• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Brutal ad: The Chinese Professor

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I saw this ad this morning and looked for it online. The group sponsoring this ad is the one that puts out the yearly list of politicians who create and submit the most pork spending in the U.S. government called the Pig Book.

What's chilling in the ad is the accuracy of it. The Chinese do own a lot of debt and in a way, we are already working for the Chinese and will continue to do so as long as we're beholden to such massive debt and continue to spend irresponsibly. Obama's no change - he's Bush x5.

Where will the change come from?

 
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
12,196
Reaction score
6,462
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The Chinese are just as dependent upon the US as the US is on China. They don't "own" the US.
 

RosieS

Active member
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
272
Reaction score
69
Location
Central Florida
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Sarah Palin. :lol: :rofl: :lamo:

Regards from Rosie
 
Last edited:

Taboon

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
135
Reaction score
38
Location
Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Ok, where do I start. Getting rid of porkbarrel spending is nice and all. But, when you consider it totals approximately $8 Billion and then you also consider our current budget deficit is over $1,000 Billion it amounts to less than 1% of our total budget deficit (less than 0.4% of our total budget). Which, amounts to squat. It amazes me how this little teeny amount gets so much more attention than anything else that is hoisting our budget deficit up. Did you know we are going to spend about $750B this year on Medicare and Medicaid but we only expect to bring in approximately $200B in Medicare Payroll tax receipts? That's almost half of the budget deficit right there. Now that's something to get up in arms about! But no, the politicians want us to fight over the scraps that are too small for a mouse to eat rather than actually finding out what is really causing our problems.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Ok, where do I start. Getting rid of porkbarrel spending is nice and all. But, when you consider it totals approximately $8 Billion and then you also consider our current budget deficit is over $1,000 Billion it amounts to less than 1% of our total budget deficit (less than 0.4% of our total budget). Which, amounts to squat. It amazes me how this little teeny amount gets so much more attention than anything else that is hoisting our budget deficit up. Did you know we are going to spend about $750B this year on Medicare and Medicaid but we only expect to bring in approximately $200B in Medicare Payroll tax receipts? That's almost half of the budget deficit right there. Now that's something to get up in arms about! But no, the politicians want us to fight over the scraps that are too small for a mouse to eat rather than actually finding out what is really causing our problems.

You're numbers are wrong... 2010 Pork barrel spending was $16.5 billion.

Agreed it's not much compared to the national deficit but then again, what WOULD be much compared to that?

CAGW said:
The Congressional Pig Book is CAGW's annual compilation of the pork-barrel projects in the federal budget. The 2010 Pig Book identified 9,129 projects at a cost of $16.5 billion in the 12 Appropriations Acts for fiscal 2010.

Yet, it would be a good first step to stop the payoffs of State legislatures for their re-elections, and it might, just might allow an environment to start where we would start looking at entitlement spending, defense spending and possibly --- just maybe stop using Social Security as a government credit card through the Treasury.

However, we are owned by China - those wo don't yet realize it are either too stupid, too sheltered or too blind --- maybe a little dash of denial thrown in there as well.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
107,663
Reaction score
51,525
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
What's chilling in the ad is the accuracy of it.

Except that it is not accurate. Just one quick example, China is not the largest holder of US debt. It's scare tactics and appeal to emotion without any real substantive facts.
 

DarkWizard12

Trans-Fascist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
10,372
Reaction score
2,288
Location
Tyler TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
Except that it is not accurate. Just one quick example, China is not the largest holder of US debt. It's scare tactics and appeal to emotion without any real substantive facts.
Eh, I think they are. At least they are the largest owner of treasury securities.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
107,663
Reaction score
51,525
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Except that it is not accurate. Just one quick example, China is not the largest holder of US debt. It's scare tactics and appeal to emotion without any real substantive facts.

Source please?
 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Moderator
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
31,335
Reaction score
34,773
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
One thing I get to disagree with straight away is this:

The film claims, what did all the Great Empires have in common that made them fall?

"They turned their back on the principles that made them great"

False.

They failed to adapt to the changing times. That's what destroys empires. If you refuse to change, adapt and evolve, prepare to fall.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right

Taboon

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
135
Reaction score
38
Location
Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Ockham, you're link only provides details for the largest foreign holders of US debt. Nobody is disputing that fact. However, they are not the largest holder of US debt which is linked in a post above. They are third.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Ockham, you're link only provides details for the largest foreign holders of US debt. Nobody is disputing that fact. However, they are not the largest holder of US debt which is linked in a post above. They are third.

Why would I be concerned about domestic holders of debt? And I could have sworn the OP video I posted identified China - which as you stated, is the largest foreign holder of U.S. debt...undisputed. So now that the smoke and mirrors nonsense has cleared and the "fear mongering" claim has been stepped on, the ad makes a very good point doesn't it?
 

Taboon

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
135
Reaction score
38
Location
Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
You are correct that it is $16.5 Billion. I was using the graph at the end of the link and it only showed what could be attributed to individual states. That's where the $8 Billion comes from. Nonetheless, it remains less than 1% of our total budget. I don't think you got my whole point though. I don't agree with pork barrel spending either. I'm jut pointing out that it's (pork) a relatively minor part of what it will take to balance our budget. There are bigger fish to fry. Why use all the ammunition on a relatively worthless pawn?
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
You are correct that it is $16.5 Billion. I was using the graph at the end of the link and it only showed what could be attributed to individual states. That's where the $8 Billion comes from. Nonetheless, it remains less than 1% of our total budget. I don't think you got my whole point though. I don't agree with pork barrel spending either. I'm jut pointing out that it's (pork) a relatively minor part of what it will take to balance our budget. There are bigger fish to fry. Why use all the ammunition on a relatively worthless pawn?

1. Because it's relatively easy to do in Washington and easy to sell back home
2. Because the taxpayers money is not meant to be used as a State creditcard for pet projects
3. Because spending has to be curtailed and this has to start somewhere - so why not with political pork?
4. Because it would be supported by the a majority of U.S. citizens both in an election year and non-election year.
5. Because tax increases alone cannot reduce the debt by itself.

Those are just off the top of my head, I'm sure would I give it some thought I could come up with better / more reasons.
 

Taboon

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
135
Reaction score
38
Location
Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Why would I be concerned about domestic holders of debt? And I could have sworn the OP video I posted identified China - which as you stated, is the largest foreign holder of U.S. debt...undisputed. So now that the smoke and mirrors nonsense has cleared and the "fear mongering" claim has been stepped on, the ad makes a very good point doesn't it?
My issue is that people are making it sound like China own's us when they don't even hold 10% of our total debt. It's about 8% based on the link that was provided above. Now, I don't particularly like the fact that China has control of 8% of our debt but it needs to be put into perspective. It's still a huge amount, I don't contend that it's not. But, I prefer facts with substance to facts that are spun to get a point across even though the whole story is not being told.
 

Taboon

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
135
Reaction score
38
Location
Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
1. Because it's relatively easy to do in Washington and easy to sell back home
2. Because the taxpayers money is not meant to be used as a State creditcard for pet projects
3. Because spending has to be curtailed and this has to start somewhere - so why not with political pork?
4. Because it would be supported by the a majority of U.S. citizens both in an election year and non-election year.
5. Because tax increases alone cannot reduce the debt by itself.

Those are just off the top of my head, I'm sure would I give it some thought I could come up with better / more reasons.

Ockham, I'm not sure if you realize you are preaching to the choir when you give justifiable reasons for doing away with pork related spending. Like I've said (this will be the third time now I believe) I am no fan of it myself. Here's a summary of my position to make it easier for you.

1. I don't like pork barrel spending!
2. Pork barrel spending is a minor contributor to the deficit.
3. We should be looking at the big ticket items first and not waste so much time on trivial subjects.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
My issue is that people are making it sound like China own's us when they don't even hold 10% of our total debt. It's about 8% based on the link that was provided above. Now, I don't particularly like the fact that China has control of 8% of our debt but it needs to be put into perspective. It's still a huge amount, I don't contend that it's not. But, I prefer facts with substance to facts that are spun to get a point across even though the whole story is not being told.

You don't measure it by the % of debt they hold, you measure it vs. the yearly GDP which shows the measure of economic strength a country has, which is a debt to GDP ratio. CBO estimates $14,400bn while total debt by year-end will be $13,000bn – 90 per cent of GDP. China's ownership is closing in on 1 trillion very soon - and yes I agree they don't own us yet and I'm not sure they'd want to. But the amount of foreign debt to China is unexceptable as is the total amount of foreign debt. So while China may not own us today, the groundwork is laid for China or some other foreign country to do it in the future.

Not just that - but this debt is not just unsustainable but I'm wondering what influence and what business we are giving away due to this debt. The intangible effects may be broad or narrow - but that they exist in such a large amount, and amount that historically has never occurred before, shows signs of trouble ahead. You asked why cut pork? To avoid that trouble ahead.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
It's not fear mongering - and my one point in this thread I want to stress is to refute that nonsensical point made by Redress.
 

Taboon

Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2010
Messages
135
Reaction score
38
Location
Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
You asked why cut pork?
Where did I ask that? Seriously, how many times do I have to go through this with you? I think pork is bad. I think pork is bad. I think pork is bad!
What I don't like is the fact that a relatively trivial amount in the grand scheme of things is getting so much more air time out of our politicians when there are more important things to look at that will help reduce our deficit.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Where did I ask that? Seriously, how many times do I have to go through this with you? I think pork is bad. I think pork is bad. I think pork is bad!
What I don't like is the fact that a relatively trivial amount in the grand scheme of things is getting so much more air time out of our politicians when there are more important things to look at that will help reduce our deficit.


I took your post #16, particularly this part:

Taboon said:
I'm jut pointing out that it's (pork) a relatively minor part of what it will take to balance our budget. There are bigger fish to fry. Why use all the ammunition on a relatively worthless pawn?

As identifying pork cuts aren't worth the time - my view is that they are very much worth the time as a first step to change our financial spending spree, and to start the process of paying down our debt. We have to start somewhere so why not there? I took your post to not see the value of cutting pork. Did I misunderstand?
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
107,663
Reaction score
51,525
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
By country - China holds the most: Source - US Treasury.

http://www.ustreas.gov/tic/mfh.txt


The CRC report to Congress January 2008 (predating the US Treasury info).
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/99496.pdf

Yeah - it's all fearmongering. :lamo

You seem to be failing to understand the point I made, which is that China is not the largest holder of US debt, nor is it even close. It is in fact third. I did not dispute that China is the largest foreign holder of US debt, but over 6b of the US debt is owned within the US, or over 6 times what China owns.

Further, that was just to point out one factual flaw of the video, and that is not why it is fearmongering. The reason it is fearmongering is suggesting a false, scary potential problem with the debt.
 

Ockham

Noblesse oblige
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2009
Messages
23,909
Reaction score
11,001
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
You seem to be failing to understand the point I made, which is that China is not the largest holder of US debt, nor is it even close.
You fail to understand that I don't CARE about domestically held debt, I'm concerned about FOREIGN debt. And the largest foreign holder of U.S. debt? CHINA.

Further, that was just to point out one factual flaw of the video, and that is not why it is fearmongering. The reason it is fearmongering is suggesting a false, scary potential problem with the debt.
It's showing a potential future which may indeed come true. Obviously China doesn't currently own the U.S. I would have thought the view is clearly a warning and not a "true to life" representation of today. Sorry you missed that and didn't understand the context of the ad. Apparently it went over your head.
 
Top Bottom