"Bill Tuthill" wrote in message ...
riverman wrote:

By the way, for a real eye-opener, try graphing this data on excel. Then
project to 2008. Here, I'l help you:
http://www.die.net/musings/national_debt/

Using logarithmic scale (2nd graph) the largest increase in federal debt
occurred after (not during!) the Civil War. I have never heard this
before.
Was it due to the high costs of Reconstruction?

Or else its just a bookkeeping artifact from the debt of the South being
added to the coffers? I won't pretend to know for real.


And contrary to those who say "debt was worse during WW2" note that
per-capita debt is much higher now. It had started to decline a bit
during the Clinton era.

From a river-runner's perspective, I suppose the best thing about this
is that the Feds won't be able to afford Auburn Dam now!

I love graphs.

Me too, but I don't fully understand the economics behind the numbers. I
hear folks talk about how the Natl Debt is a bad thing, other folks say its
an either-way kind of thing, and still others say that its actually a
healthy, even highly desirable thing. Beats me...I think its like personal
debt: the guy with all the toys has all the debt, and will tell you right up
to foreclosure day just how great debt is. If foreclosure day never comes,
he wins. If it does, then he probably has all sorts of twists and turns to
play the numbers and get away unscathed. It probably means that he was right
all along, and that debt is a good thing, but it makes me worried,
especially in times of huge financial upheavals, as that means we are in
waters without precendent, and no one can rightfully claim to have
experience in what is the right thing to do. With the dollar at an all-time
low (all recent time, anyway) against foreign currencies, and with the
petro-dollar vs. euro-dollar skirmishes going on, as well as this expensive
and endless war and the lack of US sympathies in some other major players, I
think we gotta just hold on to our assets and see what happens.

--riverman

Financial upheavals - just another excuse to use to get better camping and
boating gear - it's a hedge against inflation - Honest dear, Really.....

A really, really good paddle appreciates - right?


Ken

"riverman" wrote in message
...

"Bill Tuthill" wrote in message
...
riverman wrote:

By the way, for a real eye-opener, try graphing this data on excel.
Then
project to 2008. Here, I'l help you:
http://www.die.net/musings/national_debt/

Using logarithmic scale (2nd graph) the largest increase in federal debt
occurred after (not during!) the Civil War. I have never heard this
before.
Was it due to the high costs of Reconstruction?

Or else its just a bookkeeping artifact from the debt of the South being
added to the coffers? I won't pretend to know for real.


And contrary to those who say "debt was worse during WW2" note that
per-capita debt is much higher now. It had started to decline a bit
during the Clinton era.

From a river-runner's perspective, I suppose the best thing about this
is that the Feds won't be able to afford Auburn Dam now!

I love graphs.

Me too, but I don't fully understand the economics behind the numbers. I
hear folks talk about how the Natl Debt is a bad thing, other folks say
its
an either-way kind of thing, and still others say that its actually a
healthy, even highly desirable thing. Beats me...I think its like personal
debt: the guy with all the toys has all the debt, and will tell you right
up
to foreclosure day just how great debt is. If foreclosure day never comes,
he wins. If it does, then he probably has all sorts of twists and turns to
play the numbers and get away unscathed. It probably means that he was
right
all along, and that debt is a good thing, but it makes me worried,
especially in times of huge financial upheavals, as that means we are in
waters without precendent, and no one can rightfully claim to have
experience in what is the right thing to do. With the dollar at an
all-time
low (all recent time, anyway) against foreign currencies, and with the
petro-dollar vs. euro-dollar skirmishes going on, as well as this
expensive
and endless war and the lack of US sympathies in some other major players,
I
think we gotta just hold on to our assets and see what happens.

--riverman

Went over your head huh Brian? Well try this....

No, but unlike you, my life doesn't revolve around scouring the internet
for bad news that I can whine about. I have a life to live.

Oh go ahead Brian, have a look. After all it's your war, your's and the rest of
the neocon's. You own it, this should make you very happy.

http://fallujapictures.blogspot.com/

In article , Paddlec1
wrote:

No, but unlike you, my life doesn't revolve around scouring the internet
for bad news that I can whine about. I have a life to live.

It's your "doom and gloom". It belongs to you and the rest of the neocon
cheeleaders for death. Don't blame the messenger.

Have fun paying down that seven and a half trillion dollar debt...

Not a problem, unless you live in Germany, France, Russia, Canada,
Australia, New Zealand, etc. Ah, that must be your problem.

