You mean the one Bush caused and Obama is attempting to clear up, since the whole Credit crunch happened before Obama was even elected?Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
Printable View
You mean the one Bush caused and Obama is attempting to clear up, since the whole Credit crunch happened before Obama was even elected?Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
possibly even clinton could take the credit since he encouraged fannie and freddie to pursue 'social' lending...............?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Yeah but you got to admit that Bush sort of pushed the American economy a few flights of stairs further to the abyss of a 3rd world economy (dominated by its debts to the point it cannot even pay the interest on the debt). He might've done it for a noble cause or just 'cause he liked being photographed in front of military kit; but it sure cost the American taxpayer a lot of dollars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
No.
Well actually the big Tea Party issue is the federal deficit which Bush, a Republican, allowed to balloon under his presidency. Don't tell the Republicans that though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
This thread is about how the Tea Partiers are fed up with the republicans letting the deficit balloon.Quote:
Originally Posted by tibilicus
Yes, because Obama was elected right at the start of it and was there during the full swing. So you are misrepresenting the facts, because you are only focused on one source of data, not the context.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
The 'bailout' and 'stimulus' while highly unfavorable were necessary, the Republicans would have done the same, or have experienced an armed revolution if they didn't due to mass employment and the complete collapse of the economy.
Also, that graph is entirely wrong, it is not even the year 2019 so they are just claims just attempting to make him look bad. I think the Labour and the Republicans have lot in common, ex-political parties who were causes to a crisis and attacking the current governments for the mess they themselves created.
It's a good thing Republicans never passed massive, deficit-tripling unfunded entitlements for old people. Or passed massive tax cuts of dubious economic value, thus ballooning the deficit even further. Oh, wait, they did all of that. Along with two wars China funded, for which my kids will receive the bill.
Please. "Republican" and "fiscal responsibility" have been mutually exclusive terms for my entire lifetime. The nice thing about having Dems in power for a little while is watching the Republicans experience a second (third? fourth?) virginity about deficits; once they're in power again they'll spread their legs for massive entitlements and unpaid-for everything again.
Unless, of course, the Tea Party can have a lasting impact beyond being the militia of Beckistan. If they can roll past the race-baiting, the social issues, and actually focus on deficits they might scare the Republican leadership into paying attention to the concept of fiscal responsibility. That's a whole lot of variables that need to line up, but it could happen. Maybe. Possibly.
I don't really know much about the other T.E.A. *Taxed Enough Already* party candidates. The problem with depending on the mainstream media for info is that they do the established party's bidding, so their reporting is skewed and mostly negative. I'm more concerned with my state, New York, this election. The man I want representing me for Governor, Carl Paladino. There's no such thing as an ideal candidate, but I'll take Carl over the anointed one, Prince Andrew Cuomo, any day. I suggest my fellow New Yorkers do the same, unless they like the status quo that Prince Andrew represents...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Which facts am I misrepresenting?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Whether the bailouts were necessary or not is debatable on a case by case basis. The stimulus was not at all necessary (or effective), nor was the 600 billion borrowed to kick off the health care overhaul or the litany of other spending orgies this administration has embarked on. You seem to be under the impression it all has to do with Obama's failed Keynesian efforts.Quote:
The 'bailout' and 'stimulus' while highly unfavorable were necessary, the Republicans would have done the same, or have experienced an armed revolution if they didn't due to mass employment and the complete collapse of the economy.
Hehe. Guess whose numbers those are?Quote:
Also, that graph is entirely wrong, it is not even the year 2019 so they are just claims just attempting to make him look bad..
Some people seem to be confused. Maybe a trip on the debt highway will help?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5yx...layer_embedded
You know what I don't understand is this whole fascination with Small Government how is that gonna work?? Are they just give all that power away
Things like healthcare and the military are things probably tea party people have most contact with and thats the biggest part of government
As a Pennsylvanian, I'd rather have a have a Democrat win a senate seat than end up with another Arlen Specter. The math for the GOP taking the senate was a bit dubious anyway, and Delaware doesn't make much difference. :shrug:
Honestly, I (and obviously many other primary voters) are sick of the 'support the team over policy' mentality that much of the GOP leadership still seems to have. After they screwed up their majorities in the Bush years, they tell us- don't give up on the GOP, you can still change it from withing. Well guess what? That's what they're doing.
On the "socialism" tangent... What's happening in the US is, in my opinion, worse than socialism- crony capitalism, corporate welfare, government over regulation, ect. In most cases, the government doesn't actually own the means of production, but it's still playing favorites and picking winners and losers. Legislators passing regulations that funnel money to their pet causes or eliminate their competition may not be socialism in the literal sense, but I don't get my panties in a bunch if some people use it as shorthand for the phenomena. However, if it were real socialism, it might be a little less corrupt.... maybe.
That's the big problem. Obama is mainly simply pushing through the policies he was elected on, at a very poor moment of time. The thing is that McCain wouldn't be that much better because neither had the mandate for debt decrease at the election.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
And that's the really bad part, since a budget fixer would be raising taxes and cutting/reforming down expenses. Does anybody feel that there's room for such a politician in the US atm? It's needed from either Obama or his opposition in the next election.
Should the Tea Party movement take power atm, we would see a big tax cuts (since it will "obviously" create a bigger pie by default) and massive inconsiderate slashes in the budget. So the problem with the Tea Party is if they're content with fiscal responsibility or their extremely limited version of "fiscal responsibility". If it's the second, then it's a really biiig mess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
And simply because I found this. Appearently a large reason on why the budget is going even more out of control is because of massive tax cuts under Socialist Obama (tm). :wall:
Well the simplest boon of having a goverment owned company is that if they screw you over to get more money to their stockholders, you're one of the stockholders in the first place. Easier to keep them in line with good media and transperent goverment as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
In another note, as a free-marketeer, why should a rich comapany in a oligopolic market (that occurs in the late age of a capital investive market) play by the rules? It is inhibitive to profits after all.
FiveThirtyEight runs the numbers and agrees almost entirely with Panzer:
A comeback by Ms. O’Donnell is not impossible, the forecasting model gives it only a 6 percent likelihood of happening — and has established Mr. Coons, therefore, as a 94 percent favorite. Had Republican voters selected Mr. Castle instead, the numbers would be exactly the opposite: Mr. Castle would be the 94 percent favorite to win the seat, leaving Mr. Coons with just a 6 percent chance of an upset.
What does it say about people in Delaware and more specifically the Tea Party in Delaware that they vote for a career politician with a string of bad debt who believes people hide in her garden and that mad scientists are cloning mice with human brains.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
If she wins or loses it reflects bad on the State
I suspect that's because you agree with their position; were equivalent sloppiness/laziness used by those whom you oppose, you would object. As I said previously, instead of using language to describe or communicate, you're accepting it as political-stance moose call.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xiahou
Your description of what's troubling about the current admin is much more on the mark. Why settle for (utterly inaccurate) tub thumping?
I am reminded of Pindar, who would dissect the language of those whom he opposed in the most picayune, lawyerly manner, and then respond to a right-wing rant of utter incoherence with approbation.
Agreed with Lemur. Why not call it "Failings of the Free Market" or simply "The Free Market" ? Same thing, isn't it, as Corporate Cronyism and Corruption owns your government.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
I am not saying they are the KKK...they are not openly racist, some of the individual's involved would even claim not to have racist views at all if directly asked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
but if you ask some questions, proble a little deeper, it's there deep down in some, a lot closer to the surface in others.....it's no coincidence this movement flared up as soon as it became apparent that Obama could win the presidency.
these people are enamored with a view of the 'good ol' days' and freaked out that it's being taken away from them....even if it was never as they remembered it anyway.
back in the good ol days when certain people knew their place and taxes were low.....don´t mention to them that their 'saint' Reagan actually raised taxes.
