What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Obama 6(...66)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Obama 6(...66)

Not really. Spending on certain sectors can have a positive feedback effect on the economy, getting more bang for the buck. I'll use an example which highlights both this and my second bullet from my earlier post, which you seem content to turning a blind eye on.

Of the hundreds (actually, isn't it thousands?) of earmarks in the bill, one that is easiest to remember, because of how shameful it is, is the 3 or 4 million dollar earmark to build a tunnel so turtles could crawl under a road instead of across it. While this was money in the pockets of the contractors and their employees, it's a pretty irresponsible building project to be included in a bill whose money is designed to stimulate the economy.

Money changing hands and cycling through, you say - I agree. Once the contractors walk away, how will this stupid turtle tunnel promote that. Why not have paid them to build a shopping center? Once they walk away, their efforts will have put X more people back to work as the new stores hire employees and created a new forum for money changing hands and cycling through. You see what I mean about feedback? Target the money that's spent on projects which will go on keeping the wheels spinning round long after the contractors walk away. Urban renovation projects, as long as they aren't politically corrupted, are good too. Build and expand highways to promote economic growth in areas poised to expand. It's all about commerce, baby. :)

And as I said, allocating spending toward certain areas can have a more effective long term benefit to the country. But in the short term, any spending is positive, no matter who's doing it, or what it's being spent on. Those contractors can then buy a week's groceries, get their car fixed, buy a new ATV, whatever. That money in turn flows to the checkout girl at the register, and the mechanic, who do the same. So can the nurse at the medical clinic that's able to stay open for another six months, or at the employees at the poverty counseling center, or extending unemployment benefits.

Yeah, let's build another strip mall, so that one can sit vacant like all the rest of them that have been closing down in this economy. Brilliant. Doesn't do a damm bit of good long term if you don't have tenants for it. Right now, there's about a thousand empty Circuit City buildings across this country, and I don't see any companies snapping those up to put businesses into.

And I think there would have been more money advocated for infrastructure, but the Repubs had to have their tax cuts. Likewise for all those employees that state government has laid off to balance their budget, since they didn't get as much direct aid in favor of those same tax cuts. What immediate stimulus does a tax cut have?

Oh, and BTW, my compliments on your "some of my best friends are black" comment earlier. That's nice. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama 6(...66)

But by far, the biggest source of anti-Obamism are Republicans who can't get over the fact that their party has sunk to historic lows. This is the same bitterness that Clinton encountered when he ended the Reagan era. For these people, it wouldn't matter if Obama was a white Southerner (like Clinton) instead of a black Northerner. They never imagined being in this position and are willing to cling to any stupid rumor or minor issue because they're sick of losing and want to relive past glory. There are less of these people around now than 10 years ago, but they can still make a lot of noise.
I agree with this but it's not to relive past glories. It's to snipe and nitpick and seize any issue, no matter how small, to be contrarian on, to weaken, deligitimize, and impugn this presidency until they can achieve their God-given right to be back in charge of running this country again.

If it's good for Obama, they're against it, no matter how good it might be for this country. Because if it's good for Obama, the day they can return to power grows ever further and further away.
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

Obama's approval rating is at 50%

Still 30% above the previous office holder's.

Get back to me when he's sitting in the low 20's, and then try to tell me this says he's got no right to be leading the country where he wants it to go. :rolleyes:
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

Wow dude, you really have a warped view of all those that dare disagree with The One's agenda.

Obama's approval rating is at 50% so let's do the math using your estimates. 5% of Americans are just fringe lunatics... ok, you might not be so far off there. 10% of Americans are racist and disagree with Obama because of his skin color and middle name. I'd actually cut both of those numbers by a third, but whatever, close enough....

These are the kickers though. 30% of Americans are nothing more than bitter Republicans that don't care about the issues - they're just holding a 16 year long grudge and are being petty about it and are cutting off their nose to spite their face. Seeing how, that's the large majority of the Republican party, I can see how you would want to stereotype Republicans as morons.

And - and this is very telling about your attitude towards the average American - only 5%, or 1 in 20, Americans is following the issues and has come to the conclusion that Obama's agenda is a bad path for America. (While the other 10 of 20 intelligent Americans presumably agree, right? Intelligent people favor Obama's agenda by a 10 to 1 margin....) Wow, Zogby and Gallup blew it, they have no idea how stupid the average American is - Obama really is The One!

Honestly, with your views of the average American I can totally see why you have that "F you moron, I don't need to debate you people intelligently" attitude of yours.

Nice try, but Obama's disapproval rating is in the high 30's to 40 on average. To that end, and as I believe Slap Shot said, a vast majority of the opposition does not care on iota about his policies nor can probably separate his actual plans from rumors like "death panels" and "selling the country to the Muslims". You in fact are typical of the whiny conservative who can't come to grips that his ideology is on life support and as popular as the IRS right now. Check out the GOP's ratings as a party sometime and get back to me, will ya?:D
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

And as I said, allocating spending toward certain areas can have a more effective long term benefit to the country. But in the short term, any spending is positive, no matter who's doing it, or what it's being spent on. Those contractors can then buy a week's groceries, get their car fixed, buy a new ATV, whatever. That money in turn flows to the checkout girl at the register, and the mechanic, who do the same. So can the nurse at the medical clinic that's able to stay open for another six months, or at the employees at the poverty counseling center, or extending unemployment benefits.
Not that any liberal ever buys this argument when applied to military spending... Well, okay - maybe Zell Miller. ;)
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

TF, multiply that by 4 and I'd say you were close

I think I'm going to start another thread enumerating the things he hasn't accomplished and ways in which he's trampling on the Constitution. That way I can see Rover clearly avoiding the thread rather than continuing to derail those two "disapproval" topics with his DNC talking points in this one.
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

But by far, the biggest source of anti-Obamism are Republicans who can't get over the fact that their party has sunk to historic lows. This is the same bitterness that Clinton encountered when he ended the Reagan era. For these people, it wouldn't matter if Obama was a white Southerner (like Clinton) instead of a black Northerner. They never imagined being in this position and are willing to cling to any stupid rumor or minor issue because they're sick of losing and want to relive past glory. There are less of these people around now than 10 years ago, but they can still make a lot of noise.

In a word (well, two): sour grapes. I'm reminded of a comment an acquaintance made during Bush Senior's presidency in the late 80's. She was a history professor at UT-Austin, and she reported one of her friends opining that Bush "must have stolen the election" because "everybody they knew voted for Dukakis." There are districts that went 70-30 for McCain (I live in one and most of my coworkers live in others), and a lot of those people firmly believe that the whole country is just like them, and therefore any time they don't get their way the result is because of some evil conspiracy by feminists, gays, Hollywood, ACORN, gun control activists, Vegans, whatever.

Just because you're sincere doesn't make you right.

Rufus said:
If it's good for Obama, they're against it, no matter how good it might be for this country. Because if it's good for Obama, the day they can return to power grows ever further and further away.

That degree of cynicism is, IMHO, only present in the tiny fraction of conservatives who are GOP politicians, make-believe "news" shills, and operatives whose 24/7 job is to get back into power. The vast majority of conservatives will support Obama when the chips are really down, just as the vast majority of liberals gave Bush a chance to be a real president after 9/11. Bush blew that chance by being a mere partisan opportunist. Hopefully we'll never endure a disaster of that magnitude to test the right's patriotism, but I'm sure they would come through too.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama 6(...66)

spending is spending, it doesn't matter what it's spent on, or who's spending it. If consmers won't, then government will. Certainly spending on certain things provides a long term benefit for the country, but any spending, on anything, puts dollars into the economy. Dollars that replaced those not being spent by consumers.

Spending isn't just spending. If you just spend without an increase of production (much like we having going on now) then you are just inflating the currency.

If you have $10 in an economy and 10 hamburgers its going to cost you $1/hamburger.

If you double the money in the economy to $20 without making more hamburgers all thats going to happen is an increase in the price of hamburgers to $2.

Little of the "stimulus" went into anything that will make the country more productive. The main thing that happened is more dollars being put into non-productive sectors. Those dollars will have to be paid back with interest so that is going to hamper the economy in the future as one of two things will have to happen. Either taxes will go up or inflation (another form of tax) will kick in. Either one will wipe out any recovery that would have taken place eventually regardless of gov't action.
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

Today's humor

lt.dc2e1eaaaa360ef2bb743b2ba181a7f4.gif
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

Nice try, but Obama's disapproval rating is in the high 30's to 40 on average. To that end, and as I believe Slap Shot said, a vast majority of the opposition does not care on iota about his policies nor can probably separate his actual plans from rumors like "death panels" and "selling the country to the Muslims". You in fact are typical of the whiny conservative who can't come to grips that his ideology is on life support and as popular as the IRS right now. Check out the GOP's ratings as a party sometime and get back to me, will ya?:D

Won't matter. Once Saturday Night Live gets ahold of you, you're through.
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

Still 30% above the previous office holder's.

Get back to me when he's sitting in the low 20's, and then try to tell me this says he's got no right to be leading the country where he wants it to go. :rolleyes:
What? :confused: Bush was at around 80% at this point (it was right after 9/11). 30% ABOVE the "current" office holder's. Even 8 yrs in, when he gave BO's big bailouts the headstart last fall, the lowest he fell was around 30%. Obama, in his first year has fallen further and faster than any other president. Not that that's a good thing for the country, but at least it shows the bloom is off and people are starting to wake up to the consequences of the 08/09 bailout bonanza.
Spending isn't just spending. If you just spend without an increase of production (much like we having going on now) then you are just inflating the currency.

