US Economic Collapse?

Well... you see, what happened was...

We had this issue with large companies going bankrupt, and instead of letting them do so and allowing new and more virile/productive companies to replace them, politicians used our money to float them. So instead of these companies dying, the system was unable to purge the rot and their debts became the debts of the American people.


This is in addition to the already insurmountable debt that we as a nation already had.

Blame your government for sleeping with big business. They've cost you your financial future.

One thing I really believe is going to happen very soon is the formation of, not only the North American Union but more "continental unions" all over the world, following suit of the EU.... its already begun (not counting the EU) with the Union of South America, and the African Union...

I really dont want these to happen, but its probably inevitable, and it will be the only way of the countries of the world, including ours, of actually surviving...

i want to move to sweden =(

They have lots of hot mens :3

sweden also has notch =3

Why Sweden >.>

It's always pass the blame tho...
"My side is right, your side is wrong" "The way we spend money is justifiable, the way you spend money is not"
When the truth is it's all wrong.

Billions of dollars spent on military operations in foreign countries, billions of dollars in "aid" given to foreign countries.
The refusal to drill our own oil, thus requiring us to rely on foreign imports.
The combination of unfair tax code, greedy unions, and free trade agreements, that cause greedy corporations to outsource jobs to foreign countries, killing industry in this country.
Billions of dollars spent on the ever growing number of entitlement programs.
The insane thought that everyone is entitled to OWN a house/land and the programs and institutions that guaranteed mortgages to people that could not afford to pay them, thus causing the "housing crisis" and failure of financial institutions and the need to pump billions of dollars into them to hold off another great depression. (at least for now)

These are just a small number of the problems.
It comes down to it being unsustainable.
We cannot continue to spend money we don't have, money that doesn't even exist.
It just doesn't work. It doesn't work for the "everyday joe" it sure as hell can't work for something as bloated the size of the US govt.
Until people realize that ALL this spending is unsustainable, not just the spending you don't agree with, then the problem will never be solved.

inb4Phyrexius

lol if I didn't know better, I would think so.
There are plenty who do believe in the numerous conspiracy theories.
But I do know there are good intentions behind all of these things and justifiable reasons for all of them.
That doesn't change the fact that they are unsustainable tho.
That's what those in power for the last 100 years or so seem to fail to realize.

I know everyone says every generation thinks theirs will be the last and such.. But it seems to me the entire world is going to hell, and pretty quickly too.. I try to tell myself that civilization has endured much tougher times, and if they hadn't we wouldn't be here... But I just can't ever shake the thought that I'm actually bearing witness to humanity's fall.

Hell at the rate we're using it, oil production alone could start collapsing within my life time easily.. The estimates of when we'll start feeling the squeeze of lower oil production, when it will become a major, worldwide problem, range from 20 to 100 years.. Unless we find new reserves or more efficient methods of getting to it, 100 years is the absolute max we have.

The problem with that is... No major country is going to go "no more oil? well okay then, it was fun while it lasted" in the state they're in now. Oil is vital to a nation's survival, we depend on it more than any other one thing I'd say. When it starts disappearing, you can bet your *** there will be wars over it. Maybe not at first, but eventually there will be.

I'm not a tree humper, but everyone should be able to look around and see that we need to find a more sustainable source of power to keep our countries running, and we need to do it soon, or we're going to be totally ***.

Yep Slip you are right.
Those in other countries of the world that think they are immune to the problems the US faces, are ignorant. A collapse of the US would rattle the entire world. That's not just arrogant thinking, it's the truth.
Not only that, the majority of developed countries have excessive spending problems of their own and are facing similar issues or will be soon.

As for the oil, most countries have already hit their peak oil and have seen a decline in production.
I would say 100 years is a very generous estimate and would be more inclined to lean toward 20 or less before it is a very major issue.

Oil is very vital to our existence and there is no way we can wean ourselves from it any time soon.
Wind and solar power are options, but very expensive compared to the energy they produce. Biofuels are even worse.
Nuclear is a viable option, very clean (bar the waste), long lasting, and produces large amounts of energy, but there is so much paranoia surrounding it.

No matter what tho, energy is a big concern for the world, and yes we must start thinking more of what we will do about it.

I watched it for at least an hour, and as soon as I saw the "Subscribe now for only $20.00" I clicked out.

Obvious scam is obvious.

That and the fact that his presentation on what happened in Britain is incredibly skewed and mostly wrong.

These are some excellent points, Arawn. It's a very hard decision to make, for those in power to steer American foreign policy.
On one hand, providing foreign aid to countries helps to promote a benevolent image, especially when it comes to feeding the hungry with food that would otherwise spoil in a government warehouse somewhere. Humanitarian efforts also go a long way to promoting good will, like after the earthquake in Haiti, or the tsunami in southeast Asia. In addition, some foreign aid money is devoted to the dissemination of inexpensive prevention of preventable fatal diseases (malaria, HIV). Unfortunately for us, we've also provided "aid" to some in the form of weaponry. While that may earn us some short-term political leverage in volatile parts of the globe ... over time I'm afraid it works against us, when the same weapons eventually fall into the hands of our enemies.

So, if we yank back all this foreign aid, and return to an isolationist policy, the ramifications are largely unpredictable. Obviously, it would be a huge step towards a more balanced federal annual budget. That *might* ease tensions between Democrats and Republicans in Congress, *possibly* resulting in more progressive and efficient lawmaking, but I have my doubts. While Americans, who have felt the weight of domestic economic dismay in recent years, would likely applaud the government for refocusing its efforts on domestic agendas, without the distraction and resource allocation needed for our current foreign affairs ... unfortunately the rest of world would likely have a very negative reaction. We'd be viewed as selfish elitists, since even the Americans below the "poverty line" right now are more wealthy than 95% of people in the world.

Another potentially unseen ramification would be loss of jobs (yes, more loss of jobs). One reason the agriculture industry has not suffered during the current Recession is because it doesn't ever have to slow production, no matter how difficult it is for Americans to pay their bills ... regardless, SOMEONE in the world is hungry and can therefore benefit from limitless food production in the USA. If we stop sending foreign aid, the USA's agricultural industry would slow, substantially. Although a lot of agriculture is mechanized now, there are still hundreds of thousands of people employed in agriculture, and their jobs would be in jeopardy, and we could have fertile farmlands lying dormant.

Lastly, if we shut off Asia, Africa, and Europe, Americans would have to GREATLY increase their tolerance for Mexicans, and for Latin America in general. Leaving the Middle East to its own vices would probably reduce or even eliminate Islamic extremists' acute contempt and violence towards America (obviously a good thing), but it's likely that oil reserves in the Middle East that we currently rely on would likely fall into unfriendly hands. While converting America to clean energy is the ultimate and preferred solution, we all know it won't be that simple. In the meantime, we would HAVE to maintain VERY friendly relations with nearby nations, like Venezuela, in order to ensure adequate oil supply. Furthermore, it's possible that China and other Asian countries that supply US manufacturers with inexpensive manual labor, would "retaliate" against an isolationist American policy with trade embargoes or export tariffs. Such an action would require American manufacturers to exploit a new inexpensive source of labor (Mexico), or they'd be forced to raise retail prices for their goods domestically (to offset the overhead costs of employing more Americans who are subject to US federal and state minimum wage laws, etc.).

So, while it seems like a clear-cut choice to cut all USA foreign aid at this juncture in time ... it's never as simple as that.
Ultimately, I am still in favor of returning to an isolationist foreign policy, if only for a short time in order to get our "house in order" and shift resources to solving pressing domestic issues more expeditiously, rather than diluting our resources putting out fires across the globe. Still, I think it's important for Americans to realize that there's a price to pay for any action America makes on the world stage ... even an action that seems to make perfectly good sense "at home".

Also, Spicyryan, we absolutely can fight terrorism. The weapons aren't missiles and tanks though. War in the modern era is fought with information/intelligence and covert ops. Don't you watch "24"?

are you talking about the state of paranoia terrorism has put people in mayhap?

We found it a long time ago, it's called nuclear.

The uneducated masses are just too afraid of it.

I think 24 is actually a good example for what Elanabelle was saying. 24 demonstrates in many realistic ways just how much intel on an issue changes everything.

I wasn't just referring to power plants.. What's to power our transportation? Sure your lights will stay on, but when the trains and trucks that carry freight across the world no longer have fuel to deliver your toilet paper, food, tools, medical supplies, etc, what good are lights? Do you seriously want to be driving around with the people you see driving everyday, all being powered by nuclear reactors?

Just for the record, electric cars aren't an answer either, they rely on resources not really any more abundant than fossil fuels. We need something sustainable. That's the big problem. So far our best choice is fuel we can make ourselves at rates greater than we'd use it, as it stands, the only thing we could really do that with is bio-fuel, but that has it's own problems and set backs.

The slow implosion of the US economy is almost at full circle. Soon, the enlarged masses will be fed up with high gas prices, high food prices, blazing summer temperatures, wars all over the world, and nothing else to watch on tv except re-runs of American Idol. Eventually, they will turn on each other and their political leaders as they rampage through the streets like a flock of bumbling, punch drunk gorillas, destroying everything and black people in their path as they make their way to the white house.

the president will pay for being the first black president.

I want to move to Canada. /comfort.

Best way to fight terrorism to to stop being scared. We're all gonna die anyway, live well till it happens.

Hydrogen Fuel Cells.

You totally should.

one-way trip to Brazil {Can I have it?}

Nuclear power ftw.

While that is true for power to buildings, he was asking for an alternative for vehicles.