Federal Government Shutdown

[Aractus]

I enjoyed reading your post DP.

No one is suggesting the debt isn't a problem that needs to be addressed ...except the Republicans when they're in power. There's a pattern we've seen in this country in the last 30 years and it's something we need to keep in mind as the GOP feigns such grave concerns for our grandchildren.

• Republican in the White House: "Deficits don't matter! Spend money on all the things conservatives love! Wars! Defense spending! Corporate giveaways! War on Drugs! Cut taxes for the rich! Wheeeee!"
  
• Democrat in the White House: "OMG! OMG! Where did all this debt come from? Quick! Slash and burn all the liberal programs now!"
  

Think I'm exaggerating? Look at the recent history:

Reagan tripled the debt and HW Bush was equally unable to balance his budget. When Clinton came into power, he was forced to deal with the problem. He had to give up all the things he campaigned on and instead focused on cutting spending and bringing down the debt. As a result, he created a surplus.

I agree that Clinton is the only US president - in my lifetime - that has tried to do something about it.

W Bush ran against that surplus with the campaign platform "it's not their money, it's your money". Once in office, he made good on his promise and slashed taxes for the rich. He also ran two wars off the books, gave away sweet no-bid contracts to his corporate friends and passed a budget-busting corporate giveaway in Medicare Part D. His grand finale was giving away 700 billion in bailouts to banks, needed as a result of the economy he crashed.

So my summary is correct, that the parties and the president appease the wishes of the rich, being that the rich turn up and vote on election day.

What you need is electoral reform: 1. make it manditory to be on the electoral roll, 2. make it an offense to have your enrolment on the electoral roll incorrect/out-of-date (this may already be the case), 3. make voting manditory, and set a fine in the ammount of $50-100 for not voting, without a good reason (certain people will be exempt, eg the mentally disabled, the dyslexic, the aged, etc). Unless everyone turns up to vote, you don't really have a democracy.

Can you imagine if courts worked the way that voting in america works at present? Jurors have to reach a unanimous decision in criminal matters, this is the model that we're all used to, imagine if voting in the juror's room was optional and you could be convicted because 4 of the 12 jurors wanted to vote and the others decided they didn't want to vote? No one would accept such a system, and yet, this is essentially what the US electoral system is like!

Currently, the US spends more than the next four nations combined and doubled. We could cut the Pentagon's budget in half and still be ahead of the next four nations, two of which (UK and France) are our allies. The Soviet Union is long gone but we're still running in the arms race all by ourselves. The Military-Industrial complex isn't about to let its gravy train go and no politician wants to "look weak".

Well, yes, the USA has a history of using its military force against nations who would have no vested interest in engaging them with military force. The main dangers that the USA faces though is not military action however, but fiscal. Now China has a co-dependant relationship with the USA, if they up and liquidated their usd 1.3 trillion bonds, it would certainly spell a severe depression for the USA, but it would also mean a depression just as horrible for China. If Japan liquidated their usd 1.1 trillion bonds, then both China and the USA would face a sevre depression as a result. Japan would too, and Australia would also be affected by a huge recession that may well become a depression too.

That doesn't mean that China can't take fiscal action, however. They could liquidate a more limited number of bonds, and force the USA into recession, without facing the same economic backlash, and it could work to strengthen the Euro or whatever currency China chooses to invest into.

Last but not least, there's the tax cuts for the rich which were supposed to stimulate the economy and trickle down to the rest of us. In reality, the money trickled off into offshore bank accounts. We've tried Reagonomics for 30 years now. It's time to admit it doesn't work and the rich need to pay their fair share of the sacrifice needed to get our budget under control.

Correct.