Economics question

Why is it when a kid asks "Why can't the government just print money to pay for everything" he gets told it's too simple to think like that and he doesn't understand concepts like the devaluation of currency, but when Obama asks the same question it's not considered the same thing?

Are you comparing a black man to a child? Racist!

Obama is black, to criticise him is to be racist. May Hope and Change bless The One.

I'm not so sure I see where Obama is asking people to just print money with no regard for inflation. Would you care to back up your argument with some evidence?

>>1
The North Korean government has been doing that since the eighties and it's called superdollars. It's a brilliant idea and solution to all financial problems.

>>5
You must have spent the last year in a mineshaft, then.

Trillion dollar "stimulus" bill, two trillion dollars to nationalize healthcare and impose socialized medicine.  Where's the money going to come from?  "Hurp durp a durp can't we just print more?  Hurp durp a durp Bush's fault!  Hurp durp a durp yes we can!"

>>5
Umm... have you never heard of the Federal Reserve System? Or the Department of the Treasury? Where have you been the last nearly 100 years?

>>5
Obama doesn't have to print money to cause inflation, when banks issue loans the interest they charge is essentially new money that has been conjurred up out of thin air.

We know, but for some reason he thinks our credit based system is a good thing rather than something to be reformed or abolished.

>>10
That goes for about all the crumbling systems (prison system, health care, defense spending).  Obama's a complete chickenshit, elected on the (guaranteed to be unfulfilled) hopes of college kids.  The only bone he'll toss to them is that he'll let people smoke weed in some states.

>>11
Sound government policies are not a priority, as long as he has a black face, taxes their boss and lets rich kids smoke weed they'll keep supporting him.

>>11
The Government should have no say in what states allow what their citizens are allowed to do. Of course we live in dying times where the Constitution is looked upon as nothing more than a quaint document from the 18^th century that has no bearing on these modern issues that we face. Oh, how very wrong these people are. It's as relevant today as it was in 1789.

>>13
Slavery was legal in 1789 so I think it's more relevant now than it was back then.

>>14
Well the Thirteenth Amendment officially abolished slavery. And eventually something had to be done about the slave issue that was facing the still quite young nation at the time.

That's the great thing about the Constitution is that it can be amended and expanded upon, and the founders very well knew that slavery would probably become a big issue past their lifetimes. Thomas Jefferson touches upon this in some of his writing.

Of course future amendments can bring bad effects too, see the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Amendments, that allowed the IRS to tax income and the Seventeenth which changed how Senators are elected, chipping away at state sovereignty.

>>15
Oh and not to mention that the Eighteenth Amendment was just a horrifying disaster.

>>15
>>16
Of course it was relevant among a few renowned intellectuals, but among the general population it was not. The majority of the population at this time were still agricultural laborers, not much more wealthier than African subsistence farmers and only about 5% of the population were urbanised.

>>17
That changed drastically as the 20^th century progressed. Yes, different times indeed.

The majority of the population being not much more wealthy than African subsistence farmers is still relevant.

>>19
Do you have sources that cite such information?

>>20
Here, I guess. I can't remember where I found that 5% figure though.
http://mars.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/wc2/lectures/towns.html
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=correlation+between+poverty+and+crime&btnG=Search&meta=