can people explain this to me...Why do liberals want so much debt?

[jschaefer]

I don't get it. Maybe things will be more controlled by the government but there will be a lot less for the poor and middle class.

anyway it doesn't make sense to me. Does anyone have good explanations?

Thanks.

[libertybrewcity]

why do Republicans AND Liberals want so much debt? So the 435 elitists can stay in power, have a nice title, and pay off the companies that support them.

[Carehn]

I don't get it. Maybe things will be more controlled by the government but there will be a lot less for the poor and middle class.

anyway it doesn't make sense to me. Does anyone have good explanations?

Thanks.

Deep down i think most of them hate them self's and this manifests in them supporting destructive measures. Also many of them think that spending money to spur activity will improve the economy, but they forget that resources are not infinite and it only is wasteful. Though its easy to forget when the money we use is infinite even though money is only the representation of resources. That is why in the end you have more money but only the same amount of wealth, and after its spurred wasteful uses of resources even less wealth.

This is that guys idea... kanes or something who is the economic equivalent of the philosopher kant. Kant thought that nothing was what it was and know true knowledge could ever be had by men because they senses could be fooled. He believed in collective 'if i remember right' will. that is like will to power or so. where the collective will creates reality. He may have been fucking nuts but his ideas gave rise to many other nuts like kanes whether he knew it or not.

Its an idea that things are what you need them to be at the time if only you believe hard enough. In modern days the ideas show in books like THE SECRET or in economics like Kaines or how ever you spell it. Its when you use reality when it fits but at the same time disregard massive facts even when they are right in front of you. And so long as no one speaks about it, it must not be real like Ron Paul in 08. or so long as you keep saying it it must be so like "fringe candidate Ron Paul" in 12.

Unfortunately reality is what it is no matter if you recognize it or not, and that my friend is why the dollar is bombing, even if the fed is highly educated in Bull Shit and refuses to talk about Gold.

What the hell am I talking about again?

[heavenlyboy34]

why do Republicans AND Liberals want so much debt? So the 435 elitists can stay in power, have a nice title, and pay off the companies that support them.
this^^ Debt gives the elites leverage over the masses and allows them to do favors for their buddies and get favors in return.

[specsaregood]

I don't get it. Maybe things will be more controlled by the government but there will be a lot less for the poor and middle class.
anyway it doesn't make sense to me. Does anyone have good explanations?
Thanks.

That want it because their team is in power; when the republicans were in power the republicans wanted it. Hence, Obama's vote against the debt ceiling when he was a senator. It is all theater to keep exanding the state.

[Carehn]

also listen to the cat. He knows. and his avatar is beast! its as if that cocky cat is actually typing the words.

[johnald]

They can use the debt to fund the wars w/o anyone raising too big of a cry

[Anti Federalist]

That want it because their team is in power; when the republicans were in power the republicans wanted it. Hence, Obama's vote against the debt ceiling when he was a senator. It is all theater to keep exanding the state.

Truth ^^^

[Zippyjuan]

BOTH parties have voted to spend money they don't really have on their pet projects. Paying for them requires making serious decisions so that part of it is postponed or hidden as much as possible. They offer "free" goods and services to their various constituents. If you could call it a good thing, at least Democrats try to pass tax increases to try to help pay for what they want to spend money on. Republicans meanwhile promise a free lunch.

[AuH20]

Liberals can't come to grips that their prize laden Great Society is in it's death throes, so they will stave off any potential reductions like a cornered animal. Their special interests are going to take major hits if they don't continue down the current path of unsustainable expenditures.

[erowe1]

I don't get it. Maybe things will be more controlled by the government but there will be a lot less for the poor and middle class.

anyway it doesn't make sense to me. Does anyone have good explanations?

Thanks.

You just hit the nail on the head. Things will be more controlled by the government. That's all that matters. Who gives a rip about the poor and the middle class?

[Brian4Liberty]

Your everyday, unsophisticated and ignorant left liberal doesn't care about debt. They want the government to spend on things they want, and as far as they are concerned (or aware of), the government is this separate entity that is rich and should give them stuff. Similar to a child's understanding of family financials.

[amonasro]

Deep down i think most of them hate them self's and this manifests in them supporting destructive measures. Also many of them think that spending money to spur activity will improve the economy, but they forget that resources are not infinite and it only is wasteful. Though its easy to forget when the money we use is infinite even though money is only the representation of resources. That is why in the end you have more money but only the same amount of wealth, and after its spurred wasteful uses of resources even less wealth.

My mom-in-law is a dyed in the wool democrat. She certainly doesn't hate herself, but she does buy into the idea that we can't let the government gravy train end. She also buys into the fear mongering that the world will end, banks will shut down, chaos will ensue, cats and dogs living together, etc if the ceiling is not raised. She loves Obama and would like to give him another chance. She said it takes time to pay off the debt and we have to do it slowly. I countered with, "As long as they keep raising the debt ceiling, what incentive do they have to NOT keep spending and pay it off? Absolutely none until the dollar is slowly destroyed. They will never ever pay it off. NEVER EVER. NEVEEEERRRR EVEEEERRRR." She got pretty silent after that.

[Brian4Liberty]

She loves Obama and would like to give him another chance.

She must not care about Obama's wars then.

[gjdavis60]

The ruling class secures its position by delivering privileges and favors in order to obtain votes. They know they cannot pay for their largesse through taxation because the people would not accept it and would vote them out. So they have figured out how to buy support on the layaway plan. So far, most of the country has not noticed that we have mortgaged our future for our current standard of living. But this ponzi scheme - like all ponzi schemes - cannot last forever. Regardless, our wise overlords in Washington are trying real hard to make sure it lasts just a little while longer.

[enjerth]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjbPZAMked0

[RideTheDirt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjbPZAMked0
lolz
What a crazy bastard

[JamesButabi]

Why? Because they don't know any better. They are spoon fed bad information. 90% of people just go with the flow and take in the propoganda without question.

[SilentBull]

Liberals are all about illusion. They want to "feel" like they are helping to make society better. However, they are not interested in figuring out how to do so, because they are not problem-solvers. They prefer to take money from other people, and put it in a black-box that claims it will help solve all our problems. They get to go home feeling better about themselves. Make no mistake about it. This is what it's all about. Deep inside, they know the kind of people they are, so they try to compensate by "helping" society. They are not interested in whether their techniques work or not. In fact, they would rather not think about it. They're afraid to find out that they actually are doing nothing to help anyone and are, in fact, making things worse. Just a theory.

[Tom in NYC]

Why? Because they don't know any better. They are spoon fed bad information. 90% of people just go with the flow and take in the propoganda without question.

This is as close to summing up the truth in a sentence or two as you can get. Let's be honest: there are plenty of folks who want to use debt/government spending for personal gain. There are also a lot of other, well-meaning people who just don't see the principles of the issue (e.g. the immorality of taxation, the moral hazard of the Fed, etc.) the same way we do. Instead, they focus on the small bits of good government programs and the like can do, and resolve that with better, more honest leadership, "good government" can exist. They feel that the smartest people in the room can and should be in charge of the rest of us. I understand how repulsive that is to us, since we know better than putting all of our eggs in that oh-so-fallible basket, but most of the people I deal with day to day aren't 'evil liberals,' they just either haven't thought about it that hard or haven't been convinced that our position is the best ... yet.

[outspoken]

This is as close to summing up the truth in a sentence or two as you can get. Let's be honest: there are plenty of folks who want to use debt/government spending for personal gain. There are also a lot of other, well-meaning people who just don't see the principles of the issue (e.g. the immorality of taxation, the moral hazard of the Fed, etc.) the same way we do. Instead, they focus on the small bits of good government programs and the like can do, and resolve that with better, more honest leadership, "good government" can exist. They feel that the smartest people in the room can and should be in charge of the rest of us. I understand how repulsive that is to us, since we know better than putting all of our eggs in that oh-so-fallible basket, but most of the people I deal with day to day aren't 'evil liberals,' they just either haven't thought about it that hard or haven't been convinced that our position is the best ... yet.

The Milgram Study illustrates well how the majority of people just go along with what people are told even we the potential for immenant risk to exterminating the life of another human being is in play. Human nature is often our greatest worst enemy.

[smithtg]

its funny watching the democrats cry about the war spending, while they were the ones that passed the porkulus package

[purplechoe]

Democrats/ Socialist/ Communists hate capitalism. What they want to do is destroy it by spending so much that the whole system collapses and then have their socialist utopia arise from the crisis. The problem is that the so called Republicans/ Conservatives elite pretty much want the same thing. You vote for one or the other you pretty much end up in the same place, the only difference being is how fast you get there...

"Don't let a crisis go to waste"

[angelatc]

I don't get it. Maybe things will be more controlled by the government but there will be a lot less for the poor and middle class.

anyway it doesn't make sense to me. Does anyone have good explanations?

Thanks.

Because it makes more people poor, and dependent on government. Liberals want people to depend on government.

[nobody's_hero]

I think it boils down to vote-buying. Either party will use it to varying degrees.

"I'll give you free money, and you vote to keep me in power. Of course, I can't legally buy your vote, *wink wink* ;). But you know the deal."

[josh b]

They see short term benefits to themselves and the interests that get them into power. I think they try to avoid thinking about the long term consequences of their policies. That or they are in denial. Better to cut and run after your term is over and let the next in line deal with it. This is what the non ideological politicians do.

The ideological ones that actually believe the bullshit they preach will bring everyone prosperity are just stupid.

As multiple people have said already this comes from both sides of the political isle. Incentives for politicians are pretty much the same all around.

[reillym]

its funny watching the democrats cry about the war spending, while they were the ones that passed the porkulus package

The cost of the stimulus was nowhere near the war.

And most economists say it paid for itself + created jobs.

[erowe1]

The cost of the stimulus was nowhere near the war.

And most economists say it paid for itself + created jobs.

I think the cost of the two things was pretty comparable.

It didn't pay for itself or create jobs. Its net effect on our wealth and our level of employment was negative, just like the Iraq war's (which also created jobs by the reasoning of those economists).