To Republican Controlled House: Stop with the Stupid!

Jump to Last Post 1-4 of 4 discussions (77 posts)
  1. Credence2 profile image79
    Credence2posted 14 months ago

    I stumbled upon a recent article the excerpt of it is below:

    The former chair of the Republican National Committee (RNC) has a blistering response to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene's, R-Ga., recent remarks about debt.

    According to HuffPost, Michael Steele was not pleased with Greene's adamant pushback against the proposed initiative of raising the debt limit. Her remarks came as Democratic lawmakers push for what is described as a "clean" bill to increase the debt limit for financial flexibility.

    The former Republican leader went on to offer hard facts with a direct statement to Marjorie Greene as he explained how legislation actually works. He also offered her a blistering word of advice.

    "If you understand how this works, Marjorie, then you know that this is about bills that have already been created, not new spending. So this is not a spending question. This is just paying the damn credit card of the country for the $8 trillion your president ran up between 2016 and 2020. So stop with the stupid."

    ----------

    So, the Jewish space lasers lady aka "The Heifer" and her Republican House associates wants to shortcircuit the requirement to pay our debts. Those debts having been accumulated during Trump's term. And it is funny that I don't recall that any of  this sort of controversy raising its head during Trumps term. So, the party of so called fiscal responsibility is not so much as it is the party of showboating and irresponsibility.
    They are making a "scene" here. I say that they can go to hell and I insist that not one Democrat fold over their ridiculous demands. We will not be held hostage over their insane demands.
    --------------

    Others think the White House needs to come at it differently for officials to have any hope at cross-aisle cooperation.

    “Biden’s initial comment of zero negotiations is a non-starter,” said Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who said he personally hasn’t heard from the White House. “[Republicans] can’t get 100 percent of what we want with only control of half of Congress, but our voters sent us to D.C. to control spending, so the Democrats have to show some movement our way, too.”

    “Both sides need to negotiate in good faith,” he added.


    'No negotiation’: White House calls on Congress to raise the debt limit
    --------
    As far as I am concerned, Biden's comment is the ONLY starter. They are holding hostage the very functions of our government so they can can wrangle cuts in Social Security and other social benefit programs? Those tax cuts that we could ill afford during Trumps term and the bloated Defense budget, I don't hear any concerns about that. I tell the President: the Republicans are to receive absolutely nothing and I will find displeasure with any Democrat who allow him or herself to be intimidated. If there are consequences to not passing the increase the blame, as during Clinton's term and more recently, Obama's, is to be placed 100 percent  on the GOP. The only "movement" available to Republicans are to be of the bowel variety.

    ----------

    SharePlay Video
    Concessions over the debt ceiling were a vital part of the deal that McCarthy negotiated with his 20 conservative holdouts to finally attain the speakership. He agreed that the GOP House wouldn’t move to lift the debt ceiling unless Congress slashes at least $130 billion in federal spending next fiscal year or addresses broader fiscal reforms that tackle the ballooning debt, as many Republicans argue it threatens the nation’s economic security and future.
    ----------

    Oh really? You will pass it as is or else...
    Oh, My God, Republicans suck......
    ------------
    Such spending cuts should be negotiated as part of the annual budget and appropriations process Congress will also have to tackle later this year, said Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.). He argued it shouldn’t occur during a high-stakes battle over the nation’s borrowing authority.
    -----
    Yes, we learned that in junior high civics classes.
    ---------
    “We’ve been very clear. The President’s been very clear. It’s everybody’s duty to make sure the United States pays its bills on time,” Van Hollen said. “There will be no negotiations over the debt ceiling and paying our bills on time.”
    ------
    Damn right, no negotiations, exceptions nor excuses....

    1. GA Anderson profile image88
      GA Andersonposted 14 months agoin reply to this

      The criticism that the argument is about paying the bills on time, not future spending cuts, that they are separate issues, has a weak spot. A valid arguable 'flip-side.'

      Consider the issue without any specifics. No names, no details. Just the concept of forcing a discussion on compromise. Rhetorically, Is there anyone that doesn't think our government has been over-spending for decades, that something has to be done to control it, that the issue is a political fight more than a dire emergency and national disgrace, (Continuing Resolutions haven't been a problem before)?

