.
Four years ago, the Democrats, Liberals, Hollywood goof balls, polar bear lovers and those stricken with Bush Derangement Syndrome, weighed in over the approximately $50 million that was spent on GWB's 2nd inauguration.
.
How many children could be fed, how many homeless housed, how much squid could be airlifted to starving polar bears?
.
4 years later, the Democrats, Liberals, Hollywood goof balls, polar bear lovers and those stricken with Bush Derangement Syndrome are planning on spending 3 times that on the coronation of "The One".
.
One again, they show that their words are like bamboo, hollow. But even with the down turn in the economy, aren't they ignoring 3 times as many hungry children, homeless and polar bears?
.
The hypocritical sons-of-bitches!!
8 comments:
feed the homeless polar bears to the starving children
No, no, no, after 4 years of Obama, we will have to feed the starving children to the polar bears so we can then eat the polar bears.
It's not Soylent Green if it's recycled through another species.
Soylent White: made from only the freshest polar bears.
I guess what really gets me on this, is that the American Populace is so damned clueless. How can $50 million be gross and wasteful, but $150 million be appropriate?
Side Item:
anyone watch the Sunday Morning political shows? It was the opening day of the 4 Day Obamafest. Bob Schieffer said he's personally over joyed about Obama taking over.
So much for journalistic objectivity. I think I'm going to puke.
"...anyone watch the Sunday Morning political shows?"
Wouldn't that be a lot like Self-injury/cutting? Schteveo - don't do it! Watch the History Channel - they've been showing a lot of end-of-the world catastrophe stuff - You know; meteor strikes, giant volcanoes wiping out mankind, Giant tsunamies, earthquakes. It's not NEARLY as depressing as Obama.
Jimbo,
I was just "listening" to them. I was actually making Wimp Chili for lunch.
50 million be wasteful, yet 150 million be appropriate?
It is actually the same value, it's just that the massive inflation of the dollar caused by the ridiculous spending program that the dems claim is supposed to get us out of the recession has devalued the dollar to 1/3 its previous amount.
(Just kidding, but not really)
Goober,
huh?
Goober,
huh?
It was a joke, sort of.
Massive government spending, using "fiat money" (ie, money not created by taxation revenue) means that more money suddenly got printed. There is an accounting concept called the "conservation of value" that goes a little something like this:
There is a finite amount of real value in any system. This value is fixed, barring external inputs of value. Lets say at current rates, the value of system X is 100 million dollars. The government of system X then prints another 100 million dollars of fiat money. You now have 200 million dollars covering what was, the previous day, 100 million dollars in value. Therefore, the dollar was devalued by half, and saying 200 million dollars today is the same as saying 100 million dollars the day before they printed the money.
If you were to buy system X using system X currency, you would now need 200 million system X dollars in order to purchase it, but that does not mean you are handing over any additional VALUE than if you were to have bought it yesterday for 100 million system X dollars at their pre-inflation unit value.
THerefore, in my statement above, I was jabbing at the fact that our government has been printing money so fast the presses have needed extra maintenance, yet the total value of the US system is staying the same, or if anything, falling. In my hypothetical joke posted above, inflation due to this wanton printing of money has reduced the value of one dollar by one third, so that something you could have bought for 50 million 8 years ago, you now need 150 million to buy it.
Keep that in mind, Steve, because it is very important. Every time the government prints money, we do not gain additional value in anything. The money is freed up by the devaluing of monetary assets like your 401 K, IRAs, stock portfolios, etc. Since monetary assets are a set sum of money, and do not hold value, but rather a dollar amount, when the dollar is loses value by half, a monetary asset is likewise deflated by half (you have the samesum of dollars, but those dolalrs are worth less). The net value taken from those assets is then assigned to that money the government printed.
THink of it this way. YOu have an apple. The government needs more apples, so they change the definition of "one apple" to be any portion of one whole apple. They come around, cut a quarter off of every apple you have, and say, you still have that one apple, even though one apple is now only 3/4s of an apple. THey take the quarter and use it as they see fit, but you still have your apple, so everything is cool.
Don't let them blind you tot he fact that inflation caused by their wanton, unrestrained spending adds a huge "tax" to your savings and portfolio. The 100K that a person has in their 401 K becomes worth less and less every day
Post a Comment