Kerry's Economic Plan (www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=30)

"Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry has made a lot of political hay out of attacking President Bush's tax and spending policies, which have resulted in a fairly sizable deficit of $400 billion-plus for the coming fiscal year...it ignores the size of the deficit relative to the size of the overall U.S. economy, which is manageable by any historical standard.
For example, ... the 1986 federal deficit was 5 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), as compared to the current deficit, which is 3.8 percent of GDP.
Kerry's campaign has released spending plans in 15 broad domestic and military categories, only five of which show spending reductions. The whole package results in a net increase in spending during a President Kerry's first term of $226.1 billion." Link (www.rapidcityjournal.com/articles/2004/09/17/news/columns/563tsitrian.txt)

How is Kerry's any better than what's happening now?

No matter who gets elected in November, our economy is going in the crapper, simply because the world is running out of oil, yet we use the most per capita of any country, and because such a high percentage of our spending is going into these military adventures.

Ultimately, military spending does almost nothing to strengthen the economy, and having our manufacturing all move overseas is going to leave us very little for an economic foundation.

But rolling back W's 350 billion in tax cuts for the richest 1% would go a long way towards covering his proposals, it just isn't going to be enough to fix the mess we are headed into.

How is Kerry's any better than what's happening now?

Because Kerry isn't Bush?! That seems to be the going answer these days... ;)

Someone wake me when this thread's over & Greenspan talks again....

I agree with Psoper. Until we find a way to become independant of Foreign oil then our economy will continue to go down the tubes. Sometimes it just seems like it is going faster than any other times. (like now) ;)

Until we find a way to become independant of Foreign oil then our economy will continue to go down the tubes. Sometimes it just seems like it is going faster than any other times. (like now) ;)

So we should start drill in CA and AK, right? But dr3d1zzl3 and MonkeyAB will be upset.

So we should start drill in CA and AK, right? But dr3d1zzl3 and MonkeyAB will be upset.

No, No, We should invest more time and money into alternative fuels for cars and trucks. We need to get away from the combustion engine. I realize this would take away my beloved WRX :( So I am not really ready for that ;) but we need to do something in the way of changing how our economy works.

No matter who gets elected in November, our economy is going in the crapper, simply because the world is running out of oil, yet we use the most per capita of any country, and because such a high percentage of our spending is going into these military adventures.

Ultimately, military spending does almost nothing to strengthen the economy, and having our manufacturing all move overseas is going to leave us very little for an economic foundation.

Regardless of who gets elected, my prediction is that the economy will make net improvements over the next four years, although it will be modest growth as compared to the mid to late 90's. Economics goes in cycles, guys.

Military spending is largely funneled to US businesses, which generally pay US employees, who then buy stuff, pay taxes and hopefully save a bit. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "strengthen the economy", but you could make an argument that military spending is like any other government spending - it funnels dollars into the hands of consumers. It does beg the greater question of military spending being unsustainable, particularly in light of less government subsidy going towards higher education. But that is a big conversation I don't have time for right now.

Military spending is largely funneled to US businesses, which generally pay US employees, who then buy stuff, pay taxes and hopefully save a bit. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "strengthen the economy", but you could make an argument that military spending is like any other government spending - it funnels dollars into the hands of consumers. It does beg the greater question of military spending being unsustainable, particularly in light of less government subsidy going towards higher education. But that is a big conversation I don't have time for right now.

You are missing the point that the way military business is done has changed, most of it is now being "outsourced" to a few companies who are consolidating undue profits- war profiteering in its purest form.

It doesn't funnel money to consumers, it feeds a bloated and corrupt old boys network of military/industrial/energy "vendors".

Also consider that the top consumer of petroleum in the US is our Navy, our combined armed forces consume far more of this diminishing resource than our WRX's.

silver scoober is right too; why do you guys insist on subscribing to the false dichotomy of importing oil vs drilling offshore? there are a myriad of choices in between, giving tax breaks to electric and hybrid vehicle R&D and sales, developing and encouraging alternate fuels like natural gas, hydrogen, alcohol, and bio-diesel, researching ways to extract energy from sewage, or garbage, plastics recycling and stuff- things that we have plenty of.

There are lots of alternatives already poised for deployment that will become all the more viable if the effort is put towards developing them.

You are missing the point that the way military business is done has changed, most of it is now being "outsourced" to a few companies who are consolidating undue profits- war profiteering in its purest form.

It doesn't funnel money to consumers, it feeds a bloated and corrupt old boys network of military/industrial/energy "vendors".

Just because you don't like them, doesn't mean they aren't consumers. The point is not lost on me, but I don't really think it's terribly "new", either. I've caught bits and pieces of "For the Record with Dave Emory", and it makes common sense to me that when dollars as big as what the US military spends are involved, there will be corruption. It's the nature of big money. But none of this changes the fact that government is pouring money into the economy as a whole. I think you're begging the questions of where the money could be better spent, and if going into deficit spending to fund our military is prudent. Two very good questions, imho, with complex answers.

The one think I have to agree on is making alternative fuels, do something with garbage as stated before....like the delorean on back to the future lol, hey it could happen you never know we just need to research alittle faster.