>There aren't many parking spots for money right now. USA may still be best game in town.
Gold? That is where everyone goes when the proverbial shit hits the fan?

>USA Schulden immer noch einer der besten Orte, um Geld zu bringen. Es gibt nicht viele Parkplätze für Geld jetzt. USA können immer noch am besten Spiel in der Stadt<

this thinking is driving the crisis - stop the money printing

@Dazza
:-)
Something like it.
But more difficult.
US and other developed countries very much like to run hyperinflation and burn the debt.
Problem is what it is very hard to control and with most production moved out of the country consequences are hard to predict.

@alcomposer

Right no almost no one want to give USA money.
Largest buyers are UK, Offshores and Fed (read - US money).
China is buying but not much and pretty inconsistently.
Japan had been also forced to not sell after long negotiations (most probably they can't say no, as otherwise their own debt could become focus of mass media in a moment).
Russia is pulling slowly our of the USA debt (as far as I remember about 18 billions sold in recent months).

@Mr.Anthony
Re: the Supreme Court saying that a business can be treated as a person. That's nothing new; legally, incorporation has always meant the business could be treated as a person >>>>>>
Nah, corporations=people is an invention of the courts, and even as the courts have defined it, it has limitations. Bottom line: Big Business has been given all the keys to pure ownership of the government. They're the only ones with resources to fund major elections, so they get to pick the winners and losers. Generally I think it's BS, corporations and people are different despite what various crooked and stupid judges have written over the years.

@brianluce I hope my previous comments have not been misunderstood. I am not in any way accusing the poor of being the problem. Our government's methods for dealing with the poor, however, are one part of the larger problem. On the whole, they've branched out all sorts of systems for solving all sorts of problems . . . problems that are not the government's responsibility (IMO, and often in the words of the Constitution). They've stuck their dirty hands into all sorts of stuff they've no right to, and none of them has the guts to pull out of stuff.

The implication in some of these comments is that poor people somehow have this lavish cushy lifestyle on the dole while everyone else works and supports them, when in fact welfare provides for a paltry lifestyle that borders on destitution. And the free medical care? I've worked in the medical service industry, most dogs get better medical care than LA county medical services provide.

@brianluce
I don't think anything of such matter :-)
But all I ask is to look deeper.
And deeper you'll see problems much worse than mentioned.

@ Vitaliy
I don't know what that chart shows, but if you think America doesn't have long term social problems with regards to a burgeoning underclass, then I'll say you've never been to America. Wage stagnation, unemployment, these are statistical trends headed in the wrong direction.
@Mr. Anthony
I'm not saying you said defund schoosl. Where did I say you said that?
I agree, the social safety net needs reform. For example, I think food stamps should only be used for basic staples like meat, rice, potatoes, milk etc. Not for Doritos and 7up to create another generation of obese diabetics. My main point is these people that rely on government aid have crummy, impoverished lives, and aren't driving around in BMW's with 14 illegitimate kids in the back seat eating CrackerJacks. And building more prisons isn't the answer either.

@brianluce: Where exactly did I suggest defunding schools? If you could point it out to me, that would be great; otherwise, do not create strawman targets for you to knock down.

Also, where did I suggest that food stamps and public housing were the American dream? Oh wait, I didn't, you did. Again, do not create strawman targets and knock them down.

What I will say explicitly is that I believe we are creating a culture of dependency, where individual responsibility is replaced in many key areas by government intervention and collectivism, where money is used as a narcotic to keep people from moving onward and upward. Literally, it's possible in some states to not work for almost two years due to unemployment benefits. And I've seen people not seriously start their search for work until 3 weeks before the benefits run out, and I doubt that's unusual.

Ever see generational poverty, from people getting government handouts? I have in Louisiana and Mississippi, as two examples that come immediately to my mind.

I'm not saying we should eliminate all social programs; far from it. But the money has to be delivered more efficiently and to the right people, cutting down on fraud. Incentives need to be built in to get people off public money, because shame and embarassment at not being able to take care of yourself isn't doing it anymore. Walk through any large American city and you will find plenty of people who take their government money (e.g. taxpayer money) to buy alcohol, drugs, cigarettes, and prostitutes, while refusing services to house them, get them off drugs, or make them anything other than a man or woman pushing a shopping cart. Most of those people need serious psychological help, but all they want is the cash.

As for food stamps, I can't even begin to tell you how that program is abused and food stamps are a joke. Thanks to our current president, we now have 44 million people on food stamps. He's ended means testing, so anyone who claims no monthly income can get food stamps and sell their benefit cards. Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304657804576401412033504294.html

Is fraud a good use of taxpayer money? Food stamps are a good idea and necessary; fraud is not.

Re: the Supreme Court saying that a business can be treated as a person. That's nothing new; legally, incorporation has always meant the business could be treated as a person or individual--think lawsuits, for example. The Supreme Court decision was purely a First Amendment decision: should a person have his/her/its free speech rights limited simply because it is a business? I read the decision and the legal reasoning is sound. Why did I read it? Because I had concerns about the implications, but realized after reading the decision what the case was really about.

Your insinuation that I don't care (Let them eat cake) is insulting and you should apologize. Your veiled suggestion that I want to machine gun people is so disgusting that I think it gives more insight into your thought processes than I ever want to know. If you are incapable of reasoned discourse, just say so.

Finally, when it comes to prisons, I agree that putting people in prison is a bad solution that isn't cost effective for some non-violent offenders. From my experiences with jails and prisons, the largest cause of crime are drug-related offenses. And drugs are creating a whole underclass that, thanks to the brain damage caused by these drugs, will likely permanently require taxpayer support. Until we get addiction under control in the U.S., all the attendant problems--thefts/burglaries/assaults/murders/cycle of poverty/costs of prisons and jails--are going to continue to exist. We need creative and effective solutions for non-violent drug offenders.

@sam_stickland

Exactly. Thanks for the links.

@vitaliy
What I mean by "cycle" is that people born to impoverishment and limited education tend to have kids who follow the same pattern. A college education, assuming you can meet the requirements, is about $200,000. There are exceptional people that break the cycle, but more often than not, the cycle spirals outward -- and nowadays tends to suck down people who'd previously lived at middle class levels. It's a big problem and turning a blind eye or building prisons isn't an efficient way to attack it.
This is the common sense behind some of what President Obama wants to do. Are his policies the right ones? I don't know, but these are public policy issues, and we elect our leaders to solve them.