Solutions...

[YANCEY]

To all the posters who talk politics and the economy all day every day, can anyone offer any viable solutions? Instead of all the Mr. Obama bashing and all this left/right gibberish, someone, anyone offer up something that will actually help our nation. I am aware that this will be extremely difficult for most here (since most of what goes on is nothing more than complaining and finger pointing) but someone should give it a try. Thanks.

 

[islandman]

Solution #1: Adopt isolationism as our national policy.

You're welcome.

 

[beetlebum]

solution #2: happy hour prices ALL DAY LONG

 

[YANCEY]

Solution #1: Adopt isolationism as our national policy.

You're welcome.

Too late for that.

 

[Iris_M]

To all the posters who talk politics and the economy all day every day, can anyone offer any viable solutions? Instead of all the Mr. Obama bashing and all this left/right gibberish, someone, anyone offer up something that will actually help our nation. I am aware that this will be extremely difficult for most here (since most of what goes on is nothing more than complaining and finger pointing) but someone should give it a try. Thanks.

Don't you point that finger at me or i'm gonna tell

 

[run_silent]

As a country we are broke and in debt. There are many citizens in the exact same place.

What does the citizen do? Examine their life style. Cut out any luxuries. Find ways to cut expenses on everything thing they can find. They have to because no one will lend them money. They find a way to get by. They have to find a way to live within their income.

What does the government do? They have automatic increases to all programs. When you hear that a program has been cut by 50% what they mean is the automatic increase has been cut by 50%.

When you are broke you are broke. I can't go to any business and say this is all I can pay so you have to charge me less.

The government solution if borrowing more money, raising the debt ceiling and print more money which devalue all the money we actually have.

Then the government starts new programs and wars even though they have no money to pay for it.

My basic point is a citizen has to live within what they can afford. The government doesn't even think about it.

Edited to add

Both Democrats and Republicans are equally guilty of this. They just spend money we don't have.

 

[YANCEY]

Any solutions yet?

 

[EducatedOwl]

Right, because Literotica is where I go for solutions to the world's biggest problems.

 

[Sean Renaud]

The inflation rate has been rather steady. Apparently we can print money without devaluing it. Which makes sense because you'd have to print a whole lot all at once and dump it into the economy as a whole for that to happen. We're in debt, that's not the end of the world. Most people will spend most of their lives in debt. Debt really isn't a bad thing, not being able to pay your bills is a bad thing. We can however pay our bills, we just don't want too.

 

[islandman]

Right, because Literotica is where I go for solutions to the world's biggest problems.

You should.

There are several posters here who are experts at politics (domestic and international), military history and strategy, finance and climatology.

And two constitutional scholars.

 

[neci]

solution #2: happy hour prices ALL DAY LONG

two dollar tuesday's!

 

[Lancecastor]

You should.

There are several posters here who are experts at politics (domestic and international), military history and strategy, finance and climatology.

And two constitutional scholars.

Don't forget those aspiring to break into the fast-paced world of McDonalds lobby hostessing.

 

[neci]

and that's what makes this the best board ever.

 

[YANCEY]

Still nothing?

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

To all the posters who talk politics and the economy all day every day, can anyone offer any viable solutions? Instead of all the Mr. Obama bashing and all this left/right gibberish, someone, anyone offer up something that will actually help our nation. I am aware that this will be extremely difficult for most here (since most of what goes on is nothing more than complaining and finger pointing) but someone should give it a try. Thanks.

Fallacy

That there can be a directed solution.

It just creates more problem when all you have to do is let people be people and they will work out most problems as long as they know they cannot steal...

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

If I was Fascist Master of the Americas we'd have two rules" MIND YOUR OWN GODDAMNED BUSINESS & GET UP OFF YOUR CANDY ASS AND GO TO WORK (SCHOOL, WHATEVER).

 

[Desiremakesmeweak]

Yancey... Of course you are quite right. But suggesting actual objective solutions nowadays has to also deal with the practical context - namely that you have to have an acceptance that often now one selfish interest or other is going to block, AND HAS THE POWER TO BLOCK, a real solution that could otherwise be of general benefit.