In article , Paddlec1
wrote:

Went over your head huh Brian? Well try this....

No, but unlike you, my life doesn't revolve around scouring the internet
for bad news that I can whine about. I have a life to live.

Oh go ahead Brian, have a look. After all it's your war, your's and the rest
of
the neocon's. You own it...


And we can pay for it because we live in a country with an economy that
actually grew in the last several decades, unlike the moribund Euros.

On 28-Nov-2004, Warren wrote:

The world that sold out to Hitler in the '30s

Never studied American history, did you? The yanks tried to hide
under the covers and avoid the war as long as possible. They only
entered after the German's declared war on them. How very brave.

Mike

Warren wrote:

In article , Paddlec1
wrote:


Went over your head huh Brian? Well try this....

No, but unlike you, my life doesn't revolve around scouring the internet
for bad news that I can whine about. I have a life to live.

Oh go ahead Brian, have a look. After all it's your war, your's and the rest
of
the neocon's. You own it...



And we can pay for it because we live in a country with an economy that
actually grew in the last several decades, unlike the moribund Euros.

Actually, you can't pay for it, partly because most of the money
invested in your country comes from other countries. If those
investments would be pulled back because the investors are getting
worried about the U.S. economy, the U.S. economy would crash.

Also, with the ever increasing fall of the dollar, inflation is catching
up with the gross overspending of your government. You can't spend what
you don't have, and taking out loans to still spend more than what you
have means that eventually there will be someone knocking on your door
asking that money back. As things stand, the U.S. isn't going to be able
to pay back that debt as it is right now, and it's only growing bigger.

To think that you can pay for it is a nice false sense of security.

BTW: since you are obviously not very well educated wrt the rest of the
world: FYI the economy of most EU nations actually did grow quite a bit
in the last couple of decades.

Wilko

--
Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o t)nl
Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe
---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.---
http://wilko.webzone.ru/

"Michael Daly" wrote in message
...
On 28-Nov-2004, Warren wrote:

The world that sold out to Hitler in the '30s

Never studied American history, did you?
=====================
I suggest you read a little more history. Just because it had not been
officially declared does not mean that the US wasn't morally and legally
already at war with Germany long before. I'll give you a stating place,
look for a connection between destroyers and bases, and come back with the
date.



The yanks tried to hide
under the covers and avoid the war as long as possible. They only
entered after the German's declared war on them. How very brave.
======================
It was the rest of europes' indecision and appeasment that allowed the war
to happen, not the USs'. If Europe had had the balls to stand up and
enforce the treaties, there would have been a better chance at staving off
war. It rests on Europe's cowardly inaction.



Mike

"Wilko" wrote in message
...
BTW: since you are obviously not very well educated wrt the rest of the
world: FYI the economy of most EU nations actually did grow quite a bit in
the last couple of decades.

Damn, don't I know it!! My college tuition is based on the British Pound, my
vacation expenses are usually based on the Euro, and my purchased items are
based on the South African Rand. The dollar exchange rate has pretty much
collapsed against all three of those, escalating my costs by 20% or more
in every arena.

--riverman
(thinking of heading to the Far East.....no, wait, that won't work either.)

On 29-Nov-2004, "rick etter" wrote:

Just because it had not been
officially declared does not mean that the US wasn't morally and legally
already at war with Germany long before.

Yer joking, right? Well it's a pretty poor joke and an insult to those who
lost their lives actually engaged in the war. I'm sure Hilter was quaking
in his boots at the thought that the US was "morally" engaged in the war.

Bleeding the British treasury dry by selling them munitions isn't the best
way of showing moral involvment. Picking up a gun and pitching in would have
been a lot more productive and would have shortened the war considerably.

The only way for the US to be legally at war was to defend itself against the
Nazis, which in turn required them to have declared war on the yanks which only
happened as a result of the Japanese attacks on Pearl Harbor and the Philippines.

I'll give you a stating place,
look for a connection between destroyers and bases

Oh you mean the token escorts of the North Atlantic convoys? Here's a fact -
even after the Americans entered the war the Canadian Navy had more ships on
escort than the yanks. IIRC, the yanks took over a year to gear up to the
point that they actually contributed as much as a nation one-tenth its size.

It was the rest of europes' indecision and appeasment that allowed the war
to happen, not the USs'.

Nice try. You find it easy to lay blame but impossible to admit that the
majority of Americans had no interest in the situation in Europe. Last
I checked, the US was a member of the League of Nations at that time.
They could have acted but chose not to.

Mike