I wonder how is it gonna fly that their new darling Christine o'Donnell (A.K.A. - Palin 2.0) used to be a practicing witch....that should be fun.
Doesn't account for the facts and context (again), namely, the partial economic collapse which is responsible for the debt, as the government is trying to bail-out the economy and save it from ruin.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
Now you have an economy in the middle of the boom years (Bush) going into debt massively, now there is the partial collapse of the American economy which significantly decreases tax revenue and the forking out of money attempting to save it. No wonder the "mph" is higher, it is logical.
A better model would be this:
You have a careering businessman (Bush jr) who has his own business, receiving a higher and higher income over the years. Instead of investing this money, he spends it out, going into debt, on the logic of "I will get more and pay it off on the never ever"
His company ends up having accounting problems and ends up going heading into administration (Obama takes over). The businessman's only solution to save the company is invest money into it. Unfortunately, during the boom years, the increasing the debt is a cause of concern. Due to the economic cut backs, he is also receiving far less income as customers don't have as much money. Which means the debt is ending up accelerated.
Though Ron Paul if he got elected would have been an interesting choice...
I'm a US conservative and find myself in sympathy with much of the TEA party agenda. I think you are seriously overstating the racism component. Most of us are happy that a person of African parentage got into the White House -- but we'd have rather had it be J.C. Watts instead. Obama's breaking of that color barrier was one of the things I like most about his Presidency.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin
no, i'll say this again; "to write them off as a bunch of nutball racists is lazy and flawed."Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin
the tea-party movement if fundamentally about low tax and small government.
it is not a political party with a disciplined message, it is a loosely aggregated political protest movement that will inneviatbly pick up all manner of wild and wacky ideas, including the unpleasant one.
Comprehensive list of goofy O'Donnell quotes. Yes, I know, any such compilation makes the target look freakish, but man, there are some great ones in there. And yes, I know before you tell me, I'm linking to a left-wing site. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
I do not disagree that they also care about those issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
but would you say that their rise in american politics occuring at the same time that Obama became a presidential candidate is pure coincidence?
the size of the US government is roughly the same it was during the previous administratrions, tax levels are also no higher than they have been in previous periods in time, but we didn´t hear this level of histrionics coming from the american right.
Very good point. They are also avowedly based purely on economic issues. Perhaps that is because announcing you're intending to set up a modern KKK wouldn't garner as many votes.
~:smoking:
maybe because the healthcare system is seen to breach the limitations on federal interference on state governance?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin
now pay attention here; i fully agree with the principle that america's healthcare as stands costs a great deal to little effect, but that is just a britisah opinion, and the mechanism used to repair this deficit is obviously riling a lot of folks.
you're acting like this is purely a grass roots movement, like fox news didn´t baby-fed this group from the start.Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
and they are repeating and even encouraging some of the crazy rhetoric...this is not just an issue of the loony that shows up to a rally with a megaphone and some crazy notions, it obviously goes higher than that and is more organized and intentional than that.
but what can you expect from Faux News? They are funded by a crazy Muslim and so obviously hate America! :P
I masturbate for the health benifits >:(
No lust requried
The amount of research that's been done on this subject by institutions all over the globe is legion and all show what terrible value for money the American system is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus
~:smoking:
Ahahaha, you shouldn't lie to a Nazi but invading Iran and killing people is perfectly fine. :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Actually, there have been a number of well-funded organizations supporting the tea party movement, and Fox isn't even the most important of the lot. Freedomworks, for example, which is fronted by Dick Armey, has been the single-most effective organizer, suppier, funder, etc. Needless to say, Freedomworks does not disclose its finances, but it's reported as receiving funding from Phillip Morris, Verizon, the Schaife family and AT&T. A great deal of money for various tea party organizations has come from the Koch brothers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin
There's a lot of money going into this thing.