[QUOTE="LOXO7"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

No, it's not. Although there are different definitions of racism, notions of racial superiority need to apart of the equation.

I don't get why you think entitlements inherently have anything to do with race.

GreySeal9

I just see when someone talks about an entitlement program people automatically picture some kind of discrimination factor for it. So entitlements help discrimination to be alive and well. As it should be. But the irony is that people think that the world should be against all discrimination and then support entitlement systems. So it becomes an endless war on discrimination, which is not wrong. Neither is racism, until it affects someone by law.

Only the TC never actually said any of that. I don't understand why people on this site still can't argue based on what people say.

I still don't see how entitlement programs have an inherent connection to racist.

Good for you? How about, you still don't see how entitlement programs have an inherent connection to discrimination?

[QUOTE="CondorCalabasas"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Yeah, I agree that the OP is not racist. Glad we could see eye to eye on something.

sonicare

[QUOTE="LOXO7"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

That's not racist in of itself. Illogical, but not racist unless there is a tangible implication that white people=racists.

GreySeal9

No, it's not. Although there are different definitions of racism, notions of racial superiority need to apart of the equation.

I don't get why you think entitlements inherently have anything to do with race.

I just see when someone talks about an entitlement program people automatically picture some kind of discrimination factor for it. So entitlements help discrimination to be alive and well. As it should be. But the irony is that people think that the world should be against all discrimination and then support entitlement systems. So it becomes an endless war on discrimination, which is not wrong. Neither is racism, until it affects someone by law.

[QUOTE="CondorCalabasas"]

You know whats racist?

Assuming the guy is treated the way he is because he is white.

GreySeal9

That's not racist in of itself. Illogical, but not racist unless there is a tangible implication that white people=racists.

I view entitlement and discrimination as two very similar things.

It is for the most part it is, but everyone wants to act politically correct, despite the fact our society in is reality far from it.

eboyishere

Which is impossible. All spending by the government contributes to economic activity. Every dollar spent by the government is income for someone else, and when any spending is cut by the government, those persons spend less. There are positive and *negative* multipliers to government spending decisions.

radicalcentrist

So you're saying government creating government jobs is a good thing?

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

I think we may need to adopt a more austere lifestyle at the individual level, where people tighten their belts and give up some of their luxuries.

theone86

I wouldn't disagree with this outside of the context of a discussion on macro economics. However, this recession wasn't caused by people spending luxuriously, and belt-tightening (which is going on anyways) isn't going to solve it. In fact, this recession spun out of control due to a lack of consumer demand, i.e. people spending less.

Everyone is hit in a depression. We can't spend now and pay it back latter. We have to pay it back now. We will just be in a deeper hole. The government causes these depressions. It is the biggest spender in the US. And where does it get the money from I wonder? The Federal Reserve makes money and loans it out to it's friends overseas. Just a mere 12.3 trillion in 2010.

Saving on an individual level is good for the individual. It doesn't effect the economy, unless it is done right on mass scale. What we can do right now is stop buying from China. Stop going to stores who sell China products and the US needs to start making goods pronto. But that is after and during depression.

The economy never has to dip to recession like lows if the population keeps growing and government stops spending. The useless wars that don't make America safer would be a start. Oh, and never to bail out another corporation again.

That's the beauty of capitalism. The opportunity of success, while the bankruptcy of failure. And that's were welfare is their to save you. Oh yeah, and cut the minimum wage law so you can get out of welfare.

You're bias hate against the rich is blinding you.

The big question facing the world's economy today is how to get out of our current malaise.

On one side, we have the republican party, the German government, and the European Central bank saying that governments need to cut their deficits through tax increases and/or cuts in spending on social services, preferably a balanced approach that is tilted in favor of spending cuts. The theory behind this is your basic classical story: huge spending on social services today financed by debt will necessitate large taxes in the future, which discourages long-term investment. Spending cuts are better because they are supposed to address the source of the problem, which is future growth in spending on social services ("The US Federal Government is basically an insurance company for old people with an army on the side")

On the other side, we (used to) have the democratic party, the Italian and Greek governments, Francois Hollande, and a large part of the economics profession saying that governments need to spend more and central banks need to print more money because the ultimate cause of our current crisis is a shortfall in demand on the part of consumers and investors. Investment demand will not pick up any time soon unless consumption increases because interest rates are zero, and investment is a function of interest rates.

OT, I ask you, should OECD governments be following stimulus or austerity?

radicalcentrist

Spoiled is not a negative term.

Spoiled in this context means to accustom someone to goods they don't inherently deserve. Nothing wrong with that.

Just like when a man says "I'm going to spoil my wife tonight and take her shopping" Sometimes people want to do something for loved ones that make them happy even if they don't particularly deserve it. Now, if the receiving party doesn't appreciate, then they become a brat.

Blue-Sky