Debt Ceiling and the threat of The U.S. Defaulting

[HeyYou]

Talk about biting the hand that "FED" you...

 

Did you hear AIG and their share holders are considering to sue the government for unfair bailout deal. lol.

 

This is exactly why any country needs to regulate corperations and buisnesses because giving the opertunity of not being properly regulated they will do anything and everything in their power just to try to make an extra buck even if it is at the cost of screwing over the general population . For AIG they basically gambled away money they didn't even own and at the cost of the american people and the economy who end up suffering because it. Tax payer money had to bailout AIG in order for the economy not to completely crash because there was so much deregulation during Bush's administration where companies became way too big to not bailout (corperations this big need to be broken down in the future or they could crash the economy again someday through too much deregulation). There is too much historical evidence that deregulation of corperate buisness will abuse the people, the country, the environment, etc... in the name of greed and profit.

 

Even if the deal was unfair AIG didn't have to take the bailout but they did regaurdless if they didn't it would have still crashed our economy.

 

AIG decided they didn't wanna do that. :) Imagine that.... LOL

[colourwheel]

AIG decided they didn't wanna do that. :) Imagine that.... LOL

 

lol It is probably because of stuff like this getting around...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PoMU0Br2u8&feature=player_embedded

4PoMU0Br2u8

Edited January 11, 2013 by colourwheel

[HeyYou]

I want my ROTFLMAO emoticon. :)

[ColdHeartonIce]

Rights ain't something who get managed or declared by Government' date=' i have rights already. On which base of knowledge i'am debating here?[/quote']

I think I disagree.

Do you see yourself as mindless drone, as animal without any rights or freedoms untill a government let you have some?

 

 

You don't get rights out of thin air. Rights are granted amongst a group of people.

You get rights by taking them. They are granted against a group of people. I can say what i wan't no matter if the other ones like it or not.

 

You have a basic wrong philosophy and i see no point in debating on this.

 

HeyYou

Rights are given to you by the government. THEY get to dictate just what rights you have.

See, another one who thinks people ain't anything untill government decides else.

 

What do you think the Bill of Rights was about? They jotted down a few basic rights as securitization. They said people have way more rights than that, given by god(or nature) than this. All men are created equal by god, not by government. And they knewd, someday someone will show up and say "Oh these are the only rights you have and not one more". This is wrong and a sick philosophy which makes it total meaningless debating anything based on self-determination, because for you people doesn't exist such a thing as self-determination.

[Ghogiel]

Rights ain't something who get managed or declared by Government' date=' i have rights already. On which base of knowledge i'am debating here?[/quote']

I think I disagree.

Do you see yourself as mindless drone, as animal without any rights or freedoms untill a government let you have some?

I don't see myself as a mindless drone. Like animals rights, I too have also been granted rights. For example when the Bill of Rights was penned, which legislated 10 basic fundamental rights that were to be granted to the people in an attempt to codify and guarantee some basic freedoms, some of them were to limit the extant of a governments powers.

 

You don't get rights out of thin air. Rights are granted amongst a group of people.

You get rights by taking them. They are granted against a group of people. I can say what i wan't no matter if the other ones like it or not.

 

You have a basic wrong philosophy and i see no point in debating on this.

 

In a manner of speaking you can take rights. But you would only be able to keep them if they are mutually agreed upon by the society and safeguarded. Which is where legislation comes in. Or if they go against the sentiment of a society and it's populace, you need to have the power to dictate and enforce those rights.

 

No matter how they propagate or are enforced, they have to be made up, at least in your own head before you can 'take' them. Yes, many rights have been tyrannical as history shows. For example the rights of one man to own another. Simply declaring whatever you want your rights to be, doesn't make them the rights you actually have. What rights you do have are likely on a piece of paper somewhere. And those rights are only assured as long as everyone around you, or who/what ever has powers to take them away/grant them, continues to agree you have them. We know rights are made, removed and are broken all the time.

 

Even seemingly broad rights are limited to context too. For example the first amendment in the bill of rights. Freedom of speech does not unilaterally allow you to "say what i wan't no matter if the other ones like it or not." You can say some things and they, us, society, government, the people, will put you in a cage or otherwise punish you. eg, here in the nexus community, you have limited rights of speech.

 

Asserting I have a 'basic wrong philosophy' does not make it true. That is your opinion, which I naturally disagree with.

 

Edit: In how I interpret your use of the term, the concept of god given rights is the antithesis of SELF determination. It's exactly the same as if a government granted them or a god. It was someone else, ie not you.

Edited January 11, 2013 by Ghogiel

[Maharg67]

AIG decided they didn't wanna do that. :) Imagine that.... LOL

 

lol It is probably because of stuff like this getting around...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PoMU0Br2u8&feature=player_embedded

4PoMU0Br2u8

 

Very interesting video, Colourwheel, though with too much colourful language. Having dealt with creationists here in Australia, I have seen such shallow tricks done by extreme Christians not only against science, evolution in particular, but against other beliefs and much else besides.

