If IT spending plummets, blame your politicians

By | August 9, 2011, 4:23am PDT

Summary: It didn’t have to be this way. If our politicians had put America first, put our economic recovery first, we wouldn’t have scared our creditors.

Imagine, if you will, a modern American family looking for a loan. Perhaps it’s a home loan, perhaps it’s a car loan. The details don’t matter. What matters is how they behave.

Let’s say this family has excellent credit, but in full earshot of the lender from whom they’re applying for the new loan, they have a violent, loud, highly disruptive debate about whether they’re going to pay their bills.

The husband argues that they should always pay their bills, no matter what, but the wife argues that since they spent more than they should, they should just stop paying bills until they learn to stop their profligate spending.

You can imagine how the lender would feel. Where, before this argument, he might have felt perfectly comfortable lending more money to the couple, now that he’s been hearing their views about debt, spending, and even whether they’re willing to pay their bills, his confidence in them would undoubtedly go down.

He might still be willing to lend them money, but because he can no longer trust them as much, he’s likely to charge more for the money he loans.

In effect, because of their bad behavior, he’s been forced to downgrade their credit rating.

Sound familiar?

This is the problem America currently faces. While there are many arguments about whether Standard & Poors used fully best practices in reducing their rating of America’s credit-worthiness, the indisputable fact is this: America’s politicians behaved badly.

Now, none of us expects actual adult behavior from our politicians. We’d like them to behave with some level of maturity, but we’ve known this breed of creature for far to long to be able to expect real maturity. When it’s a matter of public discussion that members of opposing parties in Congress were willing to actually sit together, you know maturity has left the building.

Our recent debt ceiling debate was an embarrassment.

Look, there’s good reason to debate the issues. Even if the Republicans hold hard and fast to one world view and the Democrats hold hard and fast to another four or five world views, we’re spending a tremendous amount of money as a nation and we need — collectively — to decide what’s in our best long-term interest.

This column is not about which side is right. This column is about how we behaved in our debate about whether we were going to honor our debts. Every year since about 1917 — when America got it’s first public credit rating report card — we’ve had top-shelf credit.

Until 2009, we’d always lived under the debt ceiling, and we’ve always raised the debt ceiling as a matter of course. Now, personally, I don’t think we should be allowed to borrow beyond our means, but we’ve always scraped together enough to cover our obligations, and from a credit-worthiness perspective, that’s what’s important.

But not this time. This time, our politicians aired their dirty laundry in public. They made our creditors nervous. We’ve always had some disdain for the political class, but — until recently — we’ve always felt they could get along well enough to, at least, manage the nation’s important activities.

Not so much anymore.

Nowadays, we’re no longer confident that our politicians will put America first and political differences second. We’re now no longer sure that one party or the other won’t go for a scorched earth policy, simply for political points or the favor of their base constituency — even if that constituency doesn’t understand the subtle nuances of governance.

That’s why I titled this piece, “If IT spending plummets, blame your politicians.” ZDNet Editor-in-Chief Larry Dignan wrote yesterday, “I’ve lived through enough business technology cycles to know that companies instinctively pull back their capital spending amid uncertainty.”

I completely agree with his assessment. We are in a period of uncertainty. The thing is, it didn’t have to be this way. If our politicians had put America first, put our economic recovery first, we wouldn’t have scared our creditors.

Whether S&P is right or wrong in their credit rating, there’s no doubt that if you behave badly in public, if you argue whether or not you’re going to pay your bills, the people who you’re asking to lend you money will start to worry.

So, if we start to see a decline in IT spending due to uncertainty in the economy, we should blame our politicians.

See also:

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

David Gewirtz, Distinguished Lecturer at CBS Interactive, is an author, U.S. policy advisor, and computer scientist. He is featured in The History Channel special The President's Book of Secrets.

Disclosure

David Gewirtz

At various times during his adult life, David has voted for both Democrats and Republicans, and has been disappointed by both. He is deeply disturbed by how partisanship has come before patriotism in America, which gives him the freedom to pick on both sides.

David is a frequent guest on TV and radio stations across America and can usually be heard or seen on-the-air at least once a week. He writes weekly commentary and analysis for CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 and has been interviewed by Fox News, CNN, various ABC and NBC affiliates, and Canada’s Global TV. He has been a featured guest on National Public Radio and has also been featured on Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, and Radio Liberty where his commentaries on technology, industry, and emerging nations have been broadcast into 46 countries (all in their own unique translations).

David is the executive director of U.S. Strategic Perspective Institute, a nonprofit research and policy organization. He is the Cyberterrorism Advisor for the International Association for Counterterrorism & Security Professionals, a columnist for The Journal of Counterterrorism and Homeland Security and a special contributor to Frontline Security Magazine. He is a member of the FBI’s InfraGard program, the security partnership between the FBI and industry. David is also a member of the U.S. Naval Institute and the National Defense Industrial Association, the leading defense industry association promoting national security.

David is an advisory board member for the Technical Communications and Management Certificate program at the University of California, Berkeley extension. He is also a member of the instructional faculty at the University of California, Berkeley extension.

