Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.

Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More

Mar 4th 2013 new

(Quote) Sean-851370 said: I'd be more supportive of a regional-based reserve or something to that effect, wi...
(Quote) Sean-851370 said:




I'd be more supportive of a regional-based reserve or something to that effect, with trade settlements in gold at the end of the year. At any rate, something that leads to more fixed exchange rates but doesn't destroy sovereignty as the euro has done. Giving power to any supranational entity is very dangerous.

Offshoring would exist on its own, but with the indirect incentives the government has given companies to move production abroad, there's even more of it than there would be otherwise. Skyrocketing healthcare costs and employment taxes don't do much to encourage producers to stay in the US. There's nothing wrong with open trade among countries with similar economies (e.g., US and Canada), but open trade between a wealthy country and a poorer country always results in much production leaving the wealthy country for the poor country. I think one of the main points of transfering US manufacturing capacity to China was to rope China into the globalist empire as much as possible. What the internationalist types at the IMF, World Bank, WTO, etc. never can handle is an independent economy. There's absolutely nothing wrong with trade, but globalists use trade as a weapon of warfare to wreck national economies in order to subject those economies to the "global marketplace." In reality globalization is nothing more than a new word for old British imperial economics.

Also, "offshoring" has existed within the US itself (e.g., when textile mills moved from the NE to the South). But there are only so many places to relocate within one country.

--hide--


Why would the US try to rope China into the globalist empire? After all, America is getting very cheap goods out of the
deal.

Mar 4th 2013 new

(Quote) Peter-449116 said: Thanks Tom, had to steal your cartoon and pass it along.
(Quote) Peter-449116 said:

Thanks Tom, had to steal your cartoon and pass it along.



--hide--


Peter: Can you explain this cartoon to me?

Mar 4th 2013 new

(Quote) James-17080 said: Hi Sean et alia, I have a very strong suspicion that we are our own wo...
(Quote) James-17080 said:




Hi Sean et alia,



I have a very strong suspicion that we are our own worst enemy.

James ☺

--hide--


WE are NOT our own worst enemy unless you are talking about the socialists, who are
tying like hell to destroy our precious country from within.

Mar 4th 2013 new

(Quote) Marianne-100218 said: The government is currently operating under the Continuing Appropriations Resolution,...
(Quote) Marianne-100218 said:

The government is currently operating under the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, which provides funding through March 27, 2013
for all Government agencies. It was signed by President Obama on September 28, 2012. It is in lieu of a formal Budget written by
Congress for the new fiscal year which began October 1, 2012. A Continuing Resolution provides funding for existing federal
programs at current, reduced, or expanded levels.

This Resolution means that Sequestration really does not change Government spending from October 1, 2012 until March 27, 2013.
The harsh terms of the Sequestration will take effect after that time.

The Sequestration is part of the Budget Control Act of 2011, which was signed into law by President Barack Obama
on August 2, 2011, during his first term as President. The main purpose of the Budget Control Act of 2011 was to deal with the
US debt-ceiling crisis, which, if not extended, would have let the US default on its debt on August 3, 2011. (Default means
not paying the money that became due on August 3, 2011 to those who lent money to the US Government.) We all went
through this calamity with the Fiscal Cliff.

The part of the Budget Control Act of 2011 that is effecting us now involves the Act's introduction of several complex mechanisms.
One of them is the automatic budget sequestration. This automatic budget sequestration proposed a compulsory trigger that
would go into effect if another agreement was NOT made on tax increases and/or budget cuts.

The intent of the Budget Control Act was to secure commitment of both sides of Congress to future Budget negotiation. The
enforcement mechanism of the act, called the Sequester, would be unpalatable to Republicans and Democrats alike.
President Obama agreed to the plan.

As we have seen, there has been no commitment or agreement yet, as of today.

But the Continuing Appropriations Resolution signed by Obama ensures that until March 27, 2013, nothing has to
change as far as Government Budget and spending goes. Letting prisoners out of jail and sending pink slips to
teachers and furloughing non-military workers is a bit premature and theatrical.

After that time (3/27/13), there will be a mandatory $85 Billion Cut in Government Spending. It will slash most Government
Departments, but more than half of that Money, $46 Billion, will come out of the Pentagon's spending for this year.

In 2013, with the effects of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the nations young men and women either being in harm's way,
or giving their lives for freedom, or home trying to cope with the inflicted scars of war, this heavy blow to the military makes
an intended visible impact.

And it shows that Obama made the potential Sequester bite as hard as possible in order to avert the Sequester and have
Congress pass necessary bills to enact new spending rules. Remember when Obama told the Russian diplomat that he
would have more flexibility in his second term?

This is a quote from General Odierno, Army Chief of Staff, from his reports to the Congress House Appropriations Subcommittee
on Defense, February 26, 2013. It shows how hard the cuts to the military will hit the armed forces.

"....our Soldiers, our young men and women, are the ones who will pay the price, potentially with their lives."

Below is part of Interview of General Odierno (GO) as he is being questioned by Charlie Rose (CR), and Nora O'Donnel (NO), on the
CBS Morning Show, 3/1/13. It shows how the military is absorbing the hardest blow of the cuts. He tells them how targeted
the cuts to his budget are, as a result of the Continuing Resolution and the Sequestration. He also shows the threats to our National
Security by our present Government, by never enacting and putting into place a Fiscal Budget.

NO: You have called this fiscal uncertainty the greatest threat to our Nation Security? Really? Greater than Al Qaeda, greater
than cyber warfare?

GO: The bottom line is if we continue to not be able to have a plan, we are supposed to build a five-year plan for our budget.
I cannot do that right now because we keep going through Continuing Resolutions. We have no certainty in what our money is going
to be. So we are wasteful, we are inefficient, and we can become more ineffective with our dollars. And I think people
watch this, and wonder what are we doing?

NO: We have heard from Congress though, Congressman Duncan Hunter, of accusing the Defense Department of adding
drama to this whole debate. What is your response to that?

GO: Well, what I would say is right now, I got a briefing last week on our cuts. Right now I have to come up with the money.
I can't find it yet. And I have not found it all yet. And right now we are furloughing 251,000 civilians; we are laying off about
8,000 people; I can't train 80 percent of my units; and I still have not found enough money yet that will pay the bills in 2013.


NO: "Some people are going to say that you cannot find the money in the entire Defence Budget? It is a huge budget."

GO: "I can't do it. See again, I am telling you that the money is fenced. And the Continuing Resolution does not allow us
to move money around. And Sequester, by the way, is Directed Cuts. We have no say in where those cuts come in
Fiscal Year '13. They are directed. They are every line item within your budget.

--------------------------

The Defense Department is hardest hit. Yet Homeland Security, Teachers and other agencies have made the most noise.
This is theatrics by Journalists, Democrats, and mostly, by President Barack Obama. He wants to blame Republicans.

Why haven't we had a budget for years? Why does spending increase, despite the lack of funds to support this spending.

This is Obama's ploy to have laws put into place to legitimize his unfunded spending.

His claim to change America is happening. Unfortunately, it will change the America that we have all come to
know and love.

--hide--



Marianne, I agree with Cheryl, this was a bit hard to read. The source reference really needs to be included as part of anything this long as I believe anything more than one paragraph of quoted material without a reference violates CM's terms of usage.

But I will say that General Odierno has a point in one respect about militarly appropriations, but then again that 5 year plan really only applies to funneling replacement euqipment. It drags itself out 10-20 years when you look at life expectancy for high dollar hardware procurement. This is where the new funding bill adds the option for spending to be reappropriated between agencies. This is one step in being able to start containing costs. In the past, it's always been the army asks for this amount and gets it, the navy asks for this much and gets it, the air force...the marines...etc. The major problem is once that's appropriated, even if it's not used for it's intended purpose it has to be spent before the end of each fiscal year. There is no refund to the taxpayers, and this is where billions in waste comes from. With the new resolution, the overall dollars will be less, but as the government keeps modifying where and how they choose to deploy their resources, the money can be shifted as needed. This doesn't prevent any one service from building out their short term plans based on the 'current' need, but it will start requiring each service's bean counters to be more responsive, just as the needs in various agencies change on a regular basis.

Mar 4th 2013 new

(Quote) Marianne-100218 said: Peter: Can you explain this cartoon to me?
(Quote) Marianne-100218 said:



Peter: Can you explain this cartoon to me?

--hide--



If you look at it in a different light, the total value was ~$20 Billion more than the government just handed out for Sandy rebuilding, or it was about 25% of what we wound up spending rescuing fannie/freddie, or about 30% of what we spent AIG. In other words, it's a pimple on a fly's backside at this point. But Obama tried to make it sound like Armegeddon riding herd on his pink unicorn.

Mar 4th 2013 new

(Quote) Brian-699857 said: Marianne, I agree with Cheryl, this was a bit hard to read. The source reference real...
(Quote) Brian-699857 said:




Marianne, I agree with Cheryl, this was a bit hard to read. The source reference really needs to be included as part of anything this long as I believe anything more than one paragraph of quoted material without a reference violates CM's terms of usage.

