http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=xOAgT8L_BqQ&feature=player_embedded

Time for the people to take over the government.

I almost thought this was about Hillary Clinton showing her boobs!

House votes to defuse debt limit crisis overwhelmingly to defuse debt crisis, decides to increase borrowing limit.....

What they are trying to say is "once again they kick the can to further enslave and in-debt us to the FED bankers and foreign powers, increasing the size and scope of government still further, devaluing the dollar yet again, rather than doing anything to fix the problem or cut their spending".....

but that would have been too long a preface and told too much truth!

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/house-votes-defuse-debt-limit-183338191.html

Boobs? Don't you mean her man pecs? Perhaps her schlong?

Showing her chest would reveal the black hole where her heart should be!

But that's their dilemma isn't it? There is a need to cut spending, but in a time of high unemployment, to do so (and jeopardising more jobs in the process) would only serve to generate more economic instability and diminish investor confidence. And, as a result, the spiral down to recession and or economic depression accelerates.

You are a plant aren't you?!

Let's ruin the dollar further so people have to work harder for still less pay, raise taxes on everyone that might pay .03% towards the interest, but will definately cause the lose of more jobs, along with Obozocare, and regulation now coming to fruition.

How stupid can one foreigner be? You come live under this foolishness!

Now, now. There is no need for such bucolic ignorance and puerile behaviour. So, you disagree with the economic scenario I posited? If so, why is it inaccurate? Bear in mind, this is the immediate concern.

Further devaluation of a dollar that we already borrow over 40 cents of over our revenue, while a POTUS and congress continue to run up even more debt on the taxpayers dime further enslaving us to a culture of debt our children and their children will never pay off, and they want to raise it even further rather than admit their spending is the problem, or actually working to do something to fix it! Even stopping 2 wars, taxing the rich, raising taxes on everyone, and ending entitlements will never get us out of debt!

Rather than promoting small business (the backbone of this country) this POTUS regulates it to death in favor of corporations! The corps outsource everything (including their profits) because they can afford to, leaving our small business industry to fail.

They could fix it immediately by admitting they don't have a clue how to fix anything, stepping down, clearing regulations, and let the free market work for a change!

Simply following the constitution and doing nothing but their job.... protecting our liberties and our country! Not trying to erase and conquer!

But how many business (large or small) and sub-contractors rely on government spending? Stationers, building maintenance firms, construction workers, cleaners, school suppliers and on and on and on...

Very few actually, and so many more would if gov't was completely out of it!

It is NOT gov't job to be involved in those things.

The gov't is supposed to have 2 jobs.... protecting our liberties and protecting our country... NOT regulation!

The very problem is that anything gov't puts their hands in will fail! Need proof? Open your eyes and just look around!

There's a storm brewing as a sleeping public awakens!

You are so right.

But because of how "money" works, the people creating money MUST HAVE A PRODUCT. Therefore for their system to work.. they have to be a business.

Our government is a business. That is not what it is supposed to be.

It does not have to be this way if they would let us (congress) print our own damn money.

Germany 1922! That is where we are right now. Shortly we will be Germany 1923. That is when the Deutschmark became utterly worthless. Then Hitler rose to power...

So, all levels of government don't order supplies and services from the private sector? That's not really true, is it?



I don't think you understand my point. The government is often a company's biggest customer. Government spending keeps thousands in jobs from local government spending right through to the Federal level. Do I really have to illustrate this? They buy fleets of cars, buy materials for your kids to use in schools; they buy cleaning products for use in government buildings etc. ad nauseum...the list just goes on forever. You heavily restrict government expenditure within your domestic economy and you will have so many unemployed that recession is quite possible. Most governments are the biggest economic force driving a nation's economy.



Ah, but when the economy goes sour who do the people turn to? Damned if they do and damned if they don't eh?



Well, that's not really true, is it? You seem to have a model of the government being a singular beast with simple tasks to perform. Nothing could be further from reality. Your government (and mine) is made up of individuals who represent constituencies and have a duty to further the interests of the said constituents in order to be re-elected. I see many here didn't approve of the GM bailout, but can you imagine the jobs that would've been lost had GM failed? Not only within that company, but all the parts suppliers as well. These people would have turned to the government and asked, 'why didn't you help us?'. Not to mention what such a collapse would've done to the share market. A no-win situation.

I understand that you don't agree with many policies of government. Nor do I. I don't believe in everything governments do, but then, like most people in the world, I don't have the time to examine the minutiae of each policy in extreme detail, nor access to all the information. Nor would I wish to.

We shouldn't just rant when we disagree with what our governments do, we should investigate why they do what they do, and try to understand that in a society striving for egalitarian values, not everyone will be pleased by every policy.

The govt is good at spending the peoples money foolishly, creating jobs for friends and family members, creating more govt and more paperwork for others, but if they didn't, there would be more businesses and people buying larger amounts of those items. If the economy were working, they would be working, thriving and profiting from a good economy of working class, tax paying consumers.... gov't jobs, now at its highest point in history, makes up 18% of the jobs market....that's far too much! It's still far from the majority.



Goes back to what I said above. Control is not good governance. Govt has become a business. They are in the business of welfare and warfare and neither profits the people in reality!

People need more jobs, freedom, and a spirit of pride they can thrive under, not more govt which destroys jobs, pride and freedoms with bad policy and poor leadership.

Debt is NOT wealth!



Sad isn't it, what govt has reduced its people to thru manipulation, propaganda and regulation which kills the possibility of a free market and a thriving society.



You make my point very nicely!

Government debt is nothing more than postponed poverty.

So which generation of kids will get our debt?

I'm not talking about how many people the government employs, but the level of employment within the private sector owing to government consumption. If they limit spending the 'knock-on' effect would increase unemployment figures dramatically. You're not explaining how the economy would thrive and businesses show growth if these high levels of consumption were removed from the marketplace.






It's not about profit. Welfare is about creating a fair an equitable society. Remove welfare and then you'll truly understand what Germany was like in 1922. Anarchy, riots & rampant crime will become the norm.



And that is why they can't limit government spending.






If they let the 'free market' work as it should in 2008, you'd still be in the throes of a great depression.

All BS!

Well, thank you for your erudite and well-reasoned response. I take it you're unable to demonstrate how limiting government expenditure would aid growth in employment and business? I understand completely, it's a rather difficult statement to defend.