Steve, at what point and time did our senators start making 6 figure salaries/ Most of the people I know that work the hardest, are th ones that make the least, yet they love their jobs and that's why they are so dedicated. Firemen come to mind. They make so little, yet they are so dedicated. Many other professions do the same. Once upon a time our elected officials workded regular jobs and then got paid to represent the people. Then they went back to their lives as citizens. How did we lose that?
We went from that to nancy pelosi demanding a private jet. Good grief.

Is thre anything that can be done about it to get it changed?

Stay involved as much as possible. We cannot expect someone else to do it for us. That is much of our problem now. We depended on our schools to teach our children right from wrong. The problem was the teachers were not allowed to do so even if they knew themselves the difference. We must maintain the attitude; If not now, then when? If not here, then where? If not me, then who? Get others involved. Easier said than done but never stop. Lead by example! A change of culture must be spread the same way the decay of our society began, by teaching what is right not what is okay to get by with. We have taken morality out of our schools, government buildings and virtually every place except the church. If it feels good...do it. Mega churches are sprouting up because they (not all) say what people want to hear not always what the Bible says. We need to witness at every opportunity for God and country.
If the first four priorities of your life is not God, country, family and conservativism for our republic and its laws, you need an adjustment to your thinking. Changing our culture is a monumental undertaking but nothing notable is ever easy.

Steve
You make valid points. This nation has been robbed. Many others have too. John Perkins, The Economic Hitman, comes to mind. If you Google him, simply exchange the loans he forced on countries for derivatives. Lobbyists with bottomless pockets and unending influence, the lack of term limits, real oversight, and buying votes. It is a complex problem that requires layered and immediate solutions. I'm not smart enough to know how to fix the damage or even stem the tide, but if we choose to continue on this path stopping entitlements, spending, and endless wars will stop themselves for lack of resources. Nothing lasts forever, not even our fiat currency system. America has a disease and needs surgery. Cutting will be painful. Allowing it to go on until it stops itself will be catastrophic and cost tens of millions of lives that do not have simple skills because they've been "taken care of". Math always wins eventually. Getting back to a constitutional financial system would be a great place to start.

If you state that cash for clunkers lost billions and billions of federal dollars, you ought to show where and how those figures were obtained. Inflation has been under control for awhile now. What figures indicate to you that a change to hyper inflation is on the horizon? And how far away do you see that horizon?

I'm sorry Lee but your question is not valid enough to be worthy of an explanation.

Steve, I disagree with your premise that the cash for clunkers program did no good. I mean, it did get rid of a large number of the 2008 Obama stickers.....

Point well taken, Karsten!

failure.

Crystal, the automobiles destroyed. All the engines were ruined so the parts could not be recycled (strange coming from a green president). All fenders, doors, radios, hoods, trunk lids, wheels, tires, radios, transmissons, etc., were all completely destroyed. It put many used car dealers out of business. Many people have a low opinion of used car dealers but ther are small business owners and hire people to work on their cars helping the economy. The repair business increased the cost to customers infinitely by having to buy new parts.
Over the years my company cars have been new but my personal cars were purchased used. I could never bring myself to drive a new car off the lot and lose $5-6K. Obama almost destroyed a whole industry singlehandedly with this move.
Lee, do you know what fiat money is? Didn't think so. Well, bottom line is our money is printed without anything to back it up except our word. Previously, money printed was back by silver or gold bullion making it worth the amount on the bill. Have you noticed over the last three years groceries groceries have doubled? Have you been to Publix and seen the $14.99 per pound T-bones? Did you know that Halibut is close to $35.00 per lb? That is virtually double from 3 years ago and it is called inflation. If diamonds were like gravel do you think they would be valuable? The more readily available a substance is the cheaper it becomes. Printed paper is not worth very much. When China comes calling, watch out!

@Steve Ramsey
"We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt" byThomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson died on July 4,1826 with over $100,000 dollars in personal debt an enormous sum for that time.

You know, the other thing to keep in mind that is right now what we have in Bernanke is somebody desperate to keep their job. Romney's already said that he's gone if he gets elected, so it seems that Bernanke doesn't really care how he affects our economy, as long as he can do what he needs to do to make the economy look as rosie as possible for Obama to stay in.

Not such a great answer. Not an answer at all. Show where you got the billions and billions of dollars. If you have no credible source for your facts, just say, sorry, I didn't say what I meant, I just think what I wrote but have no real evidence. Or, like Mr Etch-o-Sketch, are you making stuff up, then denying it afterwards. For instance, I was pleased to hear Mr Romney say he wouldn't change the existing abortion law; Roe vs Wade. I'm sure that thrilled you too.

Oh, and that China thing; the Chinese buy our debt because it is the most reliable debt in the whole wide world. They wound't buy it if it wasn't, they'd buy something else as an investment. They can't call in the debt and destroy the world. That's a teapart fiction. They'd be crazy to do so if they could. Our economy is the strongest in the world. Not, as you say, as strong as it was 12 years ago, but a growing one. For example, the lower number of people applying for unemployment benefits is one of the best indicators of growth. That means fewer people are losing jobs. Or the lower number of foreclosures nationwide. Could the price of t-bone steak have anything to do with the price of feed, or drought? What about the rate of inflation as measured by every government, Democratic or Republican? Why not use that? It's been around for a long time and if there is a conspiracy, it's been a unilateral one.

Mr. Kellogg, I'm not sure if you are school age or not. If you are still in school I strongly suggest you hit the books a little harder. If you are an adult, give me your general location and I will find a library for you to catch up to the level of conversation being held here.
Personally I am against abortion but my rights end there. I cannot tell a person what to do with their body but I would speak to the preservation of life except in the case of rape or incest. I'm sure either crime was hideous enough for the victim. I could not insist they keep this memory of torment inside them for 9 months if it caused additional mental anguish.
I haven't made anything up nor have I change what I said. I am not your neighbor in La-La Land. I am dealing in facts that you cannot fathom.

Re: "[Our rulers] are also destroying the wealth of the nation. Cash for clunkers immediately comes to mind."

A little perspective is in order. Cash for Clunkers, admittedly a bad idea given that it didn't significantly reduce carbon emissions or stimulate the economy, cost about $3 billion (one time), give or take. That's a lot of money, to be sure. But a lot of money compared to what?

* We spend, give or take, $4 billion every year subsidizing oil companies
* The debacle in Iraq cost us over $800 billion.
* The Bush tax cuts have, to date, reduced revenues by over $1.1 trillion (note: 1 trillion = 1,000 billion).
* The Pentagon spends about $530 billion per year (that amount doesn't include $8 billion per year for defense related activities, whatever that is).
* We spend nearly $18 billion per year to maintain our antiquated nuclear weapons arsenal.

Now, keep in mind that Romney's tax proposal would make the Bush tax cuts permanent and then put them on steroids by cutting rates by another 20 percent plus eliminate the estate tax which, in 2012, is paid by couples only after they inherit $10 million. He simultaneously seeks to increase defense spending by, give or take, $200 billion per year by setting a floor on such spending, regardless of need (i.e., if the economy grows, defense spending automatically grows with it).

I'm sorry, but you can't claim to care about balancing the budget while simultaneously supporting a candidate with a plan like that.

Conservatives, Tea partiers, Republicans all keep on beating the dead horse of debt. One more time, the Republicans under Bush started two wars, instituted the drug Medicare drug progam, and continued deregulations without oversight of the financial industry, and had tax cuts for the wealthy. This started the debt buildup before the great crash. Obama takes office with over 800000 jobs being lost per month and a financial meltdown in process. We had to spend money to stabilize the economy and stop a great depression and the ruin of this nation. Did we spend enough? I don't think so but I think Obama got all he could politically. Has it worked? Yes. Are we better off? Yes. Have the Republicans helped? No. They have been real obstructionist to further improvements .Do we trust Republicans to handle the economy? No. Have the Republicans talked about cutting spending of a bloated and wasteful defense budget? No.Have the Republicans talked about cutting corporate welfare and tax breaks for the wealthy? No. Are we on the right path with Obama? Yes

Dear Mater Ramey,
Billions and billions of dollars literally means a number beyond trillions which you obviously cannot comprehend. 3 billion does not = billions and billions. Plus, if CJ's accounting is not inclusive of the benefits to automobile companies through the sale of new cars and the benefits to used car dealers, and the resulting tax benefits to state, local, and federal governments then the 3 billion is even less and may well equal a plus for the economy. I know it's hard for some folks to deal with math. However, and once again, if you can show me a reliable source for the billions and billions of dollars lost to the federal government in the cash for clunkers program, I will happily post, oh, you were right, you didn't just make up a number you thought would frighten the locals. If you have a blog in public space, it would seem reasonable that you could back up your claims. I haven't seen any of that.

"Cash for Clunkers" was a huge success. It got rid of old cars and trucks that produced carbon. People had to get vehicles that got a certain percent more gas mileage. My daughter traded in a 1991 Ford 150 for a Dodge Van. It was good for everyone involved and the atmosphere to boot! Mr. Ramey made the statement "If you couldn't afford a new car you were out of luck". I don't know what that means. As far as I know, no one was forced by buy a new car if they didn't want one.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/10/28/autos/clunkers_analysis/index.htm

http://business.time.com/2010/09/14/was-cash-for-clunkers-a-clunker/

http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/fresh-greens/2009/06/22/10-things-you-should-know-about-cash-for-clunkers

And this last one isn't the only one I found that said $4B.

When I hear folks railing about our national debt I wonder where they were when Reagan and Bush were tripling and doubling our debt respectively. In fact Bush inherited budget surpluses and turned them into the largest deficits in history. I agree we should vote those responsible out of office. Start with Paul Ryan who voted for every Bush program that contributed to this mess and continue with every Congressman who voted with him.

It is true the feds handed out $3-4 Billion. Has anyone stopped to think of the wealth in the sense that these vehicles were worth $3 or 4 thousand each on average. If part used for parts, much more than that. Depending on which report you are perusing anywhere from 125,000 to 542,000 cars were sold. Let's say it was really as successfule as Obama would have you believe and 542,000 new cars were sold. At the minimum rate of $3,000.00 each we destroyed $1,626,000,000.00 of wealth. (Lee, that is One billion, six hundred twenty six million dollars) These cars could have been loaded on ships taken to foreign ports (especially the middle east) and sold for 2 or 3 times their U.S. value. When you combine the two numbers you are looking at over $5 Billion not counting job losses, lost tax revenue and company closings. Any way you look at it our government has no concept of free enterprise and have not a frugal bone in their collective bodies. (Collective can be used in numerous ways to describe them)
By the way, Sherilu, I can afford a new car I choose not to. For those without the ability to buy a new car i guess they walk. When you pass them by please wave.

The Food Stamp Program, administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is proud to be distributing this year the greatest amount of free Meals and Food Stamps ever, to 46 million people.

Meanwhile, the National Park Service, administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, asks us "Please Do Not Feed the Animals." Their stated reason for the policy is because "The animals will grow dependent on handouts and will not learn to take care of themselves."

This ends today's lesson in irony.

@all
Jobs: More than 4,500,000 jobs added in 27 consecutive months of job growth.

George, you are right. I am ashamed. I'm ashamed that our educational system enabled you to leave school without teaching you the basic principles of math, economics and obviously no civics classes, but I am not ashamed of speaking the truth about the Obama administration.
If you wonder where my info comes from...it is my job (I'm the owner) to call HR Managers of companies, approximately 50-70 per day, all over the nation to sell "RECRUITMENT" advertising. The response I get everyday is a multiplicity of answers but the one constant is: We are laying people off, We are downsizing, Our company is going out of business, We are waiting to see how Obamacare is going to affect our bottomline before we hire any additional people but the answer is probably going to be NO! Sometimes it is call me back after the election. The brave ones will tell you that if Obama is elected they are not sure they will have a job.That's 250-350 companies each week. Since Obama took office my business is down 60%!!!
If you believe in Obama's plan so much, you should use him as a role model. I would like you to go out tomorrow, sell all your assets, take out all your savings and invest in Solyndra. I hear you can really make a killing especially if you donate millions back to Obama. Then as one who believe in sharing the wealth, you can come back and help us po' folks out. Don't speak to me of shame unless you are following your masters lead! If you are not willing...sit down and shut up!

Let me try this again. So Steve, where was all of this outrage when Republican administrations (Reagan and the Bushes) were doubling and tripling our debt?

Steve, you had a good point about more being done to recycle the clunkers. And I'll accept your math, but why did you stop mathing at there? Take the number of cars traded in, Brian's number is more accurate, but whatever. Multiply that number by say $18,000, which is an arbitrary guess on my part as to the price of a new car. That much money went to support the American, and to some degree, the world economy. You realize the world economy is interconnected? That number, far larger than the government expenditure, is economic growth. You might object to the government helping the American economy, which in real terms is the American people, but I don't. Do that math and see if you don't agree with me, car dealers, salespeople, the union workers, management workers, their families, their banks, their landlords, their tenants, the businesses in and around their vacation spots, who put that money to good use. Sadly, your posting that someone should shut up is the first time I've read such a thing on Patch. Most, but by no means all, of the insults and sophomoric snark comes from the conservatives who post here, but that seems unnecessary.

Brian, If you are a Georgian as I am, you remember the embarassment of Jimmy Carter. Actually, he still is. He had gutted our military, sent interest rates to 21% and most of the world was laughing at us. He also started that wonderful world call the Department of Energy with 16 people because he wanted to reduce the 40% of crude we were importing at the time. Today the Dept. of Energy has 16,000 employees and contract out to over 12,000 contractors and we import 70% of our oil. How does that work out for you? There was no question Reagan put people back to work and brought more money into the coffers. We still had to rebuild the military and regain our reputation as being THE world power. That was a must do spend for the life of our nation which broke the USSR's back.
If the economy was down and 27 million Americans were unemployed/underemployed there would have been great consternation as there is today. The only time in recent years was during the Clinton years when we had a Republican speaker (not squeaky clean) but strong on budget. We all know the house originates all spending or did until the last few terms ago when presidents began to circumvent the Constitution. Obama is not the only one but the major one and the current one that's causing the pain. In most cases it take both houses to either increase or decrease spending. We need a leader to guide these two into agreeing on deep cuts to Depts of Energy, Education and EPA. We can run our schools at state level.

Steve,
I'm not going to critique all of the statements you've made throughout the posting and thread as there is not enough time.

I'll focus on your business of selling recruitment advertising. If you've been doing this type of work for any length of time (cold calling/telesales any type of product or service) you know the effort can often be compared to pushing a rope. If you are trying to sell recruitment advertising during a period that is described as the greatest financial crisis since the great depression.....

1. If you were being honest you would admit that the causal factor of the decline was not the election of the President, instead it was the onset of the greatest financial crisis since the great depression.

2. If you want to blame someone besides yourself, how about Mitch McConnell saying in November 2010, "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president".

He wasn't real concerned with the struggles of your business.

George, I forgot more about work in my sleep last night than you will ever know!
Michael k. I'm still making a good living. I don't know anything about pushing ropes but it seems you do so push onward. By the way, I DID BUILD MY BUSINESS and Nobama didn't have a freaking thing with building it but did help slow it down. Don't question my honesty!!!!