One of the most suspect things for me is that for a large number of years the entire broad public debate over economics has centred around almost exclusively the increase of debt or the increase of nominal numeric 'money' - whereas in fact the most significant monetary economic indicator is that there has been a steady decline in the CIRCULATION of that money. The United States now has the lowest monetary circulation velocity - and yet the highest dollar issuance - that it has ever had since proper data has been being collected. This statistic is NEVER shown in the media and I have to ask why not. Has there been a deliberate policy motivation involving every element of the monetary supply and fiscal policy strata - governments, retail and commercial banks, central banks, political parties - to drop circulation and why...? Because THIS is the main and the ONLY reason now, that governments cannot pay off debt - they are raising too little tax revenue fundamentally because there are too few economic transactions compared to issued dollars. It's not because there are too few taxes, OR too many taxes - just too FEW circulations by net tax-exposed dollars.

The only group that is benefitting from this situation is the group of twenty or so primary dealer banks who have plenty of money basically 'given' to them by Treasury and the Fed but who never direct that money into the actual domestic economy at all.

What is the purpose of that?

If someone suggests that 'the' or 'a' solution would be to de-license these banks and deny them virtual monopoly over 'cheap' seignurage money - and hand that role over to active industry that takes balance sheet risks in the current traded product and non-bank service economy - there would be too powerful a lobby from the banks' interests to ever have that be able to happen.

Yet, these banks are acting like a de facto Central Banking regime even though they have no legal or legislative directive to follow a Central Banking agenda and consequently therefore they act only for their own corporate interests and not for the domestic economic interests of the larger national public.

Another consequence of this is that the Defense Industry Sector, acts like it IS the non-bank money supply source of last resort! That is why huge parts of the national economy supports the Defense (Military Industry) sector's continued existence at such a high financial cost level even though there isn't a real equivalent State enemy any more. There is one key dynamic therefore that pulls FOR Defense, because it is the ONLY source of money circulation - and this dynamic underlines all the actual security arguments and pushes these more or less for TWO different reasons: one, defense, and two, money.

So... If one accepts that competing powerful non-voted virtual cartel interests have wrestled open democracy to a standstill and no relevant real directional or policy change is any longer possible, then you are left with personal or individual 'solution' possibilities ONLY.

And, you then have to accept what used to be termed 'fin de ciecle' decadence: the system is crumbling even though it is massive and expensiveand appears grand in parts, and only the individual will be able to navigate his or her own way through the wreckage. But not the system itself.

My own view is that I don't think there is a solution left for the actual whole entire social/political or even economic system. I think it is too late and it has possibly been too late past a point where no one recognized that the critical line was being reached. In hindsight, this line might have been somewhere just after WWII when there possibly was too much arrogance about the inevitability of government to eventually 'solve' EVERY crisis. It may have even been a crucial mistake for people to have seen Reagan as an example of successful government 'control' and 'policy' solutions being directed from the top down. This 'success' such as it was, may have obscured the reality that it was the time for objective observation and deep analysis of long-range terminal systemic problems looming, rather than the time for enforcing any one particular 'solution.'

The system itself, like its leaders, were getting too old.

I think we are in very very new social and economic waters indeed.

Something is dying and will eventually be long dead before we realise that it has actually, finally, happened. And whoever 'survives' will be standing alone in a new and completely different world.

Something is dying even while the machinery of media appears to show an on-going powerful political system still in active existence.

There are gargantuan figures of the world political stage who will be dead from old age within five years. These identities dominated the thinking of what has become the modern global political or 'politically-correct' elite.

Old age and death comes to everything. That is the solution; you have to outlast what is decadent and what is dying. You have to pass on to your own family and friends what you want to preserve in them from what you believe and what you value.

Can you rejuvenate a terminally-ill social and political system?

Beyond a certain point, I don't think so. And that fact has to be faced by sensible people.

 

[Desiremakesmeweak]

The usual argument contrasts State thuggery in the form of jackbooted security people and underhanded surveillance, or imposed lobbied policy, versus terrorism and drug-addled street hoods and employable underclasses.

Whereas the challenge nowadays is do you personally know what actual words and ideas YOU want to keep in your hard drive or in your covered books, when the gibberish leads the rest off that cliff.

That inevitable cliff. That really is there.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I've said numerous times that all you need to know about economics is: The King confiscates every pig and ear of corn he can from the peasants, and uses it to pay himself, his family, his soldiers, his friends, and his enemies. The peasant keeps only enough to delay starvation and ruin.

 

[Recidiva]

Sometimes you can you get out of a conversation what you put in. There's some gold in them thar hills. Not every hill and also a lot of shit.

If I'm the mood I can be up for some slogging and mining. I think it's worth it.

It is also a good release for some people obviously Could you imagine what they'd be doing if they were forced to compulsively cut and paste in reality? The sheer deforestation...

We do good work here.