Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 47

Thread: 45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

  1. #21
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: 45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    Well, that's pretty much meaningless. Most of the economists didn't see this coming.
    I'm not sure that means much when you have a history of making up your own criteria.

    But their solution has been what "caused the crisis," so they're really not fixing anything.
    Their solution? Really? This mess's severity was caused principally by leverage purchases of securitized mortgages. If financials had merely done equity purchases, we would not be in this mess. And don't even bother with CRA loans. Materiality alone negates their impact.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  2. #22
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: 45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    Huh, I was actually under the impression that you supported the stimulus.
    The idea behind the stimulus is not a bad idea. It's just the actual plan doesn't work, and the added debt is insane. It's bad enough Bush brought us to record levels. Adding more to record levels is not a good idea.

    Yes. The issue here is using aborted embryos for research, and people's opinion of the act isn't going to change based on how much they know about the actual process.
    So you're saying that people vote independent of their knowledge? That's rather frightening. That evidence and facts are not relevant. The simple fact of the matter is that those embryos are doomed anyways and none were made primarily to harvest stem cells. Notice that never is mentioned in the press.

    Should holding a college degree really be a requirement for the ability to vote?
    No. I'm just pointing out that the populace isn't as educated as you make them out be on the basis of college degrees.

    This can be fixed with term limits. And no, I did not say "informed". I said that very little information is actually necessary. A person could know relatively little about a subject, form an opinion, learn lots and lots about the subject, and the chances are that person would still hold the same opinion.
    While that is true, it does not address my argument. Simple fact of the matter is our Congress sucks and incumbency is part of that. People constantly complain about how Congress is failing, yet Senate and House incumbency rates are often 90%. Term limits would eliminate this problem, but not the underlying problem of why we keep that incumbency rate so high.

    I think it has more to do with the lack of good candidates on the market. Elections nowadays seem to be between a crook and another crook. I also think the partisan system has a lot to do with that... a nonpartisan primary system just may solve it.
    It is a distinct possibility. Do you mean lack of good candidates running for all parties, or just good candidates running for democrat/republican?

    I think you're just being a pessimist; things really aren't that bad, and if they get that bad, voters will start pushing back.
    While that is true that things aren't that bad (well, depends how one defines bad), Americans have a long history of changing things only when they get to the breaking point. Someone's gotta die before we change the laws. That's a bad way of running a country. We seem to have accepted that a pound of cure is less expensive than an ounce of prevention.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  3. #23
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: 45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Only net tax-payers and veterans should be allowed to vote. Net tax-consumers get to vote when they stop leaching off the system.
    A bit too much Heinlein there eh?

    Alright, so, imagine that a net tax payer who has a bad year and takes many of his deferred losses is for the tax year not a net tax payer despite a long history of being a net tax payer, should be disqualified from voting?
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  4. #24
    Sage
    akyron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    6,434

    Re: 45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    AnThe uninformed, uneducated will make decisions that are not always in the best interests of the country.
    Dont forget cattle herded by a bought and paid for media.
    Thank you

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: 45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    A bit too much Heinlein there eh?

    Alright, so, imagine that a net tax payer who has a bad year and takes many of his deferred losses is for the tax year not a net tax payer despite a long history of being a net tax payer, should be disqualified from voting?
    Instead of an annual basis is could be a lifetime basis.

    Year one - Net tax payer in the amount of $10,000.
    Total: $10,000.
    Status: Voter.

    Year two - Net tax consumer in the amount of $8,000.
    Total: $2,000.
    Status: Voter.

    Year three - Net tax consumer in the amount of $4,000.
    Total: -$2,000.
    Status: Non-voter.

  6. #26
    User BaZaRr BeAtZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Communist States of America
    Last Seen
    07-23-09 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    44

    idea Re: 45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

    First off I want to point out that adding new monies into an already deteriorating economy does nothing but drive inflation up causing the value of the American dollar to decrease. Instead of giving billions of dollars in bailout monies to the auto makers, who by the way are already filing for bankruptcy because of the apparent lack of money management skills shown by those companies' CEO's, why don't the government set up a new automobile purchase stimulus for every American of legal age? I'm not talking about the "Cash for Clunkers" and other "incentives" obama has set forth. I'm talking about a down-payment stimulus which would cover the first let's say $7,500 towards the purchase of a new American made automobile. By implementing a stimulus such as this you would accomplish 2 major things. First, the money would immediately go towards the automobile company's sales by allowing the purchase of thousands of new vehicles, instead of giving the money to the company to continue to pay $60+/hr for line workers and allow the CEO's to continue to give themselves millions of dollars in bonuses. Second, this would allow the American citizens the opportunity to purchase a new, reliable, American made automobile without having to worry about a 23-25% interest rate. Also this would allow the average American worker who isn't fortunate enough, even by working 60+ hours a week or having to work 2 jobs just to survive, to have $2,500 for a down payment and high monthly payments the opportunity to purchase a reliable vehicle to allow them to continue to show up at work every day.

