Can America be Fixed?

TwoGallants

The USA just about averted an economic catastrophe - one entirely of its own making. The short term outlook is not great. There is likely to be more of the same from the Republicans in the new year when the ceiling needs to be raised again. Despite the US having a comparatively small deficit (as in, it makes more sense to maintain or even raise spending in order to bounce the economy along), it has severe long term economic problems that neither party is serious about tackling. The baby boomers are retiring and in order to pay for the pensions and healthcare they've been promised, a fiscal adjustment equivalent to 10% of GDP will be required over the coming decade(s). Of course, Republicans are adamantly against tax hikes and democrats against spending cuts, so expect lots more gridlock. Expect some kind of catastrophe down the line. Perhaps even a default at some point.

China will overtake American economically at some point in the near future. When that happens, America will probably enter in to a spiral of decline.

Or will it?

To most sane people, America's economic problems are simple to fix, easy even. But when big money has basically full control of the political system (and that includes the influence of public sector unions), long term strategic thinking will go out the window.

If I were an American in a position of power and influence, the one thing I would try and do is pass a constitutional amendment to remove the influence of money from politics. Maybe something along the lines of taxpayer funded political parties. I'm not sure. But the current system is broken almost beyond repair, and its barely even recognisable as a democracy anymore.

Jonny7

TwoGallants wrote: »

But the current system is broken almost beyond repair, and its barely even recognisable as a democracy anymore.

What would you replace it with that's a realistic possibility

Manach

TwoGallants wrote: »

Despite the US having a comparatively small deficit

Using Wikipedia (debt-link) - it shows the US one of the few countries with a Debt-to-GDP ratio> 100. Economics is not in my strong skill set, but I reckon spending that much above what a state is not sustainable.
As for new governmental structure, might I suggest a return to base principles, the ending of this American Independence and that this renegade colony return to the mother-country

Fox_In_Socks

Jonny7 wrote: »

What would you replace it with that's a realistic possibility

Balkanise it.

Confederate States of America
Republic of Texas
Mid West Federation
Latinia
New England.


Everyone's a winner.

theblaqueguy

I think the only way to save america is to change the rules so Obama can have another term hes the best American president by far

Amerika

In addition to the $17 Trillion deficit, the amount of our other unfunded liabilities is quite staggering. The Social Security unfunded liability is projected to be $17.5 trillion dollars, the Medicare unfunded liability is projected to be even much higher, with part A unfunded liability estimated at $36 Trillion dollars, part B at $37 Trillion dollars unfunded, and part D at $15 Trillion dollars. Those total amount of the unfunded liability comes out to just over $100 Trillion dollars, and that doesn’t include the huge unfunded public employee benefits such as pensions and retirement healthcare. If all the unfunded liability of the US amounts to about $130 Trillion, then we owe more money than there exists in the entire world. How people can say our debt isn’t a problem is beyond me.

jman0war

Amerika wrote: »

If all the unfunded liability of the US amounts to about $130 Trillion, then we owe more money than there exists in the entire world. How people can say our debt isn’t a problem is beyond me.

What kind of problems is it causing?

Amerika

jman0war wrote: »

What kind of problems is it causing?

Since it is pretty evident our government doesn’t have the ability to pay off its debt in any foreseeable future and will have to keep borrowing to sustain itself... I think we can see a fast track to insolvency, bankruptcy, and no control over our future. Little things like that.

jman0war

Amerika wrote: »

Since it is pretty evident our government doesn’t have the ability to pay off its debt in any foreseeable future and will have to keep borrowing to sustain itself... I think we can see a fast track to insolvency, bankruptcy, and no control over our future. Little things like that.

It looks like those problems are really just political posturing.
USA appears to have a license to print money.

We all know that the deficit is only a problem when there's a Democratic president.

Jonny7

Amerika wrote: »

Since it is pretty evident our government doesn’t have the ability to pay off its debt in any foreseeable future and will have to keep borrowing to sustain itself... I think we can see a fast track to insolvency, bankruptcy, and no control over our future. Little things like that.

Belgium has relatively more debt, so does France, UK, Germany, Italy, Austria, Norway, Denmark.. the list goes on and on

Luxembourg has over 30 times the debt of the US

InTheTrees

jman0war wrote: »

We all know that the deficit is only a problem when there's a Democratic president.

Yup. Republican presidents run up the debt with "essential" wars and then blame the subsequent deficit on the Democratic president who's voted in to clean up their mess.