David’s “day job” is as publisher and editor-in-chief of ZATZ publishing, an online publisher of technical magazines. Other than than his ownership stake in Component Enterprises, Inc. (the parent company of ZATZ), David has no additional industry investments.

ZATZ has many advertisers who do, in part, provide for David’s lush income and extravagant lifestyle. Most of them are IBM and Lotus aftermarket suppliers, some of them make goodies for Microsoft Outlook, and a few make all sorts of strange mobile devices and add-on products. David has been a regular judge of the IBM Awards, but has no formal financial interest in or with IBM.

Because the ZATZ online magazines often review products, David and ZATZ are sent an overwhelming stream of unsolicited, silly, and often useless products to review. Because they’re such a pain to track and ship back, these products often wind up in a dumpster or fill up the corner of a large closet. Although David has no plans to review products in connection to his ZDNet blog, if he does do a product review, he will disclose any relationship completely in that posting.

Both through ZATZ and independently, David derives a small income through various advertising and sales relationships with Amazon.com and Google. These are minor relationships and they will not impede his willingness or ability to chastise either company should they deserve it.

David has many other business relationships, but none of them relate to anything he covers in his ZDNet blog. David does have a bit of the sales-guy bug and if he’s not doing a sales deal with someone at least once a month, he goes through withdrawal. He has a number of consulting clients, but none of them relate to anything he covers for ZDNet (and if they ever do, he will either disclose that fact, or decline to write about them).

Back in the 1980s, David held the unusual title of “Godfather” at Apple. He has written and published 40 incredibly simplistic applications for Apple’s iPhone.

Although David is forbidden to disclose the terms of his iPhone developer agreement, he isn’t drinking the Apple Kool Aid, will never be confused with a metrosexual, and feels free to mock Apple, and Apple users, any time the occasion permits, on alternate Tuesdays, or if he’s bored.

Biography

David Gewirtz

In addition to hosting the ZDNet Government and ZDNet DIY-IT blogs, CBS Interactive's Distinguished Lecturer David Gewirtz is an author, U.S. policy advisor, and computer scientist. He is featured in The History Channel special The President's Book of Secrets, is one of America's foremost cyber-security experts, and is a top expert on saving and creating jobs. He is also director of the U.S. Strategic Perspective Institute as well as the founder of ZATZ Publishing.

David is a member of FBI InfraGard, the Cyberwarfare Advisor for the International Association for Counterterrorism & Security Professionals, a columnist for The Journal of Counterterrorism and Homeland Security, and has been a regular CNN contributor, and a guest commentator for the Nieman Watchdog of the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University. He is the author of Where Have All the Emails Gone?, the definitive study of email in the White House, as well as How To Save Jobs and The Flexible Enterprise, the classic book that served as a foundation for today's agile business movement.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
125
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

BAAAAD and BIASED images presented here.
_Shayde_ 18th Aug
This is more like what really went on:

The husband says that even though he knows they can?t pay the bills he thinks that after they're done there they should send in a couple dozen of those credit card apps they've been getting, buy condoms for the whole city, pay for everyone in the neighborhood to go get a checkup at the Dr.'s office, put in a new pool, maybe even for the neighbors, build a few dozen more rooms on the house so all the crooks, thieves and deadbeats can have room ( or a wing all their own AND not charge them rent), invite the local drug dealers over for dinner, call every mob boss he can find and let them know he's their friend, promise to pay for EVERYONE's grandma and grandpa's meds, home and hospice, while making sure the kids have par-time jobs which he takes their money and gives it to all the former. Maybe they should buy a new 60? LED TV for EACH room and two for the bedroom. That 2011 car we have is looking dusty so let?s buy a new one so we don?t have to spend money to wash it. And beside if we can?t pay it back all we will have to do is apply for another loan and if we can?t get one or if we die first, the kids, or maybe their kids can pay it off. So don?t worry it?ll all be ok?just co-sign this loan with me so you?ll be on record as wanting this too. Because you know, if we don?t buy all this stuff and give all this stuff away, the kids will be upset and the neighbors will think we don?t like them and they might say we?re stingy. Besides, if you really want to know the truth, I hope we go down in a giant flaming ball of credit catastrophe.
What does the wife say?
She says:
We don't need cable, Satellite and HuluPlus. We don?t need a separate car for each child. The kids can drink water from the Culligan machine or the tap rather than the $1.50/oz. name brand "smart water". Each child doesn?t need a cell phone, and a laptop, and a GPS, and an iPod and an iPad. We don?t need to rent the 20 movies from Blockbuster AND have the full Netflix package. Jonny doesn't need to play, baseball, soccer, football, fencing, swimming, and the dozen other extra-curricular activities and neither does little Jenney. Both kids don?t need to have the new BMW or the fully restored Classic IROCZ. We don't need to eat steak every night, or caviar, or lobster. And maybe we should eat at home and cook for ourselves once in a while. Maybe we should put one of the game consoles on eBay. The constant trips to the game rental place are expensive and the twenty games on the shelf just sit there. Maybe for vacation this year we can just go camping or visit family; why does it have to be Hawaii, Hong Kong or Europe every year? We could buy clothes at Wal-Mart or Target instead of the boutiques. Maybe make the kids do household chores instead of having a maid. Maybe we can have them mow the lawn and not have a gardener, of heaven forbid we could help too. Let?s grow our own veggies in the backyard instead of paying $6.00 for the organic cucumber that was wilted three days before it got to the market. I think we should figure out what we really need to survive and satisfy are actual needs. We should then make a budget AND STICK TO IT! We should try our best to pay down these debts we already have. Once that is done we can see what we can do to make life easier and more enjoyable while remaining responsible and living in a way that we actually have taught our children to behave responsibly. We can look around and help some other that need help and are really trying. Then we have lifted ourselves up, our children and our neighbors and have given them a model they can use to better their lives, the lives of others and their whole world.
Time to hang some tea bags.
@Tommy S.

