dreamdancer 0 #1 July 30, 2009 and they've got the money... QuoteWhat a hoot. The Chinese Communists invaded Washington on Monday demanding not that we sacrifice our freedoms but rather that we balance our budget. Creditors get to make that kind of call. And the Marxists of Beijing, who have turned out to be the world’s most prudent bankers, are worried about their assets invested in our banana republic. “China has a huge amount of investment in the United States, mainly in the form of Treasury bonds. We are concerned about the security of our financial assets” was the way China’s assistant finance minister put it. Briefing reporters at the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue, he added, “We sincerely hope the U.S. fiscal deficit will be reduced, year after year.” Quite sincerely, one suspects, given a U.S. budget shortfall this year that is slated to reach $1.85 trillion. Suddenly, it was U.S. officials who were promising deep reform to their disgraced economic system rather than demanding it from incompetent foreigners. President Barack Obama’s economic team of Clinton-era holdovers, who a decade ago had hectored China on the virtues of fiscal responsibility, now were falling over themselves to reassure the Chinese that their $1.5 trillion stake in U.S. government-issued securities is safe, and that they should buy more at this week’s $200 billion Treasury auction. If they don’t, we’re in big trouble. U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner promised to behave, saying the U.S. is “committed to taking the necessary measures to bring our fiscal deficits down to a more sustainable level once recovery is firmly established.” Now let’s hope that the Chinese Communists and their natural allies among congressional deficit hawks will be able to keep him to his word. And don’t blame any of this on peacenik liberals. The new conciliatory—nay, deferential—tone toward China precedes the Obama administration, having begun in bilateral talks during the last years of the Bush administration as the U.S. economy began its ignominious downfall. It was George W. Bush’s treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, who set the course when the former Goldman Sachs chairman realized how dependent were his Wall Street buddies on Chinese goodwill. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/07/29-4stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #2 July 30, 2009 Quoteand they've got the money... Quote And don’t blame any of this on peacenik liberals. The new conciliatory—nay, deferential—tone toward China precedes the Obama administration, having begun in bilateral talks during the last years of the Bush administration as the U.S. economy began its ignominious downfall. It was George W. Bush’s treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, who set the course when the former Goldman Sachs chairman realized how dependent were his Wall Street buddies on Chinese goodwill. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/07/29-4 Obama is spending like a sailor on shore leave but I knew it was all George's fault. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #3 July 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteand they've got the money... Quote And don’t blame any of this on peacenik liberals. The new conciliatory—nay, deferential—tone toward China precedes the Obama administration, having begun in bilateral talks during the last years of the Bush administration as the U.S. economy began its ignominious downfall. It was George W. Bush’s treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, who set the course when the former Goldman Sachs chairman realized how dependent were his Wall Street buddies on Chinese goodwill. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/07/29-4 Obama is spending like a sailor on shore leave but I knew it was all George's fault. Well, since you clearly don't know, I suggest you check to see under which presidents' administrations the bulk of our debt was accumulated. Here's a hint - one was called "Reagan" and the other two were called "Bush".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #4 July 30, 2009 QuoteI suggest you check to see under which presidents' administrations the bulk of our debt was accumulated. Here's a hint - one was called "Reagan" and the other two were called "Bush". OK, I give up. Which ones? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #5 July 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteand they've got the money... Quote And don’t blame any of this on peacenik liberals. The new conciliatory—nay, deferential—tone toward China precedes the Obama administration, having begun in bilateral talks during the last years of the Bush administration as the U.S. economy began its ignominious downfall. It was George W. Bush’s treasury secretary, Henry Paulson, who set the course when the former Goldman Sachs chairman realized how dependent were his Wall Street buddies on Chinese goodwill. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/07/29-4 Obama is spending like a sailor on shore leave but I knew it was all George's fault. Well, since you clearly don't know, I suggest you check to see under which presidents' administrations the bulk of our debt was accumulated. Here's a hint - one was called "Reagan" and the other two were called "Bush". So in your mind it's OK to continue on a bad path because now it's being done by a president you like. Got it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #6 July 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteI suggest you check to see under which presidents' administrations the bulk of our debt was accumulated. Here's a hint - one was called "Reagan" and the other two were called "Bush". OK, I give up. Which ones? Obama's own budget numbers predict that his administration will accumulate more debt than Reagan and H.W. Bush combined. Calling "he hasn't done it yet" is pretty lame, considering that he has announced his intention to do so, and laid out a plan for doing so. Personally, I'd prefer to stop before we dig ourselves any deeper into debt. Also, the "hey, the other side did it too" stuff sounds really dumb to those of us who aren't happy with either side. I don't give a rats ass if you mortgage our future to support a nice little war off in the mideast or a nice new welfare program in the US, or (in the case of W. Bush and Obama, both at the same time). I'm not giving a free pass to the other guys here. Reagan, in particular, pretty much invented the now commonplace practice of "borrow and spend to buy votes". If you were to rank the presidents since 1980 according to their debt accumulation (best, meaning least debt, first), Clinton would come first, followed by Reagan (really only because he hadn't imagined the scale we've gotten to now), then George H.W. Bush, then George W. Bush, then Obama.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #7 July 30, 2009 QuoteSo in your mind it's OK to continue on a bad path because now it's being done by a president you like. Got it. But he's so dreamy...-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