The rich cycle of life...

nagilum2

jman0war wrote: »

It looks like those problems are really just political posturing.
USA appears to have a license to print money.

We all know that the deficit is only a problem when there's a Democratic president.

Sadly, this statement is totally true about the GOP establishment. That hypocrisy just one of the reasons I (and many others) won't support them.

Amerika

jman0war wrote: »

We all know that the deficit is only a problem when there's a Democratic president.

Not for me. I became part of the Tea Party when it was first formed at the end of George W Bush's term, as a result of all the gov't spending by Congress when he was in charge -- particularly Bush's banking bailout.

InTheTrees

Now all the right wingers are denying they're republicans, maybe there's a chance of third party emerging out of the fractured Republican party?

Why dont the libertarian "party" and the tea "party" go it alone, instead of this confusing battle with the republicans from within the republican party?

Amerika

InTheTrees wrote: »

Now all the right wingers are denying they're republicans, maybe there's a chance of third party emerging out of the fractured Republican party?

Actually its more like we're the real republicans and the rest are RINO's.

clairefontaine

Jonny7 wrote: »

Belgium has relatively more debt, so does France, UK, Germany, Italy, Austria, Norway, Denmark.. the list goes on and on

Luxembourg has over 30 times the debt of the US

And Europe is in worse trouble than we are.

clairefontaine

InTheTrees wrote: »

Now all the right wingers are denying they're republicans, maybe there's a chance of third party emerging out of the fractured Republican party?

Why dont the libertarian "party" and the tea "party" go it alone, instead of this confusing battle with the republicans from within the republican party?

Because they don't want to split the vote. But it may happen yet.

The GOP is a mess, Bush 1 and 2 are part of his little empire building,and in cahoots with the Clintons. They are all in it together. One party, two faces.

Tea parties and libertarians support a more traditional interpretation of the constitution as well as a more statist and less federal government.

Don't let the labels of the party confuse you. Take Nixon for example. He was a republican right.. yet he made moves towards a more centralised government with all his alphabet soup creations. Same with Bloomberg, supposedly a republican, but wants to ban big gulps. Both of these men practise politics counter ideological to traditional republican conservative lines.

Justice Roberts approved the constitutionality of Obamacare, yet he is a Bush appointed conservative judge.

Another example, Clinton, a southern Democrat. He completely changed the party, from an underdog,pro union party to one obsessed with gender politics and ended up alienation much of the traditional democratic base. Don't forget, he is southern too, so he will be more conservative.

Obama is a Chicago democrat. That should need no explanation.

Jonny7

clairefontaine wrote: »

And Europe is in worse trouble than we are.

What kind of trouble, what's gonna happen and when..

It's very easy to be all doom and gloom, but the fact of the matter is that Europe, and much of the world will most likely be in a better economic position in 5 years..

sin_city

Jonny7 wrote: »

What kind of trouble, what's gonna happen and when..

It's very easy to be all doom and gloom, but the fact of the matter is that Europe, and much of the world will most likely be in a better economic position in 5 years..

Yes, it is easy to be doom and gloom when you understand basic mathematics. The system was about to collapse in 2008 and since then money printing has taken place to cover up the cracks, kick the can down the road.

This day is coming.

Try to base your argument on facts and figures rather than emotion and you will see things clearer.

Jonny7

sin_city wrote: »

This day is coming.

Sorry which day is coming and when?

I've heard so so many predictions over the last 10 years and it's just been let down after let down.

sin_city

Jonny7 wrote: »

Sorry which day is coming and when?

I've heard so so many predictions over the last 10 years and it's just been let down after let down.

Which day? The day when the US dollar collapses.

Purchasing power of USD






When? Not exactly sure but if the signs are there and becoming clearer and clearer.

You see, the FED needs to keep printing money to buy US bonds to keep the interest rates low so the interest payments on the deficit stays low.

This has been happening like crazy since 2008.

This is devaluing the US dollar but they have to keep doing it because if interest rates increase the government will not be able to service the debts of $17 trillion.

Paying small percentages on $17 trillion is OK but once the interest rate increases the interest payments will become too much.

The answer, more money printing to pay the debt which will further devalue the Us dollar.

There are also many unfunded liabilities that are not included on the balance sheet such as all the wars.

America and much of the Western world are too high in debt.

I don't know when the collapse will take place but from listening to people that predicted the 2008 crash it will most likely happen during this decade.

clairefontaine

Jonny7 wrote: »

Sorry which day is coming and when?

I've heard so so many predictions over the last 10 years and it's just been let down after let down.

With the recent budget, we are now at zero collateral.

Jonny7

sin_city wrote: »

Which day? The day when the US dollar collapses.

Purchasing power of USD






When? Not exactly sure but if the signs are there and becoming clearer and clearer.

You see, the FED needs to keep printing money to buy US bonds to keep the interest rates low so the interest payments on the deficit stays low.

This has been happening like crazy since 2008.

This is devaluing the US dollar but they have to keep doing it because if interest rates increase the government will not be able to service the debts of $17 trillion.

Paying small percentages on $17 trillion is OK but once the interest rate increases the interest payments will become too much.

The answer, more money printing to pay the debt which will further devalue the Us dollar.

There are also many unfunded liabilities that are not included on the balance sheet such as all the wars.

America and much of the Western world are too high in debt.

I don't know when the collapse will take place but from listening to people that predicted the 2008 crash it will most likely happen during this decade.

That's your prediction, here's mine..

The US dollar will remain the main reserve currency for the next decade at least.

China, India and the BRIC countries will push world economic growth.

Most, if not all countries will officially lift out of recession in the next couple of years. Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Spain and Italy will still have problems, but no more than they are currently having today.

In precisely ten years time, on this forum, there will be a couple of nay-sayers predicting the financial demise of the Western world in another 10 years... if I'm around I'll just necro this thread.

Amirani

Further devaluation of the US Dollar right now wouldn't be a terrible scenario right now from a US point of view. China and the far east aren't the World leaders in manufacturing right now because of their productive capacity, it's because they're still far cheaper than the US. Devaluation of the Dollar will narrow this gap, and likely mandate some growth in the green energy sector (to alleviate more costly oil imports).

Obviously then there's the fact that devaluing the Dollar will reduce the debt burden and spur growth. Interest rates are historically low, there's still plenty of room for dollar devaluation.

Krugman's trillion dollar coin idea is worth reading about: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/rage-against-the-coin/

sin_city

Jonny7 wrote: »

That's your prediction, here's mine..

The US dollar will remain the main reserve currency for the next decade at least.

China, India and the BRIC countries will push world economic growth.

Most, if not all countries will officially lift out of recession in the next couple of years. Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Spain and Italy will still have problems, but no more than they are currently having today.

In precisely ten years time, on this forum, there will be a couple of nay-sayers predicting the financial demise of the Western world in another 10 years... if I'm around I'll just necro this thread.

That's your prediction. I've seen people like Ron Paul, Peter Schiff and Mike Maloney predict the crash of 2008 years and even decades in advance.

Yes its true you have given a prediction but once again you let emotions decide what you wanted to believe.

If you were asked about the strength of the USSR in 1989 you could let emotions get the better of you and say that the USSR was a strong state and that the communist bloc would remain for many years ahead.

If you were posed the same question in 1944, you might say The British Empire would last for many more years and that their economy would go from strength to strength and that the pound would remain the dominant currency.

You might also say the same thing about the Ottomans interest payments going from 15% to 50% in the years 1860 to 1875, the French before the hyperinflation and then the Revolution, the Spanish before their inflationary silver caused their collapse, the Romans and so on.

You could ignore all the facts. Ignorance is bliss, right?

sin_city

NiallSparky wrote: »

Krugman's trillion dollar coin idea is worth reading about: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/rage-against-the-coin/

If that was a good idea then it would have long been introduced.

It might be a good comedy read for the history books of the future.

Amirani

sin_city wrote: »

If that was a good idea then it would have long been introduced.

It might be a good comedy read for the history books of the future.

Sure all of Krugman's Nobel Prize material has already been turned into comic books... :rolleyes:

You've displayed some knowledge of economics in this thread. Surely you understand that the soundest economic policies don't always get implemented? If, as you believe, devaluation of the dollar is a flawed economic policy, why is it happening? There's interest groups that prevent certain policies being enacted. Why would wealthy republicans have any interest in devaluing the dollar? Why would banks who are owed tonnes of money have any interest in devaluing the dollar and consequently the value of their loan books? These interest groups are pretty powerful, and that's without mentioning Congress itself, whose members have an extremely high average wealth.

