What does a "small government" look like?

Too bad if you don't like forced integration. Your whole state government paradise has already been proven to be a terrible failure.

 

Done. Edits above in quote.

Don't care about this stuff nor did I read it just easier to quote then delete.

 

Money isn't printed, it is created through bank loans.

BTW, in order for currency inflation to happen, the economy needs to be at full employment (which we are not).

 

And when have they had the chance? The South, for instance, has been under a heavier federal thumb than the rest of the country since the civil war doing things that cost money and then had the weight of desegregation piled on them that was not piled on all the "more enlightened states" where defacto segregation is alive and well. Then there are the "enlightened" states that have systematically destroyed much of the economy--tobacco, textiles, furniture manufacturing, coal--take your pick.

 

No, it's called a BIG FAT LIE. There has never been a time in the history of the republic when a power had to be specifically enumerated within the Constitution in order to be exercised. The Constitution has ever and always established both the powers enumerated and the powers implied. There are no doubt dozens of dormant powers still lying undiscovered within the Constitution simply because the circumstances defining them have not arisen yet. Stick around.

Another BIG FAT LIE. Promoting the general welfare of society is among the uppermost duties and responsibilities of the central government. Patriots understand this. Traitors do not.

 

Correct, States with a heavy tea party presences sit at the bottom taking more federal dollars than they put in. They rely on states like California, New York, NJ, Mass to pick up the slack. As a result its hurting everyone since these tea party heavy states drag too much dead weight.

 

As the south should have been. Frankly the punishment for their treason should have been much more harsh than being stripped of congressional representation. Should have been 25 years of no congressional representation, which means all laws voted on would be binding to them but they have no voice.

 

1. Not always, the fed buys bonds through client banks, treasury spends it, same as printing (figurative) cash and giving it to treasury

2. BTW Nope, google 'stagflation'

 

No, it isn't. It's a grossly unrealistic appeal to balkanization based on perfidious pie-in-the-sky assumptions. The reason we had to amend the Articles of Confederation into the US Constitution was that the nation was rapidly collapsing into quarrelsome and disputatious failure. A new and much stronger central government was needed, and that is what we thankfully got, courtesy of the Philadelphia Convention. Going back to pre-1787 "good old days" is an absolutely ridiculous idea.

 

and now we are collapsing into one quarrelsome failure, how strange to think one big government solves all when all around the world are successful examples of nations balkanizing. UK and Scotland is one example

 

Arguing semantics about the Federal Reserve's operations.

We have the lowest inflation ever in this country over the past few years thanks to Republican idiots and conservatives around the world. Inflation is well below the Fed's goal of 2%, yet right wingers are obsessed with "money printing" lies.

 

You'd start missing them when the checks stopped coming, the felons started being released, plane crashes became as common as fender-benders, there were no more weather forecasts or economic data, and outbreaks of mad cow disease began to go viral. Wouldn't take long before faux-libertarian bozos were all on their knees BEGGING for just a few more bureaucrats.

 

showing your lack of understanding... it's not semantics, the FED is no ordinary bank, and what I said is what is happening

it is not a lie that there is a danger, everyone knows that, or else we would simply QE at ten times this rate

 

The "Small Government" of the rightwingers and libertarians...is a vague, nebulous UTOPIA.

They cannot define it with specifics. Oh, a general outline "Just enough to allow for free capitalism" or "national defense, plus a little bit for infrastructure" or "Just like it was in 1890".

But start trying to pin them down on control of interstate pollution...is that covered by the Constitution or not? How about the FBI? Do we scrap it? USDA food inspections? Do we just cross our fingers and hope that meat-packers decide to keep things nice and clean....like they did NOT do in the early 1900s? Who tells the doctors and hospitals if "Snake-oil-ox" is a viable cancer cure? No FDA so we just see how many people die and figure it out from there? If Arizona decides to strip-mine the Grand Canyon, do we let it?

Start asking specifics....suddenly this FANTASY of rolling back the clock to the late 1800s is shown for just that...a fantasy. By people with as much basis in reality as people who actually think they are a "knight in shining armor" hanging out at a Renaissance Fair.

 

That doesn't lead to bankruptcy. Because its GDP sank once upon a time to near zero levels in effective terms, the value of Zimbabwe's currency all but evaporated. But they were never bankrupt.

Actually, the currency is backed by GDP. All US currency and debt represent claims on the output of real good and services produced within the US economy. That's all currency and debt really are. The US produces about 22% of everything that is produced anywhere in the world each year. Combined with our long and significant commitment to trade, this is why our currency and debt are the most valued and trusted in the world.

 

What you don't have is a financial dictionary to tell you what "bankrupt" means.

Three recessions in eight years? The 1950's were a cold, gray, foreboding decade of suspicion, fear, repression, and decline. The Soviets beat us into space -- twice -- making us look and feel like a second-rate power. People who recall the Eisenhower years fondly plainly did not live through them.



You can even get those tax codes as long as we get our spending and debt decreases. Deal?

Even Keynes thought 25% total government was the highest you should go to without harming the economy.[/QUOTE]

 

So start another Civil War. It will end the same way as the last one. And when it's over, we won't be naming any streets after you.

 

they were effectively bankrupt and that was my point

oh right, which is why all the cross rates showed dollar depreciation and gold shot up during QE, and why the fed feels the need to buy our own bonds, because they are so valued.... try reality sometime NEO, go ahead and take the red pill

- - - Updated - - -

I won't need to, at some point enough people will get tired of each other. Read the news, people part ways peacefully all the time.

 

Seems you might want to prioritize expenditures and taxation. Like, you don't need a military, so cut it by 95%. You don't need corporate aid, bail outs, subsidies, etc., so eliminate them. You don't need foreign aid, so eliminate that. Until you do, I don't give a damn how deep we go in the hole taking care of the American people. When it comes to my own people, I got an attitude problem!

 

So to summarize for those without the capacity to do so, here is what you got rid of entirely...

List of FY2011 Federal Outlays of At Least $10 billion...
Food Stamps -- 78
Entire Dept of Commerce -- 10
Race to the Top grants -- 20
State budget support for schools -- 12
IDEA/Special Ed programs -- 17
Pell Grants etc. -- 38
Entire Dept of Energy -- 31
National Institutes of Health -- 34
Medicaid -- 275
Medicare Part-A -- 263
Medicare Part-B --234
Medicare Part-D -- 66
TANF -- 66
Child & Family services -- 11
Section 8 housing -- 19
All other housing -- 19
All Community Planning block grants -- 14
Unemployment benefits -- 168
Foreign assistance -- 15
Civilian air operations -- 11
Highway programs -- 45
Transit programs -- 12
Housing & Economic Recovery -- 29
TARP -- 24
Additional Child Care Credit -- 23
Make Work Pay Tax Credit -- 14
EPA -- 11
Security Assistance -- 12
Civil Service Benefits -- 74
Supp Security Income -- 56
SS Pension & Survivor -- 599
SS Disability -- 132

Pretty obviously, you don't care about sane and rational either. This is why your rants curry so little favor.

 

The best imaginary example is Aynrandistan. The best empirical one is Somalia.

 

Effectively bankrupt isn't an economic term.

Insolvency is IMPOSSIBLE in a state that denominates its own currency. There is no discussion to be had.

You can artificially inflate the value of your own currency (what the EU and UK do), so I don't get how this is significant. If the US dollar falls to $4 per Euro, that still will not affect the US's ability to pay its own bills. If anything, weaker currency helps the manufacturing sector in your economy, because exports become cheaper. Canada has been struggling with that problem since their dollar rose to parity.

 

[/QUOTE]

De facto bankruptcy is bankruptcy all the same.

Poverty dropped faster then and Infrastructure was built. I like Ike. Besides hunting down commies is fine with me, they did exist here by the way. Subversives.

 

Apparently republicans want small government, with a massive military, corporate, foreign spending.

 

Why would any of that happen? Cutting back on government certainly would not be the end of the world. Airports would still work, your local news would still use its weather system, mad cow is about as relevant as small pox is today, and I have yet to hear people say we should shut down our prisons.