You don't even know what that means. The tea party line is "Government is incompetent, the problem is that we relied on them for controlling so much of the economy in the first place." David is a progressive. He's constantly wishing the government would do more and spend more, he just keep expecting congress to spontaneously hold themselves to a level of accountability they have repeatedly demonstrated they are not interested in.
@tkejlboom The US govt is too small actually... Not enough regulation gave you 2008 and you still dont get it?

You should cut the FDA, that will solve your SS problem. People wont make it past 40...
0 Votes
+ -
The Tea Party line is
use_what_works_4_U 9th Aug
@tkejlboom
"Rather than responsibly changing the way the USA does business over time, we are going to D.C. to hold the Nation and the economy hostage until we get our way, even if that means acting irresponsibly and not paying the bills we already owe."
0 Votes
+ -
I don't think so.
PepperdotNet 9th Aug
Blaming the tea party for the current debacle is like blaming the firefighters because your kids were playing with matches and set the house on fire. Blame the only people who had a viable option instead of the career politicians who have been creating this for decades.
@Pepper.dot.Net
EXACTLY! Where is the president's budget? It all starts with the fact that the POTUS has NO budget. It's not just a lack of leadership, its a lack of responsibility!
@Pepper.dot.Net Does any of you understand ANYTHING about economic policies? Obviously not. Im not an American so I dont really care that you will enter a second recession because of them. But, if you start cutting down on govt spending during an economic stagnation you will push the economy over the edge.

Do you little brats think that you have the monopole on not liking debt? Or that the left somehow like to do deficits?

Your country is screwed because people are buying in talking points. Now if you dont mind Ill grab my popcorn and watch Rome burn.
0 Votes
+ -
@Pepper.dot.Net

Very well said.
@Pepper.dot.Net Wow, Pepper, that analogy is so wrong in so many ways. How is debt default and an ideology-based refusal to consider new revenues a viable option?
0 Votes
+ -
WHAT?!?
Cayble 9th Aug
@Pepper.dot.Net
You said "...like blaming the firefighters because your kids were playing with matches and set the house on fire"

In this analogy you have clearly put the Tea Party in the place of the firemen, and thats sheer nonsense. The fire fighters are not only people who have nothing at all to do with how the fire started, but they are the ones who put it out. This analogy of yours is purely nuts.

The fact is that the Tea Party did have something to do with starting this particular fire. They were not holding the match, but they certainly made their views plain on what they wanted done with the match if things didn't go their way. And its well known at this point that the Tea Party is a group that holds some significant sway in a particular political party that can remain unnamed.

And as far as a viable option goes, many people can come up with viable options, but only viable in so far as could be accepted, not in so far as likely to be workable in the long run. If you think the Tea Party has some special vision about how the country should be run, its only because you don't really know how the country , or the world for that matter runs.

The political landscape is rife with politicians who have been around for years and don't understand how the world or even the government works so don't feel too bad. Bet your bottom dollar that practically every president who gets into the Whitehouse for the first time is unpleasantly shocked at just how divisive the political landscape truly is.
@Pepper.dot.Net It saddens me you can vote.
Does any of you understand ANYTHING about economic policies?

It's quite apparent that you're the one with the least amount of understanding of economics.

Obviously not.

What is obvious to a cat, is not necessarily obvious to a dog. You live in a quite different world from reality.

Im not an American so I dont really care that you will enter a second recession because of them.

If you knew anything at all about economics, you'd understand that, what happens to America, or in America, affects the rest of the world.

But, if you start cutting down on govt spending during an economic stagnation you will push the economy over the edge.

Actually, the opposite is true.

Increasing spending just creates more debt and bigger deficits, and when an economy is in recession, there will be no hope of ever repaying that debt or of bringing down the deficit.

Increasing government spending is always the wrong solution, even during good economic times. When government increases its spending, it has to take away from the economy and from the people, and by doing so, the economy will decrease its performance and oftentimes will go into recession. That's always the case.

Spending should be increased, but at the business and personal levels. Government spending is mostly wasteful and ill-directed. The people know how to spend their money better than government. And since businesses are the engine of an economy, they're also the best place for spending increases. The spending in the economy would increase if the government would pull back and allow people and businesses to keep more of their money, rather than government taking that money and deciding where that money is going to be spent.

Do you little brats think that you have the monopole on not liking debt?

Those "little brats" are the only ones with the correct and true solutions. So, if those people are brats, then the "adults", which you think you represent, are the ones with the stupid solutions.

Or that the left somehow like to do deficits?

