GeneP59 wrote: 
Most of what I've read indicated deficits would go down modestly the first decade and more so the next, on a net basis assuming cost cuts (reduced Medicare reimbursement rates) and tax/fee increases go into effect.  And fyi, the healthcare industry (at least the larger players) is seeing ACA as a positive.  Yes, their reimbursement rates go down for services rendered, but the increased volume of insured patients and reduction of bad debt expense (about 10% of a typical healthcare facilities top line sales) will virtually disappear...so the net is positive to earnings. 

 aflanigan wrote: 
i'm sure you've seen schiff's videos speaking about the derivatives/banking/housing crisis

he, keen, casey, roubini (a ref you're familiar with) and several others were speaking out against the mainstream and schiff was ridiculed on tv practically every time he spoke

turns out that they were right, plenty of video to support that

where schiff gets into trouble is when he starts talking about a time frame or time line

there is historical reference for the scenario he's speaking to, but prediction/timing an event like this we know is difficult if not impossible

he's like a doctor telling you that if you smoke two packs a day eventually you'll have trouble breathing and eventually get cancer (assuming you don't get hit by a bus first)

he claims to know when eventually should happen

while schiff may be correct about a likely outcome, his hubris is a distraction

regards

p.s. schiff's personality isn't representative of the majority of libertarians/austrian school

 GeneP59 wrote: 
Terrorists are pretty good at that too.

 Manbird wrote:
when romney is elected in 2016 he'll be the first to say he was out in front of the trend

... or not...

No Regrets for Man WithRomney Tattoo on His Face

 Umberdog wrote: 
"Remember an army's job is to blow things up and kill people." Some Army General  

 GeneP59 wrote: 
An individual is forbidden to solve problems with murder, but the government does it all the time... even regularly hiring and training young people to do it.

"I never did, or countenanced, in public life, a single act inconsistent with the strictest good faith; having never believed there was one code of morality for a public, and another for a private man." ~ Thomas Jefferson 

 aflanigan wrote: 
Either way, national debt/deficit, we are screwing the next 5 generations over big time. Try running your household the way the government runs and they'll fling you into the hoosegow so fast you'll ask Where's My Kiss. 

 meower wrote:

aflanigan wrote:
Whether deficits result in inflation or not depends on how they're financed. Print money to pay for them and you get inflation. Borrow to finance them and you get debt.

This is true whether the deficit is during a recession or otherwise.

 GeneP59 wrote:First, I think you're confusing the deficit (i.e. the annual difference between government revenue and expenditures) with the national debt.  The National debt may have gone up roughly 5 trillion during our recovery from recession, but annual deficit spending has been around 1 trillion per year recently. 

No, I'm saying all the deficit scolds from the Austrian School have been warning us for some time that deficit spending during a recession/recovery is going to blow up in our faces in the form of hyperinflation and other evils.  They haven't been right yet, so why should I think they'll be right in the next four years?

 Zep wrote:
For once, I agree. (that Glenn Beck should have his own state, that is)
 
He does. State of Confusion.
 

 hippiechick wrote:
For once, I agree. (that Glenn Beck should have his own state, that is)
 

 GeneP59 wrote:

the math is the math
http://www.radioparadise.com/content.php?name=Members&file=userinfo&u=113617#name=Members&file=userinfo&u=113617   is fuzzy

 aflanigan wrote: 
So you're saying that the math is fuzzy, that the deficit didn't go up $5 trillion in the last 4 years? And that the health care that will kick in in 2014 hasn't doubled to  $1.9 trillion without even taking effect?

I'm sorry for reading the false GAO reports wrong. Me Culpa. 

 GeneP59 wrote: 
I'm trying to wrap my head around the continued alarmist screeds that people are issuing post-election.  Libertarians like Peter Schiff have been saying since 2007 that we're going to get hyperinflation any day now.  Hasn't happened yet.  So what's the justification for the latest round of alarmism?  The January 2013 Sequestration?

 hippiechick wrote: 
No, they will set us back 500 years after they spend another $5 Trillion dollars plus interest in the next 4 years. Better start learning to speak Chinese or Dutch.

 steeler wrote: 
You oughta listen to Glenn Beck. He's trying to plan for his own country.

 GeneP59 wrote: 
That's mostly what I see on the cable channels; they are continuing to pursue the story because the narrative they pushed prior to the election (the race was "too close to call") was basically bogus.  So they are grasping for an explanation of how Obama managed to defeat Romney so handily (and by implication, reporting the story that they failed to report last month).

Except for Hannity, who apparently is pushing the voter fraud myth in an attempt to help Allen West maintain his seat.

 GeneP59 wrote: 
It's more than just "I won, her lost yay!" It's "Thank god our country won't be taken over by people who will set us back 60 years, yay!" This was a very important election, not just a football game.

Edit: and yes, after all the sh** we have had to listen to for the past 12 years, there is a certain amount of schadenfreude involved.