Our House

Discussion in 'Politics' started by OhWiseOne, Aug 4, 2011.

  1. OhWiseOne

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    4,493
    Albums:
    10
    Likes Received:
    133
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida
    Verified:
    Photo
    Shouldn't the government run under the same rules as a family?

    Children - " Gosh why can't we buy that computer and go on vacation"...because the budget doesn't allow for it..."Oh just put it on credit"....well we can't afford another bill and our income is dropping.

    Just a basic example that we might want to follow.

    This is not intended to be a Rep. or Dem. stance just common sense that we as a country need to wake up to.
     
    #1 OhWiseOne, Aug 4, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2011
  2. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,897
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    600
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    Ah but you have two sets of equally balanced politicians with diametrically opposed positions, and a framework for government designed to create conflict, disagreement and inaction. This is really a test of the concept behind the american constitution.
     
  3. Mensch1351

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,205
    Likes Received:
    24
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    In the only other State that begins with "K"!
    But your illustration lacks teeth. We're not talking about "convenience" un-necessary luxury spending for the US Economy. Here's more what you have to think of. "But daddy --- you said we aren't allowed to spend anymore because we're already in debt!" "I know dear --- but the car doesn't work and daddy has to spend this money in order to be able to MAKE money!" If you really want to illustrate the "credit card" mentality ---- you only have to look at our immediate past. The Republicans accused the Democrats of being "Tax and spend" --- The Republicans gave the largest tax "cut" to the wealthy -- and then spent, spent, spent, spent, spent, spent, spent (2 wars and lots of pork-barrel projects) -- raised the debt ceiling to 9 Trillion AND put it ALL on credit!!

    And then..........they "railed" against our having to spend TARP money to bail out our own industries in the Wall Street Fiasco -- and now tie the hands of government with threats because the $14 trillion we owe is money we've already spent!

    I'd like to see the Republicans take a firm stance against us spending ONE DIME over budget if a major hurricane hits Florida in the next few months (or South Carolina, Georgia, North Carolina --etc.! How about the drought in Texas??) You see -- I can conveniently be against spending until MY needs are immediate!

    So you can add to the car illustration, "Well son, mommy really NEEDS to have this surgery or she may die -- so I guess we'll just HAVE to spend a little more!!"
     
  4. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    One word. No.
    Two more. But, whatever... :rolleyes:
     
  5. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,388
    Likes Received:
    2,127
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    I'm not sure what family follows those 'rules'. I suppose if we did follow that 'rule' most families would be living in apartments and taking public transportation. Who could afford a house or a car? There would be no housing industry and no automobile industry. And the economy would be a fraction of what it is now.

    Further we might be all living under the Third Reich as the government borrowed heavily to pay for that war.
     
  6. SilverTrain

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    4,582
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    404
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    Post belies username.
     
  7. SprinkleMe69

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    7,882
    Likes Received:
    171
    Verified:
    Photo
    I get what the OP is stating. No money in the budget = no spending.
     
  8. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Even while in debt, there are necessary expenditures our country needs to engage in to make sure it operates properly. The way some people approach economic issues these days, it's as if they would be willing to shut off the water, heat and electricity in their own home just to maintain the roof over their head.
     
  9. SprinkleMe69

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2010
    Messages:
    7,882
    Likes Received:
    171
    Verified:
    Photo
    It's called a real budget.
     
  10. B_enzia35

    B_enzia35 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    878
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Texas
    What about the close to 50% that we spend on welfare?
     
  11. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,388
    Likes Received:
    2,127
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    Please direct me to where you can prove 50%. I'm from Missouri ('The Show Me State').
     
  12. B_enzia35

    B_enzia35 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    878
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Texas
    Nah, we could have our own homes and own cars. Just don't need a $500k house with $50k cars when you're only earning $70k a year.
     
  13. B_enzia35

    B_enzia35 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    878
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Texas
  14. OhWiseOne

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    4,493
    Albums:
    10
    Likes Received:
    133
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida
    Verified:
    Photo
    I believe it's called living within your means. So, if I am in debt the answer is to spend more? Gosh for some reason I don't think that works.

    Again this is not a party based thread. It's a simple discussion regarding how we, the U.S. government, spends money.
     
  15. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    That's too simplistic of an explanation for what is a rather complex issue. If you were in debt right now and owned a home (or rented an apartment), would you forego paying the utility bills just to live within your means? Of course not.

    But before the U.S. Government can spend money, it needs to generate revenue and it can't do so if people in Congress continue to propose that we always cut taxes and make massive cuts to necessary entitlement programs such as Medicare, Medicaid & Social Security. Literally all money paid out as entitlements is spent by those who receive it and that raises demand as well as stimulates the economy.

    In some areas (such as New York), a studio will run you $500K by itself, never mind an actual home. However with the proper credit, appropriate housing loans and careful budgeting, someone who makes $70K a year could swing that. Problem is, many people who would fit in this category found themselves jobless out of no real fault of their own (aka The Recession & the popping of the Real Estate Bubble). Others are having a terribly hard time getting the necessary loans because banks are simply not lending like they should. I know this firsthand because my life partner and I just bought a home in Massachusetts. We're also selling a condo in New York that will generate far more than what we're now paying for the new domicile. Even with credit ratings in the top percentiles, banks were willing to put us through fiery hoops just to get the necessary funding to move forward.

    Ugh... why am I even bothering?
     
    #15 B_VinylBoy, Aug 5, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2011
  16. houtx48

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,095
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    I keep hearing this, mostly teabaggers, but can never find hard fact confirming it.
     
  17. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,388
    Likes Received:
    2,127
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    Where did you go to school? Did you attend community college?


    Ohh so now we're 'redefined' welfare to include 'social security'?? Sweet. I suggest you look up the word welfare.

    VB for conservatives there is no such thing as a 'complex issue'. Everything everything that ails the planet can be cured with tax cuts and less regulation. Period.
     
  18. OhWiseOne

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    4,493
    Albums:
    10
    Likes Received:
    133
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Florida
    Verified:
    Photo
    I would maintain my water, heat and electricity by eliminating personal entitlements such as going out to eat, cutting out movie nights and so on. Possibly look at where I'm living maybe I can't afford it and need to down grade.
     
  19. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    That really wasn't the point I was trying to make with my previous analogous comment, OWO. :no:
     
  20. SilverTrain

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    4,582
    Albums:
    8
    Likes Received:
    404
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    No. The premise of this thread is entirely misguided. It's gigantically inapt to compare running a government the size of the United States of America to the maintenance of a single family household. The level of complexity between the two is vast. The number of intersecting factors, vastly different. The aims of the two "operations": different. The level of growth necessary to sustain a population growing by millions vs. a family trying to save for retirement, etc.

    It's a junk thread, because the premise is bunk. But it's certainly the kind of thing a politician would raise on teevee when he wants to avoid the real (and difficult) issues.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted