Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 02-11-2010, 07:54 AM   #81 (permalink)
Who You Crappin?
 
Derwood's Avatar
 
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
if you only imported goods that were manufactured with the U.S. standards of labor regulations......well, you wouldn't import anything anymore
__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel
Derwood is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 08:15 AM   #82 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy View Post
do you think that the obama administration will suffer the same kind of fate that the hoover administration suffered

which is a loose parallel question and **not** what you tried to make of it.
you do this stuff all the time, ace.
I don't understand what you are trying to say here.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 11:01 AM   #83 (permalink)
Lennonite Priest
 
pan6467's Avatar
 
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru View Post
Pan, I don't disagree with your stated problems; I disagree with your plan, and despite what you say, promoting the well-being of all people is a focus of liberalism and various forms of socialism.

Your plan will eliminate many imports (i.e. some products would seek markets other than the U.S.), and raise the prices on many others (raised costs = raised prices). This will spike the CPI and inflation, as would arbitrarily raising wages domestically.

I'm a proponent of a balanced mixed economy. That means I value markets that are regulated and fair. I also value market values being set primarily by market forces: namely, supply and demand. Too much intervention in this is a bad thing, as it discourages/dampens competition, which hurts everyone.

I would like it very much for Third World countries to raise their standard of living. Unfortunately, this would come at the cost of the standard of living in developed nations. Put another way: a higher quality of life to the Third World will come at the cost of the developed world: average prices around the world would go up. America would see an end to cheap goods. And they would have tougher competition for labour pools as well. This would send shockwaves through world markets, and I think you would find an even greater disparity between the rich and poor in the U.S. Though the Third World would have more livable lives, which I guess isn't such a bad thing. Sacrifices would have to be made, I suppose. America (et al) has had to too good for too long.

Like you said, you can't have it both ways.

I'd sooner support a plan in the form of widespread subsidies, grants, and tax breaks.
Not if EVERY country is self reliant. Granted that is impossible, but every country can make their own cars, roads, infrastructures. Some may need food, some oil, whatever... that is what you trade for. IT is possible. IT is extremely possible for EVERY country to be primarily self reliant and advanced. The only people who would not want this are people who want to keep other countries down.

You don't send jobs to countries with little to no human rights, sweatshops, dictatorships, etc and expect those conditions to change when you are part of the problem.

You work to educate, you have humanitarian missions to make sure those people are fed and medically cared for but YOU GIVE NOTHING to reward those governments until they change.

Your argument is one that does not take into account the self sovereignty and reliance of a nation. If Nigeria starts building an infrastructure and creates jobs, then Nigerians will stay in Nigeria and the country will begin to prosper. If the US became more self reliant, stopped importing and started making things again, the wages would go up. There would not have to be sacrifices.

You build an infrastructure and you keep it safe and you add on to it.

The only way inflation will happen is if those top 1-5-10% decide not to give up what they have.

The top 1-5-10% have us so brainwashed and so skewed that we are to believe ANYTHING other than the same old same old laissaez faire, let them control everything... will fail and we'll be worse off.

I argue the opposite. I argue that if we promote national sovereignty and self reliance (as much as possible), no longer sending jobs to countries with dictatorships, spotty human rights and so on... the WORLD will be better as a whole not just the US.

---------- Post added at 02:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:55 PM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derwood View Post
if you only imported goods that were manufactured with the U.S. standards of labor regulations......well, you wouldn't import anything anymore
Then we have a problem that we should be fixing. IF we are supposed to be this great country (and I believe we are) then we need to make sure we do not do business with countries that have spotty human rights, dictatorships and so on.

Trust me, the US is the world's largest consumer nation, companies will do what they have to, to make sure they sell product here. But, what we have done is wanted cheaper so we shipped jobs to those countries and paid less and spiraled downward. Even our "human rights" advocates don't speak out anymore. It's time we show that what we are.

We are the US, we are the greatest nation to ever grace this planet and we do not need nor will we condone human rights violations, dictatorships and so on.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"
pan6467 is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 11:13 AM   #84 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
but those days are over, pan. national sovereignty is a quaint old thing at this point.

i was reading some articles the came out in a journal called Global Social Policy commemorating (if you want to call it that) the 25th anniversary of the bhopal disaster. it outlines the serious problems with regulating the actions of transnational corporations like dow, how close to impossible it is to hold them accountable, the problems of jurisdiction and the usual types of class-fraction based corruption/coziness, the many and varied ways in which these trans- and national regulatory/legal problems converged on screwing over the victims. it's pretty interesting and really quite grim and seems the way of things these days.

if you like i can get the articles and make them available--pm me with an email address----i'm not sure how easy the journal is to find.
i mention this not only because i just happened to read a bunch of stuff earlier this morning, but also because we can't really carry on too far in thinking about what might make sense to do to change the organization of capitalism without having a good working idea of how things operate...the bhopal disaster became emblematic of many things, mostly ugly but some not so (the mobilization of the survivors for example) and its analyzed that way.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 11:58 AM   #85 (permalink)
warrior bodhisattva
 
Baraka_Guru's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
Also, Pan, becoming self-reliant goes against the grain of global markets. After all, why would a country start up or heavily expand an industry when it can just purchase the end products from someone else at a fraction of the cost, using the wealth they've generated by doing what they do well?
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot
Baraka_Guru is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 02:59 PM   #86 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan
We are the US, we are the greatest nation to ever grace this planet and we do not need nor will we condone human rights violations, dictatorships and so on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy View Post
but those days are over, pan. national sovereignty is a quaint old thing at this point.
are you saying that the only way to move forward for humanity now is to condone human rights violations and dictatorships? This is what you want in your new world order?
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 03:23 PM   #87 (permalink)
Darth Papa
 
ratbastid's Avatar
 
Location: Yonder
dk, when you cherry-pick your one and your one, you shouldn't be surprised to end up with a very strange two.
ratbastid is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 03:40 PM   #88 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
dk...wow. just wow.
i hardly seems necessary to ask whether you read the post you bit that sentence from. you *obviously* didn't and what's better is that you demonstrate the point i was making in the process.

but still. wow.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 05:24 PM   #89 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy View Post
dk...wow. just wow.
i hardly seems necessary to ask whether you read the post you bit that sentence from. you *obviously* didn't and what's better is that you demonstrate the point i was making in the process.

but still. wow.
glad you like it. maybe now you'll see what I see on other threads when you disagree with 'conservative' positions. Because, to be honest, your statements in those circumstances don't make alot of sense either.......so, wow.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 05:36 PM   #90 (permalink)
Crazy, indeed
 
Location: the ether
Quote:
Originally Posted by dksuddeth View Post
glad you like it. maybe now you'll see what I see on other threads when you disagree with 'conservative' positions. Because, to be honest, your statements in those circumstances don't make alot of sense either.......so, wow.
How about whenever someone talks about what a majority of self described conservatives believe, instead of just pointing out that there is a minority of self described conservatives who don't believe that you actually explain why you don't believe that?
dippin is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 09:10 PM   #91 (permalink)
immoral minority
 
ASU2003's Avatar
 
Location: Back in Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy View Post
i was reading some articles the came out in a journal called Global Social Policy commemorating (if you want to call it that) the 25th anniversary of the bhopal disaster. it outlines the serious problems with regulating the actions of transnational corporations like dow, how close to impossible it is to hold them accountable, the problems of jurisdiction and the usual types of class-fraction based corruption/coziness, the many and varied ways in which these trans- and national regulatory/legal problems converged on screwing over the victims. it's pretty interesting and really quite grim and seems the way of things these days.
It was Union Carbide that caused the problems over there (They were bought out by Dow).

But I would agree that India needs an EPA organization that has the power to fix things.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for this thread topic, it is hard to claim Obama is anything yet. He has been criticized by the Right for things he 'might' do (but has no plans to), and the left wants him to do something yet any attempt is blocked by the Senate.
ASU2003 is offline  
Old 02-19-2010, 10:07 AM   #92 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
This chart appeared in today's IBD. Commercial and industrial loans issued by commercial banks has been declining for the past 8 months and is down $583 billion from the peak according to IBD.



As the federal government pumps stimulus into the economy it is being siphoned off, this should be a concern.

In addition the money supply as measured by M2 is shrinking in spite of the Fed's soft money policy:

Quote:
Worse, key monetary indicators signal a steep plunge in money supply growth, despite the Fed's printing of well over $1 trillion in new money in the past year and a half.

M2 money supply, the most frequently used gauge for measuring the economy's demand for money, has fallen from solid 8% to 9% growth just last summer to growth of less than 2% since the start of the year. This level is often seen just before recessions, and thus may augur another downturn. Despite two quarters of GDP gains, no rule says we can't have a double dip.
Investors.com - A Bad Time For Fed To Tighten?

Now the Fed is signeling to the market a shift in posture to tighten the money supply and "easy credit" in spite of virtually no inflation:

Quote:
The Federal Reserve Board sent its most explicit signal yet that the emergency supply of liquidity to financial markets is done and the most aggressive monetary policy easing in its 96-year history will eventually reverse.

Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and his colleagues at the Board of Governors raised the rate charged to banks for direct loans by a quarter-point to 0.75 percent, effective today. It was the first increase in the discount rate since June 2006.

The Fed portrayed the decision as a “normalization” of lending that would have no impact on monetary policy, repeating in a statement in Washington yesterday that its benchmark federal funds rate would stay low for an “extended period.” The assurances didn’t stop investors from increasing bets that the Fed would tighten policy in the fourth quarter. The dollar rose and U.S. stocks fell.
Fed Discount-Rate Move Signals End to Emergency Steps (Update1) - Bloomberg.com

No inflation:

Quote:
The cost of living in the U.S. rose in January less than anticipated and a measure of prices excluding food and fuel fell for the first time since 1982, indicating the recovery is generating little inflation.
U.S. Economy: Consumer Prices Increase Less Than Anticipated - Bloomberg.com

The Obama administration and the Fed are not in sync and one of the major problems affecting job creation, the availability of credit, goes unaddressed. Liberal or conservative, what we need is a concerted effort to turn the economy around on a long term basis. Right now we are seriously at risk of another down-turn given a shrinking monetary supply, strengthening dollar, higher interest rates, higher taxes and deflationary pressures.

I hope the President is having a good time in Vegas campaigning for Reid.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."


Last edited by aceventura3; 02-19-2010 at 10:10 AM..
aceventura3 is offline  
Old 02-19-2010, 11:06 AM   #93 (permalink)
immoral minority
 
ASU2003's Avatar
 
Location: Back in Ohio
Certain people will benefit from higher interest rates, higher taxes, less money, stronger dollar, lower stock prices, and deflation. It might not be you, but there are winners. I like higher interest rates, a strong dollar, and deflation (lower commodity prices). I have quite a bit of money in a savings account, but I am also locked in at a low rate on my mortgage.

If I had to buy a house, I would want really low rates, and easy credit available with a large monetary supply.

If I was getting ready to retire, it might be different. I wouldn't want the stock market to crash before I was able to get out. I would be worried about inflation or the dollar getting really weak. I would also be worried about taxes.

If I was a high school kid, I want my $7/hour to actually buy something.

If I was a 40-something business owner, I would want lower rates. Easy loans, and low taxes.

If I were a foreigner, I would want a weak dollar to be able to buy more and get more on vacation here.

If I was paying back the national debt, I would want our money to be worth less than it is now with an increasing monetary supply.
ASU2003 is offline  
Old 02-19-2010, 11:48 AM   #94 (permalink)
Crazy, indeed
 
Location: the ether
You do know that the Fed and the president are "not in sync" pretty much because the fed is set up to be independent of the presidency, right?

Sure, I think that the fed should pump a little more money into the economy, but that is me as liberal interventionist saying this. The fact that you also believe this leads me to think that anything you can use against Obama you will, regardless of whether it fits with your own ideas.
dippin is offline  
Old 02-19-2010, 12:40 PM   #95 (permalink)
Darth Papa
 
ratbastid's Avatar
 
Location: Yonder
The main economic indicators are starting to show a turn-around happening. Those committed to the view that Obama is Doing Bad Things to the Economy are having to reach into more and more obscure indicators for evidence.

Anecdotally, as one of the excessively-numbered unemployed, I'm seeing a sudden surge in job opportunities just in the last couple weeks. I have an application in for a contract-to-hire gig with McCann Erickson New York right now--so think employed thoughts my direction please! (And no, I won't be moving there if I get it, it's a telecommute position, but I probably will be visiting the city more frequently if I do.)
ratbastid is offline  
Old 02-19-2010, 01:48 PM   #96 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASU2003 View Post
Certain people will benefit from higher interest rates, higher taxes, less money, stronger dollar, lower stock prices, and deflation. It might not be you, but there are winners.
This is true, but I think most would prefer an end to the recession and certainly for economic improvement rather than deterioration.

Quote:
I like higher interest rates, a strong dollar, and deflation (lower commodity prices). I have quite a bit of money in a savings account, but I am also locked in at a low rate on my mortgage.
My problem tends to be with things like bailouts for banks and then they raise rates/fees, lower credit availability, record record profits, continue record foreclosure rates, etc. I did not support the bailouts, but since the banks got them, should they be obligated to do something in return? We, the taxpayer and consumer, got the raw end of the deal

Quote:
If I had to buy a house, I would want really low rates, and easy credit available with a large monetary supply.

If I was getting ready to retire, it might be different. I wouldn't want the stock market to crash before I was able to get out. I would be worried about inflation or the dollar getting really weak. I would also be worried about taxes.
But we are talking about savings rates of 2%, or nothing after taxes and inflation, then on the other side people are paying up to 20% or more on credit card debt. Then banks can get capital or be bailed-out at virtually no real cost????

Quote:
If I was a high school kid, I want my $7/hour to actually buy something.

If I was a 40-something business owner, I would want lower rates. Easy loans, and low taxes.

If I were a foreigner, I would want a weak dollar to be able to buy more and get more on vacation here.

If I was paying back the national debt, I would want our money to be worth less than it is now with an increasing monetary supply.
You support my view the economy is too complicated to micro-manage and for everyone the government tries to help they hurt someone.

---------- Post added at 09:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:38 PM ----------

Quote:
You do know that the Fed and the president are "not in sync" pretty much because the fed is set up to be independent of the presidency, right?
Why be condescending?

Why shouldn't we expect or demand the Fed and the administration get on the same page?

Quote:
Sure, I think that the fed should pump a little more money into the economy, but that is me as liberal interventionist saying this. The fact that you also believe this leads me to think that anything you can use against Obama you will, regardless of whether it fits with your own ideas.
Looking at the causes of the Great Depression, poorly timed restriction of the money supply hurt. We do not want a repeat. The Fed's words indicate that they understand that, but some of the indicators I see, indicate otherwise.

This issue is bigger than Obama. We all know how I feel about him. I don't know how you want me to respond to him when I think he is wrong, misguided, being political, etc., but what we need is to get him and everyone else focused on the real issues. I think his campaigning at this time is an insult, given what is going on. He talks about global warming but ignores how the financial industry got bailed-out but turns around and hurts every American in this country needing or using credit!

I am very frustrated.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."


Last edited by aceventura3; 02-19-2010 at 01:50 PM..
aceventura3 is offline  
Old 02-19-2010, 01:58 PM   #97 (permalink)
Crazy, indeed
 
Location: the ether
It's not about being condescending. It's about being at least a bit coherent when trying to get on the "let's bash Obama" bandwagon. I mean, if you are posting another "Obama is the devil" type of post, you should at least get the basics right, right?

The fed was set up to be as independent from the presidency as possible. The interest rates are set by the FOMC. The president nominates some, but not all, of the members of the FOMC, and their terms are set to overlap with multiple presidents to make sure that the fed works in an apartisan manner. So 11 out of 12 members of the board were not appointed by Obama, including the Chairman.

And the second point is that the Fed rate really won't impact the economy for at least another 6 months.

Point being, the fact that you don't what you are talking about and yet insist on making it a sort of political point about Obama is very telling about the possibility of having an actual debate with you.
dippin is offline  
Old 02-19-2010, 02:07 PM   #98 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratbastid View Post
The main economic indicators are starting to show a turn-around happening. Those committed to the view that Obama is Doing Bad Things to the Economy are having to reach into more and more obscure indicators for evidence.
There is forward looking information and there are lagging indicators. There is no doubt there are some positive data points, but there are also some data points that should give cause for concern. In addition there is the condition of a fledgling recovery being reversed by premature action or doing things that can quickly put an end to the recovery. For example if banks hoard capital at the expense of business growth we could see a second round of job loss, consumer demand, foreclosures, etc. , in turn putting more pressure on banks to preserve their capital. Some cycles need to be broken, some cycles in order to be broken require risk taking with a profit motivation as opposed to risk avoidance with a survival motivation. Banks need to be encouraged to transition from survival to a profit motivation. But, we have a President who talks negatively about the financial sector taking risks and talks likes he wants to punish risk taking. I agree that the extreme is not good, but neither extreme is good.

---------- Post added at 10:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:00 PM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by dippin View Post
It's not about being condescending. It's about being at least a bit coherent when trying to get on the "let's bash Obama" bandwagon.
I am bored with the above. Trust me, Obama doesn't get 2% of the criticism he could get. I don't even point out most of the easy and obvious areas. In my first post today, I only had one line about Obama, most would have seen that line and understood it was just a guy venting at the politics of the day. In fact, when Bush was President this board thrived because of the criticisms and defenses of the Bush administration, there is no defense of the Obama administration. People here, on the right don't need to rub it in, and people on the left don't seem to want to discuss it. Just a few months ago, there were countless comment about the survival of the Republican Party, endless speculation. Why has that changed? why isn't there the same level of interest in the future of the Democratic Party?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."


Last edited by aceventura3; 02-19-2010 at 02:11 PM..
aceventura3 is offline  
Old 02-19-2010, 02:36 PM   #99 (permalink)
Crazy, indeed
 
Location: the ether
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
I am bored with the above. Trust me, Obama doesn't get 2% of the criticism he could get. I don't even point out most of the easy and obvious areas. In my first post today, I only had one line about Obama, most would have seen that line and understood it was just a guy venting at the politics of the day. In fact, when Bush was President this board thrived because of the criticisms and defenses of the Bush administration, there is no defense of the Obama administration. People here, on the right don't need to rub it in, and people on the left don't seem to want to discuss it. Just a few months ago, there were countless comment about the survival of the Republican Party, endless speculation. Why has that changed? why isn't there the same level of interest in the future of the Democratic Party?
Maybe the reason for that is that you get out what you put in? Maybe the discussion ends because there is a pattern of posting nonsense and then responding with the sort of victimization and metadiscussion above?

I mean, what is the alternative? Seriously discussing how Obama messed up because the fed raised interest rates, even though the fed is independent from the president and 11 of 12 members were either appointed by the FED board of governors or Bush?

As far as discussing the future of the democratic party, wasn't there a thread on Scott Brown and other stuff? Healthcare? Gitmo?


You make it sound like everyone here is an ardent Obama supporter. I have significant problems with him: the stimulus was to small, the new banking regulations too little and too weak, the healthcare reform proposal too weak and poorly sold to the public, he should have prosecuted the Bush people for war crimes, and he seems to be more concerned with appearing moderate and above the fray than actually doing anything. But just because I have these problems with him doesn't mean that I will join any Obama bashing bandwagon just to score a few political points. Just because I disagree with a lot of what he does doesn't mean that I'll buy the "Obama lending money to Brazil to enrich Soros" posts, or the "Obama is to blame for the FED" posts, or the "Obama is the next Herbert Hoover" posts.
dippin is offline  
Old 02-19-2010, 04:37 PM   #100 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Economic Scene - Success of Stimulus Bill Is Noteworthy as Another Is Weighed - NYTimes.com



It looks that about the same time that the stimulus started the economy did a complete 180.
Rekna is offline  
Old 02-19-2010, 05:24 PM   #101 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by dippin View Post
Maybe the reason for that is that you get out what you put in? Maybe the discussion ends because there is a pattern of posting nonsense and then responding with the sort of victimization and metadiscussion above?
I am not a victim of anything. I will do something you won't do, I admit that some of my posts are lame attempt at humor, sarcasm and occasionally in bad taste but I am pretty certain that the vast majority of what I post is certainly not nonsense. And my typical pattern is to initially start off with a prettern serious point, question or observation, it is typically only after getting baited do I go down into the gutter. When I do that I know what I am doing and I know why.

Quote:
I mean, what is the alternative? Seriously discussing how Obama messed up because the fed raised interest rates, even though the fed is independent from the president and 11 of 12 members were either appointed by the FED board of governors or Bush?
If what I posted was not clear, asking for simple clarification would help. The above is not clear to me as to what you are looking for in a response.

---------- Post added at 01:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:21 AM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rekna View Post
Economic Scene - Success of Stimulus Bill Is Noteworthy as Another Is Weighed - NYTimes.com



It looks that about the same time that the stimulus started the economy did a complete 180.
Is it your view that the stimulus saved us from the "brink"? Do you think the stumulus is all the needs to be done? Is simply spending nearly a trillion dollars the answer to future recessions? Do you have concerns of a "double dip", if not why not?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 02-19-2010, 10:12 PM   #102 (permalink)
immoral minority
 
ASU2003's Avatar
 
Location: Back in Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
Is it your view that the stimulus saved us from the "brink"? Do you think the stumulus is all the needs to be done? Is simply spending nearly a trillion dollars the answer to future recessions? Do you have concerns of a "double dip", if not why not?
There should be a government economics course at college. The rules that apply to governments aren't the same as companies or individuals.

1. The banks have been stabilized. If they had not been stabilized, it would take years for the smaller banks to grow to the size required and offer decent rates.

2. A lot of that money has been paid back or may not need to be spent. Recovery.gov is a good concept, but they need to whip up a simple TV show to explain it to people like me.

3. Some calculated 'unknown to me' amount gets paid right back to the government in taxes. I pay about 40-50% in taxes once everything gets added in I believe. And then the money I give to other people gets taxed, and the cycle repeats.

4. The psychological impact on the stock market here and around the world was positive. The stock market can cascade and snowball down fast now that a lot of trades are based on mathematical models by large institutional investors.

I'm not saying that there aren't problems with printing money out of thin air or funding projects that may not of been done (or should not have been done), but I feel that the economy is healthier now than a year ago.
ASU2003 is offline  
Old 02-20-2010, 09:41 AM   #103 (permalink)
Junkie
 
The fact that we are better off now then a year ago is what is important. Is everything fixed? No there is still a lot to do but we are better off.

If you are driving 100 MPH down a freeway the wrong direction you can't simply throw the car in reverse and expect to be going 100 MPH in the right direction, you first have to slow down, then stop, then turn around, then accelerate back up. The same is true with the economy. We can't just make it change directions instantly, it takes work and it takes time. Will Obama get the economy back to where it was, i don't know, but he sure has gone a long way toward that goal. And it is pretty damn clear that the change occurred right when Obama started enacting his plans.
Rekna is offline  
Old 02-20-2010, 12:53 PM   #104 (permalink)
Lennonite Priest
 
pan6467's Avatar
 
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rekna View Post
The fact that we are better off now then a year ago is what is important. Is everything fixed? No there is still a lot to do but we are better off.

If you are driving 100 MPH down a freeway the wrong direction you can't simply throw the car in reverse and expect to be going 100 MPH in the right direction, you first have to slow down, then stop, then turn around, then accelerate back up. The same is true with the economy. We can't just make it change directions instantly, it takes work and it takes time. Will Obama get the economy back to where it was, i don't know, but he sure has gone a long way toward that goal. And it is pretty damn clear that the change occurred right when Obama started enacting his plans.
I personally don't see ANYTHING better than 2 years ago as far Obama is concerned.

What I do see is that gas prices are holding somewhat steady and people are making adjustments. But as for the job market, it's worse, wages are still decreasing, people are still losing decent paying jobs and having to pick up low end wage jobs. People are still defaulting/getting deferments which just ups the interest, on student loans because they don't make enough.

I still see houses in foreclosure, it's easy to say "well they are down... well, how many were foreclosed on before and how many remain empty or bought up dirt cheap and turned into "rentals". We should see the stats on those being evicted.

I still see jobs being shipped overseas and no true jobs here being created. I still see an infrastructure that is falling apart and the excuses of no money to fix them being bandied about. SO what happened to the stimulus money that was supposed to fix our infrastructure and create "shovel ready jobs". I know of 4 major cities in Ohio that their water/sewer systems are being held together with duct tape (almost literally) and will be totally in need of a new system, within the next 2-3 years, IF they are lucky.

I remember posting on here how roughly 75% of our major bridges were in need of repair (most built in the 50's to early 70's and not meant to with hold heavier trucks and the amount of daily traffic they do).

Our roads have gotten worse, but that's a fucked up Ohio thing. For whatever reason we continue to use the same company to repave the same highways every year, regardless of what party is in power.

Government corruption, partisanship and selling out the hard worker is still running rampant and there is NO push from our president or Dem leaders to change that.

Figures can be pulled out of anywhere, what matters is when I see my neighbors, family and friends actually realizing a better standard of living and not going backward.

Going backward should be unacceptable to ANY government official especially a president.

I reiterate, you can state whatever poll or bring out any graph you want to, but it doesn't mean shit when the wages are falling, the classes are moving further apart, and we are being fed bullshit.

There is no reason, whatsoever, that a person who works 40 hours a week should have to live on food stamps, live in fear of foreclosure, need government assistance in ANYWAY. Only reason that happens... wages are not high enough to support a respectable standard of living (a house payment that is decent, but you know with raises every year and maybe a chance to move up, the payments become more and more affordable, basic cable, reasonable utility use, average mileage, maybe a 1 or 2 night out dinner, being able to save a little for Jr's college or that Summer vacation, etc). NOT ONE OF THOSE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A "LUXURY" TO SOMEONE WHO WORKS 40 OR MORE HOURS A WEEK. IT SHOULD BE UNACCEPTABLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE TOP 10% ARE STEADILY INCREASING THEIR WEALTH. FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PART TO MAKE EXCUSES FOR THIS TO BE OK AND FOR A DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT TO NOT WORK TO TRY TO CORRECT THIS IS FUCKING INSANE. The GOP are paid for by the top 5% when did the DEMS sell out?
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"
pan6467 is offline  
Old 02-20-2010, 01:29 PM   #105 (permalink)
Junkie
 
rahl's Avatar
 
Location: Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467 View Post

There is no reason, whatsoever, that a person who works 40 hours a week should have to live on food stamps, live in fear of foreclosure, need government assistance in ANYWAY. Only reason that happens... wages are not high enough to support a respectable standard of living (a house payment that is decent, but you know with raises every year and maybe a chance to move up, the payments become more and more affordable, basic cable, reasonable utility use, average mileage, maybe a 1 or 2 night out dinner, being able to save a little for Jr's college or that Summer vacation, etc). NOT ONE OF THOSE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A "LUXURY" TO SOMEONE WHO WORKS 40 OR MORE HOURS A WEEK. IT SHOULD BE UNACCEPTABLE, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE TOP 10% ARE STEADILY INCREASING THEIR WEALTH. FOR THE DEMOCRATIC PART TO MAKE EXCUSES FOR THIS TO BE OK AND FOR A DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT TO NOT WORK TO TRY TO CORRECT THIS IS FUCKING INSANE. The GOP are paid for by the top 5% when did the DEMS sell out?
Pan this is where personal responsibility has to come into play. Just because you work a 40 hour week, doesn't entitle you to have a $200k house that you can't afford, eat a steak dinner 2 nights a week, or go on vacation. people have been buying things they can't afford for quite a while now. And to blame govn't for peoples' overspending is just dishonest.
__________________
"Your life is Yours alone...Rise up and live it"
rahl is offline  
Old 02-20-2010, 01:54 PM   #106 (permalink)
Junkie
 
dogzilla's Avatar
 
Location: New York
[quote=pan6467;2760566]I personally don't see ANYTHING better than 2 years ago as far Obama is concerned./QUOTE]

Some things are slightly better but I don't see great improvement either. The DJIA has somewhat stabilized up about 20% from where it was when Obama started, but that level seems weak since every time Obama makes a dumb statement about taxing banks or canceling bonuses the stock market drops again for a few days.

The financing crunch from a year and a half ago seems to have eased but I read about small businesses still having problems getting financing and Obama seems convinced he has to do something about that.

Unemployment is up from a year ago and is projected to be around 10% for years.

Foreclosures are still a problem. Car sales and home sales were up a bit but that seems more like stealing future sales thanks to Obama's giveaways with cash for clunkers and home purchase credit. I read stories shortly after cash for clunkers ended that car sales fell off the cliff again and there was great concern that the same would happen with home sales if the home purchase credit ended.

Now I'm reading that commercial foreclosures are expected to be a problem. I'm reading complaints that the credit card companies are boosting rates again.

I think the reality is that there has been a fundamental shrinkage in the economy thanks to people no longer being able to use their home equity as a piggy bank and no longer being able to live on credit. I think Obama is going to have to deal with that instead of trying to artificially inflate the economy and stick the taxpayer with a huge debt.


Quote:
Originally Posted by pan6467 View Post
There is no reason, whatsoever, that a person who works 40 hours a week should have to live on food stamps, live in fear of foreclosure, need government assistance in ANYWAY.
So where do businesses get the money to make this happen? Most businesses are not making huge profits where they can afford to pay increased salaries and remain competitive. And no, I don't think excessive executive salaries are the rule. Maybe in some large corporations, but in small businesses I think lots of owners are just getting by. I have inlaws who run a small software business and they are commenting all the time about how the money just isn't there.

Secondly, what is a reasonable income? If it's say $15.00/hr, then how is paying the person who formerly made $8.00 /hr $15.00 hr remotely fair to the person who was skilled enough to earn $15.00/hr? What happens to his salary? If it stays at $15.00/hr then why should he improve his skills when all he has to do is show up at work to collect $15.00/hr? If the $15.00/hr guy's salary now increases to $23.00/hr or $30.00/hr then what happens to inflation?

I've been thru this personally and the answer in my opinion is not to just pay everybody what the government says is sufficient to cover his living expenses. When I started working, the best job I could find was at just under 2x minimum wage. I decided that I didn't like that, so I spent the time learning skills that were needed to get hired by the company that I wanted to work for in the first place. It took me a few years bt managed to get to where I wanted to be.
dogzilla is offline  
Old 02-20-2010, 02:05 PM   #107 (permalink)
warrior bodhisattva
 
Baraka_Guru's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
I'm wondering how much of the problem with the average American has to do with things other than real wages. (BTW, do we know how real wages have fared in the U.S. over the past couple of decades?)

What about other issues such as the savings rate or the debt-to-income ratios of the average American household?

Jobs will get back on track when the economy does, not before. And we won't know it's happening until after the fact. It will be a long, slow recovery. Few people are expecting otherwise.

The next time around, I hope many will have learned some hard lessons. You cannot go about your business expecting something like this cannot happen.

Is it perhaps that too many were reaching too far for the American dream?

You have to know the risks. You then have to know how much you are willing to take.
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot
Baraka_Guru is offline  
Old 02-20-2010, 04:03 PM   #108 (permalink)
Lennonite Priest
 
pan6467's Avatar
 
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru View Post
I'm wondering how much of the problem with the average American has to do with things other than real wages. (BTW, do we know how real wages have fared in the U.S. over the past couple of decades?)
I believe it was one of the links I posted in this thread. It showed a steady and marked decrease since 1995.


Quote:
What about other issues such as the savings rate or the debt-to-income ratios of the average American household?
Quote:
Jobs will get back on track when the economy does, not before. And we won't know it's happening until after the fact. It will be a long, slow recovery. Few people are expecting otherwise.
Perhaps, but I don't see wages increasing for a very long time.

Quote:
The next time around, I hope many will have learned some hard lessons. You cannot go about your business expecting something like this cannot happen.
We have become a somewhat "live for today society" for numerous reasons, primarily I believe it the news feeding us pablum and our politicians being flat out corrupt.

Quote:
Is it perhaps that too many were reaching too far for the American dream?
And what exactly were people reaching too far for? When everything goes up but wages there is serious trouble.

And as the hard working class and lower 90% of the people are told "They are over reaching", the top 10% continue to grow wealth off the backs of the working man, paying him lower wages, outsourcing jobs and having government in their back pocket.

Quote:
You have to know the risks. You then have to know how much you are willing to take.
So, someone working 40 hours and wanting to live within his means but can't because wages are, IMHO, artificially held down.... it is that worker's fault for wanting a decent life?
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"
pan6467 is offline  
Old 02-20-2010, 05:11 PM   #109 (permalink)
Who You Crappin?
 
Derwood's Avatar
 
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru View Post

The next time around, I hope many will have learned some hard lessons. You cannot go about your business expecting something like this cannot happen.
There's a lengthy article in the newest Rolling Stone that says the banks are setting us up for another fall here shortly. I haven't read all of it, but I'll summarize when I'm done
__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel
Derwood is offline  
Old 02-21-2010, 02:26 PM   #110 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derwood View Post
There's a lengthy article in the newest Rolling Stone that says the banks are setting us up for another fall here shortly. I haven't read all of it, but I'll summarize when I'm done
I have not seen the Rolling Stone article, but as the financial crisis gets studied what we will find is most of the problems revolve around the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act in 1999, signed by Bill Clinton, written by Republicans with virtually unanimous bi-partisan support. This allowed commercial banks to engage in investment banking activities, to date nothing has changed. The exposure of a catastrophic repeat is very real. Congress needs to act separating commercial banking activity from investment banking activity. This is not a "failed Bush administration policy" it is a failed banking policy. It would be nice for people to stop the blame game and get the job done. So, in spite of Obama's rhetoric we are still at risk, and I think or hope he knows it. Volcker seems to have Obama's ear and is certainty sending that message.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 02-21-2010, 07:44 PM   #111 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
I have not seen the Rolling Stone article, but as the financial crisis gets studied what we will find is most of the problems revolve around the repeal of the Glass-Steagall act in 1999, signed by Bill Clinton, written by Republicans with virtually unanimous bi-partisan support. This allowed commercial banks to engage in investment banking activities, to date nothing has changed. The exposure of a catastrophic repeat is very real. Congress needs to act separating commercial banking activity from investment banking activity. This is not a "failed Bush administration policy" it is a failed banking policy. It would be nice for people to stop the blame game and get the job done. So, in spite of Obama's rhetoric we are still at risk, and I think or hope he knows it. Volcker seems to have Obama's ear and is certainty sending that message.
ace...I am actually impressed that a free market, "no regs" guy like you is willing to acknowledge that the financial services modernization bill that effectively repealed most of Glass-Steagall was responsible for the abuses of the last 10 years.

IMO, it was compounded by Bush's SEC chairman turning a blind eye to those abuses.

And the economy was further adversely impacted in terms of debt/deficit by taking a budget surplus (and paying down the debt) and instead of continuing that policy, enacting the 01 and 03 tax cuts (at a cost of $1 trillion) that provided little or no stimulus...and an unnecessary invasion and occupation of Iraq (at a cost of another $1 trillion before its over).

But now that you recognize the impact of the de-regulation of the banking/financial services sector, are you ready to re-regulate?

The House passed a bill (with zero Republican votes) late last year that the WH supports.

The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act addresses:
sub-prime lending - The bill outlaws many of the egregious and predatory industry practices that fueled the subprime lending boom and establishes a simple standard for all home loans: institutions must ensure that borrowers can repay the loans they are sold

derivatives - the bill regulates the over-the-counter derivatives marketplace, requiring all standardized swap transactions to be cleared and traded on an exchange

bail-outs - the bill requires big banks and other financial institutions (with $50 billion in assets) to foot the bill for any bailouts in the future. These institutions would pay assessments based on a company’s potential risk to the whole financial system if they were to fail.

ponzi schemes - the bill strengthens the SEC’s powers so that it can better protect investors from Madoff type frauds

consumer protections - the bill creates a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency to protect consumers and small businesses by ensuring that bank loans, mortgages, credit cards are fair, affordable, understandable, and transparent.
This certainly is not the answer to the long-term need to retool the US economy....but it would help prevent a recurrence of those abuses.

---------- Post added at 10:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:38 PM ----------

The Recovery Act was never intended to "fix" the economy, but rather to stop the free-fall, jump start the economy and put it in the right direction.

To that end, it included significant investments in alternative energy programs, health technology, a national broadband program, etc. where, in recent years, the US has fallen behind China, India, EU countries and even Iran (see below) in science, engineering and technology....IMO, these are essential to growing the economy in the right direction.

We are no longer the "great innovator" and if we dont address that fact, the long-term outlook for our place in a global economy is not good.

An interesting article (and report) on "geopolitical shifts in knowledge creation"
Quote:
Science-Metrix, a data-analysis company in Montreal, Canada, has published a detailed report (PDF) on "geopolitical shifts in knowledge creation" since 1980. "Asia is catching up even more rapidly than previously thought, Europe is holding its position more than most would expect, and the Middle East is a region to watch," says the report's author, Eric Archambault....

...Science-Metrix also predicts that this year, China will publish as many peer-reviewed papers in natural sciences and engineering as the US. If current trends continue, by 2015 China will match the US across all disciplines – although the US may publish more in the life and social sciences until 2030.

China's prominence in world science is known to have been growing, but Science-Metrix has discovered that its output of peer-reviewed papers has been growing more than five times faster than that of the US....

..."European attitudes towards collaboration are bearing fruit", writes Archambaut. While Asia's growth in output was mirrored by North America's fall, Europe, which invests heavily in cross-border scientific collaboration, held its own, and now produces over a third of the world's science, the largest regional share. Asia produces 29 per cent and North America 28 per cent.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...y-country.html
Knowledge creation (R&D) leads to job creation and a 21st century economy.

We better refocus our efforts and that takes both public and private commitments and investments!
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 02-21-2010 at 08:22 PM..
dc_dux is offline  
Old 02-22-2010, 11:27 AM   #112 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux View Post
ace...I am actually impressed that a free market, "no regs" guy like you is willing to acknowledge that the financial services modernization bill that effectively repealed most of Glass-Steagall was responsible for the abuses of the last 10 years.
I understand debate technique and the use of hyperbole to emphasize a point, but to suggest I am a "no regs" guy is a bit over the top. I am not sure if you actually believe your summation of my views or if it is something else. Which is it?

Quote:
IMO, it was compounded by Bush's SEC chairman turning a blind eye to those abuses.
I would not characterize investment banking activities as an abuse. There are winners and losers. the dramatic shift in market conditions was compounded in my view by government, and there was certainly no legitimate reason for the government to selectively bailout some and not others.

Quote:
And the economy was further adversely impacted in terms of debt/deficit by taking a budget surplus (and paying down the debt) and instead of continuing that policy, enacting the 01 and 03 tax cuts (at a cost of $1 trillion) that provided little or no stimulus...and an unnecessary invasion and occupation of Iraq (at a cost of another $1 trillion before its over).
This goes off point. The federal deficit had virtually nothing to do with the financial crisis. It is very common for an economy in war to increase its debt. And deficit spending as a percentage of GDP was in line with historical averages. Even with the tax cuts, taxes collected went up. The real problem with the deficit is spending and the accounting tricks used to raid social security.

Quote:
But now that you recognize the impact of the de-regulation of the banking/financial services sector, are you ready to re-regulate?
Again, I am not clear on what your intent is in the way you characterize the issue. Banks were never de-regulated, I would say they were wrongly regulated. The government did not let the hens run free, the government let the wolves into the hen house thinking it was a good thing.

Quote:
The House passed a bill (with zero Republican votes) late last year that the WH supports.
If true it should have passed and become law, the WH had a super majority.

I currently support reinstatement of Glass-Steagal, past Fed chairs support it, and there are some conservatives who do as well. If the WH supports it, I think Obama could get it done. I think this would be a major win for him, and could re-set the tone in Washington. I have no interest in a repeat of the financial crisis or a double dip recession. Now is the time to act.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."


Last edited by aceventura3; 02-22-2010 at 11:30 AM..
aceventura3 is offline  
Old 02-22-2010, 12:30 PM   #113 (permalink)
Crazy, indeed
 
Location: the ether
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post


This goes off point. The federal deficit had virtually nothing to do with the financial crisis. It is very common for an economy in war to increase its debt. And deficit spending as a percentage of GDP was in line with historical averages. Even with the tax cuts, taxes collected went up. The real problem with the deficit is spending and the accounting tricks used to raid social security.
The federal deficit during the Bush years had A LOT to do with the financial crisis. Part of the reason a bubble was created was that the need to finance that deficit led to a huge influx of foreign money into the US, helping foster excess liquidity, risk taking, and inflating the bubble.

From a 2005 paper by Menzie Chinn:
Quote:
Right now, nonresidents (foreign firms, individuals, and governments) are funding America’s budget deficits. In the absence of action, the government’s financing needs will increase over time, meaning that more debt will be issued at a faster and faster
pace. Foreigners do not have an infinite appetite for Treasuries, so yields will have to rise.
As more U.S. government debt is dumped into financial markets, either U.S. interest rates will rise relative to foreign interest rates after accounting for expected depreciation, or the dollar will plummet...
How will this play out in the broader economy? With interest rates spiking, the housing sector will experience a sharp correction. Since much of the typical American household’s wealth is in the form of housing, less wealthy consumers in particular will suddenly be forced to cut back on their spending. The weakening dollar will put upward pressure on import prices, which will then confront the Fed with a choice between accommodating the shock and stifling inflationary pressures. To the extent that the Fed opts for greater price stability, interest rates will have to rise by even more. All of these events will result in a deep recession.

As far as the size of those deficits go, the problem wasn't the size itself, but that they came during an economic expansion. Deficits are and should be bigger during a recession, but when you have deficits during an expansion, it only makes the recovery from the next recession that much harder.
dippin is offline  
Old 02-22-2010, 12:35 PM   #114 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
COSTOFWAR.COM - The Cost of War
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 02-22-2010, 12:43 PM   #115 (permalink)
warrior bodhisattva
 
Baraka_Guru's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: East-central Canada
roachboy, the number doesn't look so bad when you flip it over to the cost of the wars to each taxpayer. In that case, it's only $7,228 currently. That's less than $1,000 per year, certainly that's not too much to bear, is it?
__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot
Baraka_Guru is offline  
Old 02-23-2010, 08:13 AM   #116 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru View Post
roachboy, the number doesn't look so bad when you flip it over to the cost of the wars to each taxpayer. In that case, it's only $7,228 currently. That's less than $1,000 per year, certainly that's not too much to bear, is it?

I would rather have my $7K, or better yet my $7K minus the cost of universal health care.
Rekna is offline  
Old 02-23-2010, 08:30 AM   #117 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru View Post
roachboy, the number doesn't look so bad when you flip it over to the cost of the wars to each taxpayer. In that case, it's only $7,228 currently. That's less than $1,000 per year, certainly that's not too much to bear, is it?
Interesting question. An answer requires speculation regarding any assumed benefit to war. There have been some wars initiated with no social benefit to any one, some for example simply ego or emotionally driven. However, some wars have been fought with what some would see as significant social benefit, but how do you measure that? If we did the exercise with WWII, calculating the cost and asking if it was worth it, what would the answer be? Or, what if the Allies initiated preemptive military action rather than responsive military action and we did this exercise, what would the answer be?
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."


Last edited by aceventura3; 02-23-2010 at 08:33 AM..
aceventura3 is offline  
Old 02-23-2010, 08:39 AM   #118 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
ace, you cannot possibly be serious in equating the debacle in iraq with world war 2.
you cannot be.
so your question is moot.

baraka: have a look at some of the other options that parse the squandered money differently. like by amount of money that coulda been spent on health care or job creation or infrastructure development or research & development that's instead been pissed away in the afterburn of the neo-con's fiasco in iraq. some imperial dreams burn alot of fuel on their way into the ash-heap.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 02-23-2010, 11:33 AM   #119 (permalink)
Still Free
 
Cimarron29414's Avatar
 
Location: comfortably perched at the top of the bell curve!
You are going to eat your words, roachboy, when we get terror to sign an unconditional surrender.
__________________
Gives a man a halo, does mead.

"Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."
Cimarron29414 is offline  
Old 02-23-2010, 11:39 AM   #120 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy View Post
ace, you cannot possibly be serious in equating the debacle in iraq with world war 2.
you cannot be.
so your question is moot.
Yea, I was looking in the mirror this morning thinking about how moot I am. I actually like being moot, but forgive me for interfering with your fallible, oops, infallible judgment.

With all my moot regards,


Ace

---------- Post added at 07:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:33 PM ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cimarron29414 View Post
You are going to eat your words, roachboy, when we get terror to sign an unconditional surrender.
Assume we did not use our military and even with the use of our military there have been costs due to our "war on terror" or their war on us. What are those costs? What would they be if we had not used our military in war since 2001? I bet you just want to pretend that we live in a happy, happy world.How about we go to the ME and start a big camp fire and sing our way to peace and happiness. I bet Twinker Bell would sprinkle us all with her magic fairy dust and we can be happier and happier. Happy, happy happy.

{added} Sorry for the tone above. I assume people see what I see, in this case it seems obvious to me that it very important when looking at costs to look at benefits. To look at costs alone seems a bit odd to me. I think looking at the benefits and the costs is very important to the issue put on the table here, to suggest that it is not is something I assumed was dishonest, perhaps it wasn't, perhaps it was something else - and that something else is what I don't see.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."


Last edited by aceventura3; 02-23-2010 at 01:25 PM..
aceventura3 is offline  
 

Tags
herbert, hoover, obama


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:32 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360