Are you a USA conservative, do you favour a default ?

[Rashiminos]

Nixon imposed price and wage controls, Reagan raised taxes a number of times, and I needn't remind anyone of the Bush spending increases. On the other hand, Carter deregulated the airlines and Clinton signed welfare reform.

Elected executives having a common penchant for betraying their party/campaign ideals for an undisclosed set of objectives is not actually a refutation of the party politics. It does suggest another topic.

 

[amadeus]

But look at Reagan. He drastically cut welfare but also crippled labor and wages so that people at the bottom had less ability to get out of poverty by work.

Did he? Using a baseline of 2005 dollars, federal welfare spending per capita was cut by about 12% over the course of eight fiscal years. Clinton cut it by about 5%. It increased under Bush by 69%.

 

[Traitorfish]

Nixon imposed price and wage controls, Reagan raised taxes a number of times, and I needn't remind anyone of the Bush spending increases. On the other hand, Carter deregulated the airlines and Clinton signed welfare reform.

As they say, "Whoever is in office, the Whigs are in power".

 

[GenMarshall]

I care little about the default and more about getting unemployed americans displaced by the ongoing Great Recession their jobs back!

 

[Cutlass]

Did he? Using a baseline of 2005 dollars, federal welfare spending per capita was cut by about 12% over the course of eight fiscal years. Clinton cut it by about 5%. It increased under Bush by 69%.

The raw figures hide other trends. Like people losing their jobs.

 

[otago]

Interesting how some say there is no class system in the USA yet one sees the term upper class used by some to describe themselves.
The class system seems to have taken the worst parts from the UK.

But it is amusing to see the wealthy paying over US $100,000 to be a member of Prince William's polo team for ONE match.

I wonder how many of the wealthy in the USA would be keen on buying a title if they were available ?

 

[Ajidica]

Did he? Using a baseline of 2005 dollars, federal welfare spending per capita was cut by about 12% over the course of eight fiscal years. Clinton cut it by about 5%. It increased under Bush by 69%.

Simple answer: More old people and fewer traditionaly 'blue collar' jobs available. But mainly the old people.

 

[civ_king]

I care little about the default and more about getting unemployed americans displaced by the ongoing Great Recession their jobs back!

I'd like to point out that if we don't increase the debt limit welfare checks might stop coming, are you sure you don't care?

 

[Tani Coyote]

Interesting how some say there is no class system in the USA yet one sees the term upper class used by some to describe themselves.

...Really? This is nitpicking based on terminology.

What people mean is that there isn't a system of locked castes.

Some people use the term "upper income," but the term "upper class" works just as well.

Compare first class being used in just about anything.

They are not morally or legally superior as any true class system would mandate; they merely have more cash. Which even classless states do not get rid of.

 

[Traitorfish]

I wonder how many of the wealthy in the USA would be keen on buying a title if they were available ?

A few already buy Scottish lairdships, which are tied to land (specifically, the land containing the castle or manor associated with a traditional lairdship) rather than to individuals, so there's certainly a market for it.

...Really? This is nitpicking based on terminology.

What people mean is that there isn't a system of locked castes.

Nor in Britain, given that we abolished villeinage in the 15th century, but nobody has ever claimed that we are a "classless society". I think that you may be going too easy on your countrymen by excusing this as a mere semantic issue, rather than the naive self-flattery which it appears to outsiders.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Nor in Britain, given that we abolished villeinage in the 15th century, but nobody has ever claimed that we are a "classless society". I think that you may be going too easy on your countrymen by excusing this as a mere semantic issue, rather than the naive self-flattery which it appears to outsiders.

It was a semantics-based critique, and that's why I replied to it.

We Americans are fond of using a very different lexicon from the rest of the world. It would appear the use of "class" has likewise been appropriated differently, just like socialism, communism, and the like.

We don't use "class" to describe arisocrats and peasants and the like. We use it to describe income. While some say upper/lower income and whatnot, the usage of "Class" is still very popular.

 

[Traitorfish]

It was a semantics-based critique, and that's why I replied to it.

We Americans are fond of using a very different lexicon from the rest of the world. It would appear the use of "class" has likewise been appropriated differently, just like socialism, communism, and the like.

We don't use "class" to describe arisocrats and peasants and the like. We use it to describe income. While some say upper/lower income and whatnot, the usage of "Class" is still very popular.

No, that's how the rest of the world uses it too. My point was that Americans frequently do claim to live in a "classless" society (Rand Paul is a notable recent example, and, while he is certainly not a mainstream politician, his right-populist rhetoric evidently appeals to at least a significant part of American society), on the basis of its purported hypermobility, because to many of you, at least some of the time, "class" really does seem to imply some rigidly immobile quasi-caste system.

 

[BasketCase]

If the Republicans throw in their cards,taxes will go up. If they don't, taxes will go way up.

Wrong on both counts. Republicans will simply block any tax increases in the House.

The reason the "take the argument and reverse it" trick didn't work for you is because of this: the Democrats can't "vote down" a decision by a bank to stop lending to the U.S. government, and they can't vote against a reduction in the nation's credit rating.

Side note: nobody said the United States has to default. Even if the debt ceiling isn't raised and there are no new taxes, default can still be avoided. And in fact will have to be avoided at all costs, because a default would very likely chop America's credit rating to the very bottom and we wouldn't be able to borrow any more--which would cause the budget to balance anyway. Pain, no gain.

 

[Silurian]

It will take the pressure off Greece

but will not do Greece or anyone else any good.