US Government and trust

[_sabotage_]

How much do you trust the US government to be for the people, by the people and of the people?

Many people seem to feel that the government is incompetent, others feel that the government is trying to fulfill their mandate and some feel that the government asserts it's authority for the greater good of a few.

Which category do you fall in, or why don't you fall into any of the above? Can you provide a detail or two explaining why you feel this way?

I believe that the government uses it's authority to strengthen the government framework without much regard to the consequences on the population. This in particular promotes those who have been successful regardless of why. The war in Iraq seems to be a clear cut example. The government used an alleged terrorist attack and lies of WMDs to build up the military industrial complex and pursue US economic interests of those close to and in the government.

[2dimes]

I don't think the US government, or most "democratic/republic" government as an entity is not trust worthy but, sometimes not having the means for sufficient legal representation can become an issue in these modern times.

Is there any doubt this is at least somewhat true?

the government has asserted it's authority for the greater good of a few.

I don't even think that statement falls into the category of a conspiracy anymore.
Large businesses and industry directs government policy and Laws in every country.
Those with wealth tend to be in the position of having the means and staff to lobby for legal change in their favour.

I don't need to think they are intentionally trying to harm the average person. Though setting up some situations to the advantage of the corporations will sometimes bring incidental problems for many people that might not be in a position to afford to live with some laws.

It's not personal, it's just business.

[Phatscotty]

This is the case against central banks. Money runs everything, and they run the money.

Since the late 1930's, and up to the Tea Party, the re-election rate for federal politicians was consistently above 90%, all the way up to over 97% thru the 90's and 00's, and that was primarily due possible because of access to easy money.

I have trust in about 80 members of the House and 7 Senators atm

[_sabotage_]

Actually, I had a conversation with my uncle, a fat man named Scott, last night. He had always been rather trusting of the government, one side in particular and based his judgement on a few issues close to his heart. A couple years ago, he made a trip to Hong Kong, I believe it was his first trip abroad and his son had come to China prior to this. In our chat, he seemed for the first time, to be questioning the government and I was somewhat surprised by this. I was just curious to see how much this is true.

My mother is a senior legal consultant to the World Bank. I do understand how legal representation can affect the outcomes of of policy and direction. In my opinion, it has gone much too far. We are now told what to eat, where to buy, what's in what we eat, who can grow what and for who, when and where.

I have spent a lot of time in China. Apple and some other big names have stated that they will revert some of their manufacturing to the states. We seem as a nation to feel that the status quo will be maintained and that we shall continue to rule the world by force and by greenback. I feel this is an illusion and that for too long we have pursued it, to the point where if other countries wanted to harm the US, they wouldn't need military force, but mere economic and policy change would leave the States in complete disarray. I believe that some companies see the end to the benefits that cheap labor in China has conferred on the current American way of life and are eager to re-form US bases of production.

The government has lead us along a path of ever weakening infrastructure, and by this I don't mean roads and pipelines, but the very ability to feed, clothe and sustain our existence if a backlash from over a hundred years of oppressive foreign policy comes back to haunt us. In a text I read, US style agriculture has actually decreased our production to a quarter per acre of a hundred years ago. Though this makes agriculture profitable, it won't do us much good if we face self-reliance due to the inflation or trade embargoes. Americans have lost all sense of trades as they were sold of to the lowest bidders and service industries won't be of much use with a weak dollar and no food on tables.

I also feel that we have alienated not only foreigners, but our closest next door neighbors within our local communities. Our economic and legal policies have pitted us against each other and rewards those who follow the system, but what happens if the system crumbles? Our system of handouts and maintaining a strong dollar have left us dependent on foreign labor and the government and left us with few skills, few community ties and a disenfranchised society.

[2dimes]

Our system of handouts and maintaining a strong dollar have left us dependent on foreign labor and the government and left us with few skills, few community ties and a disenfranchised society

True but I don't think it was completely intentional and malicious. It is more just a side effect of taking advantage of doing business in the most "productive way" until we got here.

Who can grow what comes down to a couple of other things too.

A regular farming family is trying to afford to buy better equipment as it wears out and support a family. They're just not competitive. A guy with a hoe planting his garden can't produce enough to feed the urban centers. If there is two bad years they tend to "lose the farm." As it were. A person can't afford to buy a farm on credit and operate it as a farm anymore.

A corporate farm that is all about maximum production, can afford to carry debt longer than a person might even live and maintains a profit level that can sustain the operation during that time.

[_sabotage_]

A corporate farm is about maximizing profits, not production. An acre of farmland in China is 73 times more productive than an acre in the States, but much more labour intensive.

To the point of the thread though, when I ask about trust, I mean leadership and dependence on leadership. At what point shall we just start ignoring government regulation and policy and start to form our own direction? Everything you say is true within a framework, but as we see the flaws ever more clearly within the framework, when do we discard it and take matters into our own hands? Do we sit idly by as our country falls into lower and lower standards or say inadvertently or not, the system is not working and is promoting our downfall?

[Phatscotty]

A corporate farm is about maximizing profits, not production. An acre of farmland in China is 73 times more productive than an acre in the States, but much more labour intensive.

To the point of the thread though, when I ask about trust, I mean leadership and dependence on leadership. At what point shall we just start ignoring government regulation and policy and start to form our own direction? Everything you say is true within a framework, but as we see the flaws ever more clearly within the framework, when do we discard it and take matters into our own hands? Do we sit idly by as our country falls into lower and lower standards or say inadvertently or not, the system is not working and is promoting our downfall?

Are you talking about going Galt?

If you don't know what that means, check this out

[_sabotage_]

I will check it out, but I'm on an iPhone at a cafe and somewhat shy without headphones.

I'm asking at what point, what specific catalyst would cause you to say: something is wrong, we need a change, and that change needs to be individually directed instead of handed to us by the same body which made the change necessary.

[Phatscotty]

I will check it out, but I'm on an iPhone at a cafe and somewhat shy without headphones.

I'm asking at what point, what specific catalyst would cause you to say: something is wrong, we need a change, and that change needs to be individually directed instead of handed to us by the same body which made the change necessary.

That already happened...when I left the sheltered world of childhood and education and entered into the real world. For some reason, I was over aware of financial bubbles, and I learned what I learned very much by watching other people who were balls deep for the bubbles, and came to understand the patterns thru monetary policy. I realized something was wrong when people started insulting me just for trying to help them with their mortgages 2003-2006 (in my brief stint in real estate) and trying to get them to diversify just 1% of their portfolio's out of paper and into tangible assets (longer stint as a commodities broker).

It's the reason I am all in with the Tea Party, or the Campaign for Liberty, or whatever you want to call it. Whoever is for change, the specific change I believe we need, in that cutting spending and aiming towards a balanced budget is the best thing we can do, and whoever is serious about doing that, call me that, and I don't care about their issues on abortion or marriage or the death penalty.

We need to reconnect with our founding principles of Independence and Liberty, that have worked for centuries, that have guided the way to get us where we are in the new world. Much progress has been made, but it's all at stake.

[2dimes]

When I was talking about productivity in farming I meant in the produce Americans use. You can compare rice to corn but it's quite different to grow.

If a guy had over a hundred chickens in 1925 he was running a pretty substantial operation. Now a corporate farm might have more like a couple hundred thousand chickens.

[Funkyterrance]

Having worked for the US government I can say that there is no hidden agenda that I can tell. The people I worked with/for were very sincere and honest in their dedication to the citizens of the USA. Tbh, I got the impression that anyone who showed any indication of not feeling this way was rooted out quite quickly without mercy. I think the worst thing you can accuse the US government of is being dull.

[_sabotage_]

So you feel comfortable with the general direction of the US and our recent history?

[Funkyterrance]

So you feel comfortable with the general direction of the US and our recent history?

Nah, I wouldn't say that, just that I have had a view from the inside in the somewhat recent past and in general, yes, I would say you can trust the government as an entity which is trying it's best to do what's best in the interest of the USA.

[BigBallinStalin]

A corporate farm is about maximizing profits, not production. An acre of farmland in China is 73 times more productive than an acre in the States, but much more labour intensive.

Whichever one was more productive (i.e. greater ration of output to inputs), then that method of production would be chosen for the "corporate farms that maximize profits."

Also, even Farmer Joe uses his 7-acre farm to 'maximize profit'. If you only maximize production, it's very easy to drive yourself out of business, so production is not the only thing that matters.

[jay_a2j]

I'll tell you what I think. (popular or not it seems the only logical explanation)



The US government is purposely destroying the US economy. Other than those getting "free stuff" from Obama, not a single person in this country should support this man. He took the fiscal cliff and got an INCREASE in spending and a tax increase on 77% of Americans (is that about equal to ALL working people?) Then he has said he will not budge on the debt ceiling. Dude, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see into the future with policies like this! No one is this stupid. There is no way our leaders can honestly believe that bailouts, TRILLIONS $ added to debt each year, increasing the amount we can borrow (debt ceiling), increased spending is in any way going to BALANCE a 16.3 TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT!!!!!!!!

[Funkyterrance]

I'll tell you what I think. (popular or not it seems the only logical explanation)
The US government is purposely destroying the US economy. Other than those getting "free stuff" from Obama, not a single person in this country should support this man. He took the fiscal cliff and got an INCREASE in spending and a tax increase on 77% of Americans (is that about equal to ALL working people?) Then he has said he will not budge on the debt ceiling. Dude, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see into the future with policies like this! No one is this stupid. There is no way our leaders can honestly believe that bailouts, TRILLIONS $ added to debt each year, increasing the amount we can borrow (debt ceiling), increased spending is in any way going to BALANCE a 16.3 TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT!!!!!!!!

Don't you think you may be oversimplifying a little?
I look at the US government like an old beater car; it's got a high cost of upkeep but at the moment it's acceptable versus the cost of scrapping it and buying a new one.
I'm no economist obviously but I still fail to grasp how lowering taxes is going to be some magical solution to the bigger issues like energy crises. I mean, do tax hikes really make you or break you or is the fact that they hurt so bad just a symptom of a deeper, more serious problem?

[jay_a2j]

I'll tell you what I think. (popular or not it seems the only logical explanation)
The US government is purposely destroying the US economy. Other than those getting "free stuff" from Obama, not a single person in this country should support this man. He took the fiscal cliff and got an INCREASE in spending and a tax increase on 77% of Americans (is that about equal to ALL working people?) Then he has said he will not budge on the debt ceiling. Dude, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see into the future with policies like this! No one is this stupid. There is no way our leaders can honestly believe that bailouts, TRILLIONS $ added to debt each year, increasing the amount we can borrow (debt ceiling), increased spending is in any way going to BALANCE a 16.3 TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT!!!!!!!!

Don't you think you may be oversimplifying a little?
I look at the US government like an old beater car; it's got a high cost of upkeep but at the moment it's acceptable versus the cost of scrapping it and buying a new one.
I'm no economist obviously but I still fail to grasp how lowering taxes is going to be some magical solution to the bigger issues like energy crises. I mean, do tax hikes really make you or break you or is the fact that they hurt so bad just a symptom of a deeper, more serious problem?

As Reagan proved LOWERING tax rates INCREASES tax revenue. When you RAISE tax rates you stifle job growth because the guys who own companies can't afford to open new businesses/ hire more people. The rich MOVE as did Rush Limbaugh when NY passed a millionaires tax. (He went to FL where there is no income tax). Not to mention the rich that recently left FRANCE after they raised taxes on the rich.


Taxes aside. The GOVERNMENT spends too much money!!!!!! The only way to BEGIN getting out of this debt is spending CUTS!!!! Obama only INCREASES spending!

[Funkyterrance]

As Reagan proved LOWERING tax rates INCREASES tax revenue. When you RAISE tax rates you stifle job growth because the guys who own companies can't afford to open new businesses/ hire more people. The rich MOVE as did Rush Limbaugh when NY passed a millionaires tax. (He went to FL where there is no income tax). Not to mention the rich that recently left FRANCE after they raised taxes on the rich.

Isn't it possible that Reagan's success was merely coincidental and there was not a causal relationship between lowering taxes and better economy? I'm just getting the feeling that there is way too much focus on taxes, taxes, taxes. I look around and see a plethora of inefficient and wasteful practices on a daily basis. Isn't it just possible that this is the reason for our current predicament? The government may be wasteful but that's just maintaining the American status quo.

[Phatscotty]

As Reagan proved LOWERING tax rates INCREASES tax revenue. When you RAISE tax rates you stifle job growth because the guys who own companies can't afford to open new businesses/ hire more people. The rich MOVE as did Rush Limbaugh when NY passed a millionaires tax. (He went to FL where there is no income tax). Not to mention the rich that recently left FRANCE after they raised taxes on the rich.

Isn't it possible that Reagan's success was merely coincidental and there was not a causal relationship between lowering taxes and better economy? I'm just getting the feeling that there is way too much focus on taxes, taxes, taxes. I look around and see a plethora of inefficient and wasteful practices on a daily basis. Isn't it just possible that this is the reason for our current predicament? The government may be wasteful but that's just maintaining the American status quo.

Well. the thing is it wasn't just a regular old tax cut. It was a tax slashing. Just curious though, what other things are candidates for coincidence?

oh, and the American people in 1984 were pretty sure what it was

[Funkyterrance]

Well. the thing is it wasn't just a regular old tax cut. It was a tax slashing. Just curious though, what other things are candidates for coincidence?

oh, and the American people in 1984 were pretty sure what it was

Again, I'm no economist. I gather most of my "knowledge" about the economy by looking around and observing and from what I learned in school. I also admit that I tend to focus on microeconomics multiplied by the masses to come to some of my "conclusions". This is probably why I don't understand what the map above is supposed to be representing?
However, it does stand to reason that the lowering of taxes in 1984 or whatever was only one aspect contributing to the following boom, not the only one. I'm just not sure you can take the square shaped peg that worked in 1984 and place it in the round shaped hole that is our current state of affairs. We seem to have grown socially, perhaps too far to be able to support ourselves, but you can't just go back. Reagan would never be successful now, he was way too "old school". I mean, just look at these forums, it's probably safe to assume this is a pretty accurate representation of the general consensus/political ratios and Reagan supporters would be severely outnumbered. He's just not soft enough.

EDIT: Had a second look at you map. Those are red states? I think the amount threw me off lol. That being said, the situation is only more futile. Repubs are just more apt to cut through the bullshit but the US is just way past the point of no return.

[Phatscotty]

The point of the map was: Reagan got it right.

but, the first thing I would say about other factors that accompanied tax cuts is the consumption and investment boom that resulted immediately afterwards.

The government got out of the way, and the American people were allowed to be Americans again

I don't wanna turn the thread into a Reagan thing tho

[Funkyterrance]

The point of the map was: Reagan got it right.

but, the first thing I would say about other factors that accompanied tax cuts is the consumption and investment boom that resulted immediately afterwards.

The government got out of the way, and the American people were allowed to be Americans again

I don't wanna turn the thread into a Reagan thing tho

I made an edit to my last post, not sure if you saw...
But as far as sidetracking the thread we can totally bring it back into context. I would say that Americans trusted the government a lot more during the Reagan administration. How do you know that this wasn't the key to the US's success back then? The government got out of Americans' way back then but Americans also seem to have gotten out of the government's way as well. I think it may work both ways.

[Phatscotty]

The point of the map was: Reagan got it right.

but, the first thing I would say about other factors that accompanied tax cuts is the consumption and investment boom that resulted immediately afterwards.

The government got out of the way, and the American people were allowed to be Americans again

I don't wanna turn the thread into a Reagan thing tho

I made an edit to my last post, not sure if you saw...
But as far as sidetracking the thread we can totally bring it back into context. I would say that Americans trusted the government a lot more during the Reagan administration. How do you know that this wasn't the key to the US's success back then? The government got out of Americans' way back then but Americans also seem to have gotten out of the government's way as well. I think it may work both ways.

Any government that says "we want less of your money" is off to a good start with me! I would agree that was probably an important ingredient in the recipe, but that ingredient still needed to be nurtured and encouraged and harvested fresh organic. Any government that encourages the second amendment, rather than try to take the guns away and make more restrictions, is off to a good start with me too.

I would say Americans probably trust the government about as much as the government abides by and respects the Constitution and the laws of the land.

[Funkyterrance]

Any government that says "we want less of your money" is off to a good start with me! I would agree that was probably an important ingredient in the recipe, but that ingredient still needed to be nurtured and encouraged and harvested fresh organic. Any government that encourages the second amendment, rather than try to take the guns away and make more restrictions, is off to a good start with me too.

I would say Americans probably trust the government about as much as the government abides by and respects the Constitution and the laws of the land.

Ok, here's the problem: "We want less of your money" is only going to be condoned by those who don't benefit from those dollars. What about the whole 40% thing? It's pretty much granted that those 40% wouldn't like that statement. That's a pretty big immediate buffer the other side has. I think part of the problem may be pointing the dirty finger at the "government". The government itself at least works for a living. I should think looking at thy neighbor would be more productive, at least for the next 3 years or so.

[Phatscotty]

I think I said earlier in this thread that there were 8 Senators that I trust.

It brought a smile to my face to see the fiscal cliff legislation was passed in the Senate 89-8

I think people trusted the government and Reagan more because he embraced Freedom and promoted Liberty, and it spoke to people right in their gut. Another aspect, we were hardly as polarized then as we are now. America was united.

and united we stand, divided we fall. Right now we are as divided as it gets.