By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - GDP Shrinks by 6.1% in Q1

HappySqurriel on 30 April 2009
Kasz216 said:
akuma587 said:

We should get rid of Alaska then. They take in $1.84 in federal dollars for every $1.00 they send out in federal tax dollars.

You'd be surprised.

The minute Alaska was "let go" they would suddenly be making a lot more money then that $0.84 net gain they're getting from the federal government.

Because they'd start drilling for oil and getting other resources the US government doesn't want them to have.

Also... it's not like Tyranical doesn't have a point here.

I'm not sure it'd do much good for unempoyment and the economy... but there are still tons of illegal immigrants here who are a drain on the economy.

Some even get Medicaid.

Getting rid of illegal immigrants would stop this drain. Plus.... they're here illegally.

Of course the problem is it'll be as expensive as hell to get rid of them.

I'm not convinced that eliminating illegal immigration in the United States would have much of a positive impact on the economy ...

Illegal immigrants do a lot of very low cost work which enables many companies the opportunity to offer services at a very low cost, and illegal immigrants also spend most of the money they earn locally. The loss of illegal immagrants in these industries would result in companies having to pay dramatically more for labour, which (effectively) acts like a large tax on these industries which would result in them moving out of the country (lowering overal economic activity), going out of business (lowering overall economic activity), or passing these costs onto their customers who would then have to cut back on other spending (lowering overall economic activity).

Now, I don't really know if we can say that the costs associated with these immigrants is greater than the benefits they provide.

With that said, I think that this argument is academic because until the border is secure enough there is no way that the United States could effectively deport any illegal immigrants ... One of the core reasons why the United States has so many Mexican Nationals in their prisons is that their government knows that deporting these criminals is meaningless, and a week (or two) after they were deported they would be back exactly where they were when they were picked up.

 



Around the Network
akuma587 on 30 April 2009

Illegal immigrants and their offspring are the only reason the U.S. is actually growing in population. Otherwise, our growth rate would actually be negative.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Bitmap Frogs on 30 April 2009
HappySqurriel said:
Bitmap Frogs said:

If that were true, the first thing the government should do is dismantle the military forces. As a whole the US military costs a shitton more than it generates for society. Nowadays a bunch of nuclears and a small task force is all is needed.

But hey, I forgot somewhat the concept of a fiscal blackhole such as the military forces is at the core of the republican beliefs. Guess someone has to lobby to keep hundreds of thousands of people on the government payroll.


The Military was (probably) a very poorly chosen target ... They were only 21% of the budget in 2008 (and will be dramatically less in 2009 and beyond); the military trains a lot of people for productive careers which are available in the private sector; the Military pays for a lot of people to go to university; the Military gives their soldiers discipline, personal motivation and self respect (which results in people far less likely to commit crime or be dependant on the government); and the Military spends an amazingly large amount of their money on Research and Development which results in new technologies which work their way into tons of products.

... In other words, the Military is far from a fiscal blackhole and military members (and everyone) benefits from the spending even if you don't consider safety

 

Only 21%? That's one fifth of the budget. It's a crapload.

All the R+D spent by the military would be more efficiently translated into advancements through regular science channels. It's a huge argument that deserves its own thread but while it is true the military is funding R+D, is doing it at a higher cost. The only military R+D spending worth its salt is DARPA - and the society as a whole would benefit way, way more if all DARPA projects were blown open instead of hidden behind red tape. Remember military science requires secrecy so it takes time until those advancements reach society.

Your argument about military values is bollocks because it clashes with a harsh reality: countries with significantly smaller military forces have lower crime rates that the USA. So either significant military forces increase crime or are not a factor, your choice.

In other words, the military is a fiscal blackhole unless you spin some facts and hide some other ones.





Current-gen game collection uploaded on the profile, full of win and good games; also most of my PC games. Lucasfilm Games/LucasArts 1982-2008 (Requiescat In Pace).

Tyrannical on 30 April 2009
akuma587 said:
Illegal immigrants and their offspring are the only reason the U.S. is actually growing in population. Otherwise, our growth rate would actually be negative.

 

 That's true, which is all the more reason to halt it. Overcrowding can cause serious ecological problems, and at over 300M people the US is crowded enough. So for the sake of the environment, please help stop immigration.



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire

akuma587 on 30 April 2009
Tyrannical said:
akuma587 said:
Illegal immigrants and their offspring are the only reason the U.S. is actually growing in population. Otherwise, our growth rate would actually be negative.

 

 That's true, which is all the more reason to halt it. Overcrowding can cause serious ecological problems, and at over 300M people the US is crowded enough. So for the sake of the environment, please help stop immigration.

