JC Political Thread - For All Things Political Part 2

[Reaper]

In one respect the far right are correct - spending does need to be cut across the board in USA. The other option is to increase taxes, or a combination of the 2. TBH I am not across taxation in USA beyond the odd tit bit we see in the paper but on the face of it they are very under-taxed compared to Australia and much of the western world. That is not going to change in the next couple of weeks and thus their debt ceiling will have to raise for the short and possibly medium term. No 2 ways about it.

In general if Obamacare is similar to what we know as Medicare then I have no problem with it. Part of the reason big business, and particularly the big 3 Auto manufacturers are (were) in the predicament they are is because the corporation was expected to pick up the tab for their employee's health care for life after their retirement. In most respects I prefer it if govco stayed out of our business but a basic health care system is something they should be involved with.

 

[Calaber]

Overseas politics - US govt in shutdown. Debt ceiling issues in next few weeks.

Thoughts?

My understanding with the shut-down is that some Tea-Party type people are unhappy about a couple of things (e.g. Obamacare), and have taken their bat and ball and gone home.
As for debt ceiling - on one hand if it isn't lifted federal US funding would need to be slashed by 32% across the board; this could have grave impacts for US security and economy (and ultimately ours). OTOH if you have a debt situation that for decades has been spiralling out of control, maybe it could be refreshing for the US to have a good look at how it taxes, and how it spends money. My understanding is that taxation levels in US are very much on the lowish side, and their spending on things like defence is ludicrous (apparently the US spends as much on its defence as the next 14 countries...combined...)

That defence spending isn't just the Americans wanting to spend up big time on defence. The Western World has treated the US as the world's policeman for decades and if the US hadn't performed that role in a number of conflicts, what might the outcome have been? And if they hadn't performed this role, who else is there to do it when the genuine need arose? (ie Korean War). I'm not referring to those futile wars like Vietnam or even the Middle East where the results are not what was required. Just those where the might of the US played a major part in attaining a peaceful conclusion.

 

[vr94ss]

That defence spending isn't just the Americans wanting to spend up big time on defence. The Western World has treated the US as the world's policeman for decades and if the US hadn't performed that role in a number of conflicts, what might the outcome have been? And if they hadn't performed this role, who else is there to do it when the genuine need arose? (ie Korean War). I'm not referring to those futile wars like Vietnam or even the Middle East where the results are not what was required. Just those where the might of the US played a major part in attaining a peaceful conclusion.

Maybe if the US didn't dismantle the British Empire as part of it's lend lease... The US picked up the baton and ran with it. It's not a simple story and America has revelled in that position as world police as much as some of it's citizens hate it. Sure they whine but they wouldn't have it any other way and they'll remember it with a happy heart years after it's gone, just as those that long for the British Empire do. They should also be accepting of criticism, after all they find themselves in that position through their own actions and the Brits were criticised.

Edit: Winter is coming, prepare and share. <-- there's my paranoia and hope for man.

 

[Immortality]

Overseas politics - US govt in shutdown. Debt ceiling issues in next few weeks.

Thoughts?

My understanding with the shut-down is that some Tea-Party type people are unhappy about a couple of things (e.g. Obamacare), and have taken their bat and ball and gone home.
As for debt ceiling - on one hand if it isn't lifted federal US funding would need to be slashed by 32% across the board; this could have grave impacts for US security and economy (and ultimately ours). OTOH if you have a debt situation that for decades has been spiralling out of control, maybe it could be refreshing for the US to have a good look at how it taxes, and how it spends money. My understanding is that taxation levels in US are very much on the lowish side, and their spending on things like defence is ludicrous (apparently the US spends as much on its defence as the next 14 countries...combined...)

It seems quiet simple really,

Under the Clinton administration national debt was coming down (taxes went up). Under the Bush administration the top tax rates/company tax rates were cut and spending increased drastically (war on terror), Obama inherited a very high cost economy, however as he does not have control of the upper and lower houses in his 2nd term and is therefore unable to raise taxes debts go up......

Basically put, the Tea Party, the wealthy elite don't like paying there fair share of the taxes and are effectively holding the rest of the country to ransom.

 

[Calaber]

Maybe if the US didn't dismantle the British Empire as part of it's lend lease... The US picked up the baton and ran with it. It's not a simple story and America has revelled in that position as world police as much as some of it's citizens hate it. Sure they whine but they wouldn't have it any other way and they'll remember it with a happy heart years after it's gone, just as those that long for the British Empire do. They should also be accepting of criticism, after all they find themselves in that position through their own actions and the Brits were criticised.

Edit: Winter is coming, prepare and share. <-- there's my paranoia and hope for man.

