Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

We NEED to start talking more about "odious debts" and govt. spending

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
kuozzman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-07-05 07:53 PM
Original message
We NEED to start talking more about "odious debts" and govt. spending
We always hear about "govt. waste" and "pork", but this term actually gets straight to the point, and also has a damn good solution.

http://www.odiousdebts.org/odiousdebts/index.cfm?DSP=subcontent&AreaID=3

But Sack believed that debts not created in the interests of the state should not be bound to this general rule. Some debts, he said, were "dettes odieuses."

*If a despotic power incurs a debt not for the needs or in the interest of the State, but to strengthen its despotic regime, to repress the population that fights against it, etc., this debt is odious for the population of all the State.

*This debt is not an obligation for the nation; it is a regime's debt, a personal debt of the power that has incurred it, consequently it falls with the fall of this power.

*The reason these "odious" debts cannot be considered to encumber the territory of the State, is that such debts do not fulfill one of the conditions that determine the legality of the debts of the State, that is: the debts of the State must be incurred and the funds from it employed for the needs and in the interests of the State.

"Odious" debts, incurred and used for ends which, to the knowledge of the creditors, are contrary to the interests of the nation, do not compromise the latter — in the case that the nation succeeds in getting rid of the government which incurs them — except to the extent that real advantages were obtained from these debts. The creditors have committed a hostile act with regard to the people; they can't therefore expect that a nation freed from a despotic power assume the "odious" debts, which are personal debts of that power.

Even when a despotic power is replaced by another, no less despotic or any more responsive to the will of the people, the "odious" debts of the eliminated power are not any less their personal debts and are not obligations for the new power....

One could also include in this category of debts the loans incurred by members of the government or by persons or groups associated with the government to serve interests manifestly personal — interests that are unrelated to the interests of the State.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-07-05 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. Don't say "odious".. Lots of people will think you're talking about
a cartoon dog :evilgrin:















Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-07-05 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. The Clinton economy proves
The ratpublican debt machine of corporate give ways and defense spending is stifling the economy

Self perpetuating debt machine. they spend without limits creating huge burdens upon the American tax payer and then the economy slides downward in response further increasing the problem.

Happened during the Reagen years and is happening again
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InvisibleBallots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-07-05 08:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Debt is a Tax - Bush raised taxes
not only did Bush spend more, thus increasing taxes, he borrowed the shortfall, meaning we have to pay more taxes for interest as well. Tax cut? What tax cut?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 11th 2024, 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC