‘Spending cuts won’t solve problems, will only damage US economy’

Posted by & filed under .

On Capitol Hill, there’s still no deal in sight to avert the 85-billion-dollars’ worth of cuts which will kick in later on Friday. It’s known in Washington a…
Video Rating: 4 / 5

Buy It On Amazon.com – Discount Prices – CLICK HERE

Get The Lowest Price On Amazon

If a natural disaster or economic collapse occurs:

* The 1st food item that will fly off the shelf
* Where to get the top 3 items even if you’re barely making ends meet
* How to lockdown your supplies when the starving mob hits

Don’t risk your family going hungry when crisis hits: Click Here

http://tinyurl.com/prepare-now37


25 Responses to “‘Spending cuts won’t solve problems, will only damage US economy’”

  1. Skibum Willy

    In “Inheriting an Abundant Earth” a simple rule tweak on inheritance ends up changing the direction and purpose of modern human life! It’s something specific we can demand. Are we really just this close to having it work right? Oh yeah, it’s a Ski movie! Watch? “Inheriting an Abundant Earth” on Youtube (“Occupying Chairlifts” 5.0) then sign the petition, and share it!!

  2. SVGuss

    Like Detroit? 🙂 Bailed out were the core financial institutions that make the current system work. I DO think that the collapse of the financial system (when no loans available and noone trusts anyone cause knows everyone like himself is up to the neck in toxic assets) would put the economy to a standstill. You really think Paulson had no reasons to act the way he acted? Really have to run, maybe respond a couple later as I settle in a new place. Was nice talking to? you.

  3. Ken Pruitt

    “Allow the fall of the Wall Street and major European? banks? Do you realize that it would bring the whole modern world economy into the Stone Age?”

    If you believe that, then I have a bridge in Europe to sell you. No, the good assets of those banks would’ve been bought on the market, the bad assets would’ve been liquidated, and life would continue on. You’re speaking as if we didn’t bail out these people, we’d be eating each other in the streets….

  4. SVGuss

    Allow the fall of the Wall Street and major European banks? Do you realize that it would bring the whole? modern world economy into the Stone Age? The irony is that you HAD to bail them out. Your “pure capitalism” theory works only in the jungle. No politician can afford it (and it’s good).

  5. Ken Pruitt

    “Show how crappy it is?”

    I was going out of my way to set you up to use a little bit of reasoning, but I was clearly wasting my time. You don’t have bailouts in a system of Profit and Loss. The very function of bailouts is to eliminate losses to a specific group of people. Had the banks not gotten bailed out, they would’ve? eaten the loss and they would’ve gone bankrupt, which, contrary to the Keynesian morons who say otherwise, would’ve saved the taxpayers trillions in the long run.

  6. SVGuss

    on? a plane 🙂 no native speaker, sorry

  7. SVGuss

    Show how crappy it is? Sir, you remind me communists in my country 25 years ago, who, when told “look, your comm. experiment failed” responded “BS! The idea was great, the implementation terrible” 🙂 I believe that when tens of thousands of people loose their retirement money? and whole towns go broke – there’s something wrong about it. Thinking differently is plain inhuman. Have to get on a plain abroad in a few hours so I cannot continue the conversation, but I’m sure we’ll agree to differ 🙂

  8. Ken Pruitt

    Remember what I said earlier about Capitalism being a system of Profit and Loss, loss being more important because they make companies like Enron and the Wall-street banks who sold us the sub-prime crap fail? Well, what do? you think bailouts do to this system of Profit and Loss?

  9. SVGuss

    Great. But the unconceivable losses for the Wall Street were never actually losses of the ones responsible. A legal entity? reformatted… big deal! Those losses had to be digested by the whole society during tremendous “bail-outs”. If such a system, that puts itself on the brink and needs cardiostimulation by everyone cause otherwise it is too scary to think what happens, if you call it a good system… I do not know what to say. Congratulate Frederick A. Goodwin with his pension maybe.

  10. Ken Pruitt

    You’ve created a complete strawman. Capitalism isn’t about just profit, it’s about profit and LOSS, LOSS being more important because LOSS is what makes companies like Enron? and the Wall-Street banks who sold us that sub-prime crap go under. If you eliminate LOSS from the equation, what is left?

  11. SVGuss

    You maybe can separate the sheep from the goats, but it’s much harder to separate the wolves from the wolves. Any “flat-out fraud” is always respectful and a great example of advantages of capitalism… until it’s too late? and the government has to step in (which is full if shite itself,of course) – Enron is a classic example. If the main purpose is profit profit profit, then any means are good. And the Wall Street banks with their phoney subprime stuff… weren’t they a “flat-out fraud”?

  12. Ken Pruitt

    Enron is a strawman,? because what Enron did was flat-out fraud, and let me point out to you that Enron was a financial power-house for years. No one thought Enron could fail. We see now that’s not true. But yes, company takeovers are good for the economy because the only companies that get taken over in Gordon Gecko fashion are those companies that are already dying off.

  13. SVGuss

    “What you call hostile takeovers of? companies does immeasurable good to the economy” – Enron? RBS? You-name-it? Good to the economy, right.

  14. Colin W

    I do not have your education in economics but, $1.5 trillion savings every 10 years x $16.67 trillion US debt =111.1 years to? pay off,and that is not considering interest and it presumes no more borrowing — I suspect you are in the crapper!–Good luck

  15. PositiveMindNews

    Iran vs Israel / What The Media Wants? You To Forget
    LOVE & PEACE TO ALL OF YOU!

  16. bodryn

    I guess you can say anything you want, believe anything you want. But sometimes those beliefs are best kept secret just so somebody doesn’t say you’re so bonkers you need to be put away for your own? protection.

  17. sniper6081

    I think you have the wrong person sir.? All I did was comment on how these “cuts” aren’t actually cuts.

  18. katherineandjack13

    Without economic freedom for the poor and the middleclass there will be no freedom and above all selfworth, which is attained through unhindered economic freedom which in turn promotes real achievement as opposed to the self esteem agenda which grants out of thin air just like money creation it is not REAL, and no real value system will exist, as it is today it will remain tomorrow a global society living in severe moral hazard that continues to decay the human spirit.?

  19. Astr0nymous

    So you don’t think it might be a good idea to? have a couple less tanks?

  20. tritun1999

    from 1/3/2009 to 1/3/2011, both the Senate and the House were controlled by? the Democratic party!

  21. Ken Pruitt

    Cont.

    Also, the threat of a hostile takeover forces companies to make sure that they’re being productive, i.e.,? they’re effectively satisfying the needs of the consumer while making a profit. By taking this threat away, you take away one of the forces that makes sure that companies are being productive and not wasting resources, all because you think it’s wrong that people like Gordon Gecko can make so much money.

    Your position, I say again, is nonsense on stilts.

  22. Ken Pruitt

    “anybody with a lot of? money who wants a legal way to avoid paying things like social security, retirement benefits, health benefits, etc. to their former employees.”

    Wrong. Entrepreneurs buy those assets, and they use them to build businesses (or add to existing businesses), which effectively creates jobs. What you call hostile takeovers of companies does immeasurable good to the economy, because strong healthy companies are NEVER taken over in this fashion, the weak struggling companies are.

  23. TheEpoxyExpert

    Barry Soetoro (aka Loser obama) How many? economic classes did you take in college? I took 7 Keynesian Economics” is the insane belief that the economy can be stimulated by government spending. It has failed in every society

  24. bodryn

    Barry? who?

  25. TheEpoxyExpert

    bridge. but Barry is still a loser?