      Those legislators explaining that the issue is about paying for money we already borrowed know that the Republican thrust is valid. They know overspending will only continue until there is some penalty for doing it.

      To lecture that Republicans don't understand basic Civics stuff is hypocrisy. Green, (et al.), knows what the fight is about and that future spending cuts are directly related to the nation's debt ceiling. Her attackers know that she knows. They know that the 'pay your bills' criticism is baloney because, except for the newbies, they all created those bills.

      And look at the response those criticism plant in partisan minds. Look at your responses to the link's blurbs: name-calling and denigration using many of the media-presented talking points and buzz phrases. Shooting the messenger without any discussion of the message.

      This issue is just political hardball. Gird up.

      *all the 'they know' claims are just an opinion.

      GA

      1. Credence2 profile image79
        Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

        Alright, GA,thanks for your reply.

        Are we to shut down the government and go through all that we had in 2011 just because Republicans can't get their way?  I and the nation will blame them for any hardships associated with not increasing the debt ceiling. If you can't see the hypocrisy of pursuing this at this very moment and the tendency to put this on Democrats, disregarding GOP administrations that bear responsibility for exorbitant spending, then you need to remove those amber colored glasses. I can't believe that you suck up to these guys and believe all their crap, which has been timed and totally political in nature.

        So we either get what we want or we shut down the government? That is holding a pistol to Miss Liberty s head.

        This is a "hardball" that is going to be a pie in the face just like it was for Gingrich back in the day.

        Politics works within the standard options of the two party system, we do not threaten to derail the locomotive just because we have issues with the passengers. Neither side...

        Excusing Republicans again, are we? In your world of "both sides do it" and "two wrongs don't make a right", somehow in that world, Republicans always get a free pass. I bet you thought that J-6 was just "political hardball"?

        NOW, everybody is concerned about future spending cuts, what did Republicans do about it when they were in charge?

        I don't want to be on the edge as we were in 2011...

        I am being kind in my descriptions of Republicans and what it is they are attempting to do.

        I have no respect for Green nor anything that she says....

        If Republicans wanted to do what they wished in Congress, they should had made sure that their planned red wave was successful, filling the House and Senate with veto proof majorities. Such was not the case, the electorate said otherwise. Cheaters do not prosper.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

          "I and the nation will blame them for any hardships associated with not increasing the debt ceiling."

          Do I and the nation get to blame liberals and Democrats for refusing to rein in spending and work towards getting off the borrowing bandwagon?  After all, it means more taxes for all of us, and it is the middle class that ends up paying the lions share.

          It's hard to respect people without a shred of financial sense, people that will borrow endlessly until suddenly the well is dry and then shift the blame to someone else.

          1. Credence2 profile image79
            Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

            Do Republicans rein in spending or do they merely choose to "spend" somewhere else?

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

              When they try to force the issue suddenly they are the bad guys, right? 

              Not sure what you mean by "spend", in quotes.  You lost me there.

              1. Credence2 profile image79
                Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                You don't force the issue by burning down the entire house.

                Both parties are responsible for excessive spending, the reactionaries(Republicans) with their corporate bailouts and military outlays. Their spending is just as profligate but just going in a different direction,

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                  How do you suggest government reign in it's gross spending habit? 

                  As you say, when it comes time to spend both parties do it to at least some extent (meaning more than is reasonable or needed) - at that point the desire or will power to reign it in is nonexistent.  Right now it is there - when do you think would be a better time to make an effort to stop the madness?

                  1. Credence2 profile image79
                    Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                    They should control the spending habits as they are supposed to by compromise and give and take. That is their job as legislators, not to unravel our government.  I don't trust Republican ideas of fiscal restraint as they do not trust the Democrats on the same accord. We have to compromise over whose ox is to be gored and to what extent.  The all or nothing politics from both sides is the problem.

          2. Fayetteville Faye profile image59
            Fayetteville Fayeposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            Well many believe that Mr. Trump built a national debt so big (Even before the pandemic) That It’ll weigh down the economy for years.  He oversaw the third-biggest deficit increase of any president. Republicans had no objection to raising the doubt limit three times during his tenure.  Oh but now we have a problem??