So, I take it you are for the new more aggressive stance the EPA has taken on a wide variety of ecological problems and for Congress's cap-and-trade legislation then, right?

And compare our popluation to landmass ratio to China, and our country looks like it is completely empty.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
Tyrannical on 30 April 2009
akuma587 said:
Tyrannical said:

Overcrowding can cause serious ecological problems, and at over 300M people the US is crowded enough. So for the sake of the environment, please help stop immigration.

So, I take it you are for the new more aggressive stance the EPA has taken on a wide variety of ecological problems and for Congress's cap-and-trade legislation then, right?

And compare our popluation to landmass ratio to China, and our country looks like it is completely empty.

 

I do not believe in the global warming alarmist’s theory. I also think within 10 years no one else will either.

However, "reduce, reuse, and recycle" are extremely important concepts, as are renewable energy sources such as nuclear and deep oil drilling. It is only common sense to not be wasteful.

Thank God China is China's problem and not mine. They are over crowded and I am glad they have taken some steps to improve on that. Though I suppose with the proper application of science, over population could be rendered a thing of the past.

 

 



Yet, today, America's leaders are reenacting every folly that brought these great powers [Russia, Germany, and Japan] to ruin -- from arrogance and hubris, to assertions of global hegemony, to imperial overstretch, to trumpeting new 'crusades,' to handing out war guarantees to regions and countries where Americans have never fought before. We are piling up the kind of commitments that produced the greatest disasters of the twentieth century.
 — Pat Buchanan – A Republic, Not an Empire

Bitmap Frogs on 30 April 2009
Tyrannical said:
akuma587 said:
Tyrannical said:

Overcrowding can cause serious ecological problems, and at over 300M people the US is crowded enough. So for the sake of the environment, please help stop immigration.

So, I take it you are for the new more aggressive stance the EPA has taken on a wide variety of ecological problems and for Congress's cap-and-trade legislation then, right?

And compare our popluation to landmass ratio to China, and our country looks like it is completely empty.

 

I do not believe in the global warming alarmist’s theory. I also think within 10 years no one else will either.

However, "reduce, reuse, and recycle" are extremely important concepts, as are renewable energy sources such as nuclear and deep oil drilling. It is only common sense to not be wasteful.

Thank God China is China's problem and not mine. They are over crowded and I am glad they have taken some steps to improve on that. Though I suppose with the proper application of science, over population could be rendered a thing of the past.

 

 

 

 

 

You are wrong there. Very, very wrong. Aislationism as a political idea is nation suicide, as a basis for intellectual discussion is even more dangerous.

For starters, you pay for China's overcrowding with every gallon of gas you drop on your car. 

 





Current-gen game collection uploaded on the profile, full of win and good games; also most of my PC games. Lucasfilm Games/LucasArts 1982-2008 (Requiescat In Pace).

TheRealMafoo on 30 April 2009
akuma587 said:

Stock market didn't seem to care at least.  Was up 168 points today.

 

In the last 6 months, the economy dropped 12%, and the stock market in that time dropped 26%.

How does this equate to the stock market not caring?

 



akuma587 on 30 April 2009
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:

Stock market didn't seem to care at least.  Was up 168 points today.

 

In the last 6 months, the economy dropped 12%, and the stock market in that time dropped 26%.

How does this equate to the stock market not caring?

 

The news came out yesterday.  The stock market did not react negatively to the news even though the numbers were worse than expected.  Its like people reacting to a company's earning reports for the quarter.  You can't have a negative reaction to published numbers before those numbers are finally published. 

I'm not talking about their reaction to the economic contraction in general but their reaction to what those numbers ultimately were.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

TheRealMafoo on 30 April 2009
akuma587 said:
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:

Stock market didn't seem to care at least.  Was up 168 points today.

 

In the last 6 months, the economy dropped 12%, and the stock market in that time dropped 26%.

How does this equate to the stock market not caring?

 

The news came out yesterday.  The stock market did not react negatively to the news even though the numbers were worse than expected.  Its like people reacting to a company's earning reports for the quarter.  You can't have a negative reaction to published numbers before those numbers are finally published. 

I'm not talking about their reaction to the economic contraction in general but their reaction to what those numbers ultimately were.

 

 

True. But the problem with the market of late, in my opinion, is not if the news is good or bad, but if they don’t know what the news really means.

GM killed Pontiac, the market went up.

Chrysler files for bankruptcy, the market went up (or stayed the same).

What kills the market is uncertainty, not bad news. The government pouring money into a system, making in unclear where the good investments are or aren’t, is what has made the market do these crazy things. Not bad news.

The market has reacted already to the slow in the economy. Telling the market what it already knows should have little impact.