Search the Community

Hello. Im up here in nowhere land.. seems too far out to meet people.. anybody around?

It seems USA has fallen very low in the view of people from other countries. How bad is it and has new president helped the world opinion of USA :?: Mike

Reagan Did It June 1, 2009 OP-ED COLUMNIST By PAUL KRUGMAN ?This bill is the most important legislation for financial institutions in the last 50 years. It provides a long-term solution for troubled thrift institutions. ... All in all, I think we hit the jackpot.? So declared Ronald Reagan in 1982, as he signed the Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act. He was, as it happened, wrong about solving the problems of the thrifts. On the contrary, the bill turned the modest-sized troubles of savings-and-loan institutions into an utter catastrophe. But he was right about the legislation?s significance. And as for that jackpot ? well, it finally came more than 25 years later, in the form of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. For the more one looks into the origins of the current disaster, the clearer it becomes that the key wrong turn ? the turn that made crisis inevitable ? took place in the early 1980s, during the Reagan years. Attacks on Reaganomics usually focus on rising inequality and fiscal irresponsibility. Indeed, Reagan ushered in an era in which a small minority grew vastly rich, while working families saw only meager gains. He also broke with longstanding rules of fiscal prudence. On the latter point: traditionally, the U.S. government ran significant budget deficits only in times of war or economic emergency. Federal debt as a percentage of G.D.P. fell steadily from the end of World War II until 1980. But indebtedness began rising under Reagan; it fell again in the Clinton years, but resumed its rise under the Bush administration, leaving us ill prepared for the emergency now upon us. The increase in public debt was, however, dwarfed by the rise in private debt, made possible by financial deregulation. The change in America?s financial rules was Reagan?s biggest legacy. And it?s the gift that keeps on taking. The immediate effect of Garn-St. Germain, as I said, was to turn the thrifts from a problem into a catastrophe. The S.& L. crisis has been written out of the Reagan hagiography, but the fact is that deregulation in effect gave the industry ? whose deposits were federally insured ? a license to gamble with taxpayers? money, at best, or simply to loot it, at worst. By the time the government closed the books on the affair, taxpayers had lost $130 billion, back when that was a lot of money. (around 1988) But there was also a longer-term effect. Reagan-era legislative changes essentially ended New Deal restrictions on mortgage lending ? restrictions that, in particular, limited the ability of families to buy homes without putting a significant amount of money down. These restrictions were put in place in the 1930s by political leaders who had just experienced a terrible financial crisis, and were trying to prevent another. But by 1980 the memory of the Depression had faded. Government, declared Reagan, is the problem, not the solution; the magic of the marketplace must be set free. And so the precautionary rules were scrapped. Together with looser lending standards for other kinds of consumer credit, this led to a radical change in American behavior. We weren?t always a nation of big debts and low savings: in the 1970s Americans saved almost 10 percent of their income, slightly more than in the 1960s. It was only after the Reagan deregulation that thrift gradually disappeared from the American way of life, culminating in the near-zero savings rate that prevailed on the eve of the great crisis. Household debt was only 60 percent of income when Reagan took office, about the same as it was during the Kennedy administration. By 2007 it was up to 119 percent. All this, we were assured, was a good thing: sure, Americans were piling up debt, and they weren?t putting aside any of their income, but their finances looked fine once you took into account the rising values of their houses and their stock portfolios. Oops. Now, the proximate causes of today?s economic crisis lie in events that took place long after Reagan left office ? in the global savings glut created by surpluses in China and elsewhere, and in the giant housing bubble that savings glut helped inflate. But it was the explosion of debt over the previous quarter-century that made the U.S. economy so vulnerable. Overstretched borrowers were bound to start defaulting in large numbers once the housing bubble burst and unemployment began to rise. These defaults in turn wreaked havoc with a financial system that ? also mainly thanks to Reagan-era deregulation ? took on too much risk with too little capital. There?s plenty of blame to go around these days. But the prime villains behind the mess we?re in were Reagan and his circle of advisers ? men who forgot the lessons of America?s last great financial crisis, and condemned the rest of us to repeat it. IMHO REAGAN is second biggest crook and faker, first place goes to W. I had endure f*cking Reagan for 16 years, 8 years as Governor of California and 8 years as POTUS. I thought the US would never recover from the damage of Reagan the years. Add the W. years fiasco, it's amazing that there's anything worthwhile left in the USA.

Processed foods and Fast foods in the USA are full of poisons and its making people sick !!!!! Yes its true. In order to make more money Meats are pumped full of anibiotics and steroids and hormones and the feed is full of pesticides and herbicides and Mad cow desease can even exixt in a fast food burger. Cereals are made of genetically altered grain which isn't allowed in Europe and some fruits are injected with flavor as the earth is becomeing so depleted that some areas can't produce fruit with flavor for sale !!! The Government Organization that is supposed to regulate these chemicals and protect the American people has sold out many years ago to the big money offered by corporations. In the name of money the very food we eat is making people sick and obese. So remember that about American food and I'm sure alot of other countries have food full of garbage. Money has twisted the minds of many in the food industry. The good news is small farmers are moving to Organic foods and the Organic Food industry is growing. There are Organic food farms in Thailand too. So be aware of what you eat. Some would make you sick to make a buck................

The latest shooting of 3 children on top of last weeks shooting of a girl at her school makes me wonder about the well known power of the Gun Lobby in the USA and its ability to scare the pants off politicians from even mentioning gun control. I did some research amongst the hundreds of thousands of sites dedicated to this subject, both pro and anti. Just too much to go into it here however one site that reports gun violence in the USA is worthy of showing to gauge the true level of gun violence related crimes in the USA. http://www.guardian.co.uk/usguns/0,,182056,00.html It seems never ending. As I understand it, when the Constitution was written and included the famous Second Amendment that states "every citizen has the right to bear arms" it was in the days of President Lincoln, and I guess it is obvious why it was included in those days. However this is 2006 and yet that clause in the Second Amendment remains today resulting with very little control in most states of the USA. Further there is doubt that this Amendment so often used by the pro gun lobby does in fact mean what they construe it to mean and I quote from a recent Senate debate - "Relative to the "bear arms" meanings, an extensive study found " ...that the overwhelming preponderance of usage of 300 examples of the "bear arms" expression in public discourse in early America was in an unambiguous, explicitly military context in a figurative (and euphemistic) sense to stand for military service"[33] Further, the Oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles declares that a meaning of "to bear arms" is a figurative usage meaning "to serve as a soldier, do military service, fight". This study casts doubt on the modern definition of 'bear arms' to mean 'carry firearms'. In Amyette v. The State the court stated in 1840 that bear arms "has a military sense, and no other" etc. As late as last week a bill before the Senate was vetoed calling for the inclusion of child proof safety features on all guns, can you believe this? What say my fellow TF'ers on this issue, should the Constitution be amended to commence bringing in gun control so as to take out the one salient point that the pro gun lobby continuously uses to thwart gun control?