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

              LOL  The debt was so big, long before Trump, even before Obama, that it will weigh down the economy for longer than my lifetime.

              And yet we complain when the party we do not affiliate with drags their heels at increasing the debt ceiling without concessions in future spending.  Are politics really that big a thing to the average American?  Or do they truly not understand the future result of ever increasing debt?

              1. Miebakagh57 profile image69
                Miebakagh57posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                That's why civics lessons should be given a top priority in schools.

          3. Kathleen Cochran profile image78
            Kathleen Cochranposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            Why is it the Democrats always get blamed for "spending" but the GOP doesn't get blamed  for giving away our revenue stream through cutting taxes? Both deplete our cash reserves.

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

              Perhaps because we should be cutting taxes, being taxed far beyond the actual needs of the country (as opposed to individuals).

        2. GA Anderson profile image88
          GA Andersonposted 14 months agoin reply to this

          You are off to a great start. Simply because I offered a supporting view of an arguably valid perspective of the concept of this issue, you say I am a closed-minded suckup that believes the Republicans' mirror image of the political crap that is being thrown out. Political crap such as the OP's presentation of the only possible, (and acceptable), view of the issue.

          And you get all of that from a response that didn't include any names or specifics of the action. Hells bells, if I say anything more you'll have enough to expose me as a closet-Trumplican. 

          Your OP, as I read it, was a political presentation that demanded the president hold to an obstinate closed-minded inaction against any criticisms. Your response to my comment was full of character assassinations and party buzzwords and phrases, yet didn't speak to any of the substance. (if there was any?)

          To take another shot at the basics of my response; could you consider the possibility that the reason for the action is valid, even if you disagree with the action's specifics?

          GA

          1. Credence2 profile image79
            Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

            Ok, GA, I will take another shot...

            Whatever foul adjectives I used for Republicans, present company excepted.

            The only thing that I can add that there is some support for the idea that the sort of extortion is commonplace like an annual holiday, more than I would have believed.

            I think that the Republicans are going to remain deliberately mum about specific desired cuts, as they do not want to reveal to the public the direction to where they are going to take their suggestive cuts and give Democrats more ammunition against them.

            You are not a Trumplican, but you do have strong Republican leaning s that puts us at odds, automatically.

            I am not supporting Biden being obstinate. But we know that Republicans are not insisting on budget cuts that would be anything but advantageous to their base. They know we are not going to gore our oxen, no more than we expect to gore theirs. So what do they expect to accomplish? There will be no touching Social Security or Medicare, so what do they hope to accomplish with this "innocent" extortion?

            I did not like what happen d 2011. This is not a viable political ploy for either political party.

            Did, I otherwise, miss anything?

            1. GA Anderson profile image88
              GA Andersonposted 14 months agoin reply to this

              Considering that the 'action' has been a frequently used political tool, and not a single party's attack on democracy and the nation's reputation is a good piece of common ground. The sky isn't falling.

              That implies that there is also common ground regarding the need for spending control. (as that is the promoted rationale by whichever party is doing it at the time) 

              Add a few more pieces of common ground that I think we would find, (e.g. the last 20+ years have  brought us to the not-good normalization of Continuing Resolutions and budgeting by 10,000-page omnibus bills and that something must be done), and here we are: we both know that we're talking about the same dog, (the 'action' your OP condemned to hell), but just arguing about its hairs. (the names and details in the OP)


              If we have made it this far it must infer the disastrous claims of damage that will result from the Republicans' effort isn't what you are condemning, it is the people doing it. I think that loops back to my starting point: There is an arguable counter to the claims of the OP because they are your opinions and opinions are the most arguable thing there is.

              As for those names and details, you have me there. I seldom dig deeper than an initial media impression unless something compels me. I've gotten lazy.

              I will argue about the merit and need for some sort of "action"  to disrupt the status quo that we both seem to agree is not a good thing, but the personal characterizations—good or bad, will have to be a point-by-point, name-by-name thing.