It may not be that they "like deficits". The problem is that, they don't know when to stop spending, and they don't know when to stop digging a bigger hole. When the "solutions" to a problem aren't working, then perhaps there is a problem with the solution. Or, perhaps, and most likely, the solution to the problem is removing the problem makers, that being the democrats who got us into the deep holes and would dig some bigger holes for us if allowed to continue being in charge.



Your country is screwed because people are buying in talking points.

I agree. We need to put a stop to those Obama and democrat party talking points.

Now if you dont mind Ill grab my popcorn and watch Rome burn.

Better yet, why don't you go back to school, and get some real training in economics.
0 Votes
+ -
How is debt default and an ideology-based refusal to consider new revenues a viable option?

Nobody wants a default, but, continuing on the spending path, would just create deeper debt and the solution would just get harder to find down the road. Continuing to spend more, especially in the current economic environment, would just insure that, the economy would never be able to recover.

Then, increasing revenue is the complete opposite of what's needed. We need to insure that the economy recovers, and by increasing government revenue, we would be taking money from businesses and people, which would cause the economy to take a bigger dive. With the economy and people doing less spending because government took more revenue, the entire economic system would collapse. It makes no sense to take away from the economy when that economy is in recession and when there are so many people in need of jobs, and real and productive jobs come only from the private sector. Taking away from the economy would just make a dire situation and turn it into hopelessness. Businesses are now not investing in growth or in hiring because of the uncertainty of government decisions. Businesses are leery of government spending, because, with that spending, the government would need to increase taxes, and it taxes are increased, then those businesses won't be investing for the future or for growth or for jobs.

There is no other way than to stop spending and to actually cut taxes drastically. So, the only solution is actually the complete opposite of your thinking.
@Tommy S. Agreed.
Wake up people!

Get a clue already!
0 Votes
+ -
More sabre rattling
rock06r 9th Aug
I hate to add to the political arguments on this site... I mean, it's a tech site and not a political one, but for once I *essentially* agree with David. With a "caveat":

"America is a great country", that's what we've been told since we were small children. Perhaps...not so much anymore. Between the out-of-control spending of the federal government, the states, and even our local governments (I live in upstate NY), something had to give. Every year, no matter what the economy is doing, no matter which way the deficit points further up, no matter how our jobs are doing and how many imports come from Mexico, China, Taiwan, Japan, Germany, and Canada, our mindset has been elsewhere other than our own internal policies. We're glued to the TV when a white SUV with and ex-football star speeds down a California highway; We're enthralled when a bunch of privileged teeny-boppers make "life changing decisions" (like what shoes go with what outfit) on reality TV. I bet more people know which Iron Chef won against this contender or that than know the ins and outs of the last version of the Patriot Act. We're one of those countries where we don't even blink anymore when a politician throws out 1 Billion $$ at this program or that war.

In other countries, people are much better informed about what their own government is doing. They know where their tax money goes, and they hold their government accountable. They routinely FIRE their leaders if they don't do a good job. They actually even REMEMBER when it comes time for election who voted for what, and who screwed this and got something right. And... most importantly, in many other countries people still have a sense of "community" and "country". Not so much here.

Sure, we still all take off our hats when they play the Star Spangled Banner at baseball games. We still pause in thought when we pass a military cemetery. But... look at TV these days. Look at late night "talk shows" on CNN, MSNBC, and those other news channels. It's not about facts and figures anymore. It's about winning an argument with your point of view, just so you can make sure you (a) don't pay taxes, and (b) get the services you feel you're entitled to.

Everybody has, in some small way (or large), become a passive-aggressive consumer of government services. We love it when everything works, we hate it when we actually have to find out the details of why it doesn't. And God spare those poor politicians if we find out they all actually (for once) did the things we voted them in office for to the point of having an actual political debate.

You can blame this on a couple of hundred politicians all you want, Dave, but in the end of the day it's our own darn fault. Too long have wanted to pay $2 for 4 liters of Gas (aka a Gallon). Too long have we wanted to play football and baseball after school instead of studying chemistry and math. Too long have not shown up when it came time to vote, and when we did show up we voted based on what color the candidates ribbons were (blue or red) rather than finding out what they stood for and what their voting records were. We've got the collective memory of 1-day flies, the patience of a cafeeinated, sugar saturated A.D.D. patient, and the cognitive skills and critical reasoning ability of a 3 year old. And yeah... that's why they lowered our rating. They finally saw the light. There's only so much fluff and marshmellows in the bag, and when you start to see the bottom that's what happens.

I'm just surprised they waited this long.
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
@rock06r Can't argue a thing you said. You're right.
Extraordinarily well said .. while it is really easy to blame the politicians (eeeek.. drives me crazy when my KIDS act like that!!!), in the end, we don't get what we asked for, we get what we were willing to stand up for. And about the only thing most of us stand up for anymore is getting our own piece of the pie. It doesn't have to be this way, but we're no doubt so far down the road now that it will have to hurt quite a bit before it gets better and as a culture, we're not much into suffering...
@rock06r My highest praise to FINALLY hear some rational thought and not well this side said this and that side said that. Everyone is to blame from voters to politicians because for the majority it is more about gimme than what is needed. It is high time that this country gets its collective head out of its rear and do what we need to do. Thank you again, this article and your comments have made this day feel much better.
@rock06r Not so sure about your elevated view of "other countries." They seem to be having the same problem, wanting benefits, and cradle to grave security, but not wanting to pay the price. Riots in London are a current example of that. And they are all on the verge of insolvency too.
0 Votes
+ -
Many of those countries that the poster had in mind have the same exact problems, and perhaps bigger.

Saying the politically correct thing is no way to solve a problem.

Reality is a lot harsher than talking points or politically correct speech.
0 Votes
+ -
@Red In Blue ....regarding other countries. I didn't state that other countries are in better economic shape than us. Many are, but some are in as much doodoo as we are. My statement was limited to their political environment. At least in most of Europe people at least know what's going on. Their news isn't reporting junk all day long. When I was a kid, I lived in Germany for several years, and even now - decades later - I still envy their news casts. They were !! 15 !! minutes long, and even included the weather! Compare that to the junk we watch now. For one hour I listen to all kinds of junk I (a) don't care about or (b) which doesn't affect me, just so I can listen to 15 second snippets of what some Congressman said or a new policy that will turn the world upside down.

And then we've got the 24x7 "news" channels, that have fallen so far from grace and into corporate hell that they spend hours a day piecing together stupid scraps of info, spinning them together into a clump of junk, and spitting it at us wrapped in -obviously- pro-democrat or pro-republican viewpoints. I grew up thinking that news was about facts, not emotion.

Guess I was wrong about that one too.
You make several good points I agree with. I'll just add that the first rule of "quality improvement" is that management owns the systems. You can't expect the hourly workers to fix quality problems without effective leadership.

Next, many people have forgotten that money is about exchanging value. The basis of our standard of living is creating things of value for our fellow citizens. It is not war, or repackaging investments so you can sell them to someone else for more later. Just a thought.
0 Votes
+ -
Good point!
sissy sue 9th Aug
@psichel
Yes, American manufacturers used to make things that American consumers bought. War doesn't create prosperity, just the illusion of it, and only a handful of already well-heeled individuals and companies profit. Repackaging investments is just moving paper around, creates no wealth.

Our economy now places too much reliance upon retail sales while people's incomes have been flat for years. On one hand, Big Government and Big Business have followed policies that have discouraged job growth while encouraging us to take on personal debt and buy-buy-buy at the retail level; on the other hand, they bemoan the fact that Americans don't save. They want it both ways, and it just isn't possible that we can buy junk that we don't need to bolster the economy, and yet have enough savings socked away. They have killed this goose with their depressed wages and tax-and-spend ways, and now they find that there is nothing inside that goose but debt, poverty, and hopelessness.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: It is not war, or repackaging investments...
fatman65535 Updated - 9th Aug
@psichel

(sarcasm)
But you fail to grasp the reality. War is about transferring enormous amounts of wealth into the hands of defense contractors, for the sole purpose of creating implements of destruction. Defense contractors have spread the jobs "created" around the country, so that it would be political suicide for a politician to espouse cutting the defense budget. "What, Congressman X is weak on defense" would be the talking points of his opponents. God forbid, those $billions were actually used for productive purposes, like improving our water and sewer systems, and other infrastructure needs. A lot of the problems Congress faces is caused by entrenched interests expecting their "government bailouts". After all, do you expect companies to look the other way, when a politician that had been bribed received their campaign contributions; turns on them???? Follow the money. Every two years, 435 members of the House are up for (re)election, and it's Show Me The Money time. Then add an additional 33 or 34 Senators to that mix. Cash flows freely, and thanks to the SCOTUS, we can no longer restrict political contributions, because it is an "infringement of free speech".

Wall Street's monitory manipulation is essentially a "shell game" and guess who the sucker is? The answer is who ever buys the load of crap they are trying to dump on you. They do it only for one reason, to incur substantial fees for nothing of value, expect repackaging s---, in a nice clean wrapper. Inside, the contents still stinks to high heaven. It is kind of like the way some stores put a few nice examples of fruit or produce, out front, and hide the rotting ones in the back of pre-wrapped food. Now, you know why I never but the shrink wrapped stuff.
(/sarcasm)

Now to get real, one of the biggest problems is the attitudes of Corporate America toward its workers and customers. My take is that attitude amounts to "F--- Them". If we (Corporate America) can "increase shareholder value" and increase our years' end bonuses at the expense of the American worker and consumer, "then so be it".

I hope that their short sightedness bites them right on the ass!
0 Votes
+ -
"Effective Leadership"
rock06r 10th Aug
@psichel

I love that phrase. I had lots of effective leadership in the Army (not being sarcastic in the least, being completely honest in this). Good people that were rolemodels and actually did something called "making decisions". I wish Congress could do this just 5% of the time. Instead they roll over on their backs and let the special interests write the policies for them, just so they a couple more bucks in their warchest. 30 years ago Congressmen campaigned 1 day in 7 for their next election. Now it's more like 6 1/2. That gives us a precious 4-8 hours a week for them to actually act like the leaders we elected them to be - and what do we get for it? $700 Billion bailouts with no strings attached. You know, if I want to borrow $5 from my credit card I more strings attached than Congress put on the bailout?? LEADERSHIP. It's not just a word, it's what we're bleeding for right now. I bet we had more leadership in that helicopter that went down this past weekend than we have in all of Washington put together. It's a crying shame, it is.
@rock06r

As long as when you say "other countries" you don't mean Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece, Ireland, France, or, and this is my favorite, have you been following how the provinces of China secretly secured private sector loans so that Beijing couldn't keep stealing all their money?
0 Votes
+ -
Well said.
PepperdotNet 9th Aug
@rock06r Agreed. Since we can't expect the buck to stop in Washington anymore, it stops here. With me. Let me get my priorities straightened out and then I can help others do the same.

Imagine what this country could be if everyone took such an attitude.
0 Votes
+ -
@Pepper.dot.Net

The buck has/will always stop/ped with us. The problem is where it starts, how it got there, who tells you about it, and why we don't listen when it's being told to us.
0 Votes
+ -
regarding where the "buck starts"?

If the news/information is not getting to the people, it often has a lot to do with the decision those people make. The news and information is out there, but the people need to learn how to find it. Far too many people have become dependent upon sound bites they hear on the radio or TV or from a TV talk show (Leno, Jimmy Kimmel Live, Colbert) or friends/family, and they don't realize that, the news or info they're getting is not factual.

I have an idea about how to get the "real" news and information out there, but, I'm still working on it.
@rock06r
"We've got the collective memory of 1-day flies, the patience of a cafeeinated, sugar saturated A.D.D. patient, and the cognitive skills and critical reasoning ability of a 3 year old."
//

I think its the cognitive skills and critical reasoning that has us screwed.

People listen to the Talking Head of their choice, who lists several actual facts but then ties those facts together in a conclusion that any thinking person would have serious doubts about.
0 Votes
+ -
EXACTLY
rock06r 10th Aug
@rmhesche I wholeheartedly agree with you. Half the time I have to make sure I didn't click through the religious channel - they are oddly similar in the way they talk and the junk "info" they spin together.

And no, dinosaurs didn't walk with people, no matter what the Republicans/Democrats will tell you.
0 Votes
+ -
You hit the nail on the head.
safesax2002 Updated - 9th Aug
@rock06r +1
0 Votes
+ -
Great post!
sissy sue 9th Aug
@rock06r
"It's about winning an argument with your point of view."

Yes, and whoever screams loudest wins.

With that passing as political discourse anymore, it's no wonder that we just see failure coming out of Washington.
0 Votes
+ -
@rock06r
Sure, its the politicians who get the say, but as we all know, what the politicians say is what they think will get them re-elected. That means if either side has any kind of mindless rabble on their side who is insisting on certain policies being brought in, or particular issues be handled in a certain way, those who want to rely on those votes will say and insist on following the rabbles line. Crazy, unworkable or not.

And everyone who wants a their way or the highway approach risks becoming a member of a mindless rabble that will hold sway over politicians, inspiring them to ever greater feats of partisanship, above and beyond the pall of sanity.

You seen it folks with your own eyes. The politicians you created, on polar opposites of the American political landscape unwilling to bend, lest it be interpreted as a "break" and then risk the wrath of their own rabble eating them alive for showing some degree of cooperation for the good of the country at large.

I don't know if thats what you want, but thats what you created, and that certainly is what you have got, and its a real question if the American people have the will to change it because its going to require being a lot more flexible in your political views then you have lead your political leaders to believe you can be.
0 Votes
+ -
The people you blame for our problems, were elected by the people. If you voted, you elected those people who "created the problems".

You are as guilty of putting those people in Washington as anybody else that voted.

Perhaps, having a more educated population on the issues and candidates is the best solution to the problems. The problems stem directly from the decisions that the citizenry make. Make that citizenry a lot more savvy about the issues and the candidates, and perhaps we'll be well on the way to solving a lot of our complaints and problems.

But, how to do that? Can you think of a way?
0 Votes
+ -
The people in other countries are more informed about what their governments are doing? Uh-huh. Right. If you think being more informed is making sure you continue to get your handouts and throw a riot when the government tells you there isn't any more money.

There are a number of politicians who are trying to do precisely what they were voted in to do. And people like the blog author crucify them for it. Because he has his snout in the public trough.
0 Votes
+ -
History.....
rock06r 11th Aug
@baggins_z .... You might want to wiki this one, baggins:

LA Riots.

That's right, right here in the US of A. And not in the 1960, not in the 1920's. 1992.

Why don't you actually talk to someone from Europe? Ask them about Afghanistan. Ask them about the Taliban. The Pashtuns, the tajiks, the Uzbehks, the Hazarah, Aimek, Baloch and the Turkmen. What... you never heard of those before??? How come? Don't you have a TV? Don't you have an internet connection? A car stereo? A newspaper? How come, after almost a decade in Afghanistan, millions of reporting hours, millions of newspaper articles, and millions of soundbites the average American can't name the tribal groups or the tribal regions of Afghanistan, but they all know the name of Paris Hilton's dog?

