USA Default Problem and Game Industry?
polycounter lvl 14
Hey,
I am kind of scared about this USA Default thing. I am sorry if this is way off topic from games or art , but what will or would happen if the USA goes into default? or do you think we won't? and what would happen to the game industry if this were to happen?
I am kind of scared about this USA Default thing. I am sorry if this is way off topic from games or art , but what will or would happen if the USA goes into default? or do you think we won't? and what would happen to the game industry if this were to happen?
Replies
On the whole washington fiasco... it's just a big show. Just like last time, it'll come down to last minute and they'll remarkably agree on something. Washington is a sad story.
Basically this. We're in no danger, it's all political stunts to try to scare the populace to agree to stuff on a whim.... like with the patriot act after 9/11.
The patriot act is a criminal act by our government... but I won't get into that here.
In what way is the Patriot Act a 'criminal act'? Please don't tell me it violates the 4th Amendment, there are plenty of exceptions to the Bill of Rights...
On Topic: there won't be a default. If Congress can't pass a law to raise the debt ceiling, the President will issue an executive order to do it via the 14th Amendment. Congress will bitch about it, but no one will challenge it in the USSC until there actually is a law in place, as the penalty for failure to pay America's debt is too high.
In other words, business as usual.
Old people would shit bricks.... you don't FUCK with old people and their social security.
How much shit hits the fan once this happens, can be seen in Greece at the moment.
edit: Virtuosic, pretty much - but then again, that's not how the game is played. The republicans would fire a massive campaign against Obama within hours and everyone be throwing mud at each other is not solving the issue either.
He already did that. In response, Republicans accused Obama of a) using scare tactics to frighten the electorate and b) not having the foresight to plan for this emergency in a way that avoids cutting SS/Medicare.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903554904576458294273264416.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Regardless of that issue though, the game industry seems to do quite well in recessions.
However, unfortunately, he won't really be able to pull that until it reaches a "state of emergency" and by then the damage may already be done.
People don't like to be told they're doing something wrong, so they look for outside reassurances on everything. They want people to tell them that if they're afraid of muslims or homosexuals, if they drive a gas guzzling car, if they're constantly stuffing themselves full of horrible food, if they don't want to pay higher taxes or buy healthcare for the good of the nation, that it's okay. Unfortunately disarming these ideas usually means warping the information they have to suit their point of view, so they tell themselves islam is a violent religion, homosexuals have some agenda, global warming doesn't exist, they shouldn't have to lose weight, and that Obama is going to kill seniors.
It will never get to that, as everyone's already stated this is a puppet show. Default is universally bad for everyone.
but heaven forbid anyone try to take away your 2nd amendment...
Agreed. As an outsider living in the US, the past 4 years or so has shown me some of the worst political pandering and clearly bough & paid for bullshit Ive ever experienced in my life. It happens everywhere but my goodness. And far too many people get so wrapped up in their 'party' allegiance they'll agree to pretty much anything the political-media machine will spit out! /groan.
As mentioned though, recessions are never as bad for industries that make their money through entertainment as they are for most.
I like how cutting back on social security and all that jazz takes precedent over any talk of reeling in the out of control military spending.
I think we should do what ancient Rome did though, and clean house. Of course, instead of killing everyone involved with the corrupt government they should just be fired.
Oh, and media does well in recessions/depressions. During the great depression everyone watched movies to escape their problems, what makes a game any different?
Thats what prune juice is for.
infact, the worse the US dollar does, the more people will be buying gold (its happening right now), which in turn will keep it skyrocketing upwards as the world economy is in a huge mess. Chances are when the dust settles, people who had their money in gold will come out ahead, as even if it drops a bit, they will be in a much better position than if their life savings was sitting in a bank account that just suddenly became worth 20x less than it is now.
Some are speculating this is the backdoor US needs to manage it's debt currently, is cheese. I'm not kidding, if you look up the numbers, it's way to fishy to be simply another case of 'China is opening up to World Food Consumption'.
I'm sure they'll be able to pay that 15 trillion back sometime soon..... Technically, it doesn't even matter if the US defaults. In the eyes of every other country in the world, the US has noooooooo way to pay back it's debts. The only reason other countries continue lending to them is because they already have such a significant investment in them (China), that the prospect of pulling everything out and allowing them to fail isn't a sound business decision. Most countries still lending to the US have switched to short term loans instead of long-term, so that they don't have to keep their money invested any longer than they have to. Part of the reason the US is able to be such an assclown with it's debt is because they're the world reserve currency, which means that other countries need to convert their dollars to US dollars to dabble in matters of international trade (oil, commodities etc). As soon as they aren't the world reserve currency anymore, they're capoootz. Not to mention the fact that because their industrial base (their one way of reducing their debt) lies in china and not domestically doesn't help their debt situation at all....
