09-03-2004 03:01									#181
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Agathon seems like ha has the better case to me. I always thought that it was a little wierd when people started claiming to be social liberals and fiscal conservatives.

	09-03-2004 03:06									#182
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc Agathon seems like ha has the better case to me. I always thought that it was a little wierd when people started claiming to be social liberals and fiscal conservatives.

Isn't that a libertarian?

	09-03-2004 03:07									#183
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Sure, but not spending on such policies leads to other costs, particuarly to the environment, to the victims of crime and to future generations who have to deal with the lack of educated citizens due to underfunding of schools and the subsequent erosion of democracy (which needs a reasonable standard of public education to avoid descending into mindless populism). People are too dumb to see that tax cuts will usually cost them more in things they then have to pay for than the amount they got in the cut.

I know. I largely agree (though it's possible we would disagree on specifics). What I meant was that a fiscal conservative approach means emphasis on balancing the budget (and indeed more than that if we want to dig out of the hole we're in). That means spending cuts. Even though I would cut the military a bunch, that's not enough. Somebody posted a link here on the OT that let you play with the federal budget, and I kept coming in at ~100 million in the red. Then again, that's partly because I'm not big on drastic changes right away (tax increase? yes. Massive tax increase right now? no. Do it in stages. Ditto on spending cuts). Anyway, the drive to stop the fiscal bleeding would at times conflict with the drive to spend on social programs. That's all I was saying.

quote: By and large it does. There is always some degree of corruption and mistakes, but these are unavoidable.

No, no it doesn't. The current administration (and congress which technically holds the purse strings) is out of control. Clinton (hmm, Dem pres, Repub congress) was so-so, although looks GREAT by comparison.

I'd say that there hasn't been fiscal sanity in the US government during the majority of my lifetime (born 1976).

-Arrian

	09-03-2004 03:17									#184
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Compare the US with your average African country (say the Congo) on fiscal sanity. You aren't that bad. I thought conservatives were supposed to be pessimists.

Your electoral system seems to lend itself to pork politics, but it's not fatal.

Anyway, you want to know what Bush really stands for?

A boot stamping on a human face... forever...

	09-03-2004 03:20									#185
	Put an end to popups!

Comparisons to the Congo are pointless.

There is no value in pointing at an total disaster and saying "See! We're not as bad as them!" other than to avoid fixing our problems.

Even if we were the BEST in the world at it, there would probably be room for improvement (though at that point it probably wouldn't be a major issue for me in a campaign).

-Arrian

	09-03-2004 03:31									#186
	Tired of ads?

quote: Comparisons to the Congo are pointless. There is no value in pointing at an total disaster and saying "See! We're not as bad as them!" other than to avoid fixing our problems.

Yes there is. A society that is subject to total disaster is obviously doing things wrong - and in history disaster is the norm. Take a look at a society like Canada which is very well run. People will complain about it, but perhaps they might realize that every functioning political institution is a compromise and that it just might not be possible to eliminate problematic government spending without eliminating a lot of good things.

Have you ever thought that it might be something to do with the kind of government that the US has, which has caused such enormous wealth which has then allowed the same government to squander some of it.

quote: Even if we were the BEST in the world at it, there would probably be room for improvement (though at that point it probably wouldn't be a major issue for me in a campaign).

I guess I'm more of a pessimist than you. Working government that actually takes into account the interests of most citizens and is relatively free from corruption is a fairly recent phenomenon. I don't think it should be taken for granted.

There's nothing wrong with tweaking things to reduce corruption, but such policies can have unforeseen effects.

Acting like it's a major problem doesn't seem right to me. Perhaps we could run things a bit better, but let's put it in perspective. As long as citizens aren't running amok killing each other and there are no famines or epidemics or mass financial crashes, the government must be at least holding steady. Look at what happened in Yugoslavia - communism there was not ideal, but it was a hell of a lot better than what followed.

	09-03-2004 03:37									#187
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

i say down with this current system and let's have a nice, quick move to a virtual democracy. shouldn't take more than 2-5 years for that, and with the statue of liberty, and the fact that we americans are a spiritual, and deeply religious people, we might luck out and switch in a turn.

	09-03-2004 03:38									#188
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Yes there is. A society that is subject to total disaster is obviously doing things wrong - and in history disaster is the norm.

There can be lessons learned from catastrophic failure, yes. But there is also the danger of complacency - picking an example like the Congo (about as bad as you can get) to compare one's country to pretty much ensures your country will come out smelling like a rose. I find comparisons to other successful nations more productive.

quote: guess I'm more of a pessimist than you. Working government that actually takes into account the interests of most citizens and is relatively free from corruption is a fairly recent phenomenon. I don't think it should be taken for granted.