              GA

              1. Credence2 profile image79
                Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                Conservatives have also said the J-6 was not the sky falling, was it? It was sheer luck and the flip of the coin that what happened would not have escalated, as there were no guardrails.

                While the process appears a standard political tool of both parties, it was only in 2011 (GOP) that clear and present danger was not to be ignored. So, how can you say there was no need to be concerned? With no guardrail, I am always going to be concerned. I don't like conservatives exuding confidence about an outcome without any real basis for it. i will always prefer can't over won't.
                ----
                On August 5, 2011, Standard & Poors issued the first ever downgrade in the federal government's credit rating, citing their April warnings, the difficulty of bridging the parties and that the resulting agreement fell well short of the hoped-for comprehensive 'grand bargain'.[32] The credit downgrade and debt ceiling debacle contributed to the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) falling nearly 2,000 points in late July and August. Following the downgrade itself, the DJIA had one of its worst days in history and fell 635 points on August 8.[33
                -------
                Instead of threatening the viability of the American economy here and around the world, playing "chicken", maybe, just maybe they should legislate like the high paid officials they are and stop behaving like grade school kids on a playground. Legislators have more than ample opportunity to address overspending short of holding all of the rest of us hostage.

                So, yes, I don't like taking things to the brink in an unnecessary fashion, I have no assurance that the sky won't fall next time.

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                  I get the impression that half or better of the homeowners energy needs are still met by burning fossil fuels.  Is that true?  Gas heat, gas hot water, gas cooking - that doesn't leave much, comparatively speaking, for the energy of electricity.

                  1. Ken Burgess profile image76
                    Ken Burgessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                    True.

                    And what people also don't realize is most recent tax bill passed that kicks into effect this year puts major new taxes on coal, ngas, and oil.

                    These prices will go up.  You have to love how they promise no new taxes on people, but who do you think will be paying for all these new taxes on energy, corporations, etc.

                    These costs will be passed on to all of us.

                2. GA Anderson profile image88
                  GA Andersonposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                  A little clarification: I didn't intend to infer there was no reason to be concerned. I support the action these new folks are proclaiming to be their purpose but don't trust the folks behind those claims.

                  When any extreme is on a roll there is always a reason to be concerned. I am saying the action they are taking isn't a Republican anomaly and it appears to be, to me, because of the need for some action to control spending, a needed action.

                  J6 was a serious breach, but I think it is arguable that it wasn't a serious attempt that had any chance of success.

                  GA

                  1. wilderness profile image95
                    wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                    Ask yourself: If every person in the Capitol had been killed that day would Trump be President?  Would the US have been overthrown and now governed by a dictator for life?

                    No?  Then it is not arguable; it is factual that it could not succeed.

                  2. Credence2 profile image79
                    Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                    The attempt is dire enough in of itself, that in itself is serious as it has never occurred in over 2 centuries, and then by a foreign power.

                    If we are serious about reining in spending rather than resort to one party using a truncheon on the other, this should be top billing every day the legislators are in session, rather than just to make political points with their respective supporters. In this environment, one side will not be allowed to prevail over the other.

    2. Miebakagh57 profile image69
      Miebakagh57posted 14 months agoin reply to this

      'Yes, we learned that in junior high civics classes'.                                     When will thes politicians ever apply civic lessons to solve issues? It's such politicians that ar after money period.

      1. Credence2 profile image79
        Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

        When will thes politicians ever apply civic lessons to solve issues? It's such politicians that ar after money period.

        That just the problem, they don't...

        1. Miebakagh57 profile image69
          Miebakagh57posted 14 months agoin reply to this

          When will they start? The sooner the better.

  2. Ken Burgess profile image76
    Ken Burgessposted 14 months ago

    Credence,

    You really need to find another "hobby", your blood pressure must be sky high.

    Following politics in our country is no longer a worthwhile endeavor my friend.

    The battles have been fought, they have been won, or lost, as it may be.

    The State of the Nation is this, we are so far down the road we are on there is no turning back for America.

    The 30+ Trillion dollars in deficit is the profound statement that our economy, the value of the dollar, has reached its end.  Whether that be weeks, or a couple more years, its collapse is imminent.