 

I prefer to see a less profane, more methodical and logical response but one with some less crass humour to it. A positive support for science, for evolution, is more effective than a negative attack on the creationists though calmly exposing their stupidities is also effective.

 

The creationists are convinced by such arguments mainly because they wish to be so convinced. It is better to fight them by addressing the general public than to go directly against the creationists themselves. I have dealt with these people, in the real world and arguing against them directly, or attacking them, is as effective as :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash:

Edited January 11, 2013 by Maharg67

[HeyYou]

Rights ain't something who get managed or declared by Government' date=' i have rights already. On which base of knowledge i'am debating here?[/quote']

I think I disagree.

Do you see yourself as mindless drone, as animal without any rights or freedoms untill a government let you have some?

 

 

You don't get rights out of thin air. Rights are granted amongst a group of people.

You get rights by taking them. They are granted against a group of people. I can say what i wan't no matter if the other ones like it or not.

 

You have a basic wrong philosophy and i see no point in debating on this.

 

HeyYou

Rights are given to you by the government. THEY get to dictate just what rights you have.

See, another one who thinks people ain't anything untill government decides else.

 

What do you think the Bill of Rights was about? They jotted down a few basic rights as securitization. They said people have way more rights than that, given by god(or nature) than this. All men are created equal by god, not by government. And they knewd, someday someone will show up and say "Oh these are the only rights you have and not one more". This is wrong and a sick philosophy which makes it total meaningless debating anything based on self-determination, because for you people doesn't exist such a thing as self-determination.

 

Now that is outright funny. Why don't you go ahead and start advocating violent overthrow of the government, and see how far your 'rights' get you.

 

As I said, you ONLY have the rights government grants you. If the government suddenly decides that you no longer have the right to drive a car, guess what, if you get caught driving, you go to jail. The government has the power. You have none. You get the illusion of power in some societies with the opportunity to vote, but, who decides who runs? Certainly not you.

 

You supposedly have the right to keep and bear arms. But, you need a permit to carry a weapon in most places. And in some places, you don't even get that. So, will you exercise the 'right' that you 'took', and carry anyway? If you decide to do so, hope you enjoy prison.

 

The bill of rights is a fine example of the GOVERNMENT DETAILING just what rights you DO have. If it ain't in writing, guess what, you don't have it.

 

You can't "take" rights in any event. Unless of course, you are some military power, that can enforce your will on others, thereby, denying them THEIR rights.

 

In any event, I am going to take a wild stab in the dark here, and conclude that no one here is going to pull you out of your delusional view of the world, so, I am not going to bother with it any more.

 

Back on topic:

 

The repubbies seem to think they are in a position of power at this point, and plan to hold the entire country hostage by NOT increasing the debt ceiling. Thereby potentially causing a government shutdown, and the US defaulting on it's debts. That should make for a wonderful economic boost. I would guess, that if the repubbies actually carry thru with that threat, there won't be a single republican left in washington come 2015.

Edited January 11, 2013 by HeyYou

[colourwheel]

@Maharg67

 

The commercial was just an edit of AIG recent commerical called "Thankyou America" There was no actual profanity in the original commercial they just *bleeped* the "thank" out of "thankyou" lol

 

The point it was tyring to make was AIG was bailed out with tax payer money by the Federal Government which AIG accepted Otherwise they would have gone into bankruptcy and crash the economy at the same time. No one forced AIG to accept the deal. But their shareHolders thought the deal was unfair regaurdless it was the companies choice to take it up. So Instead of saying "Thankyou America for the Bailout." the spoof of the video I posted was trying to imply how AIG really feels by suddenly concidering to sue the Federal government for a bad deal to their shareholders...

 

AIG shareholders should actaully be sueing the AIG board if anything. If they thought they got a bad deal, it was the AIG board who accepted the deal given to help them out.

[HeyYou]

Not to mention it was the board that made the decisions that caused AIG to need the bailout in the first place.... but, hold someone responsible for crashing our economy so they could make a fast buck? Oh hell no.....

[colourwheel]

But you see my point why our country needs government regulations monitoring corperate enterprise.

 

As for the Republicans using the Debt Ceiling as some kind of bargaining chip and seems willing to actually purposely take the country into defualt as well as ruin the US economy, It might damage Obamas Presidential legacy but at the cost of damaging our country and making the people suffer for it.

 

As well If the Republicans do decide to takes us into default it would ruin the republican party for decades. We are about to see Democratic rule in a majority of levels of government soon. After what 67 Congressional Republicans did voting down disaster relief for hurricane sandy, a huge majority of political campaign contributors in the north east will not be supporting Republicans next cycle and over a majority of campaign money is found by both political parties in the North East region. Reguardless If these congressmen fear being primaried next cycle doing something their caucus would reject, over all making such a political move has damaged the chance for any congressional republicans to get campaign funds from the richest part of our nation the North East New England area.

 

Republicans are not only internally divided but externally alienating their entire party from supporters and contributers for campaigns for years to come.

 

Ever since the Election in November Seems the Republican party has only been shrinking thier base and support. Every move and decisions made since by republicans has so far done nothing but hurt their party brand.

Edited January 11, 2013 by colourwheel