• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Blacks Lives Matter" Rioters Racially Attack "Whites"

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Also. How much is government failure and how much is the natural economic rise and fall? A little of both maybe?
Good point. If my memory is correct, the public sector makes up only about 1/6 of total spending here in the States.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
First of all, most of that had to be done to keep the banks solvent as three of four of the largest banks in the U.S. were taking a noser started under the Bush administration. Secondly, the deficit rate is now lowering under Obama and the economy actually has done a good job of recovery even though it's not uniform across the boar
Of course, correlation is not necessarily causation.
The reasons the banks & other mortgage lenders got in trouble preceded Dubya.
The trigger, crashing planes on 9/11, even had origins beforehand in the policies of
prior administrations. Bush, a newly inaugurated president cannot be blamed for
the attack, or lack of precautions against such a thing. This was the beginning of
the economic slowdown which caused business contraction, job loss & pay reduction.
That in turn, led to delinquent loan payments, real estate value loss, loan defaults,
& finally lender failure.
I fault Bush for bad economic, security & regulatory policies. But we gotta be fair.
In this debacle, there's bi-partisan blame to go around for decades of politicians.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Bush, a newly inaugurated president cannot be blamed for
the attack, or lack of precautions against such a thing.
Why not? He may not have been in for very long, but he still had warnings, and prior knowledge of Al-Qaeda growing in strength and power as well as making threats.
And we can blame the other Bush, as he really didn't have a good reason for going to Iraq either. Honestly, I would not be surprised at all if Bush Jr. was trying to finish what daddy - the only Bush we actually did elect as president - had started just abit over a decade before. Out of everyone who could ever be elected, I would be expect the Bushes to be the most intimately familiar with the fact there are people in the Middle East who want to see us dead.
 

RRex

Active Member
Premium Member
. . . And we can blame the other Bush, as he really didn't have a good reason for going to Iraq either . . .

Iraq invaded Kuwait. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia requested the United States assist in correcting the situation.

And we did so in fine fashion. That mission was entirely honorable.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Iraq invaded Kuwait. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia requested the United States assist in correcting the situation.

And we did so in fine fashion. That mission was entirely honorable.
Be that as it may, it is still perpetuating outside interference that are now starting to have dire consequences for people back in the West who aren't even involved. Even before "round two," there were embassy bombings, the USS Cole was bombed, and two attacks on the World Trade Towers.
We need to completely cut off all ties and leave the area alone. "World policing" may have its humanitarian aspects, but it's a great and tremendous burden on the state that's doing it. Especially when they stick around for long periods of time, or indefinitely. And during the Kuwait/Iraq war, we were pretty much already there. It was also a good way for the military to show off their fancy new toys.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Why not? He may not have been in for very long, but he still had warnings, and prior knowledge of Al-Qaeda growing in strength and power as well as making threats.
Then Clinton, who had 8 prior years would deserve far more blame.
But my point is that these presidents, prior presidents, & Congress all share responsibility
for being unprepared for such an attack, & for fomenting hostilities which gave rise to it.
Dubya, with the least time in office, is perhaps the least culpable.
And we can blame the other Bush, as he really didn't have a good reason for going to Iraq either. Honestly, I would not be surprised at all if Bush Jr. was trying to finish what daddy - the only Bush we actually did elect as president - had started just abit over a decade before. Out of everyone who could ever be elected, I would be expect the Bushes to be the most intimately familiar with the fact there are people in the Middle East who want to see us dead.
Do you believe only Republicans were responsible for the climate which led to 9/11?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Except that he's making claims he can't prove and which the evidence shows otherwise.
No matter what Huff Po says, I've seen what he describes too.
I've had both tenants & employees who abused the system.
And I've seen others.
There's a real question to be asked about the extent, but it's there nonetheless.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Here for the ride
Premium Member
No matter what Huff Po says, I've seen what he describes too.
I've had both tenants & employees who abused the system.
And I've seen others.
There's a real question to be asked about the extent, but it's there nonetheless.
That's nice, but unless you have evidence that this is a widespread problem...
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
That's nice, but unless you have evidence that this is a widespread problem...
Without thorough corroboration, vetting of info & arguments presented by Huff Po,
I wouldn't consider such an agenda driven source as real evidence either.
What I see is some abuse, but mostly legitimate claims.
A source which says otherwise is trying to pull something.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Do you believe only Republicans were responsible for the climate which led to 9/11?
No. Clinton got the "shroud of Columbine" where the media gave his bombing the hell out of Bosnia no attention because the deadliest school shooting in history was going on the same time. And Hillary did vote for the war the created ISIS - but a wave of those who hadn't seen war for themselves did while those who had seen it were saying no.
 

McBell

Unbound
No matter what Huff Po says, I've seen what he describes too.
I've had both tenants & employees who abused the system.
And I've seen others.
There's a real question to be asked about the extent, but it's there nonetheless.
I also have seen it.
Quite a lot of it.
The fact that states are extremely reluctant to prosecute for welfare fraud is also disturbing.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
That's nice, but unless you have evidence that this is a widespread problem...
I've seen it, and more than enough of my fill of it from both sides. Like my trailer park example, they are nearly anywhere close to that bad (typically), but there is still a good deal of it there. And it's to be expected because both hoods and trailer parks are typically working lower-class. Either place has plenty of good people, but on occasion you do either than one ******* or a herd of them. One has handguns, the other shotguns. The one big difference is the police aren't killing the trailer park inhabitants like they are hood inhabitants.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I also have seen it.
Quite a lot of it.
The fact that states are extremely reluctant to prosecute for welfare fraud is also disturbing.
I should've pointed out that most of the abuse I saw was by white folk.
(That should buy me some credibility, eh.)
Unemployment insurance fraud is rampant too.
 
Top