If you have $10 in an economy and 10 hamburgers its going to cost you $1/hamburger.

If you double the money in the economy to $20 without making more hamburgers all thats going to happen is an increase in the price of hamburgers to $2.

Little of the "stimulus" went into anything that will make the country more productive. The main thing that happened is more dollars being put into non-productive sectors. Those dollars will have to be paid back with interest so that is going to hamper the economy in the future as one of two things will have to happen. Either taxes will go up or inflation (another form of tax) will kick in. Either one will wipe out any recovery that would have taken place eventually regardless of gov't action.
We appreciate what you're doing here, and you're absolutely right of course, but your wisdom will fly right over the heads of these people.
I probably shouldn't post at all the morning after the end of baseball.
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

Spending isn't just spending. If you just spend without an increase of production (much like we having going on now) then you are just inflating the currency.

If you have $10 in an economy and 10 hamburgers its going to cost you $1/hamburger.

If you double the money in the economy to $20 without making more hamburgers all thats going to happen is an increase in the price of hamburgers to $2.

Little of the "stimulus" went into anything that will make the country more productive. The main thing that happened is more dollars being put into non-productive sectors. Those dollars will have to be paid back with interest so that is going to hamper the economy in the future as one of two things will have to happen. Either taxes will go up or inflation (another form of tax) will kick in. Either one will wipe out any recovery that would have taken place eventually regardless of gov't action.

Why is it that common sense and basic economics like this so rarely appears in the national dialogue anymore? :(
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

Why is it that common sense and basic economics like this so rarely appears in the national dialogue anymore? :(

Because too many people want to feel good and get the quick fix. Stimulus spending gives them a sense of that even though anyone with a brain knows the real problem is we have too much debt (as a people and as a government)... hence the term "debt recession".
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

at least it shows the bloom is off and people are starting to wake up to the consequences of the 08/09 bailout bonanza

You really think it reflects policy? Approval ratings jump and dive over the course of a presidency -- why would people suddenly and simultaneously reverse their opinion on policy, en masse?

I think it's much more indicative of:

(1) Approval will be artificially high right after an election because of all the hype behind the candidate and the sharpening of the choice.

(2) Approval will fall immediately after election or reelection because of the cessation of the effects described in (1).

(3) External effects (war fever, etc) can drive approval through the roof for a short period, creating the illusion both of spectacular rise and spectacular fall, when really nothing has changed.

(4) Approval tracks the economy more closely than anything else.
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

You really think it reflects policy? Approval ratings jump and dive over the course of a presidency -- why would people suddenly and simultaneously reverse their opinion on policy, en masse?

I think it's much more indicative of:

(1) Approval will be artificially high right after an election because of all the hype behind the candidate and the sharpening of the choice.

(2) Approval will fall immediately after election or reelection because of the cessation of the effects described in (1).

(3) External effects (war fever, etc) can drive approval through the roof for a short period, creating the illusion both of spectacular rise and spectacular fall, when really nothing has changed.

(4) Approval tracks the economy more closely than anything else.

will you knock it off with all the common sense. I'm trying to rabble-rouse here.
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

Why is it that common sense and basic economics like this so rarely appears in the national dialogue anymore? :(

What? :confused: Bush was at around 80% at this point (it was right after 9/11). 30% ABOVE the "current" office holder's. Even 8 yrs in, when he gave BO's big bailouts the headstart last fall, the lowest he fell was around 30%. Obama, in his first year has fallen further and faster than any other president. Not that that's a good thing for the country, but at least it shows the bloom is off and people are starting to wake up to the consequences of the 08/09 bailout bonanza.

We appreciate what you're doing here, and you're absolutely right of course, but your wisdom will fly right over the heads of these people.
I probably shouldn't post at all the morning after the end of baseball.

Great stuff indeed, but When Rover and Kepler are so engorged in apologetics for their Big O Man, well, it won't really sail over their heads, but rather bounce senselessly off their tinfoil head armor.
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

Great stuff indeed, but When Rover and Kepler are so engorged in apologetics for their Big O Man, well, it won't really sail over their heads, but rather bounce senselessly off their tinfoil head armor.

I wouldn't put Kepler and Rover in the same category. Rover is a frothing-at-the-mouth partisan. Kepler has his leanings, but certainly can engage in reasoned discussion at lot more than Rover tries to.
 
Re: Obama 6(...66)

I wouldn't put Kepler and Rover in the same category. Rover is a frothing-at-the-mouth partisan. Kepler has his leanings, but certainly can engage in reasoned discussion at lot more than Rover tries to.


Oh, sure. Kepler has the ability to reason and engage in fruitful discourse, but when he states (piling on top of Rover's BS) a short while ago that the only reason anyone can critique Obama is simply due to "sour grapes"....well, that doesn't match your description or what he's capable of.

He's in the beltway. Rover works for a government bail out. I wouldn't expect anything more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top