"Politicians trying to do precisely what they were voted in to do." Really??? I don't remember seeing a flyer from ANY candidate outlining their plan for making sure that Wall Street got bailouts and their full yearly bonuses. I don't remember any of them lining up and slapping each other's cheeks and high-fiving themselves in front of voters when this recent mess happened. I can't remember anyone raising their hand and professing their love and devotion to outsourcing, corporate tax breaks, and millionaire loop holes...?!?! But it still happens. Every Congress. Every One.
0 Votes
+ -
YES..
Hasam1991 9th Aug
YES, the author is correct BUT he failed to tell you that this family makes 60,000 a year, spends 90,000 a year and is in debt 380,000.... so his creditors were a bit worried...
0 Votes
+ -
@Hasam1991 You actually are much more correct than Gewirtz. There was no reason to raise the debt ceiling--all it did was give the Dims the opportunity to spend more! Standard & Poors was waiting to see if we'd finally deal with the out-of-control spending. When a family spends more than it makes, they can only borrow so much before they bankrupt themselves. We long since bankrupted this country with all sorts of boondoggles paid for by us, the taxpayer! The farther down the road you kick the can, the bigger the crash in the long run. Our founders recognized that our type of government can only survive with a responsible, self-disciplined people who don't try to feed at the public trough. Once that happens, it will go the way of the Roman empire, self-destruction.
@Red In Blue

if you really look the last time the debt went way up was when GOP was in power. The other issue is that we are in this mess because we want into two wars without paying for it. We had a trillion dollar (over 10 yrs) tax break and have spend about the same on two wars. You may argue that the wars were necessary but then. In the above analogy it is almost like the wife went shopping and maxed out the credit card and was paying the bills. Then when the husband took over finances and said we need to access additional line of credit said that we should not pay the bills as we cannot afford it.
0 Votes
+ -
pmantri: Nonsense!
adornoe@... 10th Aug
if you really look the last time the debt went way up was when GOP was in power.

Nonsense!

The debt had been mounting for decades, mostly driven by the social spending, better known as entitlements. That's where the problem lies, and, last I looked, most of the entitlements were instituted by democrats. That is a fact that can't be disputed.

Furthermore, Bush was very close to balancing the budget while he was president, but then, the economic crisis hit, and congress (democrats and republicans, including Obama) and the president then created deficit spending ($trillion dollar stimulus, TARP, bailouts for auto companies and for home owners), and that's where the insane spending took off.

While the debt was huge to begin with when Bush was in office, Obama and the democrats went and doubled the problem. Look, the solution to a problem is not to make the problem a lot bigger to the point where it becomes an insurmountable problem.

The other issue is that we are in this mess because we want into two wars without paying for it.

Not true!

While Bush had those two wars going, the federal government was receiving enough tax revenue to pay for them, with the increased taxes that came as a result of the tax cuts that were instituted at the beginning of the Bush administration. The mortgage meltdown caused the economic crisis and hence, the deficit spending. But, again, the housing crisis is another problems brought to us, compliments of the democrats, with the CRA and regulations which forced lending institutions to give loans to people who could not afford to pay them back.

We had a trillion dollar (over 10 yrs) tax break and have spend about the same on two wars.

What the heck are you talking about? What tax break?

A one time tax refund is not a tax cut. Tax cuts should encompass businesses and people. Simple "giveaways" are just gimmicks intended to buy votes from the unsuspecting public.

You may argue that the wars were necessary but then.

Well, they were necessary, and we did take the war to the enemy's front yard. Not retaliating would've just encouraged more 9/11s. Simple, ain't it?

In the above analogy it is almost like the wife went shopping and maxed out the credit card and was paying the bills. Then when the husband took over finances and said we need to access additional line of credit said that we should not pay the bills as we cannot afford it.

Well, tell that to the democrats, because, it's their spending that has us in deep doo-doo. The wife/husband analogy is not applicable, because, a household cannot be run in the same way we've been running government spending. When government is using someone else's money, they don't have any real control, because, they always believe that there is more where that came from, and if they can't get it from the people and businesses, then they just take it upon themselves to print the money. No household can get away with doing that, otherwise, they would end up in jail almost as soon as they undertake the activity to take money from neighbors or to print counterfeit money. Besides, the banks would not lend them any more money once the bank noticed that they were in over their heads. The federal government has been overspending for decades, and if they were to be treated as a business or as a household, then the lenders (China and bondholders) would not have bought into the debt.

Things are not as you suspect, and you have a lot to learn about the real facts. Time to get a real education there, buddy.
0 Votes
+ -
@pmantri
baggins_z 10th Aug
Factually incorrect. Debt started this insane climb when the democrats took control of the house in 2006. Which makes sense, because all spending originates in the House. The last time the budget was in balance was when CONSERVATIVE Republicans controlled the house in 1996. Again, because all spending originates in the house.
0 Votes
+ -
Yes again
Robert Hahn 9th Aug
@Hasam1991
Yes, it was unconscionable -- if not downright dishonest -- for David to leave that little detail out.

If there had NOT been an argument over whether it makes sense to have an ongoing policy of borrowing 43 cents of every dollar we spend, with no end in sight, the politicians would have been doing even more harm.

They all know this has to stop. Not even the United States of America can borrow at the rates we have been without the rest of the world calling a halt to it by refusing to lend us any more. That's a far worse consequence than having an argument... even one in public.