Well, the US didn't really dismantle the Empire, although Roosevelt could see that Britain (or at least, Churchill) would fight tooth and nail to retain all its dependencies and colonies after the war and the US was definitely against Imperialism. The Brits may have been on the winning side, but many previous colonies found that the war had changed things. They had seen their previous Imperial masters badly beaten by the Japanese and sought their independence (eg India, Malaya, Singapore). The US supported their actions but I don't think they actually dismantles the Empire. Britain's loss of prestige, it's indebtedness after two major wars and the national fervour in those former colonies was probably far more influential than the US.

That said, the US is probably the victim of its own doing in many ways, because there was, for a long time (and perhaps remains to this day in some parts of the States), the belief that what was good for the US was good for the world. America has forced itself on countries which didn't welcome its intrusion. The hatred against the States that exists within the Middle East these days comes from their allegiance to Israel, their plundering of natural resources such as oil for their own benefit for so many years and their military intervention in many localised conflicts as that world policeman, have created an enmity that will probably never disappear.

 

[BuzzB]

Whoa thats some heavy stuff. It would be the same if the US tried to invade OZ. All the surrounding countries would fight for OZ because if Oz fell so would the surrounding countries. I dont really care. Im juz talkin shiz. Ive had a few. Leave me alone :what:

"A Heavy Bassline Is My Kinda Silence"

 

[BuzzB]

Then NZL would have to save Aussies ass

"A Heavy Bassline Is My Kinda Silence"

 

[vr94ss]

It seems quiet simple really,

Under the Clinton administration national debt was coming down (taxes went up). Under the Bush administration the top tax rates/company tax rates were cut and spending increased drastically (war on terror), Obama inherited a very high cost economy, however as he does not have control of the upper and lower houses in his 2nd term and is therefore unable to raise taxes debts go up......

Basically put, the Tea Party, the wealthy elite don't like paying there fair share of the taxes and are effectively holding the rest of the country to ransom.

I would think Al Qaeda would be very jealous of the Tea Party right about now.

 

[vr94ss]

Well, the US didn't really dismantle the Empire, although Roosevelt could see that Britain (or at least, Churchill) would fight tooth and nail to retain all its dependencies and colonies after the war and the US was definitely against Imperialism. The Brits may have been on the winning side, but many previous colonies found that the war had changed things. They had seen their previous Imperial masters badly beaten by the Japanese and sought their independence (eg India, Malaya, Singapore). The US supported their actions but I don't think they actually dismantles the Empire. Britain's loss of prestige, it's indebtedness after two major wars and the national fervour in those former colonies was probably far more influential than the US.

That said, the US is probably the victim of its own doing in many ways, because there was, for a long time (and perhaps remains to this day in some parts of the States), the belief that what was good for the US was good for the world. America has forced itself on countries which didn't welcome its intrusion. The hatred against the States that exists within the Middle East these days comes from their allegiance to Israel, their plundering of natural resources such as oil for their own benefit for so many years and their military intervention in many localised conflicts as that world policeman, have created an enmity that will probably never disappear.

This is what the US really had against the empire and what it wanted dismantled, not really dismantling the empire itself, the colonies saw to that but giving the US this kinda defunded the empire.

Roosevelt wanted the British to pay compensation by dismantling their system of Imperial Preference, which had been established by the British Government during the Great Depression and was designed to encourage trade within the British Empire by lowering tariff rates between members, while maintaining discriminatory tariff rates against outsiders.

Office of the Historian - Milestones - 1937-1945 - The Atlantic Conference & Charter, 1941

edit: Which seems very similar to the "free trade" agreements going on these days between countries and blocks of countries weirdly enough the US has no problem with these now.

Edit2: lol! from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_Preference

The United States was determined to maintain its tariff protections and access to markets, but was vociferously opposed to any such preferences enjoyed by other countries.[citation needed]

I note the citation needed but would that surprise anyone?

 

[Calaber]

This is what the US really had against the empire and what it wanted dismantled, not really dismantling the empire itself, the colonies saw to that but giving the US this kinda defunded the empire.

Office of the Historian - Milestones - 1937-1945 - The Atlantic Conference & Charter, 1941

edit: Which seems very similar to the "free trade" agreements going on these days between countries and blocks of countries weirdly enough the US has no problem with these now.

Edit2: lol! from Imperial Preference - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I note the citation needed but would that surprise anyone?

I hadn't read that exact first reference you quoted, but it's a more succinct and accurate description of events than my version. I recall reading that Britain had endeavoured to impose discriminatory trade agreements that got up the US nose. The Wikipedia version has more than just a hint of pro-US sentiment included, doesn't it?