A New Course for the Military

LineInTheSand said:
Day-Tripper said:
Well, in those politician's defence, the economy moves at the pace of a lightning bolt whereas government moves at the pace of a glacier.

And democratically-elected leaders, by their nature, cannot make revolutionary changes without voter consent.

Being mayor of NYC in 1960s-1970s would have severely tested the Jeffersons, Franklins, Lincolns, etc.
Click to expand...

But not the Ed Kochs?
Click to expand...

Wall Street boomed post-1981, and Ed Koch reaped the benefits. New Yorkers don't work any harder than Detroiters in 2017, but they benefit from glbal financial services industry based in Manhattan.

If things were just based on low taxes and limited government, Baton Rouge would be doing far better than NYC. But it ain't.
 
LineInTheSand said:
Day-Tripper said:
The key is CONTROLLING those expenditures. FDR promoted Social Security when the average US family had 6 kids. It made actuarial sense in 1933, and in 1953 and even in 1973. But in 2017 when the birthrate is threatening to hit 2 kids per family, it needs adjusting. Or more immigrants under the age of 30.
Click to expand...

It's no where near control now... and there's little will to change that.

Reminds me of a scene in Jurassic Park... about control.... and illusions.
Click to expand...

True, America's politicians are cowards, afraid to tell the people hard truths. But the bleating sheep of the populace get what they vote for.

But like I said, the demise of the huge Baby Boomer generation (and their government entitlements) will have tremendous economic benefits in the long run.
 
Day-Tripper said:
Wall Street boomed post-1981, and Ed Koch reaped the benefits. New Yorkers don't work any harder than Detroiters in 2017, but they benefit from glbal financial services industry based in Manhattan.

If things were just based on low taxes and limited government, Baton Rouge would be doing far better than NYC. But it ain't.
Click to expand...

Oh, there's plenty of NYC that doesn't benefit from Wall Street... we just avoid them.
 
LineInTheSand said:
What are some big governments with big programs that don't have big deficit spending, that, if not controlled, hasn't ended in big debts?
Click to expand...

None.

But who owns a house without taking out a mortgage?

It pays off eventually.

What corporation doesn't sell off it's ownership through stock or bond offerings?

Debt can be a good thing, promoting growth.

The GI Bill pushed 10 million WW2 vets into the Middle Class within 5-10 years, not to mention their children and grandchildren.
 
Bonds aren't equity.

I'm not saying debt is bad.... I am saying too much debt is though.

And I'm sure we can point to numerous examples of people who took out mortgages (or two) and never owned the home in the end.
 
LineInTheSand said:
Bonds aren't equity.

I'm not saying debt is bad.... I am saying too much debt is though.

And I'm sure we can point to numerous examples of people who took out mortgages (or two) and never owned the home in the end.
Click to expand...

At this point I'm going to call the game.

Too much intellectual to-and-fro over the last 2 hours has caused too much ice meltage in my G&T's and I've missed most of the Patriots game (they lost anyway).

Good debate.

Cheers & bottoms up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top