But I will say that General Odierno has a point in one respect about militarly appropriations, but then again that 5 year plan really only applies to funneling replacement euqipment. It drags itself out 10-20 years when you look at life expectancy for high dollar hardware procurement. This is where the new funding bill adds the option for spending to be reappropriated between agencies. This is one step in being able to start containing costs. In the past, it's always been the army asks for this amount and gets it, the navy asks for this much and gets it, the air force...the marines...etc. The major problem is once that's appropriated, even if it's not used for it's intended purpose it has to be spent before the end of each fiscal year. There is no refund to the taxpayers, and this is where billions in waste comes from. With the new resolution, the overall dollars will be less, but as the government keeps modifying where and how they choose to deploy their resources, the money can be shifted as needed. This doesn't prevent any one service from building out their short term plans based on the 'current' need, but it will start requiring each service's bean counters to be more responsive, just as the needs in various agencies change on a regular basis.

--hide--


Brian, I apologize. I did not know that CM had terms of usage.

My point was to show that Sequestration came from the Budget Bill written a few years ago. Then to show what Sequestration is
and how Obama is getting caught in the middle of his own tactics. I wanted to inform those of us who only hear Obama blaming
the Republicans.

How do you know that the 5-year plan for the military is only for replacement equipment? That is hardly a Budget for the military.

Mar 4th 2013 new

(Quote) Brian-699857 said: If you look at it in a different light, the total value was ~$20 Billion more than th...
(Quote) Brian-699857 said:




If you look at it in a different light, the total value was ~$20 Billion more than the government just handed out for Sandy rebuilding, or it was about 25% of what we wound up spending rescuing fannie/freddie, or about 30% of what we spent AIG. In other words, it's a pimple on a fly's backside at this point. But Obama tried to make it sound like Armegeddon riding herd on his pink unicorn.

--hide--


Oh, I thought all the characters were in hell, including Obama.

Mar 4th 2013 new

(Quote) Brian-699857 said: Marianne, I agree with Cheryl, this was a bit hard to read. The source reference real...
(Quote) Brian-699857 said:




Marianne, I agree with Cheryl, this was a bit hard to read. The source reference really needs to be included as part of anything this long as I believe anything more than one paragraph of quoted material without a reference violates CM's terms of usage.

But I will say that General Odierno has a point in one respect about militarly appropriations, but then again that 5 year plan really only applies to funneling replacement euqipment. It drags itself out 10-20 years when you look at life expectancy for high dollar hardware procurement. This is where the new funding bill adds the option for spending to be reappropriated between agencies. This is one step in being able to start containing costs. In the past, it's always been the army asks for this amount and gets it, the navy asks for this much and gets it, the air force...the marines...etc. The major problem is once that's appropriated, even if it's not used for it's intended purpose it has to be spent before the end of each fiscal year. There is no refund to the taxpayers, and this is where billions in waste comes from. With the new resolution, the overall dollars will be less, but as the government keeps modifying where and how they choose to deploy their resources, the money can be shifted as needed. This doesn't prevent any one service from building out their short term plans based on the 'current' need, but it will start requiring each service's bean counters to be more responsive, just as the needs in various agencies change on a regular basis.

--hide--


Brian: I deliberately did not quote any material. I tried to simplify the Budget and
continuing appropriations to let people know that is how the Government has been run for a long time.
I could have added a lot more. I just tried to get across those three points, and then show how
the military may have been unfairly targeted, as the General was saying.

Mar 4th 2013 new

(Quote) Marianne-100218 said: Brian, I apologize. I did not know that CM had terms of usage. My point was to...
(Quote) Marianne-100218 said:



Brian, I apologize. I did not know that CM had terms of usage.

My point was to show that Sequestration came from the Budget Bill written a few years ago. Then to show what Sequestration is
and how Obama is getting caught in the middle of his own tactics. I wanted to inform those of us who only hear Obama blaming
the Republicans.

How do you know that the 5-year plan for the military is only for replacement equipment? That is hardly a Budget for the military.

--hide--



It's not only for replacement equipment. Sorry if that is how it came across. Every year the military reviews long term (ongoing) and short term spending requirements before submitting their budget. If the general was only quoting 5 years (which is why I made a comment to the quoted reference), he was most likely referring to short to intermediate funding. Take for example a navy ship. It takes multiple years to build one, and then it's life expectency is 30-50 years of ongoing costs after deployment. Same thing with an aircraft.

Mar 4th 2013 new

(Quote) Sean-851370 said: (Quote) Marianne-100218 said: Has anyone realized that this is becoming the...
(Quote) Sean-851370 said:

Quote:
Marianne-100218 said:

Has anyone realized that this is becoming the new Normal for our Government. Catastrophe after
Catastrophe. And we are stuck in the middle.





They create the catastrophe and then come in as the savior.

--hide--



Yes here is an article in my friend's blog about how "Your government hates you and wants to see you suffer."



peterseanesq.blogspot.com

Posts 31 - 40 of 55