It completely has everything to do with world currency. Try taking into account how closely knit the entire global economy is. If the US defaults, economic unrest in 1/2 the world is likely to ensue for at least a little while. This will cause the price of gold to increase.
Fuck this shit.
Its amazing we can spend more than the rest of the world and still have decent living conditions and welfare, eh? :P
it isnt like the soldiers get paid well or have good care after they provided the service. the real cost of war are the weapons, tanks, fighter planes and all the war machines etc.
it is easy to live well when you steal stuff from other countries and get away with it.
http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/
edit: realized you probably aren't in america... derp
amazing!
yea, as long as you personally don't get drafted and ordered to shoot and kill anyone the gov doesn't like no matter what the reason may be. as long as you are ok with that.
I usually base it off of the 2009 and 2010 budget pie :S 20%-63% is a big difference, its either extremely biased or something is wrong
20% is just about 1/4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget
Oh, and can you please link me to the article about us taking oil from Iraq? I have only heard rumors about that and never any actual articles. I dont like the wars but I wont shoot anything I can't back up. The only article I saw was the US found an oil reserve and gave it all to Iraq to help rebuild, but it was only worth $2B iirc
let Bill explain all the way from the early 90's
[ame]
i am sure there are enough info out there to back that up but since it is the internet there are also lot of made up conspiracy stuff.
either way, just follow the money and connect the dots and use some common sense and you should be able to get the whole picture.
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=iraq+war+over+oil&aq=f&aqi=g1g-m1&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=aeb16183bfd07c66&biw=1920&bih=1007
if you come from a military family it is not surprising that you would get biased information since the people you are getting information from are probably also in the dark themselves.
anyways, here is an image that should give you a clear picture.
also look up US income disparity. lot of the dept could be helped if the top 2% tax payers would pay more tax.
So far the war on terror has cost 4.1 trillion over 9-10 years and that isn't counting the interest on the debt or the cost of caring for the 33,000+ wounded not to mention all the veterans, free healthcare for life... humm that's not going to ding us at all... It's good enough for the gov but not for the citizens.
Your pie also doesn't reflect the supplemental war spending measures (24 million here, 37 million there) that keeps flying through congress and magically get 1-2% more than what was requested.
Your pie chart also doesn't cover hush money (err I mean financial aid, economic assistance and military reimbursements) paid to governments all over the globe as a direct cause and effect of the war.
None of this covers the cost to those effected by the wars, the cost in human lives include a lot of civilians not to mention the wars have trashed more than just the US economy.
Now if you ask me 4.1 Trillion over 10 years on the war on terror VS 200 billion over 30 years on a program like the shuttle, it seems like we got a hell of a lot more out of the 200 billion. Just think of what NASA could do with 4.1 trillion...
We would have no problem having a universal healthcare system, funding medicare, medicaid and Social Security if we hadn't slashed revenue (tax cuts to the wealthy, bailed out Wall St, kicked off two wars, started prescription drug programs that where never properly funded. and spent 10 years borrowing an ass-load of money to fund programs.
Perhaps you weren't taught this in civics class, no offense, but the US Constitution is called "the supreme law of the land" for a reason. It is supposed to be above all other laws and cannot be overruled. It was crafted to protect the people from their government. That's why the supreme court can strike down laws as unconstitutional. It supposed to be held above all other laws. The Patriot Act does violate the 4th amendment and the only allowable exceptions are to be accompanied by a warrant issued by a judge under probable cause noting and describing locations to be searched and items to be seized. It was set up this way so that people wouldn't have the government poking their noses into our lives and disrupting our liberty to lawfully move about in public.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." - The 4th amendment
Probable cause must be established before a warrant to search, surveil, or seize may be granted. The exception would be plain sight, open field, or suspicion of present unlawful behavior (e.g. armed people surrounding an unarmed person). The wording makes it quite plain that the Patriot Act is nothing but a complete disregard for due process and gives government the ability to illegally breech your liberty without a warrant.
This is what I expected, the 4th Amendment argument. As I've already said, there are plenty of exceptions to the Bill of Rights.
The 1st Amendment ensures the right to free speech. That doesn't mean you can yell 'fire' in a crowded theater. It's been legally defended many times that your right to free speech is trumped by the interest of public safety.
The 2nd Amendment ensures the right to bear arms. That doesn't mean you can carry a loaded .50 caliber machine
gun down the street. Again, there's plenty of legal precedent that says your right to bear arms is, again, trumped by the interest of public safety.