Like it or not David, cutting the spending is a discussion we need to have. The unfunded liabilities of Social Security and Medicare are approaching $100 trillion. We're not going to get that by "taxing the rich." The rich don't have $100 trillion. No one does. Anywhere.

Spending cuts are going to happen. We can either discuss them, plan them, and execute the plans, or we can do it in panic mode when one day the Treasury auction doesn't bring in the money.
@Robert Hahn

I don't think he's actually saying that the conversation didn't need to be help publicly. I think he's saying that the tone and context of the conversation gave the clear impression that NEITHER(and it's a damn shame there is only 2.) side has any idea what their doing or are likely to accidentally work out some decent third solution between them either.
and refusing to confront the problems head-on.

Problems aren't solved by just talking about them. Saying the politically correct words is not a solution to anything.

Blaming both sides is politically correct speech, and it dances around the issue.

David is no help whatsoever, and contributes nothing to the solutions, and he doesn't contribute to the knowledge-base by just simply stating that both sides are to blame. That might sound soothing to some, but, it solves no problems.

In order for any problem to get solved, the problem needs a clear definition, and only then, can the solutions even be addressed. A solution without statement of the problem just means that the problem can always creep back up on us.
0 Votes
+ -
The whole example was asinine.
baggins_z 10th Aug
In reality the bank would have said:

No way in hell are we floating you this loan when you have an annual income of $58,000 a year, hold $327,000 in credit card debt and charge $17,000 a year on new cards. In fact, if you don't get some financial counseling now on how to IMMEDIATELY cut out those items you cannot afford you're going to be bankrupt in a very short amount of time.
Spam? Get real--guess the truth hurts!
It's a simple formula. If you have more people working, you will have more people paying taxes and buying goods and services.

Secondly, it has to be less attractive to buy products and services from foreign countries and far more attractive to build business and manufacturing here at home in the US.

I don't think the majority of our elected officials were smart enough to create this mess. Look to the appointees. Watch "Inside Job".

If the next 5 years are going to be difficult, let's make the hard choices and be sure that we have a stronger economy at the end of those 5 years instead of higher trade/government deficits and fewer jobs.
0 Votes
+ -
This is more like what really went on:

The husband says that even though he knows they can?t pay the bills he thinks that after they're done there they should send in a couple dozen of those credit card apps they've been getting, buy condoms for the whole city, pay for everyone in the neighborhood to go get a checkup at the Dr.'s office, put in a new pool, maybe even for the neighbors, build a few dozen more rooms on the house so all the crooks, thieves and deadbeats can have room ( or a wing all their own AND not charge them rent), invite the local drug dealers over for dinner, call every mob boss he can find and let them know he's their friend, promise to pay for EVERYONE's grandma and grandpa's meds, home and hospice, while making sure the kids have par-time jobs which he takes their money and gives it to all the former. Maybe they should buy a new 60? LED TV for EACH room and two for the bedroom. That 2011 car we have is looking dusty so let?s buy a new one so we don?t have to spend money to wash it. And beside if we can?t pay it back all we will have to do is apply for another loan and if we can?t get one or if we die first, the kids, or maybe their kids can pay it off. So don?t worry it?ll all be ok?just co-sign this loan with me so you?ll be on record as wanting this too. Because you know, if we don?t buy all this stuff and give all this stuff away, the kids will be upset and the neighbors will think we don?t like them and they might say we?re stingy. Besides, if you really want to know the truth, I hope we go down in a giant flaming ball of credit catastrophe.
What does the wife say?
She says:
We don't need cable, Satellite and HuluPlus. We don?t need a separate car for each child. The kids can drink water from the Culligan machine or the tap rather than the $1.50/oz. name brand "smart water". Each child doesn?t need a cell phone, and a laptop, and a GPS, and an iPod and an iPad. We don?t need to rent the 20 movies from Blockbuster AND have the full Netflix package. Jonny doesn't need to play, baseball, soccer, football, fencing, swimming, and the dozen other extra-curricular activities and neither does little Jenney. Both kids don?t need to have the new BMW or the fully restored Classic IROCZ. We don't need to eat steak every night, or caviar, or lobster. And maybe we should eat at home and cook for ourselves once in a while. Maybe we should put one of the game consoles on eBay. The constant trips to the game rental place are expensive and the twenty games on the shelf just sit there. Maybe for vacation this year we can just go camping or visit family; why does it have to be Hawaii, Hong Kong or Europe every year? We could buy clothes at Wal-Mart or Target instead of the boutiques. Maybe make the kids do household chores instead of having a maid. Maybe we can have them mow the lawn and not have a gardener, of heaven forbid we could help too. Let?s grow our own veggies in the backyard instead of paying $6.00 for the organic cucumber that was wilted three days before it got to the market. I think we should figure out what we really need to survive and satisfy are actual needs. We should then make a budget AND STICK TO IT! We should try our best to pay down these debts we already have. Once that is done we can see what we can do to make life easier and more enjoyable while remaining responsible and living in a way that we actually have taught our children to behave responsibly. We can look around and help some other that need help and are really trying. Then we have lifted ourselves up, our children and our neighbors and have given them a model they can use to better their lives, the lives of others and their whole world.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix