Why there is a fuss going on about the US Finance bill

[shortliner]

Short maths lesson for the hard of thinking and a brilliant visualisation of what the US national debt is

http://www.wtfnoway.com/ - I'll say no more!

[Brinkly]

Yes it's rather a lot of money! That old saying of When America sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold. I would hate to think what we might catch if they doing sort this out fairly soon!

 

Regards,

 

Nick

 

 

 

[John B]

China's getting worried about how much we owe them...

[The Stationmaster]

China's getting worried about how much we owe them...

 

And I somehow suspect the US Govt and population might not take kindly to the usual IMF solution to such a situation which is 'sell Govt etc assets' when it means that teh Chinese will be the obvious purchasers.

[brossard]

A great deal of Americans claim to be Republicans, even normal ones that have to earn a living. It's already been made clear that when Republicans say "job creators" they mean the rich. I also hear them talking about what the "American People" want. To the Republicans the "American People" are also the rich - they don't care a fig for the middle class. Honestly, I can't understand why anyone making an hourly wage or even white collar workers making less than $250K would vote Republican.

 

It is said that in a democracy we get the government we deserve. Lets hope the American voters get the message. In the meantime the rest of us must grit our teeth and hope these idiots smarten up.

 

I was particularly angry today when I hear that Exxon's obscene 41% profit is attributable to high gas prices. I understand that when a corporation's raw materials cost rise, the prices that consumers pay will rise to offset the cost increase. This, however, is blatant greed. Oil companies (and other major corporations) get subsidies and tax breaks which cannot be removed because the Republicans won't agree to tax increases on the "American People". Sometimes you want to weep.

 

Of course I think that the Roman Empire in its last days was paralyzed by political infighting, rampant corruption and poor productivity. Hmmm, maybe history does repeat itself.

 

Now where did I put my meds?

 

John

[Oldddudders]

Short maths lesson for the hard of thinking and a brilliant visualisation of what the US national debt is

http://www.wtfnoway.com/ - I'll say no more!

The weird and whacky comments underneath are rather entertaining, too!

[John_Hughes]

The parallel with the Roman republic is an interesting and instructive one.

 

The Romans had an instinctive dislike of letting one man have too much power*; hence there were always two consuls, most town councils were headed by a duumvirate (two men) instead of a single mayor, and so on. The system of checks and balances which this created - and which was largely copied in the US constitution, which originally saw the President and Vice President as a sort of duumvirate where one moderated the other - in effect makes it impossible for anyone to make any sort of decision, apart from a very few powers reserved to the President. ISTR that going to war is one of these....

 

*Even the Emperors were officially only primus inter pares, first among equals.

[Adrian Wintle]

...apart from a very few powers reserved to the President. ISTR that going to war is one of these...

 

...and ISTR Congress voted to control that too, although presidents don't necessarily abide by that ruling...

 

From the point of view of a neighbor, it is relatively obvious that the US system is somewhat dysfunctional unless the president's party holds a majority in both houses.

 

Adrian

[skipepsi]

Interesting in the comments below that it seems to be taken as read that European countries will go bust soon. When the debts surface they say not if!

[brossard]

China's getting worried about how much we owe them...

 

I don't think China is all that worried. I think the US Gov't should start to worry about how much debt the Chinese (and others) own. This can mean that the debtholder is able to apply pressure to influence US policies, foreign and domestic. It also means that US policies can become constrained by a reluctance to offend their debtholders.

 

Again I think there is a parallel with just after the war when the US was able to influence the foreign and colonial policies of Britain.

 

John

[Guest Max Stafford]

Yes, I was rather struck by the parallel...

 

Dave.

[Welly]

During the 19th century the British rose to become the world's superpower.

 

During the 20th century the British superpower declined and the US rose to become one of the 2 major superpowers ( USSR was the other one ) of the world. The USSR collapsed very quickly before the 20th century was over leaving the US as the one superpower.

 

Now I suspect the US superpower status will decline in the next few decades and both China and India will rise be the 2 superpowers of the 21st century.

 

As to the 22nd century, I reckon other planetary species will be inhabiting Earth and we will be slaves to them - hang on - it has happened already because I suspect a lot of our politicians / bureaucrats have come from another planet!!!

[Ozexpatriate]

The parallel with the Roman republic is an interesting and instructive one.

 

- and which was largely copied in the US constitution, which originally saw the President and Vice President as a sort of duumvirate where one moderated the other - in effect makes it impossible for anyone to make any sort of decision, apart from a very few powers reserved to the President. ISTR that going to war is one of these....

 

...and ISTR Congress voted to control that too, although presidents don't necessarily abide by that ruling...

Only Congress can declare war. The President cannot. The President is however the Commander in Chief. He can order troops to do his bidding, but not declare war. There are numerous military engagements where "a state of war" is not declared.

 

*Even the Emperors were officially only primus inter pares, first among equals.

The whole 'checks and balances' thing refers (but is not limited to) the separation of the executive and legislative branch. It does not refer to the Vice President.

 

For example: the President cannot veto a bill passed by Congress with a super-majority (~67%). He can veto a bill passed with a simple majority (50%).

 

The Vice President is in no way part of a duumvirate. Other than being the President of the Senate where he/she can cast a tied 50/50 vote, and there has a truly primus inter pares responsibility, the Vice President has little Consitutional responsibility. Mostly they attend royal weddings and the funerals of foreign heads of state.

[Pugsley]

Interesting in the comments below that it seems to be taken as read that European countries will go bust soon. When the debts surface they say not if!

Yep, definitely a case of when, not if.

[Kenton]

China's getting worried about how much we owe them...

just like the US banks do when the "ordinary" tax payer fails to pay their mortgage.

 

China is just waiting to foreclose.

[Ozexpatriate]

As to the 22nd century, I reckon other planetary species will be inhabiting Earth and we will be slaves to them - hang on

Damn dirty apes! They rise, August 5 at a cinema near you!

[Horsetan]

Foreign lawyer told me today that current top three creditors of the US are:

 

1. China

2. Japan

3. UK (this point made me blink rapidly in disbelief)

 

.... the US constitution, which originally saw the President and Vice President as a sort of duumvirate .....

 

Or, in the case of George Dubya's incumbency, a dumbvirate...

 

 

I don't think China is all that worried. I think the US Gov't should start to worry about how much debt the Chinese (and others) own. This can mean that the debtholder is able to apply pressure to influence US policies, foreign and domestic. It also means that US policies can become constrained by a reluctance to offend their debtholders...

 

That'll make a change. Usually they don't seem to give a damn who they offend!

[brossard]

just like the US banks do when the "ordinary" tax payer fails to pay their mortgage.

 

China is just waiting to foreclose.

 

There's an old saying that goes:

 

"If you owe the bank $100,000 and can't pay, you worry"

"If you owe the bank $100,000,000 and can't pay, the bank worries"

 

As Jon Stewart said, America will just have to move to a cheaper country.

 

John

[Ozexpatriate]

During the 19th century the British rose to become the world's superpower.

 

During the 20th century the British superpower declined and the US rose to become ... the one superpower.

 

Now I suspect the US superpower status will decline in the next few decades and both China and India will rise be the 2 superpowers of the 21st century.

Your comparisons with the 'pax Britannia' of the 19th and 'pax Americana' of the 20th centuries are apt.

 

In each case the superpower exerted commercial and cultural influences over world affairs (at least the ones that involved money). As evidence, International English is the lingua franca of the world.

 

At the core is the 'creation of wealth'. During the pax Britannia, this was largely on the backs of the industrial midlands and the Empire's subjects. In the pax Americana, it was in part the entreprenurialism of the US workforce. Once the focus shifts from the creation of wealth (with attendant meaningful jobs creating high-quality, tangible goods and services) to simply circulating existing wealth for profit (witness the credit crunch caused by repackaged sub-prime mortgages) amongst a weathly elite, the power will shift to someone who is prepared to manufacture things the rest of us want.

 

As joblessness in the US rises, it feels like this shift is inevitable. The following story said: One in five American men don't work: Where's the outrage? This statistic is inconceivable for any country even close to the top as a 'world leader'.

 

Hopefully this will happen without the bloodshed of the early-mid 20th century.

[Allegheny1600]

Hopefully this will happen without the bloodshed of the early-mid 20th century.

Let us hope and pray this does not happen.

 

John E.

[signalmaintainer]

A great deal of Americans claim to be Republicans, even normal ones that have to earn a living. It's already been made clear that when Republicans say "job creators" they mean the rich. I also hear them talking about what the "American People" want. To the Republicans the "American People" are also the rich - they don't care a fig for the middle class. .

 

1) A "great deal" of Americans claim to be conservative, not Republican. There is an important distinction. The Republican party is merely a vehicle;

 

2) There aren't enough "rich" people by actual count in the U.S. to get Republicans elected as they were last fall;

 

3) Many "rich" people are Democrats (see Bill Gates and Warren Buffett);

 

4) The Republicans have to have some appeal among the independent, middle class in the U.S. or they'd never win control of Congress or the presidency;

 

5) Of course the "rich" create jobs. Small- and medium-sized businesses are the engine of the American economy. Most people who risk their capital and launch a successful business do become wealthy. When have the chronically poor or lower middle-class ever created jobs? Exactly how do you think wealth is created? Are you that ignorant of basic economics?

 

Honestly, I can't understand why anyone making an hourly wage or even white collar workers making less than $250K would vote Republican

 

 

If your goal is sticking it to "rich" people and big corporations, you have a point. Then the Democrat party and its welfare-state, class-envy agenda is for you. But you also have to be intellectually honest and admit you don't value individual liberty, free enterprise, and smaller, efficient government. I do value those things. The Democrat party as it is constituted today offers hope for none of these things.

 

I vote for Republicans because the alternative is to vote for people whose world view, value for human life, respect for private property and interpretation of the US Constitution is diametrically opposed to mine.

[signalmaintainer]

Foreign lawyer told me today that current top three creditors of the US are:

 

1. China

2. Japan

3. UK (this point made me blink rapidly in disbelief)

 

He's wrong -- the organization holding the largest share of U.S. debt is our country's own Federal Reserve.

[Andy Y]

Politics