    There are other signs as well, such as Saudi Arabia openly announcing to the world they are willing to trade their oil in other currencies, but the world outside of the US sees the deterioration of America, economically and otherwise, and they are readying to disconnect from the Dollar as the world's Reserve...soon.

    America as is thought of by most Americans over the age of 40 is over.

    Economically, Culturally, Social Norms... completely flipped, finished, its just a matter of time before the Baby Boomers and Gen Xers have died off, and then the country will be incapable of maintaining its position as a global leader, of anything of relevance.

    Much in the way that the EU is currently being gutted, overrun, and surpassed by all things "Made in China".  From vehicles or solar panels, nothing not kept running by the State will be able to compete with the cheaper, better made products coming from China (or India).

    As for the Social Deconstruction:

    I was reading the other day how a Hockey Player refused to wear a Gay Pride uniform that all NHL players were told to wear.

    Of course, he was not American... Americans have been ground into submission to accept anything, no matter how offensive to their beliefs, which is why we are no more than a year or two from pedophilia becoming the next "bigoted norm" our society will break through.

    He was an Orthodox Christian from Russia. 

    But here is the key... just ten years ago, if a player wanted to wear a Gay Pride uniform in the NHL he would have been ostracized, or at least have gotten major pushback for attempting to do so.

    Today you get ostracized, major pushback, and perhaps even 'cancelled' if you say 'No, I will not wear a Gay Pride uniform'.

    Its not OK for you to have your own beliefs, you must conform to the Group Think, or lose you job, and be cancelled by society.

    Today it is the LGTBQ group, soon to become the LGTBQP group, if you don't think a man who feels he is a woman should be treated as a woman, be allowed to compete as a woman, there is something wrong with YOU not them.  Next are the children, and they are being programmed now by the very same people and politics that have made LGTBQ so pronounced in our society today.

    The Past:

    Your Generation and mine were taught that a Man's job is to provide, protect, produce, and lead his family.

    A Woman's job was to support and build up her man, care for the children, be the homemaker.

    Standard Nuclear Family stuff.

    Western society has abandoned this, especially in the past two decades.

    Women are expected to be the men, to not need men, not be dependent on men, put careers first.  Those women who want to have a "traditional" role as homemaker and child raiser are frowned upon.

    Women may have been reprogrammed in Western Society, but what men want out of women hasn't changed in the majority of men.

    In Summary:

    Enjoy your time doing other things than fighting over politics.

    Life is short, the Dice Rolled, the road already too far travelled, we are heading well past what you, or any other sane American, was ever 'fighting' for.  Well past... until we have completely collapsed and are built anew... into something you nor I will have any control over.

    1. Miebakagh57 profile image69
      Miebakagh57posted 14 months agoin reply to this

      I found this too hard for the likes of Credence2. But let it be.

      1. Credence2 profile image79
        Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

        There is nothing hard about it.....

    2. Credence2 profile image79
      Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

      Hello, Ken, nice to hear from you again, as always.

      Oh, no, Ken, l love to follow politics. I would be bored to death if I did not have you guys around to "mix it up over". My blood pressure is actually lower than in years past. I don't have to work for anyone anymore, while the check is still in the mail. My wife is my only "boss". So, I can be a crotchety as I please these days. I have unlimited chess games and partners and virtually unlimited entertainment and education from what could be called a compendium of all human knowledge. What is there to want? These are the best years of my life.

      So, now, on with the show.

      Yes, I read the stories over Saudi Arabia possibly abandoning the dollar as the foundation currency. I never believed that we could stay at the top of the "food chain" forever. We have had our century, perhaps the time has come for other nations to have theirs. People associate cultural change with the perception of decline. We all know that nothing is static.

      Greed of American capitalists and workers would have eventually led to this outcome. Once the technology was available, the captains of industry would much rather move manufacturing to countries where there were lower wages and no labor nor environmental regulations, what would be more natural, just as one would expect water to run downhill? There goes the American jobs....

      As for the gay stuff, no one should be compelled to wear such a political statement on any such item on their clothing. The bend of the knee at sport games was voluntary, no one was required to participate. That's the difference. In light of that difference, how does "group think" fit in?

