dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
Yeah, except the common folk don't get this.
Yeah, except the common folk don't get this.
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.
- Status
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
No, you're not wrong. The Federal Reserve has shown no balls whatsoever when it comes to raising interest rates - and their inflation targets are a joke. How meaningful is an inflation guage when you exclude food and energy costs?
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
I thought one of the many wonderful characteristics of the Obama's health care reform was that it was going to be a major economic stimulant. Oh, and spending a trillion and a half dollars a year that the feds don't have was supposed to juice the economy enough to overcome pretty much anything.
I thought one of the many wonderful characteristics of the Obama's health care reform was that it was going to be a major economic stimulant. Oh, and spending a trillion and a half dollars a year that the feds don't have was supposed to juice the economy enough to overcome pretty much anything.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
I thought the argument about HCR stimulus was it would help over time by decreasing the burden on individuals' health care costs? That certainly needs time to work, considering most of HCR won't even kick in for years.
I'm only going to play devil's advocate here, so please shoot* Krugman, not me, but there was actually a pretty strong chorus at the time that the stimulus wasn't large enough. You may think that's crazy. I don't know enough either way, but it sure sounds like throwing good money after bad to me.
I'm all for getting it all back by uncapping the payroll tax, though.
(* but not really. We know how you gun nuts are...
)
I thought the argument about HCR stimulus was it would help over time by decreasing the burden on individuals' health care costs? That certainly needs time to work, considering most of HCR won't even kick in for years.
I'm only going to play devil's advocate here, so please shoot* Krugman, not me, but there was actually a pretty strong chorus at the time that the stimulus wasn't large enough. You may think that's crazy. I don't know enough either way, but it sure sounds like throwing good money after bad to me.
I'm all for getting it all back by uncapping the payroll tax, though.
(* but not really. We know how you gun nuts are...
)
Last edited:
WeWantMore
New member
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
The long national Steele-mare is over.
The long national Steele-mare is over.
Slap Shot
I got nothing
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
Better to learn to adjust than be a thick-headed mule.
Better to learn to adjust than be a thick-headed mule.
Foxton
Banned
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
Like the new guy is going to be any better. Although he didn't screw up a book quote so I guess it's an improvement.
WeWantMore
New member
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
Honestly, it's not that hard a job. Raise money, don't say anything stupid, raise more money, don't say anything stupid, repeat for two years. Steele was a big 0 for 2.
Honestly, it's not that hard a job. Raise money, don't say anything stupid, raise more money, don't say anything stupid, repeat for two years. Steele was a big 0 for 2.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
St. Clown
Liberal Rebel Scum, apparently
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
I'd like to see McCain-Feingold repealed. It hasn't done a thing to change the tone in political ads. In fact, I'd say they've gotten worse. The money that would have once gone directly to the candidate now gets branched off into a few directions surrounding the candidate of your choice. This also provides political cover for the candidate once the mud starts flying. You get ads that state things like, Bill Berditzman supports more hand guns on the street. Bill Berditzman supports the gangs and the violence they represent. Bill Berditzman supports child rape. Bill Berditzman will rape your little girl, we saw him peeping through your window last night. ....This ad is not sponsored by any candidate.
Let's re-channel as much of the money as we can back to the candidates directly and force them to take responsibility at the polls for message of their campaigns.
As for the environment/energy, I bet we see some action in the House on trying to repeal the ethenol subsidy. Does anybody remember the list of groups that came out against that subsidy this past year? Not even Al Gore supported renewing it. The only supportering group of the subsidy was the corn farming lobby. Ultimately nothing will come of it because people seem to think the Iowa caucus being first should hold some extraordinary weight. I hate it.
I'd like to see McCain-Feingold repealed. It hasn't done a thing to change the tone in political ads. In fact, I'd say they've gotten worse. The money that would have once gone directly to the candidate now gets branched off into a few directions surrounding the candidate of your choice. This also provides political cover for the candidate once the mud starts flying. You get ads that state things like, Bill Berditzman supports more hand guns on the street. Bill Berditzman supports the gangs and the violence they represent. Bill Berditzman supports child rape. Bill Berditzman will rape your little girl, we saw him peeping through your window last night. ....This ad is not sponsored by any candidate.
Let's re-channel as much of the money as we can back to the candidates directly and force them to take responsibility at the polls for message of their campaigns.
As for the environment/energy, I bet we see some action in the House on trying to repeal the ethenol subsidy. Does anybody remember the list of groups that came out against that subsidy this past year? Not even Al Gore supported renewing it. The only supportering group of the subsidy was the corn farming lobby. Ultimately nothing will come of it because people seem to think the Iowa caucus being first should hold some extraordinary weight. I hate it.
WeWantMore
New member
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
Was McCain-Feingold's main aim to change the tone? Either way, the real big parts of the law were struck down last year anyways.
Was McCain-Feingold's main aim to change the tone? Either way, the real big parts of the law were struck down last year anyways.
St. Clown
Liberal Rebel Scum, apparently
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
Even with that, there should be complete repeal. It was a bad law and Washington should recognize that publicly.
It's main goal, as I remember it being claimed during the legislative process, was to limit the influence of money on politics, to limit the direct influence upon the candidates by disallowing those large dollar donations that always get villified. I think there was another, unstated goal of protecting incumbants by limiting the funds a challenger could raise.
Even with that, there should be complete repeal. It was a bad law and Washington should recognize that publicly.
It's main goal, as I remember it being claimed during the legislative process, was to limit the influence of money on politics, to limit the direct influence upon the candidates by disallowing those large dollar donations that always get villified. I think there was another, unstated goal of protecting incumbants by limiting the funds a challenger could raise.
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
How is the 50 year War on Poverty going?I thought the argument about HCR stimulus was it would help over time by decreasing the burden on individuals' health care costs? That certainly needs time to work, considering most of HCR won't even kick in for years.
I'm only going to play devil's advocate here, so please shoot* Krugman, not me, but there was actually a pretty strong chorus at the time that the stimulus wasn't large enough. You may think that's crazy. I don't know enough either way, but it sure sounds like throwing good money after bad to me.
I'm all for getting it all back by uncapping the payroll tax, though.
(* but not really. We know how you gun nuts are...
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
Considering the poverty rate dropped throughout the period of Dem control of Congress from the 30's through 70's, despite all measures having to be sold as entitlements rather than targeting poverty solely, and despite the right's constant smearing of every measure from social security to Medicare as tyranny, not bad at all. The situation predictably deteriorated after Reagan, but we manged to hold off the worst ravages of plutocracy for about 50 years, saved the American Dream, and didn't wind up with a wealth structure similar to a banana republic which would have happened if the divine right of wealth types had had their way.
Thanks for asking.
Considering the poverty rate dropped throughout the period of Dem control of Congress from the 30's through 70's, despite all measures having to be sold as entitlements rather than targeting poverty solely, and despite the right's constant smearing of every measure from social security to Medicare as tyranny, not bad at all. The situation predictably deteriorated after Reagan, but we manged to hold off the worst ravages of plutocracy for about 50 years, saved the American Dream, and didn't wind up with a wealth structure similar to a banana republic which would have happened if the divine right of wealth types had had their way.
Thanks for asking.
Last edited:
WeWantMore
New member
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
Instead of war on poverty they got a war on drugs so the police can bother me.
Or so I've heard.
Instead of war on poverty they got a war on drugs so the police can bother me.
Or so I've heard.
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
From 1930 to 1970? And that is 100% the result of what party was in control of congress? So, can we blame the democrats for everything that got worse from 1930 to 1970 too?
From 1930 to 1970? And that is 100% the result of what party was in control of congress? So, can we blame the democrats for everything that got worse from 1930 to 1970 too?
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
The main factor would be the postwar economic expansion of the US - since somebody had to help rebuild Europe, and it just so happened America was the only industrial power with that capability (since all the other ones were invaded and/or had the **** bombed out of them). Who was in control of Congress didn't much matter as this would have happened regardless. To put it bluntly, it's the economy, stupid. Economic growth trumps everything; the government can slice up the pie how it wishes, but it's growth that enlarges the pie.
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
How on earth would repealing a statute put that genie back in the bottle? Like the candidates are seriously going to take a hit in the polls when a private hit squad can do the dirty work for them.
How on earth would repealing a statute put that genie back in the bottle? Like the candidates are seriously going to take a hit in the polls when a private hit squad can do the dirty work for them.
St. Clown
Liberal Rebel Scum, apparently
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
It would become a matter of campaign integrity. The candidate would request that the PACs either tone down their campaigns or outright admonish them. Or it would be done with a wink and a nod to it.
Also, the role of the PACs would diminish as people woudl give more directly to the candidates and not the surrounding groups.
How on earth would repealing a statute put that genie back in the bottle? Like the candidates are seriously going to take a hit in the polls when a private hit squad can do the dirty work for them.
It would become a matter of campaign integrity. The candidate would request that the PACs either tone down their campaigns or outright admonish them. Or it would be done with a wink and a nod to it.
Also, the role of the PACs would diminish as people woudl give more directly to the candidates and not the surrounding groups.
Re: Obama Presidential Thread XIX: Starting a new chapter
I just don't see the impetus for either change to occur.
The only thing I think can and should be done regarding the third-party advertisements is a requirement for full disclosure of funding sources. I'm not aware of any requirement that freedom of speech be freedom of anonymous speech.
I just don't see the impetus for either change to occur.
The only thing I think can and should be done regarding the third-party advertisements is a requirement for full disclosure of funding sources. I'm not aware of any requirement that freedom of speech be freedom of anonymous speech.
- Status