| Guest |
03-24-2016 05:34 AM |
Quote:
Posted by Guest
(Post 1202933)
You used the word invest, that is a word liberals have taken over. Invest now means let our grandchildren pay for it. If you look up the word invest in Webster's it doesn't say borrow from next generation. While you are at it look up the word deadbeat, it will say something like someone who doesn't pay his debts. Sounds like our generation does it not. I don't mean this as a personnel attack as we are all ignoring what we are doing while blaming it on the poor. IMO
|
I do not take it as an attack. Let me explain my use of "invest" as I see it. I believe that when you invest, you are investing or purchasing our future freedom. If you invest, even if borrowed in our military, you are insuring the freedom of future generations. A weak military makes us vulnerable to our enemies. Yes, because we are frivolous with our spending, our children will have to pay for it. I don't consider the number one mandate in the Constitution to be frivolous spending. But, the Constitution does not guarantee health care or welfare. That's not to say we shouldn't help those that can't help themselves. But, to lower our defenses because of greed in our country, is to invite more and more conflicts. Whether we wish it or not, with our country being the most powerful (?) and the most moral(?) in the world, it IS our responsibility to provide world policing, whether I like it or not. We are not satisfied when others take that role, such as Russia or China. I do believe that money spent on wasted foreign aid should be used to reinforce our military instead. We should only provide foreign aid assistance as a reward for peaceful coexistence, if at all.
There is a lot of fat that we could cut from the Gov whether or not the gov agencies like the diet, so to speak. Our economy is NOT doing well, regardless of unsubstantiated assurance otherwise. We have way too many folks on supposed disability now, or have just plain given up on seeking employment. We have a record high on people that have left the work force in the past seven years. We cannot sustain that kind of hit on the economy. With less people working, the less tax revenues the gov will receive. And the more expensive it gets to support those that do not wish to work. It is not a matter of the rich getting richer. It is a matter of the wealthy hoarding their wealth instead of investing it in employment, because they don't see a lucrative return on their investment. When business does better, the gov receives an increase in tax revenues. The idea is to quit the war on the wealthy and big business and allow them to assist our economy by boosting it with their investments, without worry of being penalized for it. Like it or not, without big business, you don't have revenues to support gov spending. You can increase taxes on the wealthy, but that is a short term spurt in revenue increase. Long term is that the wealthy and big businesses take their money overseas where they can keep more of it without greedy gov hands grasping for it.
Sorry about the diatribe. And I did make it simplified because I am neither an economist, wealthy or big business. However, I might add, that anyone with an IRA or most retirement plans, want big business to invest so that they profit by it. |