    I understand that would equate to a lot of money, even more-so than the $9 billion sent to GM, but why not use the "borrowed" money to actually help the American citizen instead of helping rich CEO's who can't manage a company's money properly??? Makes sense to me.

    Another thing about this new $79.9 billion stimulus for war funding.....Didn't obama promise to bring our troops home saying that we are fighting a war that we shouldn't be involved in? Now he wants to continue to drive the already horrifying national debt up even more to support a war he opposed in the first place? I understand it takes time to get our troops home, however, if our "beloved" government is going to continue to borrow money for stimulus plans, let's use that money on something that will actually help our economy and stop trying to bully the rest of the world. $36.1 billion is being approved to help fight the flu, buy military cargo planes, and provide food and financial aid to poor countries. We have hundreds of thousands of homeless and starving American citizens here in the States, why not use that $36.1 billion to help our own citizens out? Maybe I should take my last $3.00 from my paycheck, and instead of buying a loaf of bread I should send it to a poor family over seas and let my family go hungry?

    The average American is not as ignorant to our economic crisis as one may think, as stated in a previous post. Just because the percentage of Americans holding a college degree is relatively low, doesn't mean one is ignorant to what is going on. You don't have to be an intellectual genius to have common sense, which proves to be more of a factor than normal intelligence. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that the American dollar is decreasing in value every time a new stimulus package is introduced into our economy, all you have to do is take a look at the increasing prices at the grocery store. Package of bologna in 2004 -$.50 , package of bologna in 2009 - $2.00 . We are helping our government make excuses for their actions, allowing 545 people with decision making powers to create a tyranny over the mind of our citizens, all the while putting millions in their pockets. As far as the "uneducated and uninformed" not always making the decisions with the best interest for our country goes, as we all can tell, the 545 "knowledgeable" people in control of making decisions for our country obviously haven't been making decisions with the best interest of our country in mind or we wouldn't be in this economical crisis...... In every election, there are 2 primary parties, one of which HAS to win the election, therefore you can't blame the American voters for our corrupt government that makes decisions based on pay-offs, look at the health-care system who paid off numerous government officials including the president when Hillary Clinton pressed for a reformed health plan. The majority of 300+ million, or the majority of 545, who do you think will make the better choices?

  7. #27
    User BaZaRr BeAtZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Communist States of America
    Last Seen
    07-23-09 @ 12:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    44

    Re: 45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

    As far as cold hard facts go, our government tells the American people what they want us to know. We as American citizens are afraid of our government, that's why we do nothing about it. We can't stand up without the fear of being place in jail or being heavily fined.

    "When the government fears the people, you have liberty. When the people fear the government, or irs for that matter, you have tyranny" (Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence of the United States)

  8. #28
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: 45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    I'm not sure that means much when you have a history of making up your own criteria.
    So instead of engaging me you make up things and expect it as a good rebuttal. Most economists didn't see this coming, and their solution is what caused the problem. It doesn't take much to see that if most economists agree on a solution that is no different from what we've been doing that it's probably wrong.

    Their solution? Really? This mess's severity was caused principally by leverage purchases of securitized mortgages. If financials had merely done equity purchases, we would not be in this mess. And don't even bother with CRA loans. Materiality alone negates their impact.
    But why were those done? Could it be inflation and artificially low interest rates? No wayyyyyyyyyyyyy.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  9. #29
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 07:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,237

    Re: 45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

    Quote Originally Posted by Orius View Post
    The average American knows nothing about economics, so that 45% doesn't mean much.
    You go ahead and keep worshiping and polishing that turd. We know it's crap, and I hope Obama's policies fail.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  10. #30
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: 45% Say Cancel Rest of Stimulus Spending

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    So instead of engaging me you make up things and expect it as a good rebuttal.
    Doesn't that make you a hypocrite? Especially in the thread about Chaebols, Ziabatsus and the German Railroad, where you defines evidence to mean whatever you wanted it to be and that specific circumstances on the ground are irrelevant to a discussion about highly specific historical events?

    Most economists didn't see this coming, and their solution is what caused the problem. It doesn't take much to see that if most economists agree on a solution that is no different from what we've been doing that it's probably wrong.
    Solution? You do know that many of the economists haven't given an solution? Just reading the data as to when the recession has ended?

    But why were those done? Could it be inflation and artificially low interest rates? No wayyyyyyyyyyyyy.
    I wasn't aware that the government forced them to engage in those behaviors. Remember, it was the management of companies who made bad decisions. Why aren't you blaming them?
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •