California - Southern California S2000 Owners Southern California S2000 Owners

This is why the country is bankrupt LOL

Thread Tools
 
Old 05-23-2011, 12:44 PM
  #101  
Registered User

 
05TurboS2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Seattle / Kalifornia
Posts: 24,119
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

OK now you're just making it difficult ok.

Chilli cheese fries never demand such distinction from you!
Old 05-23-2011, 04:32 PM
  #102  
Registered User

 
fujimi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by asiantrick
Originally Posted by 05TurboS2k' timestamp='1305846958' post='20594359
LOL My favorite.


Simple answer NO MORE FOOD STAMPS!

Go to a church if you're hungry. Donations should be a private optional matter not a gov't forced one.

NO MORE HOUSING, NO MORE WELFARE

problem SOLVED!

Darwin FTW.. also since we're at it, take off warning labels and let evolution take place.

I'm tired of all these motherfookin idiots in this motherfooking country.
Old 05-24-2011, 07:40 AM
  #103  

 
Ben22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Socal
Posts: 2,308
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by herrjr
Originally Posted by Ben22' timestamp='1306174381' post='20605949
^ "Americans have not paid federal income taxes. And yet, we prospered as a nation. AND, only had wars of necessity."

Can you please elaborate? tkx! (the third part mainly). Dominoes theory?
Yes, a nation without tax surpluses will not enter into a war with just cause, such as repelling an invading force or aggression that threatens its existence.

before 1913:
- 1775-1783 American Revolution - goes without saying why this war was necessary
- 1798-1800 French-American (naval wars) - [abridged reason, we didn't pay back a supposed debt]
The Kingdom of France had been a critical ally of the United States in the American Revolutionary War, and had signed in 1778 a Treaty of Alliance with the United States. But in 1794, after the French Revolution toppled that country's monarchy, the American government came to an agreement with the Kingdom of Great Britain, the Jay Treaty, that resolved several points of contention between the United States and Great Britain that had lingered since the end of the Revolutionary War. It also contained economic clauses.
The fact that US had already declared neutrality in the conflict between Great Britain and (now revolutionary) France, and that American legislation was being passed for a trade deal with their British enemy, led to French outrage. The French government was also furious over the U.S. refusal to continue repaying its debt to France on the grounds that the debt had been owed to the French Crown, not to Republican France.
The French navy began seizing American ships trading with Britain and refused to receive the new United States minister Charles Cotesworth Pinckney when he arrived in Paris in December 1796. In his annual message to Congress at the close of 1797, President John Adams reported on France’s refusal to negotiate and spoke of the need "to place our country in a suitable posture of defense."[2] In April 1798, President Adams informed Congress of the "XYZ Affair", in which French agents demanded a large bribe for the restoration of diplomatic relations with the United States.
The French navy inflicted substantial losses on American shipping. Secretary of State Timothy Pickering reported to Congress on June 21, 1797 that the French had seized 316 American merchant ships in the previous eleven months. The hostilities caused insurance rates on American shipping to increase at least 500 percent,[citation needed] since French marauders cruised the length of the U.S. Atlantic seaboard virtually unopposed. The administration had no warships to combat them; the last had been sold in 1785. The United States possessed only a flotilla of small revenue cutters and some neglected coastal forts.[3]
Increased depredations by privateers from Revolutionary France required the rebirth of the United States Navy to protect the expanding American merchant shipping. Congress authorized the president to acquire, arm, and man not more than 12 vessels, of up to 22 guns each. Several vessels were immediately purchased and converted into ships of war.[citation needed]
July 7, 1798, the date that Congress rescinded treaties with France, is considered the beginning of the Quasi-War. This was followed two days later with the passage of the Congressional authorization to attack French warships.

- 1801-1805 Barbary Wars - conflict against N. African pirates and paying tributes to them
- 1812-1815 War of 1812 - Revolutionary war round 2 against GB
- 1813-1814 Creek War - occupational war against indigenous peoples
- 1836 War of Texas Independence - regional war to continue American emigration to the Texas region
- 1846-1848 - Mexican-American War - Mexico whining about losing Texas resulted in:
The war ended on February 2, 1848, with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. This treaty ceded to the United States the land that now comprises the states of California, Utah, and Nevada, as well as parts of Arizona, New Mexico, Wyoming, and Colorado. Mexico also renounced all rights to Texas.

- 1861-1865 U.S. Civil War - (aka the war of Northern aggression)
- 1898 Spanish-American War - questionable reasoning here, though it resulted in the U.S. garnering the territories of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines - since it only lasted 6 months, it seems we made out on this one


p.s. I happened to glance at my replies above - since these were done at work, forgive me my occasional mistakes due to lack of editing


I sincerely appreciate the answer! very well versed!
But why do you stop at 1898? wars became something different after that? no more a necessity? or was it decided later we would become an Industrial military complex society in charge of policing the world?
My favourite History teacher would always say "History doesn't repeat itself, but it has the tendency to stutter...." either we adapt or we become Rome, Greece, Ottoman Empire, French first Empire, the Brits, USA and then??? fill in...

Old 05-24-2011, 07:56 AM
  #104  
Registered User

 
herrjr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Ben22
I sincerely appreciate the answer! very well versed!
But why do you stop at 1898? wars became something different after that? no more a necessity? or was it decided later we would become an Industrial military complex society in charge of policing the world?
My favourite History teacher would always say "History doesn't repeat itself, but it has the tendency to stutter...." either we adapt or we become Rome, Greece, Ottoman Empire, French first Empire, the Brits, USA and then??? fill in...

You're welcome!