      In the midst of an ever present American decline, do we have to be in such a hurry to break all of the rules of law and civility that may have played a small role in keeping the country together?


      As for the past, it is true the man was to be the breadwinner. That reality was reinforced openly and subliminally in all the media of the 1960s while I growing up. But, the reality is that life is short and each and every human being, be it man or woman, has an obligation to him or herself to pursue their desires in life to the greatest extent consistent with aptitude and diligence. That is the new paradyme. And that is far superior to the old one. Now, women can either choose to be June Cleaver or Sally Ride. 
      It is not about expectations but the right to choose. Women want what we all want, a choice.

      If some think that the new paradyme correlates with a declining America, that is unfortunate. No one is willing to just "stay in their place" as they did 100 years ago.

      Again, nice to hear from you.

      1. Ken Burgess profile image76
        Ken Burgessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

        Good reply Cred, but one that doesn't directly counter the heart of those statements.
        It just says you like the political drama and are OK with where things are going.
        When your pension(s) disappear because our well led government has sunk the nation's economy, let me know if you still feel that way.

        1. Credence2 profile image79
          Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

          When my pension disappears the sun will burn out. I am not at the point were I am going to say that the sky is falling.....

          I will let you know if my opinion has changed.

          1. tsmog profile image84
            tsmogposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            Coming out of the woodwork . . . they are threatening to play with cutting Soc Sec and Medicare to control spending. Hands off!!!. As far as that goes there is a rumor our benefits will be delayed if the debt ceiling is not resolved soon.

            1. Credence2 profile image79
              Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

              Welcome, Yes, another Republican plot to "stick it" to the little guy. Since they can't achieve that legislatively, they will now put a gun to America's head.

      2. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

        Credence, I like this post.  It has a lot going for it...but unfortunately it glosses over the negatives, very large ones, that we are also seeing today.

        You may disagree (certainly your privilege) but I think our country is also seeing a decided decline in responsibility, in self reliance, in production whether from a garden or an assembly line.  We are seeing a marked descent into lawlessness, whether from rioters or shoplifters.  Our culture has become, far too much, dependent on the nanny state for their every need and every want.  We have decided that ALL the wealth of the nation actually belongs to everyone, regardless of who produced or earned it.

        So yes, few are willing to stay in their place...but moving out of that place is the responsibility of someone else rather than the person wanting to move.  Whether it be taking the wealth of those with more or simply demanding that a different "tribe" give us what we want, we aren't concerned with doing it ourselves.

        1. Credence2 profile image79
          Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

          Thanks for the kudos,

          Yes, I do disagree partially

          https://www.cbsnews.com/news/young-adul … arch-2022/

          The difference between the number and percentage of young adults living with their parents today as compared to say, 1971, is quite stark.

          I, for one, do not buy the fact that so many are lazy as an explanation for the difference. I just think being "self reliant" is just a little harder to come by today then it was in times past. This trend has been taking place long before Biden and "his inflation" so that won't do as an explanation.

          We have less social mobility today than ever before, that means that it will be less likely that children can rise in status above parents. Entrenched wealth, the advantages and privileges of that will make this society ever more caste like in the years to come. That is my opinion, anyway. That is my greatest fear.

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            Kids living with parents; coincidentally, my son's family has aged, with now 2 children over 20.  They are both out on their own...mostly because their parents refused to support them.  If other parents followed suit instead of continuing to support kids that refuse to support themselves we wouldn't see the numbers we are.

            "I just think being "self reliant" is just a little harder to come by today then it was in times past."

            It may, or may not, be.  Either way, we as the parent generation is partially at fault here, for we have made it difficult to impossible for most early teens (meaning 14-16 years) to find work.  We have utterly failed to instill a work ethic in those same kids; if they DO find work they are unlikely to keep it. 

            So we share the problem with those "lazy" kids, but share is all, for they really are lazy.  As I said, we have failed to instill any kind of work ethic; what else should we expect?

            I disagree about the social mobility, though.  My personal experience, through 3 and soon 4 generations, is that it is quite possible and I see it happening around me.

