THE SECOND PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE FFS

[evilwebby]

The Benghazi argument was nothing more than splitting hairs. It's a non-issue as far as the election goes, I think to make that argument shows weakness in Romney.

Where's the debate on housing? The Fed? I'll be perfectly honest, no one cares how many women lost their jobs, as it relates to the election. What is Mitt going to do, start demanding that companies hire women if he's elected?

The hopelessness of these debates is that they don't address the current issues at hand.

Indeed.

The US Government spends 4 dollars for every 3 dollars of revenue and has amassed 16 trillion in debt. That is a fasttrack to currency collapse and hyperinflation. As with most western economies, they need to issue new debt just to cover the interest on the current debt. Common sense tells you that this is unsustainable position, yet-

Romney talk about balancing the budget but he is also committed to increased military spending.
Obama talks about balancing the budget but he is also committed to increased welfare spending.

Neither of them will talk about cutting BOTH, which is what is required.

They are two sides of the same coin. Whoever wins, the deficits will continue to be run until they bankrupt their country. A US Dollar collapse is coming some time in the next 4 years no matter which of these little men get in.

 

[johnnydawg68]

I liked Obama's admission that he wants to deport "gang-bangers".

I hope he doesn't mean that or I'm in trouble.

 

[Mrk]

Indeed.

The US Government spends 4 dollars for every 3 dollars of revenue and has amassed 16 trillion in debt. That is a fasttrack to currency collapse and hyperinflation. As with most western economies, they need to issue new debt just to cover the interest on the current debt. Common sense tells you that this is unsustainable position, yet-

Romney talk about balancing the budget but he is also committed to increased military spending.
Obama talks about balancing the budget but he is also committed to increased welfare spending.

Neither of them will talk about cutting BOTH, which is what is required.

They are two sides of the same coin. Whoever wins, the deficits will continue to be run until they bankrupt their country. A US Dollar collapse is coming some time in the next 4 years no matter which of these little men get in.

Exactly, the 3rd biggest party candidate (Libertarian Party) should take part in the debates to point this out, because both Democrats and Republicans know perfectly well that they agree on a vast number of policies because they're both conservative parties (by our standards) so they both play it safe and try and paint the opposition as evil/rich/statist etc

 

[roydo]

Exactly, the 3rd biggest party candidate (Libertarian Party) should take part in the debates to point this out, because both Democrats and Republicans know perfectly well that they agree on a vast number of policies because they're both conservative parties (by our standards) so they both play it safe and try and paint the opposition as evil/rich/statist etc

Pretty much the same as the UK then. Just wish these idiots, on both sides of the pond, had the balls to tell people what a mess we are really in. Blame is on all sides, politicians, consumers, (albeit often after being sold a con trick), bankers, (albeit acting after a green light was given by politicians who were not quite as clever as they thought), so get together, own up, sort it, and move on. Otherwise, well, we are screwed.

 

[Mrk]

Pretty much the same as the UK then. Just wish these idiots, on both sides of the pond, had the balls to tell people what a mess we are really in. Blame is on all sides, politicians, consumers, (albeit often after being sold a con trick), bankers, (albeit acting after a green light was given by politicians who were not quite as clever as they thought), so get together, own up, sort it, and move on. Otherwise, well, we are screwed.

To an extent, although we actually have a centre-left mainstream party over here in Labour where as in the USA all 3 major parties are more right wing than the Tories so they don't really get offered an alternative.

Saying that, Labour aren't offering an alternative to deficit reduction, so it's probably a good comparison.

 

[pfim]

Indeed.

The US Government spends 4 dollars for every 3 dollars of revenue and has amassed 16 trillion in debt. That is a fasttrack to currency collapse and hyperinflation. As with most western economies, they need to issue new debt just to cover the interest on the current debt. Common sense tells you that this is unsustainable position, yet-

Romney talk about balancing the budget but he is also committed to increased military spending.
Obama talks about balancing the budget but he is also committed to increased welfare spending.

Neither of them will talk about cutting BOTH, which is what is required.

They are two sides of the same coin. Whoever wins, the deficits will continue to be run until they bankrupt their country. A US Dollar collapse is coming some time in the next 4 years no matter which of these little men get in.

I'm not sure I share your dire outlook, but it can't continue like this, no.

And the whole world should care about this. Hyper inflation or severe US dollar debasement would be devastating for the world market.

 

[roydo]

I'm not sure I share your dire outlook, but it can't continue like this, no.

And the whole world should care about this. Hyper inflation or severe US dollar debasement would be devastating for the world market.

Which is why it wont be allowed to happen. (not to say it shouldnt though). The biggest owner of US debt is their tradiitional allies the Chinese, who will not be at all impressed if they do not get repaid in full, on time.

Then again, "Allow us access to your military/space/tech expertise, and we might think about it"

 

[Brennan]

Indeed.

The US Government spends 4 dollars for every 3 dollars of revenue and has amassed 16 trillion in debt. That is a fasttrack to currency collapse and hyperinflation. As with most western economies, they need to issue new debt just to cover the interest on the current debt. Common sense tells you that this is unsustainable position, yet-

Romney talk about balancing the budget but he is also committed to increased military spending.
Obama talks about balancing the budget but he is also committed to increased welfare spending.

Neither of them will talk about cutting BOTH, which is what is required.

They are two sides of the same coin. Whoever wins, the deficits will continue to be run until they bankrupt their country. A US Dollar collapse is coming some time in the next 4 years no matter which of these little men get in.

Welfare spending comes to approximately $1 trillion per year, a splash in the ocean compared to the $5 trillion ($9 trillion really) which Romney says he's going to cut from taxes without either screwing over the middle classes or increasing the deficit massively (which he is unable to explain the workings of).

 

[evilwebby]

I'm not sure I share your dire outlook, but it can't continue like this, no.

And the whole world should care about this. Hyper inflation or severe US dollar debasement would be devastating for the world market.

The irony is that many other countries see it as in their best interest to prop up the US, so they will sacrifice a lot of their own growth prospects to this end. So the US may well be the last house to fall, so to speak, even though they are paradoxically the most insolvent.

People think that the fallout from the 2008-09 recession is over are in for a rude awakening. We didn't fix any of the fundamental problems - we just took the politically expedient route and used the central banks to roll over the problems and push them further off into the future where they will be even larger and more difficult to deal with.

 

[chicoazul]

Obama done better in this one like. The pair of them didn't answer many questions directly though, it's a bit farcical. The moderator needs to call them out on it more.

 

[Tubey]

Obama done better in this one like. The pair of them didn't answer many questions directly though, it's a bit farcical. The moderator needs to call them out on it more.

It's largely about force of will and character. That's why Obama clearly "won" for want of a better word.

Although every time there's a debate like that then American politics is the loser.

 

[evilwebby]

[/B]

Which is why it wont be allowed to happen. (not to say it shouldnt though). The biggest owner of US debt is their tradiitional allies the Chinese, who will not be at all impressed if they do not get repaid in full, on time.

Then again, "Allow us access to your military/space/tech expertise, and we might think about it"

Repaid? REPAID???
There is zero percent chance of repayment. ZERO. The West can't even afford to pay the interest on its debt, never mind begin to make a dent in the principle.

It's a perpetual charade. The Chinese continue to lend when they know they won't get it back, because they want to keep their export driven economy going, even though their people would benefit from consuming more of their own products instead of shipping them off around the world.

There will be a readjustment at some point- the Chinese will stop throwing good money after bad; they will unpeg their currency, and they will deal directly with oil producing nations and bypass the USD system - and when that happens, the US is toast.

 

[Slavan]

why dont they answer the questions>?

 

[chicoazul]

It's largely about force of will and character. That's why Obama clearly "won" for want of a better word.

Although every time there's a debate like that then American politics is the loser.

It would seem so mate. It's a bit sad.

 

[pfim]

Repaid? REPAID???
There is zero percent chance of repayment. ZERO. The West can't even afford to pay the interest on its debt, never mind begin to make a dent in the principle.

It's a perpetual charade. The Chinese continue to lend when they know they won't get it back, because they want to keep their export driven economy going, even though their people would benefit from consuming more of their own products instead of shipping them off around the world.

There will be a readjustment at some point- the Chinese will stop throwing good money after bad; they will unpeg their currency, and they will deal directly with oil producing nations and bypass the USD system - and when that happens, the US is toast.

Sorta like Germany and Greece, though China is nothing like Germany.

The Chinese need us consuming their goods.

I'm not sure I understand the last argument. If something changes their strategy, it will likely be their own increase in consumption of goods.