• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The 1% will own more than the 99% by 2016, report says

It was the Carter economic and foreign policy plans that created the OPEC reaction which led to gas lines, the high inflation and it was the fear of Reagan's foreign policy and leadership that brought OPEC back in line. Leadership does matter as does a pro growth economic policy. to say that economic ups and downs largely are out of control of the POTUS is probably partially true but was we have seen in a consumer driven economy the POTUS economic policies do have an effect as does their foreign policy decisions.
I'm sure the partisan Republicans will agree with that.

I'm not so sure that the Arabs were quaking in their boots after Reagan's sale of arms to Iran.
 
49, 000 posts to your name and they all say pretty much the same thing.

Democrat Bad.

Republican Good.

That's about it.

Wrong, the party of Pelosi, Reid, and Obama bad, not the entire Democrat Party. You keep baiting and posting nothing more than typical leftwing BS and I will continue to post data and facts that make you look foolish. Facts matter a lot more than rhetoric, that is except to the Gruber electorate.
 
I'm sure the partisan Republicans will agree with that.

I'm not so sure that the Arabs were quaking in their boots after Reagan's sale of arms to Iran.

That happened late in the Reagan Presidency not when he took over. Seems you have a very selective memory on some issues

By the way I voted for Carter and was a long time Democrat. Carter's resume beat Fords as he was a Governor
 
That happened late in the Reagan Presidency not when he took over. Seems you have a very selective memory on some issues

By the way I voted for Carter and was a long time Democrat. Carter's resume beat Fords as he was a Governor
So, they were in fear of him until late in his presidency?

I didn't vote for Carter, but do agree that his resume beat Ford's.
 
You mentioned the Iran arms deal and I told you when it happened.
OK, and I was trying to figure out why OPEC was afraid of Reagan's foreign policy and leadership.

Here's the timeline of the start of the arms deal:

November 4, 1979-January 20, 1981: 52 American Hostages Captured in Tehran, Held for 444 Days


Early 1980: Israel Proposes US Secret Arms Sales to Iran

Summer 1980: CIA Agent: Republicans Open Secret Channel to Iran in Preparation for ‘October Surprise,’ Arms Deals

1981: Israel Begins Selling US-Made Arms to Iran

January 20, 1981: Reagan Sworn in as President; US Hostages in Iran Released Hours Later

January 28, 1981: Reagan Officials Planning to Sell Arms to Iran

1983: Israeli and US Companies Begin Supplying Iran with Arms

So, how again did fear of Reagan's foreign policy bring OPEC back in line?
 
OK, and I was trying to figure out why OPEC was afraid of Reagan's foreign policy and leadership.

Here's the timeline of the start of the arms deal:



So, how again did fear of Reagan's foreign policy bring OPEC back in line?

Oh, give me a f***ing break, I am not going to debate liberal talking points and time lines with you over something that happened over 30 years ago and have nothing to do with today. Iran Contra was in 1985. Reagan's economic record is the issue vs. what Obama has done and for someone who isn't an Obama supporter you continue to divert from his record and always want to relive the past, why?
 
Oh, give me a f***ing break, I am not going to debate liberal talking points and time lines with you over something that happened over 30 years ago and have nothing to do with today. Iran Contra was in 1985. Reagan's economic record is the issue vs. what Obama has done and for someone who isn't an Obama supporter you continue to divert from his record and always want to relive the past, why?

Good afternoon. Now back to the topic my friend.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/26/b...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

In the late 1960s, more than half of the households in the United States were squarely in the middle, earning, in today’s dollars, $35,000 to $100,000 a year. Few people noticed or cared as the size of that group began to fall, because the shift was primarily caused by more Americans climbing the economic ladder into upper-income brackets.

from 1967-2013
Interactive.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/01/25/upshot/shrinking-middle-class.html?abt=0002&abg=1

The middle class, if defined as households making between $35,000 and $100,000 a year, shrank in the final decades of the 20th century. For a welcome reason, though: More Americans moved up into what might be considered the upper middle class or the affluent. Since 2000, the middle class has been shrinking for a decidedly more alarming reason: Incomes have fallen.
 
Good afternoon. Now back to the topic my friend.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/26/b...nd-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

In the late 1960s, more than half of the households in the United States were squarely in the middle, earning, in today’s dollars, $35,000 to $100,000 a year. Few people noticed or cared as the size of that group began to fall, because the shift was primarily caused by more Americans climbing the economic ladder into upper-income brackets.

from 1967-2013
Interactive.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/01/25/upshot/shrinking-middle-class.html?abt=0002&abg=1

The middle class, if defined as households making between $35,000 and $100,000 a year, shrank in the final decades of the 20th century. For a welcome reason, though: More Americans moved up into what might be considered the upper middle class or the affluent. Since 2000, the middle class has been shrinking for a decidedly more alarming reason: Incomes have fallen.

Don't quite understand exactly what you want or expect. Per the article
More Americans moved up into what might be considered the upper middle class or affluent
making the upper class grow. So tell me what exactly is your solution since apparently personal responsibility doesn't exist in so many people's lives. There is equal opportunity in this country and hard work, initiative, and drive still pay. Ask Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and thousands of other self made millionaires who didn't sit around waiting for someone to pay them more money, they went out and made it.

Some people here still don't get it, businesses are in business to make a profit, as much profit as they can. They are not in business to employ people. I was looking for a job when I found my first one and all the education and experience I gained on my job made me more marketable. Too many are sitting on their asses waiting for someone else to make more opportunities for them. That isn't going to happen in this country or the world. You cannot raise wages enough for any liberal but raising wages could put small businesses out of business and have. Seems that the problem with too many is low wages as they totally ignore the expenses of the business and Business's ability to compete. High taxes and regulations are business costs as well
 
Don't quite understand exactly what you want or expect. Per the articlemaking the upper class grow. So tell me what exactly is your solution since apparently personal responsibility doesn't exist in so many people's lives. There is equal opportunity in this country and hard work, initiative, and drive still pay. Ask Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, and thousands of other self made millionaires who didn't sit around waiting for someone to pay them more money, they went out and made it.

Some people here still don't get it, businesses are in business to make a profit, as much profit as they can. They are not in business to employ people. I was looking for a job when I found my first one and all the education and experience I gained on my job made me more marketable. Too many are sitting on their asses waiting for someone else to make more opportunities for them. That isn't going to happen in this country or the world. You cannot raise wages enough for any liberal but raising wages could put small businesses out of business and have. Seems that the problem with too many is low wages as they totally ignore the expenses of the business and Business's ability to compete. High taxes and regulations are business costs as well

As I mentioned before increases in productivity used to mean wage increases.
Now it does not. That may be part of the answer.
 
Oh, give me a f***ing break, I am not going to debate liberal talking points and time lines with you over something that happened over 30 years ago and have nothing to do with today. Iran Contra was in 1985. Reagan's economic record is the issue vs. what Obama has done and for someone who isn't an Obama supporter you continue to divert from his record and always want to relive the past, why?


I believe my original point was that the POTUS doesn't have much control over oil prices, if any.

and they aren't "liberal" timelines. The timeline is what it is whether you're a liberal or a conservative. You're the one who said that arms sales to iran came near the end of the Reagan administration, and that OPEC was afraid of his foreign policy, which was and still is simply inaccurate.
 
I believe my original point was that the POTUS doesn't have much control over oil prices, if any.

and they aren't "liberal" timelines. The timeline is what it is whether you're a liberal or a conservative. You're the one who said that arms sales to iran came near the end of the Reagan administration, and that OPEC was afraid of his foreign policy, which was and still is simply inaccurate.

So you don't think Carter's energy and foreign policies had anything to do with the price OPEC charges for oil?
 
So you don't think Carter's energy and foreign policies had anything to do with the price OPEC charges for oil?

I don't know. What policies do you think did encourage OPEC to try to control the price of oil?
 
I don't know. What policies do you think did encourage OPEC to try to control the price of oil?

The policies that led to the hostage crisis of 1979 and the failed rescue mission, a weak President Carter
 
The policies that led to the hostage crisis of 1979 and the failed rescue mission, a weak President Carter

What policies do you think led to the hostage crisis?

A "weak president" could well be the problem, but that is not a policy.
 
So you don't think Carter's energy and foreign policies had anything to do with the price OPEC charges for oil?

I have no reason to believe that.

The US certainly isn't their only customer.

And if I had the ability to collude with others to drive up the prices of my products, I would do that also, I kinda like the idea of becoming rich - regardless of who the POTUS is.
 
What policies do you think led to the hostage crisis?

A "weak president" could well be the problem, but that is not a policy.

" Gaddis Smith might have put it best: "President Carter inherited an impossible situation -- and he and his advisers made the worst of it."

WGBH American Experience . Jimmy Carter . The Iranian Hostage Crisis | PBS

Weakness may not be a policy, but it defines a President on the world stage, and at that time allowed players in the ME to take advantage of that weakness...So, they did.
 
" Gaddis Smith might have put it best: "President Carter inherited an impossible situation -- and he and his advisers made the worst of it."

WGBH American Experience . Jimmy Carter . The Iranian Hostage Crisis | PBS

Weakness may not be a policy, but it defines a President on the world stage, and at that time allowed players in the ME to take advantage of that weakness...So, they did.

"Players from the middle east" attacked our country when Bush was POTUS. So I assume he was also a weak president.
 
"Players from the middle east" attacked our country when Bush was POTUS. So I assume he was also a weak president.

Yes, there is some truth to that...But weakness comes in many forms..Not having your eye on the ball can be a weakness too...No?
 
"Players from the middle east" attacked our country when Bush was POTUS. So I assume he was also a weak president.

major fail there dude.
 
"Players from the middle east" attacked our country when Bush was POTUS. So I assume he was also a weak president.

Yes, I can see how you expected Bush to do in 7 months after the closest election in history what Clinton did do in 3 years. 9/11 was planned and trained for under Clinton, not Bush. Bush took action, something Clinton should have done when American interests were attacked during his term. Instead he shot a multi million dollar missile into an Arab tent and hit a camel in the ass. That is a liberal success story

The following is the text of an item from the Presidential Daily Brief received by PresidentWilliam J.Clinton on December 4,1998.Redacted material is indicated in brackets.
SUBJECT: Bin Ladin Preparing to Hijack US Aircraft and Other Attacks
1. Reporting [—] suggests Bin Ladin and his allies are preparing for attacks in the US, including an aircraft hijacking to obtain the release of Shaykh ‘Umar ‘Abd al-Rahman, Ramzi Yousef, and Muhammad Sadiq ‘Awda.One source quoted a senior member of the Gama’at al-Islamiyya (IG) saying that, as of late October, the IG had completed planning for
RESPONSES TO AL QAEDA’S INITIAL ASSAULTS 129
an operation in the US on behalf of Bin Ladin, but that the operation was on hold.A senior Bin Ladin operative from Saudi Arabia was to visit IG counterparts in the US soon thereafter to discuss options—perhaps including an aircraft hijacking.
• IG leader Islambuli in late September was planning to hijack a US airliner during the “next couple of weeks” to free ‘Abd al-Rahman and the other prisoners, according to what may be a different source.
• The same source late last month said that Bin Ladin might implement plans to hijack US aircraft before the beginning of Ramadan on 20 December and that two members of the operational team had evaded security checks during a recent trial run at an unidentified New York airport.[—]
 
Yes, I can see how you expected Bush to do in 7 months after the closest election in history ..

It's about as logical as blaming Obama for not instantly having an economic recovery from the longest recession since the Great Depression.
 
Yes, I agree. Bush was a major failed dude.

I liked Bush

Great Judges
tax relief
let the clinton gun ban die

only thing he didn't do was take out Bin Laden or Soros
 
Back
Top Bottom