            But whether I am right or you are is irrelevant to the matter of a caste system, for it will grown even in the boundaries can still be crossed.  That is to say that the poor will still be poor, the middle still be middle and the rich will remain rich...and the dislike between the three will grow.  Particularly the dislike of poor and middle for the rich, for we are teaching our children that it is almost criminal to be wealthy (whether earned or not, for we are also teaching that if it WAS earned it was done so unethically and illegally) and that the wealth actually belongs to them.

        2. Ken Burgess profile image76
          Ken Burgessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

          This is an observation that speaks to the combined decline I am speaking of.

          When the economy falters, and it will, because it has more than run it's course, and the dollar can no longer be maintained, because it will no longer be backed by Saudi/OPEC oil, which has kept it valued since getting off the gold standard.

          The monumental significance of the Saudis making a declaration that they are willing to trade oil in other currencies has been glossed over by our MSM, as all important truths are...

          But just like the social and moral collapse you see in our country today, rest assured the economic collapse occuring is even more profound and will be more crushing to those 'have nots'.

          I am not not attempting to be hyperbolic when I say you can kiss your pensions and SS goodbye, when an economy falters... History tells of what happens to all such social supports, they disappear.

          1. Readmikenow profile image93
            Readmikenowposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            "you can kiss your pensions and SS goodbye, when an economy falters."

            I'm considering giving a discount to a wilderness survival course me and some friends provide.  We'll teach you how to build a shelter, find water and food in the wild. Build a fire with nothing but what you find in the wilderness.  No more SS or pension, no problem.  Who needs such things when you can easily live off mother nature?

            Back to basics.  All you really need to survive from one day to the next is food, water and shelter.  The rest is gravy. 

            I know I could survive this, but too many people are too dependent on the government to realize there is way to survive without it.

            1. Ken Burgess profile image76
              Ken Burgessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

              Most Americans couldn't handle such a life, especially those that have existed on government support to get by.

              I'm more than capable of living like that if required, I have dealt with worse than most ever experience, but I know I am the exception in America today.

              1. Credence2 profile image79
                Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                We all would do what is necessary to survive, but is that what you prefer to do?

                You all seem to exude this sense of independence and such. Without government anarchy rules, would you prefer that?

              2. Readmikenow profile image93
                Readmikenowposted 14 months agoin reply to this

                You are absolutely right.

                You should see the faces of people when they discover there are no toilets in the wilderness.  People who have lived all their life in a city are traumatized by it.  The world looks like a different place to them once they've done their business in the woods.

                I will say once people take the time and make the effort to learn outdoor survival skills, they are very happy they know them.

                1. Credence2 profile image79
                  Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

                  I step back, Mike there is a value in learning to survive in a natural environment sans the standard conveniences.

                  It is just that I don't want to find myself living that way permanently, if I don't have to....

            2. Credence2 profile image79
              Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

              You can have the Grizzly Adams lifestyle, I will just keep my creature comforts close to the vest. Your post apocalyptic, Mad Max sort of world and embrace of it amounts to a step backward.

              I choose to live over just survive.

          2. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 14 months agoin reply to this

            Let it hang together, somehow, for another couple of decades.  Beyond that it won't matter to me.

            1. Credence2 profile image79
              Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

              I would have to say pretty much the same, maybe 3 decades....

          3. Credence2 profile image79
            Credence2posted 14 months agoin reply to this

            What is the monumental significance? I have information sources to determine if your concerns are deserving to be given such magnitude.

            The economic collapse would just introduce a post apocalyptic America and no one is going to come out of it whole and in one piece.

            I wait for the economy to faulted, the same admonition s I have been hearing over many years

  3. Miebakagh57 profile image69
    Miebakagh57posted 14 months ago

    How Republican or Democrate spend public money can never affect an outsider.

  4. Miebakagh57 profile image69
    Miebakagh57posted 14 months ago

    An acuse is not yet guilty in the eyes of the law and society, until the crime is proven beyond any reasonable doubt.                                    I've been asking again and again in the forums has Trump been convict yet? Even if he had to stand trial for the  Capitolgate Revoluion Trump will surely be found innocent. Those digging big well for him should rather fall into their pit and rest there.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)