The 4th Amendment prohibits "unreasonable" search and seizure. Title II of the Patriot Act is law enacted by Congress to define certain forms of search as reasonable, due to - you guessed it - the interest of public safety. In the ten years of the Patriot Act's existence, only one element has been overturned as unConstitutional - the 'sneak and peek' delayed warrant provision, which was struct down by a US District Court four years ago. The roving wiretaps and the like remain in force, and have never been challenged before the Supreme Court. They're legal provisions that define special circumstances that mitigate an Amendment, just like causing a panic and wielding a machine gun. Rather than a criminal act, those provisions are the very definition of legal unless and until a Federal court rules otherwise.
The specifics of which provisions of the Patriot Act have survived legal challenged and those which have expired via sunset provision or oveturned on Constitutional grounds can be found on Wikipedia - no civics class required.
Wat
Well, if that's the case, then we can ignore the entirety of the bill of rights if we just say it's for public safety. It's an excuse to ignore the liberty of Americans for a false sense of "safety". Unless, you consider wiretapping for any reason whatsoever as "reasonable". How does the power to wiretap without a warrant even begin to be justified by a mandate for safety? If fighting terrorism is your reason, you might as well just throw out the 4th amendment because terrorism will always be out there so long as there are reasons to dissent. Add to that, the bar for "terrorist" is pretty low these days. The Patriot Act is a law that shouldn't exist. It doesn't improve the safety of the public and gives the government too much freedom to ignore people's privacy rights.
I'd much rather the government was impeded in the effort to protect my "safety" if it meant that I retained my right to not have them invade my privacy looking for the boogieman. It's as pointless as the war on drugs and, like the war on drugs, only persists because people are profiting from it.
Nevertheless, the underlying reason we have the 4th amendment is so the law can't search and seize without a damn good reason to do so, not just because they're looking for terrorists that may or may not exist, clear and provable reason. The only reason this Patriot Act hasn't been thoroughly challenged is because people are too full of fear from the big bad terrorists to do without it.
I'm not giving my opinion on the Patriot Act, I'm explaining why it's enforcement isn't a criminal act. I don't really see how there is any debate - Congress passes a law, the President signs it, and that's how things remain pending a successful challenge in court. I understand that you take objection to the act, but that's not really my point.
As for the United States Code's modifying effects on the Bill of Rights, the alternative to Congressional limitation is allowing people to make death threats (free speech!) and carry bazookas (bear arms!) with absolutely no legal restriction. I can't imagine you want that, but that's what you'd get if Congress didn't pass laws that specify the limits of personal freedom.
The exceptions to constitutional rights (yelling fire, carrying a mini gun)are very specifically outlined as to what qualifies as an exception and narrow in scope. The Patriot Act is rather vague and leaves a wide swath of possibilities for the law to abuse. The only reasonable instance where a warrant is not required is when an officer witnesses a crime in action (i.e. plain view or open fields). Anything that involves mere suspicion should be held to the standard of due process. Now the Patriot Act doesn't say probable cause or, even less, plain view evidence of terrorist activity, it says suspicion of terrorist activity. That's a pretty low bar for reasonable search and seizure. You don't get to breach my privacy because you have a gut feeling that I'm a terrorist. They should be getting warrants.
It's unconstitutional because it's too broad and offers too much opportunity for the police to completely bypass due process where it should have obtained a warrant. Why should I sacrifice my liberty to make their job easier? Their job is to protect the public safety within the confines of the law, not change them when it isn't convenient.
the patriot act might be a good thing or a bad thing depending on what context it is used but the bigger problem is the precedence it sets for future laws and law abuse by gov.
it is too vague and leaves too much room for subjective interpretation and probable abuse on behalf of the law officer who executes the law.
If a federal judge shoots down the Patriot Act on Constitutional grounds, then it's a fact. Until that happens, it's an opinion. I'm sure you see the difference.
there is a difference between facts and logical reasoning. anything could be a fact whether it is right or wrong. a cop not getting jail time because he beat up a black guy is a fact but doesnt mean it is right or logical.
Hasn't that happened in certain cases already?
Edit: I guess this is what I was thinking of:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/washington/27patriot.html?ref=us
That's warped logic. A fact is a fact no matter the circumstances. A SCOTUS judgment doesn't turn an opinion into fact, it was always fact to begin with or it never was. It's also foolish to hold your tongue on something you know is wrong with the law until somebody high up challenges it. These are our laws and we have the right to call them unconstitutional if they are. Saying only a judge can make it a fact, rather than my opinion is just silly.
Scenario:
Someone challenges the Patriot Act on Constitutional grounds. The case is brought to the US Supreme Court. The Supreme Court rules 9-0 unanimously that the Patriot Act is legal and valid under the Constitution.
After their ruling, is the Patriot Act unconstitutional or not?
I don't care if it's logical or right. Again, I'm offering no opinion on the virtue of the Patriot Act. I'm saying that its enforcement is not a criminal act. Slavery in the first 70 years of the United States wasn't right, but that didn't make it criminal.