In reply to the thread title, America isn't really broken. Certainly not any more broken than the majority of other nations around the World.

sin_city

NiallSparky wrote: »

Sure all of Krugman's Nobel Prize material has already been turned into comic books... :rolleyes:

You've displayed some knowledge of economics in this thread. Surely you understand that the soundest economic policies don't always get implemented? If, as you believe, devaluation of the dollar is a flawed economic policy, why is it happening? There's interest groups that prevent certain policies being enacted. Why would wealthy republicans have any interest in devaluing the dollar? Why would banks who are owed tonnes of money have any interest in devaluing the dollar and consequently the value of their loan books? These interest groups are pretty powerful, and that's without mentioning Congress itself, whose members have an extremely high average wealth.

In reply to the thread title, America isn't really broken. Certainly not any more broken than the majority of other nations around the World.

Didn’t Obama and Henry Kissinger win Nobel awards for peace? Hmmm….

I can just as easily mention Hayek and Friedman and both of those, particularly Friedman have a far higher standing in economics than Krugman.


Of course devaluation of the dollar is a flawed policy. It punishes people who save money as their savings lose value and it promotes people to use credit hence we are in a huge credit bubble which will cause massive hardship in this decade.

Wealthy republicans have nothing do to with the value of the dollar. Neither do wealthy democrats.

The banks have the interest in that they get the “new” printed money from the federal reserve first. It still has its higher perceived value. They can borrow this from the FED at 0% and then give out loans to ten times that amount using fractional reserve banking.

So, they can charge interest on something and us a tenth of the amount. Borrow $1 billion at 0% and then loan out $10 billion, obviously at a little higher than 0%. What a scam, but it’s legal.

Don’t forget also if the loans cannot be paid the banks can seize the assets and also don’t forget they are part of an industry that is too big to fail.

You need to move away from the democrats and republicans debate. Look at the monetary system.

nagilum2

sin_city wrote: »

Which day? The day when the US dollar collapses.

Purchasing power of USD






When? Not exactly sure but if the signs are there and becoming clearer and clearer.

You see, the FED needs to keep printing money to buy US bonds to keep the interest rates low so the interest payments on the deficit stays low.

This has been happening like crazy since 2008.

This is devaluing the US dollar but they have to keep doing it because if interest rates increase the government will not be able to service the debts of $17 trillion.

Paying small percentages on $17 trillion is OK but once the interest rate increases the interest payments will become too much.

The answer, more money printing to pay the debt which will further devalue the Us dollar.

There are also many unfunded liabilities that are not included on the balance sheet such as all the wars.

America and much of the Western world are too high in debt.

I don't know when the collapse will take place but from listening to people that predicted the 2008 crash it will most likely happen during this decade.

What's this? An argument based on real data on these forums! Wow, I can scarcely believe what I'm reading.

+1

Jonny7

sin_city wrote: »

That's your prediction. I've seen people like Ron Paul, Peter Schiff and Mike Maloney predict the crash of 2008 years and even decades in advance.

In fairness the crisis was predicted by a large number of people, economists, bankers, MPs and so on.

There were also those who predicted the fall of Western society and the collapse of the dollar..

One is very different from the other.

Jonny7

nagilum2 wrote: »

What's this? An argument based on real data on these forums! Wow, I can scarcely believe what I'm reading.

+1

It's the interpretation of data.

For instance, most economists see a period of relatively muted/steady growth for the US over the next few years.

Alarmists with pre-formed beliefs will seize pointy looking graphs and start telling us the end is nigh

sin_city

Jonny7 wrote: »

In fairness the crisis was predicted by a large number of people, economists, bankers, MPs and so on.

There were also those who predicted the fall of Western society and the collapse of the dollar..

One is very different from the other.

I have named 3. You have named none. None that predicted it decades in advance. None that named it years in advance. If you're going to make an argument you'll need to back it up.

Your words are just that.....your words.

In fairness, as you say, what is it about the stats that I have argued that you disagree with?

sin_city

Jonny7 wrote: »

It's the interpretation of data.

For instance, most economists see a period of relatively muted/steady growth for the US over the next few years.

Alarmists with pre-formed beliefs will seize pointy looking graphs and start telling us the end is nigh

Most economists....just a statement that means nothing without back up.

Most economists that are invested in a crash not coming? Most economists from the English speaking world? Most economists on TV? Or just most economists you know?

Pointy looking graphs....so you either didn't bother to look into it or you don't understand it.

jman0war

sin_city wrote: »

Most economists....just a statement that means nothing without back up.

Most economists that are invested in a crash not coming? Most economists from the English speaking world? Most economists on TV? Or just most economists you know?

Pointy looking graphs....so you either didn't bother to look into it or you don't understand it.

You've referred to teh 2008 crash and presume parellels to the deficit.
But deficit's don't cause crashes.
It's like you're comparing an asset bubble with a deficit. But they are not the same.

USA has the license to print money, they can keep doing it and getting away with it as long as most the rest of the world values the dollar, which ties in nicely with the neo-con empire building via military expansionist policy,.

Jonny7

sin_city wrote: »

I have named 3. You have named none. None that predicted it decades in advance. None that named it years in advance. If you're going to make an argument you'll need to back it up.

The chancellor of the exchequer warned of it

Many economists, political pundits and bankers knew that the property bubble would eventually burst, knew of the issues with the sub-prime mortgages in the States, knew that investment banks were taking enormous risks

THanks to boom and bust cycles it wasn't exactly a surprise, the only unquantified part was how much damage it would do

Those that predicted that Western society would disintegrate and the dollar would crash were a little disappointed..

You are simply doing the same thing in a post-bust cycle - not even Ron Paul would take those prediction odds

10 years to meltdown? well I wouldn't hold my breath

sin_city

Jonny7 wrote: »

The chancellor of the exchequer warned of it

Many economists, political pundits and bankers knew that the property bubble would eventually burst, knew of the issues with the sub-prime mortgages in the States, knew that investment banks were taking enormous risks

THanks to boom and bust cycles it wasn't exactly a surprise, the only unquantified part was how much damage it would do

Those that predicted that Western society would disintegrate and the dollar would crash were a little disappointed..

You are simply doing the same thing in a post-bust cycle - not even Ron Paul would take those prediction odds

10 years to meltdown? well I wouldn't hold my breath

You still haven't mentioned anyone...the Chancellor??? Who?? When?? in 2008 after the damage was done.

Try this..Ron Paul in 2002...naming the companies that were to be involved in the crash and the exact problems. He knew exactly the type of meltdown that was coming.

Boom and bust cycles are caused by federal reserve monetary policy i.e. inflation and defltion of the money supply. The US economy had the highest GDP in the 19th century and was growing annually around 3%

I only became aware of people like Ron Paul and Marc Faber after the crash of 2008 but I am listening to them for sure.

Who are you paying attention to these days? You sound a bit like Noel King, the guy that managed Ireland for 2 games.

sin_city

jman0war wrote: »

You've referred to teh 2008 crash and presume parellels to the deficit.
But deficit's don't cause crashes.
It's like you're comparing an asset bubble with a deficit. But they are not the same.

USA has the license to print money, they can keep doing it and getting away with it as long as most the rest of the world values the dollar, which ties in nicely with the neo-con empire building via military expansionist policy,.

You don't know anything about empires and how they collapse do you?

I don't mean to insult but you should try to educate yourself on the history of empires collapsing due to financial problems.

I've written in previous posts in this thread regarding your post so not going to repeat myself.

Jonny7

sin_city wrote: »

You still haven't mentioned anyone...the Chancellor??? Who?? When?? in 2008 after the damage was done.

Alistair Darling warned of the implications of the crash. My point is that it wasn't exactly unforeseen.

The US economy had the highest GDP in the 19th century and was growing annually around 3%

And it grew 1.7% in the second quarter of this year and we are still cautious

Who are you paying attention to these days? You sound a bit like Noel King, the guy that managed Ireland for 2 games.

I work in finance, I pay attention where possible

jman0war

Firstly, i note your attempt at moving goalposts.
Initially you were predicting economic collapse and drawing parells with the asset bubble bursting in 2008; and now your talking about empires collapsing, as if they are the same things! NOT

I don't ordinarily post op-ed's, but in the case i will.
Here's a little piece i found from one of your own - Libertarian on why doom merchants about the deficit have it wrong.

Everything the Hysterics Tell You About Budget Deficits Is Wrong
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2013/01/13/everything-the-hysterics-tell-you-about-budget-deficits-is-wrong/

The author goes through the usual bogus arguments about the deficit and generally debunks them.
As a Libertarian he basically makes the point that the deficit can only hamstring future governments ability to borrow, which from a Libertarian POV can only be good.

sin_city

Jonny7 wrote: »

Alistair Darling warned of the implications of the crash. My point is that it wasn't exactly unforeseen.

Great one name....btw, he warned after it happened

And it grew 1.7% in the second quarter of this year and we are still cautious

And you believe it :rolleyes:
Adjusted for inflation...which is not measured as it was the past pre 1980 before substitution.

btw you missed my point. I was highlighting steady growth minus booms and busts.

I work in finance, I pay attention where possible

Good to hear you got a job after your role in Anglo Irish Bank :pac:

Jonny7

sin_city wrote: »

And you believe it :rolleyes:
Adjusted for inflation...which is not measured as it was the past pre 1980 before substitution.

Maybe you can tell us what the real figure was (hint : I gave you the estimation for that quarter)

Amirani

sin_city wrote: »

Didn’t Obama and Henry Kissinger win Nobel awards for peace? Hmmm….

I can just as easily mention Hayek and Friedman and both of those, particularly Friedman have a far higher standing in economics than Krugman.

Why would you mention them but not talk about any of their views on the matter?

Friedman as a monetarist was a big believer in using currency devaluation to achieve a position of fiscal balance. Read his essay "The case for flexible exchange rates". Keynes would've been a big supporter in printing to drive demand also.

Fox_In_Socks

sin_city wrote: »

Which day? The day when the US dollar collapses.

Purchasing power of USD

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e8/US_high-income_effective_tax_rates.png/350px-US_high-income_effective_tax_rates.png

Does corrrelation equal causation?:pac:

Someone has to pay for spending, either taxes or debt.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

SupaNova2

Those predicting dollar collapse gave their reasons to be fair, and their reasons are sound, a main one being foreigners would stop lending to the US.

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Documents/mfh.txt

This makes all the recent talk over the FED tapering hilarious when foreigners on aggregate have not only tapered but sold over 120 billion of US debt over the past few months. Even if all those dollars going abroad as a result of the trade deficit were lent back to the US(which they are not) the FED would still have to print as the government budget deficit is even larger than the trade deficit.

Here is Peter Schiff on Tapering.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tak9ODlBJgM

Malibu Stacy

TwoGallants wrote: »

China will overtake American economically at some point in the near future. When that happens, America will probably enter in to a spiral of decline.

Or will it?

Overtake in what sense?

The size of the Chinese economy is huge, but GDP/capita is still relatively low. Private property and intellectual property rights are a joke. Corruption is rampant at every level of society. There are also major social tensions away from the coastal areas that most people don't hear about. Although the internal market is growing, it is not robust enough to keep both growth and employment at a rate that Party officials are comfortable with. Plus it scares the **** out of its neighbors.

The US has a lot of seemingly intractable problems right now, but given the mess that Europe is in and the weakening BRIC economies, it seems premature to write it off. Decline, in an international sense, is relative.

InTheTrees

Malibu Stacy wrote: »

The size of the Chinese economy is huge, but GDP/capita is still relatively low. Private property and intellectual property rights are a joke. Corruption is rampant at every level of society.

And most importantly the Chinese financial data is not reliable.

Its not an open society and numbers published by the government are not verifiable. So I dont imagine the world switching from the Dollar to the Yuan anytime soon.

InTheTrees

TwoGallants wrote: »

If I were an American in a position of power and influence, the one thing I would try and do is pass a constitutional amendment to remove the influence of money from politics.

Ummm. Its getting worse.

Unfortunately the US Supreme Court is predominately right wing now and has gone the opposite direction in the last year and has removed a lot of the restrictions that were in place to provide clarity (and restrictions) about corporate political donations.

clairefontaine

InTheTrees wrote: »

Ummm. Its getting worse.

Unfortunately the US Supreme Court is predominately right wing now and has gone the opposite direction in the last year and has removed a lot of the restrictions that were in place to provide clarity (and restrictions) about corporate political donations.

Yeah same right wingers who voted in Obamacare.

RINOS.

Malibu Stacy

clairefontaine wrote: »

RINOS.

The whole 'RINO' thing doesn't make any sense. It's essentially a stick to beat someone over the head with that disagrees with you. This kind of nonsense on the right is reminiscent of the internecine fights that one usually observes on the left. The growing insistence on ideological purity among the activist base of the GOP is pushing it into the same position that the Democrats faced in the 1980s - they can win local and Congressional elections, but are increasingly having a hard time with statewide or national elections.

clairefontaine

Malibu Stacy wrote: »

The whole 'RINO' thing doesn't make any sense. It's essentially a stick to beat someone over the head with that disagrees with you. This kind of nonsense on the right is reminiscent of the internecine fights that one usually observes on the left. The growing insistence on ideological purity among the activist base of the GOP is pushing it into the same position that the Democrats faced in the 1980s - they can win local and Congressional elections, but are increasingly having a hard time with statewide or national elections.

One party, two faces.

RINO completely makes sense. It's candidates in the GOP who pretend to hold republican values and yet do thinks like try to ban BIG GULPS.