It's not corruption I'm after (though of course I'm all for reducing that). It's reckless deficit spending. This has been going on for decades, WITH NO ATTEMPT AT PAYING BACK ANY OF IT! It IS a big issue. It's potentially huge.

I don't really understand how being complacent about serious problems (Canada doesn't seem to be nearly as bad with overspending) equals being pessimistic.

-Arrian

	09-03-2004 03:40									#189
	Tired of ads?

Who votes for the overspenders?

Isn't it the voting public's job to vote them out? Presumably shame on us if they think they can get away with it.

	09-03-2004 03:42									#190
	Suffering from ads?

Well yeah, shame on us indeed. Of course, since both viable choices will overspend, I'm screwed.

I'd like to see the 2 major parties lose their stranglehold on politics in the USA (hence my voting 3rd party), but the chances are low anytime soon. I was actually very happy to see Perot shake things, even if he was kinda loony. I almost wish he had won.

-Arrian

	09-03-2004 05:57									#191
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Just a point for people to consider. Deficits are financed by the whole world. A balanced budget alternative is financed by American taxpayers alone.

	09-03-2004 06:04									#192
	Suffering from ads?

strangely enough, i still prefer the balanced budget alternative.

why?

what if the rest of the world decides not to finance it?

	09-03-2004 07:03									#193
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Idiotic voters is why I'm starting to think elitism ain't a half-bad idea .

	09-03-2004 07:13									#194
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Ned Just a point for people to consider. Deficits are financed by the whole world.

and cost more in the long run.

quote: A balanced budget alternative is financed by American taxpayers alone.

However we don't have to pay resultant interest.

Loans are not free.

As for the largest cost... the borrowing for the military is ridiculous... they desparately need to reevaluate goals and approaches, away from a monolithic Cold War model.

The move to properly funding Special Forces and invest in unmanned aircraft is a good first approach. We need to encourage government to consider the most efficient, and cost effective force structures for a 21st century world.

	09-03-2004 07:26									#195
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: I'm a Bob Dole / John McCain type of Republican

Imran, no offense, but Bob Dole was one of the biggest pork barrel pushers ever to hit Congress. There was a book called "Senator For Sale" written about him and what he has done, but because he was in WWII he gets a pass from many who know what a crook he is... I live in a Republican state and I'll tell ya, the Repubs are damn near as bad if not worse than the Dems. State taxes here in the land of Dole are outrageous...

	09-03-2004 07:29									#196
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: But with the judiciary getting older and older, it's likely Kerry if elected would be a chance to name some of their replacements if elected.

I think that's the best reason for a moderate libertarian like Imran to not support Shrub: what if Ashcroft or someone like him gets a seat in the SCOTUS.

	09-03-2004 08:02									#197
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Bob Dole was one of the biggest pork barrel pushers ever to hit Congress

And yet was a deficit hawk. Senators are pork barrel spenders... so what?

quote: I think that's the best reason for a moderate libertarian like Imran to not support Shrub: what if Ashcroft or someone like him gets a seat in the SCOTUS.

Bush lower court nominees are better than, say, Clinton ones. You forget, my favorite Justices on the bench were appointed by Republicans.

	09-03-2004 08:04									#198
	Support Apolyton

Speaking of SCOTUS, isn't one of them wanting to retire?

	09-03-2004 10:48									#199
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Agathon Who votes for the overspenders? Isn't it the voting public's job to vote them out? Presumably shame on us if they think they can get away with it.

The problem is, it's in each voter's interest to elect someone who will bring pork into his state or district. We can't vote against the spenders from other states.

	09-03-2004 12:28									#200
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: And yet was a deficit hawk.

Since when? He was one of the top dogs - senate majority leader from 81-86 (?) - throughout the 80's and early 90's when deficits exploded.

quote: Senators are pork barrel spenders... so what?

It doesn't make sense to identify yourself by pointing to a senator who fights against pork barreling - McCain - and a senator who ranks up there with Robert Byrd when it came to throwing money around. I suspect you aren't very familiar with the Senator from ADM...

	09-03-2004 13:13									#201
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I, too, am a registered Republican who considers himself a moderate. Suffice to say, I *never* vote a party line ballot.

Gatekeeper

	09-03-2004 13:36									#202
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by MrBaggins and cost more in the long run. However we don't have to pay resultant interest. Loans are not free. As for the largest cost... the borrowing for the military is ridiculous... they desparately need to reevaluate goals and approaches, away from a monolithic Cold War model. The move to properly funding Special Forces and invest in unmanned aircraft is a good first approach. We need to encourage government to consider the most efficient, and cost effective force structures for a 21st century world.

The question is whether you can make more money by investing it in US business versus the interest you have to pay.

Since US business grows on the average of 12% per year (IIRC -- please correct me if I am wrong) I think it is plainly clear that investing it in America is the better choice.

	09-03-2004 22:12									#203
	Tired of ads?

quote: Since when?

Since always. He's been the guy saying cut spending or raise taxes to get the deficit managed all throughout his time in the Senate. The Senate Majority Leader doesn't have nearly the power as Speaker of the House over his own troops.

quote: It doesn't make sense to identify yourself by pointing to a senator who fights against pork barreling - McCain - and a senator who ranks up there with Robert Byrd when it came to throwing money around.

So there is like one or two Senators who don't like pork barrel spending (and for being against it, McCain does enough of it). Big deal.

	09-03-2004 22:22									#204
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Ned The question is whether you can make more money by investing it in US business versus the interest you have to pay. Since US business grows on the average of 12% per year (IIRC -- please correct me if I am wrong) I think it is plainly clear that investing it in America is the better choice.

I think the figure, off the top of my head, is closer to 3% or 4%, perenially. We've certainly paid much more debt interest, than we've grown.

	09-03-2004 22:30									#205
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Ned The question is whether you can make more money by investing it in US business versus the interest you have to pay.

But that's not what's happening is it? The government issues T-bills which people, businesses, and the Chinese buy. This money is spent on programs. It is not used to invest in businesses in any straightforward manner. The government is not going to invest this revenue in the stock market or anything like that.

Moreover, even if the increased federal spending leads to business growth - unless you use taxes to extract this wealth to generate revenues, the increase in business will not increase revenues. And with all of the tax cuts, exceptions, loopholes, moving to the Caymans, you won't be able to extract those taxes.

So in fact, not only will the government not make money off of some "investment", but also any indirect growth the spending spurs will not guarantee that the increased business will even cover the resulting debt.

quote: Since US business grows on the average of 12% per year (IIRC -- please correct me if I am wrong) I think it is plainly clear that investing it in America is the better choice.

Again, that would require the government to issue bonds, and then take that money and invest it in some sort of market. The government will not do that - the govenrment will fund programs.

	09-03-2004 22:33									#206
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by MrBaggins I think the figure, off the top of my head, is closer to 3% or 4%, perenially. We've certainly paid much more debt interest, than we've grown.

Even assuming your figures, we break even.

	09-03-2004 23:19									#207
	Support Apolyton

Templar, the question is not whether the government will be better off, but whether the entire country, which is 70% private sector, would be better off.

Assume one is trying to decide whether it is better to invest $500 billion in the US private sector (by not raising taxes) or borrow it at X percent interest. The answer to anyone trying to make that decision is cost. If the cost of the loan exceeds the profit from the investment, it is better not to borrow. Thus one raises taxes rather than finance the deficit through borrowing.

	10-03-2004 00:05									#208
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Ned Even assuming your figures, we break even.

Depends if you're talking about TBills, TNotes or TBonds.

Recently we kept on leveraging ourselves higher and higher, and bumping against the debt limit, currently at $7,384B (and debt is stated at $7,011 currently by the treasury.)

The 05 proposed budget estimates '09 national debt to top 10 trillion. There isn't an infinite amount of finance available to soak this... increasing caps, decreases dollar value and decreases international confidence in the US and its dollar.

	10-03-2004 00:48									#209
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by MrBaggins Depends if you're talking about TBills, TNotes or TBonds. Recently we kept on leveraging ourselves higher and higher, and bumping against the debt limit, currently at $7,384B (and debt is stated at $7,011 currently by the treasury.) The 05 proposed budget estimates '09 national debt to top 10 trillion. There isn't an infinite amount of finance available to soak this... increasing caps, decreases dollar value and decreases international confidence in the US and its dollar.

According to this report, GDP is expected to grow at an annual rate of about 5% for the forseeable future. Factoring out the growth itself, this adds around $550 billion per year to GDP. This suggests that we should be able to afford deficits of this size indefinitely without adding to the relative debt burden.

What is causing the accelerated growth? I would argue that it is the deficit itself - the investment of the saved tax dollars in the private sector. The more investment the better - to a point - where the increased investment only leads to inflation as employment becomes "full."

	10-03-2004 00:54									#210
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The 05 budget is an election year budget. Those predictions typically have all the validity of Miss Cleo's fortune telling.

5% growth is possible, but considerably (and perhaps laughably) optimistic... just like the employment projections that have been lampooned in another thread.