I stopped at 1898, because federal income taxes came into being after the Sixteenth Amendment was "ratified" in 1913. We had no participation in wars from 1898 until 1914, when the Great War began. I'll leave it to you to determine whether any wars after 1913 were actually "necessary." Oh, and along the way, see what happens to the national debt after each war as well. And to be fair, you forgot to mention the Spanish lol, who ruled before they went bankrupt through the costs of wars, which then gave an opportunity for the British Empire to dominate and flourish.

We "didn't" want to become in charge of policing the world, which was one of the primary reasons that the League of Nations was formed post WWI. However, due to several issues that didn't do well enough, and then WWII erupted. It was then replaced by the UN, whose efficacy it seems is also greatly lacking.
Old 05-24-2011, 08:03 AM
  #105  

 
Ben22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Socal
Posts: 2,308
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Excellent and you hit it right on the nail! Stop the wars and get a chance to manage our bankruptcies! (you mentioned the SDN, i haven't heard that in decades )


I'm from the Old Continent and hoping this society will not reach the impass most of the Europeans country find themselves in...
Old 05-24-2011, 08:17 AM
  #106  
Registered User

 
herrjr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Ben22
Excellent and you hit it right on the nail! Stop the wars and get a chance to manage our bankruptcies! (you mentioned the SDN, i haven't heard that in decades )


I'm from the Old Continent and hoping this society will not reach the impasse most of the Europeans country find themselves in...
It makes sense then perhaps, why you are better versed in history. Sadly, though, it seems that we are well on our way. And like the Titanic, we have already hit the iceberg, and yet some people believe that we are "unsinkable." What most people don't realize is that broke countries don't start wars, and since we can't seem to control the government that is supposed to be subservient the demands of its people regarding the end of foreign wars, then the only thing that we can control is the funding of it. Should the nation wake up and stop demanding so much in services from the government, then correspondingly can it clamor for significantly less in taxes to be imposed upon us, and to have that again become the case.
Old 05-24-2011, 09:58 AM
  #107  

 
Ben22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Socal
Posts: 2,308
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default



Also, let's argue about Imperialism. How about all these bases all over Japan, Korea, Italy, Greece, Germany etc....Should we close them? what's their purpose?

Let's glance at Vietnam, we didn't leave anything behind (remember the epic Helicopters rescue from the roof of the US embassy in Saigon) and somehow they are doing well as a nation. Heck you don't even need a visa to go there anymore.

So I understand the old school mentality of "look what happened to Germany and Japan and then S. Korea". Give the US time and the same will happen to Iraq, Afghanistan etc...but at what cost since we're going down?

As an individual, if you're in a money crunch you have the tendency to cut the non-essentials. Must admit these Imperialists useless mostly bases should be taken in consideration...and that's from someone who served for those who know me.

Cheers to a great educated discussion! And there's a solution since we're debating it...there's hope, I have faith in humanity
Old 05-24-2011, 10:18 AM
  #108  
Registered User

 
herrjr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Ben22


Also, let's argue about Imperialism. How about all these bases all over Japan, Korea, Italy, Greece, Germany etc....Should we close them? what's their purpose?

Let's glance at Vietnam, we didn't leave anything behind (remember the epic Helicopters rescue from the roof of the US embassy in Saigon) and somehow they are doing well as a nation. Heck you don't even need a visa to go there anymore.

So I understand the old school mentality of "look what happened to Germany and Japan and then S. Korea". Give the US time and the same will happen to Iraq, Afghanistan etc...but at what cost since we're going down?

As an individual, if you're in a money crunch you have the tendency to cut the non-essentials. Must admit these Imperialists useless mostly bases should be taken in consideration...and that's from someone who served for those who know me.

Cheers to a great educated discussion! And there's a solution since we're debating it...there's hope, I have faith in humanity
Cheers to you good sir! And regarding that hope, it needs to become actual change materialized in a shift in individuals as a whole. We cannot expect our representative government to change, if we do not first change ourselves. But I have faith as well in our brethren (sometimes).

How about all these bases all over Japan, Korea, Italy, Greece, Germany etc....Should we close them? what's their purpose?
- Yes, close them. We have no necessary purpose for them.

Let's glance at Vietnam, we didn't leave anything behind (remember the epic Helicopters rescue from the roof of the US embassy in Saigon) and somehow they are doing well as a nation. Heck you don't even need a visa to go there anymore.
- I agree, but we should never have been there at all.

So I understand the old school mentality of "look what happened to Germany and Japan and then S. Korea". Give the US time and the same will happen to Iraq, Afghanistan etc...but at what cost since we're going down?
- Those countries prospered because they practiced internal policies that helped to foster their economic success. Afghanistan and Iraq are nowhere near that.

As an individual, if you're in a money crunch you have the tendency to cut the non-essentials. Must admit these Imperialists useless mostly bases should be taken in consideration...and that's from someone who served for those who know me.
- Precisely. An individual entity that spends consistently beyond its means will eventually hit a ceiling, at which point it will no longer cease to function as it did. I am curious to see how bad it will be (if) when the U.S. becomes insolvent, since we are now very interconnected financially. Nixon did us no benefit at all when he took us off of the gold standard.
Old 05-24-2011, 12:32 PM
  #109  
Registered User

Thread Starter
 
Italia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Socal.
Posts: 6,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

why dont we all just get drunk instead>?
Old 06-02-2011, 01:04 PM
  #110  
Registered User
 
mrjulius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tustin, California
Posts: 2,734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

http://www.theonion.com/articles/cor...ing-steak,672/



Quick Reply: This is why the country is bankrupt LOL



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:34 AM.