jackson33

Actually nec, the US and Canadian Markets seem unconcerned about the "so called" crisis. Last night (Sunday) American Stocks selling in Asian markets, off the bat did sell down 140 points (DOW) and gold/silver were up, but settled down and after North American Markets opened were back up. I did consider selling my own stocks, in after hours trading, Friday after Obama's scare comments, could have done, but decided against it. Down grading of the US Credit Ratings are almost inevitable and probably long over due, but short of modest rate increases the US will pay to service new bonds, will be a gradual process, which IMO all US Interest Rates are and have been artificially held down for far too long, will be a good thing. The only meaning to the World Economy, including Canada will be the devalued US Dollars, which means cheaper products sold in other Countries and increased prices of foreign good in the US. Keep in mind those same "Rating Sources" also refused to down grade Fanny/Freddy, while the Housing Bubble burst, allowing continuation of derivative sales by US Banks all over the World, permitting a real market crash. If they now look realistically at US Debt verses GDP (near 100%), along with unsustainable obligations, it MIGHT force Governments (US States and Federal) to actually do something, BEFORE a crash!!! There is absolutely no change the US will default on any debt obligations, but that would make for a different story...

Cut/Cap/Balance, passed by the House, is expected to fail in the US Senate, even if allowed to be debated and voted on, the President has said he would veto and it's almost a sure case the Senate could not over ride the 'bill', even if the House could. However many are in agreement that the States should be allowed a voice in adding a "Balanced Budget" amendment to the Constitution (the balance), which takes a 2/3rd's vote from both Chambers. IMO if presented separately and the President could do nothing about it. Do they even know this??? Did you....and while your at it, where do you expect the National Debt to be January 1st, 2013, my guess being 18T$, regardless what passes before 8/2/2011.

rigney; First, please don't be discouraged by these negative points showing up, they are basically coming from one person and I'll erase a couple of them after this post, which I rarely get involved with. On your thread, if it matters, India and the radical Muslim's have been at odds forever and those involved probably don't give a hoot about the US, to begin with. This rivalry goes back to the Ottoman Empire and India's actual independence. http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/islam/empires/intro.html

swansont; First and foremost, Federal Income taxes are today, whatever they are, higher than what was before 1914 (excluding, during US Civil war), because there were NONE. 2nd; Even indexing to inflation or population increases, collections and expenditures were minute compared to today's and today's State expenses are largely determined by Federal mandates. In 1950 total Federal Revenue was 43.5B$, expenditures 44.8B$ (1.3 added to deficit) and State and Local Spending totaled 27.9B$, with a GDP of 294B$ or about 1/50th in 2010. In 2010 revenues were about 2.3T$, expenditures 3.7T$ (1.55T$ added to deficit) and STATES & LOCAL Government collected or were granted and spent 2.9T$. You will have to enter year for citations on these figures.... http://www.usgovernmentdebt.us/budget_pie_gs.php?span=usgs302&year=2010&view=1&expand=&expandC=&units=b&fy=fy11&local=s&state=US#usgs302 3rd; for all practical purposes there were no payroll taxes or collections in 1950 and virtually no expenses before 1940. Today collections are over 800B$, all of which goes to the Federal before granting. http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/federal_revenue 4th; Legal deductions in 1950 have largely been diminished, even though targeted credits have replaced some to specific business or demographics, the end result being more overall taxes and States/Local taxes, significantly higher today, have had few deduction allowable. 5th; Inflation from 1950 to 2010 has been about 800% or what cost you 20.00 in 1950 would cost you 180.00 today and for the sake of rebuttal, the population has doubled. By comparison the above high lighted increase would be a 5,000% increase. http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/ My conclusion would be that overall tax revenues have never been higher and that the evidence is NOT disputable. Keep in mind however, that I've gone through the trouble to lay out this argument, ONLY to show, under politics, any issue can be disputed and very few would bother...

Hi doG, it has been awhile; Not many years ago, moderators here did both moderate and discuss within a thread, however recently have not been doing both. We've had several threads on this sub forum and unlike on other forums the internal politics seemed to favor the posters. My point however was the formation of threads with substance and I've found experienced posters, many times moderators or long time member/posters have done the best job, not to say first time posters are incapable. Actually I can't imagine the viewer ship of an Obama/Bush debate, it would shatter any records, but I've seen many threads produced and argued, basically with two posters with ideologically different viewpoints, moderators or not, draw huge viewer ships. It has always seemed to me, that should be a motive or the motive for any forum. This leads to poster interest and of course ratings for potential advertising revenue...

I think bob's concern was, the content lacks substance, which if includes "thread topics", I'd agree. Most occasional posters like myself and interested in Politics or those that might follow interesting individuals (my objective) will scan "Today's Post", responding to what interest them and may or not respond to certain authors. That said and looking over recent political threads (two pages), there isn't really many threads that have interested me. As for moderating politics, I've found the best have also been active thread authors. ParanoiA and Pangloss, the most recent. Then there are the interesting authors, as in iNow, bascule, ydoaPs, Mr. Skeptic, (in my view rigney) and I'm sure others, that seem to have lost interest or lost interest in the replies. Elsewhere, which the administrators hate me to talk about, actual debated issues seems to draw the most attention, at least by views. Another thing I've mentioned too many times, is that many people find their way to any forum by search engines and of all the topics on any Science oriented forum, politics should be the most benign of sub forums. This requirement for 30 post or whatever (so many day's) post to someone interested in politics will not keep them around. I've been coming around here for some time and seen many periods like this and feel in time someone interesting, drawing interest to the regulars or new posters will do their time to post, will show their stuff...

One thing you might keep in mind, is that from 1789 to 1815 Congressmen, earned 6.00 per session attended, with virtually no perks. Since requirements to vote into State Legislatures, including owning property (vested interest), generally meaning a farm/business, I'd suggest FEW State Legislatures were even interested in representing their State. Even by 1914 the wages, would normally had not made leaving the farm, business or many jobs worth the effort and those that chose to serve, did so, out of some patriotic duty or maybe civic obligation.

Reality; Not claiming it was, but what if the purpose (opposed to excuse after being caught) was to BLAME unfeathered sales of guns in the US not only for violence in Mexico, but violence in general in the US, an attack on Amendment #2 USC.

Since a couple folks have found there way to this forum, from an old post by Syntax and this thread, I'll make this post. Note that I could easily argue both directions, however as a strong believer in mind therapy or that what the mind believes can be, will be. Yoga, while I don't involve religion or spirituality on my reasoning, does work for a great many people and I do believe those afflicted with various forms of psychological or mental problems can be helped, where traditional remedies seemingly can not solve the problem. On the link below are "said" testimonials made by young children. I understand parents might have said things to influence memory acceptance, but IMO for life itself to exist the brain/memory must start working well before birth.