Lets Squash The "Two Wars On A CC"

I started thinking about this and after finding someone else mention it in another thread, I felt it needs more attention. If there is a better thread on this topic, or if this would be better suited in a different location feel free to help me out.

The fact that these leaders even have the notion to keep referring back to something in the past is telling of their true ability to lead a nation "forward". Its ok to refer to the past for the cause of current issues but lets take a step back at the bigger picture here.

I have heard Obama and Biden use the "two wars on a credit card" statement. Probably used elsewhere too.

So quite simply: what about WW1, WW2, Nagasaki/Hiroshima, Korean War, Vietnam. I cannot say Democrats are solely responsible for starting these but if you want to get technical the majority of this stuff was under their watch.

Why do they have to go back and change the social welfare programs they created medicare, medicaid, SS..they almost make it seem as they are republican created programs they were getting elected and paid to create those programs that are failing today... and once again they are getting elected and paid to fix and replace parts of programs they were already paid to create.

but yeah my main point of this thread was about the wars on credit. I am pretty certain we probably didn't pay for ww2 or Vietnam yet either.

I don't wish to unjustify what our military personnel sacrificed then and now.

Squashed due to the fact that the US hasn't declared a war since June 5, 1942.

reply to post by Mailman


Good luck pickin up that turd by the clean end

I would like to add that credit, in most cases means taking value and tangible assets against the item or "war" in this case, in many cases the interest on the money is what is up for debate. Who gets the interest payments on the debt? For example, who is getting the interest payments on the long and short term bonds which were sold to pay for the war?

In most cases recently if the money is printed out of thin air, the tangible asset used as collateral is the value of labor. This lowers the value of the money, thus lowering the value of a man or woman's work. The value stolen is the interest paid and the citizens pay this through a hidden inflation tax. This inflation tax is currently at 95% of labor. Meaning your labor has been devalued by 95% since 1913. This is the interest paid to finance war.

Furthermore, whoever bought treasury bonds gets a yield from this bond.

My explanation is simplified, and the statement "2wars on a credit card" is an even simpler explanation. Absolutely true though. The only thing that is really up for debate is who is responsible for making these decisions.

It's not liKe money was taken out of a savings account to write a check. And republican or democrat doesn't matter, until people wake up enough to realize that your quality of life is what is being used as a credit card nothing will change. I don't know about you guys, but I would gladly lower my quality of life to see that the whole world is fed, housed, and has access to affordable care. Not so sure if sacrificing the quality of life for our children and grand children in order to fight baseless war is something I can support

reply to post by Mailman

So quite simply: what about WW1, WW2, Nagasaki/Hiroshima, Korean War, Vietnam. I cannot say Democrats are solely responsible for starting these but if you want to get technical the majority of this stuff was under their watch.

WW 1 & 2 America was attacked that's why we went into those wars. During Korea we went in with the UN and Vietnam started under Eisenhower a Republican and Johnson escalated it that's why people blame the Democrats for it. What's the difference between a war started by Democrats and Republicans? Democrats fight the war and get the job done Republicans just let the war keep going on. Just look at how the Republicans whine when Obama talks about ending the wars we are in now.

Originally posted by no time
I would like to add that credit, in most cases means taking value and tangible assets against the item or "war" in this case, in many cases the interest on the money is what is up for debate. Who gets the interest payments on the debt? For example, who is getting the interest payments on the long and short term bonds which were sold to pay for the war?

In most cases recently if the money is printed out of thin air, the tangible asset used as collateral is the value of labor. This lowers the value of the money, thus lowering the value of a man or woman's work. The value stolen is the interest paid and the citizens pay this through a hidden inflation tax. This inflation tax is currently at 95% of labor. Meaning your labor has been devalued by 95% since 1913. This is the interest paid to finance war.

Furthermore, whoever bought treasury bonds gets a yield from this bond.

My explanation is simplified, and the statement "2wars on a credit card" is an even simpler explanation. Absolutely true though. The only thing that is really up for debate is who is responsible for making these decisions.

It's not liKe money was taken out of a savings account to write a check. And republican or democrat doesn't matter, until people wake up enough to realize that your quality of life is what is being used as a credit card nothing will change. I don't know about you guys, but I would gladly lower my quality of life to see that the whole world is fed, housed, and has access to affordable care. Not so sure if sacrificing the quality of life for our children and grand children in order to fight baseless war is something I can support

edit on 13-10-2012 by no time because: added stuff

What!! Our taxes used for the betterment of mankind instead of senseless slaughter? What are you some kind of Socialist? Logic and reasoning is frowned upon at this day and age.

When we declare war on another country it usually means the civilian majority believes the war is just and are willing to take on the financial consequences of the war.


When war is fought only with the perception of public approval and without congressional approval. Then pretty much the players don't really care of they have approval. So long as the perception of approval is spread through the media, many won't take the time to investigate for t themselves. And even if they did there would be just enough disinformation out there to keep anyone wondering.

reply to post by Mailman


You've forgotten Gerald Ford's Earned income credit. Not to mention that it was expanded by Reagan in 1986 increased by George Bush the first in 1991, and increased by George Bush the 2nd in 2001.

And regarding social security

Nevertheless, on Aug. 8, 1935, the conference report — the final version of the bill that melds together changes made in the House and in the Senate — passed in the House 372-33, with 81 Republicans voting in support. The next day, the bill was passed in the Senate 77-6, with 16 Republicans supporting the legislation. So Social Security did pass with Republican support.

and medicare

Thirty years later, a significant number of Republicans voted in favor of the Medicare bill. The House adopted the conference report on July 27, 1965, 307-116, with 70 Republicans supporting it. And on July 28, the Senate adopted the final version of the bill by a vote of 70-24, with 13 Republicans in favor of the bill. President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Medicare bill into law on July 30, 1965.

www.politif... act.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/aug/28/howard-dean/dean-claims-social-security-and-medicare-were-pass/

reply to post by no time

William Gibbs McAdoo and Woodrow Wilson headed the aggressive WW1 bond drives.

" I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot."

"We have never begun to tax the people in this country the way they should be..... I don't pay what I should. People in my class don't. People who have it should pay."

Sound familiar? Henry Morgenthau Jr. Secretary of the Treasury under F.D.R. The orchestrator of the war bond propaganda. The "New Deal" .Glass-Steagall. Clinton signed into effect the Gramm Leach Biley Act in 1999, more of the same old we wrote and passed it fifty years ago..now we have to fix it again.

Go ahead and believe in creating more dependancy, you will never get anywhere.