confusing me with someone else?
If we spend more than we collect, you still have to address both sides of that issue. If you want to argue that we’re collecting too little, that’s okay. Some people would argue we’re also spending too much.
That would constitute the sort of proof that you need to convict in a court of law. This is a message board. Establishing any of these things rigorously probably requires some heavy research. I’d say, there’s enough evidence to make the assertion that it is very possible this is happening. I would also say that our conservative and libertarian friends will NEVER see it occurring. Reasonable people will act on reasonable indicators that this is going on, recognizing that most of life is guessing with incomplete facts. I’d say non-ideologues will accept the likelihood that WalMart and other corporations are squeezing the economic life out of their customer bases. Even the corporations will accept it before the ideologues do … the problem is, the people who own corporations are increasingly ideologues, like the Koch brothers. They will ignore the evidence of their spreadsheets waaaay past the point of no returns.
It is much more likely to lead to massive unemployment, riots, hunger and so forth.