I see you've justified Reagan's deficit spending as a means to build a stronger national defense. Wouldn't it have been wise to have a plan to pay for all of that defense spending? If your plan was to increase spending, why would you cut taxes at the same time? Where was your outrage at that? How about Bush's profligate deficit spending?

I want to make something clear about conservatives that I don't think they even know about themselves. They don't care about deficits. I'll repeat. Conservatives do not care about deficits.

Actions speak louder than words, and deficits didn't bother conservatives when Reagan was running up the debt, Bush 41 was running up the debt, or when Bush 43 turned surpluses into deficits. Nor do they care about deficits (while saying they do) when supporting a presidential candidate who has posted promises on his website that will add nearly $7 trillion to the national debt over ten years (not including the hundreds of billions that would be added by making the Bush tax cuts permanent for people making over $250,000). There aren't enough deductions and loopholes to come anywhere close to filling that gap (unless you raise taxes on the middle class).

Conservatives can say that they want lower taxes and increase defense spending, or they can say that they want to balance the budget...but they can't have both. And when push comes to shove, they'll take lower taxes, misbegotten wars, and wasteful defense spending over balanced budgets any day.

Steve,

Isn't it a very un-conservative thing to do to blame your lot in life on someone besides yourself?

You built that. So that must mean you also ran it into the ground by 60% over the last 4 years.

Seems to me you are trying to have it both ways. Your success is all your own. Your failure is someone else's?

Isn't that what the 47% are guilty of? Blaming their lot in life on external forces? Are you the 47%?

Michael
Excellent comment.
Steve did devote some time to run in the Republican primary against Senator Bob Balfour the guy who couldn't keep correct expense reports and tried to beat the state out of hundreds of dollars.Steve lost by a big margin running against a crook.Maybe because of Steves extremist views.The crook however, will probably be reelected in the general election which says something about the virtues of gerrymandering and Republicans.

Steves' comments remind me of a man who jumped on a horse and rode off in all directions.The term is "Gish Gallop".You might want to google.

@David
"In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion."

@C.J.
Thanks have enjoyed reading your factual and accurate post.We need more truth in these comments instead of rehashed remarks from right wing radio talk radio.

George, At least i had the courage to ride. You wouldn't know the front of a horse but you are quite familiar with rear end because it describes you to a "T".
George, Tell us of all the great things you have done to make a difference in this world!
Michael k, Want to match incomes? At my worst I can do better than you!
Brian Crawford, If you had any sense of economics you would realize that by reducing taxes more people go to work actually placing more money into the federal coffers. Don't let facts get in the way. If you know how look it up you will see the coffers did rise during that time.

Steve, let me break that down where the simplest among us can understnd it. If you are working, then you pay taxes to the government? If you aren't working, then taxes are raised on those who are working to pay your way, but those people will put less into the economy therefore , the economy suffers?
Roger that.

@Tammy Osier and Steve Ramey
I would suggest that you read the books (13) from the author Barbara Ehrenreich especially "Nickel and Dimed" to better understand the issues you both talk about.

David, If George read these books, he read them twice. Does double vision count for twice? Mr. Boston Vodka is a terrible waste of $5.

Yes, David, let's ask him to expound on those books and tell us just how the economics in them make any more sense than common basic tried ane true economics. If they shape your world view then it explains a lot.

Tammy - perhaps you can explain how that some of world's economies that are ranked higher than the US (Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, Netherlands) have higher effective corporate and personal tax rates, while another (Singapore) does not?

If it is a simple equation of:

lower taxes = better economy

why doesn't it apply to these economies?

Steve,

Yours was an intellectually dim response to my last posting. Perhaps your business and political struggles can be explained after all.

Don't assume that those who disagree with you are not high earners. I could be a limousine liberal.

At least i have a light burning.

Michael, on what scale are you coming up with the idea that these countries beat the US? In GDP, global competitiveness, we are the top of the heap....