congratulations to the united states

microgamer said:
What KowtowRobinson said...and the fact that the Democratic nominee wasn't all that great either. So it was like, either stay with Bush, or change presidents in the middle of a war to a guy that didn't have a lot of the nation's confidence anyway.
Click to expand...
Which was retarded thinking at best. Changing presidents in the middle of a one sided non war wouldn't have caused the nation to magically dissolve.
 
microgamer said:
What KowtowRobinson said...and the fact that the Democratic nominee wasn't all that great either. So it was like, either stay with Bush, or change presidents in the middle of a war to a guy that didn't have a lot of the nation's confidence anyway.
Click to expand...

I'd replace "wasn't all that great" with "total loser." I thought it was impossible for Bush to get re-elected but Kerry was such a crappy candidate that he lost anyway.

I didn't vote for Obama but I hope he does a good job.
 
microgamer said:
What KowtowRobinson said...and the fact that the Democratic nominee wasn't all that great either. So it was like, either stay with Bush, or change presidents in the middle of a war to a guy that didn't have a lot of the nation's confidence anyway.
Click to expand...

Alright, this kind of makes sense. Thanks.

Curious to see now how long it takes for Obama to shut down Guatanamo.

You guys are all "proud to be US citizens again" and "returned from exile"? You see the strangest things on the news.

On the economy: restoring confidence is key now. I doubt, however, that government spending is facilitating in that progress. Here in Europe, banks are being nationalized without the problem of 'sick' portfolios being solved, which is a bad thing, I think.

On the other hand: the crash of Lehman created so much volatility in the market, that they kind of need to be so careful.

I wouldn't want to be in any policy maker's shoes right now. It's a crazy time.
 
FreshPrinceofWashington.gif
 
Being the economist psycho that I am...

Spending arguably made the Great Depression last LONGER. It also lead to some of the dumbest legacy entitlement programs haunting the US. Although you can argue that it was an anomaly in that scenario and Keynsian does work... or DID work.

The reality is, however, in today's world, it DOES NOT WORK. Government spending gets a lower multiplier because imports are tied to consumption due to globalization. If you're in the US and you buy a truck, it's from Japan. You buy a shovel, it's made in China. You hire workers, they're from Mexico. Because of that, the money doesn't go back to the economy. Furthermore, debt financing is now also globalized, so Asian countries hold and finance most of the US debt. You can't spend your way up because the debt financing will act as an investment outflow drain on the economy.

It's also another reason why the opposing supply-side view of economics has been adopted by consumption heavy countries. If government spending can't stimulate the economy due to imports, then you will promote as much imports as possible and stimulate the economy through credit (which is what the US currently is).

Obama will try to spend the economy up. He will fail. Market balances will ensure for every dime he spends, the USD and bond pricing will push the economy back down.

Nobody can save the US economy. It's just going to take time. In the words of Colbert: "Hope like hell."
 
D_Matt_Ma said:
Spending arguably made the Great Depression last LONGER. It also lead to some of the dumbest legacy entitlement programs haunting the US. Although you can argue that it was an anomaly in that scenario and Keynsian does work... or DID work.
Click to expand...

This isn't even arguable it's true, and not to mention it turned us into abunch of losers who expect handouts around every corner.

Also (I hated Bush) I noticed Bush got a lot of boos leaving the White House, but I wonder how long until it happens to Obama.
 
Thankfully, the boos were the minority. I was actually worried the tradition of orderly transition wouldn't happen.

And for those still doubting my theory about Keynsiain not working, bond rates (cost of government to borrow money) has gone up for 4 days in a row. Market is anticipating Obama will borrow like crazy to finance his spending and the Asians won't finance it due to the new Treasurer bashing China for being a currency manipulator.

Whatever spending Obama does on one end, the Asians will take on the other end.
 
D_Matt_Ma said:
Being the economist psycho that I am...
Government spending gets a lower multiplier because imports are tied to consumption due to globalization. If you're in the US and you buy a truck, it's from Japan. You buy a shovel, it's made in China. You hire workers, they're from Mexico. Because of that, the money doesn't go back to the economy. Furthermore, debt financing is now also globalized, so Asian countries hold and finance most of the US debt. You can't spend your way up because the debt financing will act as an investment outflow drain on the economy.
QUOTE]

Good point. Mexico came out not to long ago saying that thier economy is in the crapper because illeagal/legal immigrants cant find jobs in the U.S. That should throw up a red flag right there.

And so far I am more than dipleased with Obama.

An executive order to close Guantanimo? He deosn't even have any idea on how hes going to do it.
Check out around 0:50ish


Next. Freeing up my hard earned money to support abortion is other countries. There is no pro life anymore. I am forced to aid in something that act against my morals. He has throw morality out the window.

Obama is also going as far as to tell me what I should and should not be listening to. According to Obama I am to ignore Rush Limbaugh. I dont listen to him often but I do on occasion. But thats besides the point. I fear this could be a foot in the door for the dreaded fairness doctorine.
Click to expand...
 
Gods-Spartan said:
Next. Freeing up my hard earned money to support abortion is other countries. There is no pro life anymore. I am forced to aid in something that act against my morals. He has throw morality out the window.

Obama is also going as far as to tell me what I should and should not be listening to. According to Obama I am to ignore Rush Limbaugh. I dont listen to him often but I do on occasion. But thats besides the point. I fear this could be a foot in the door for the dreaded fairness doctorine.
Click to expand...

Oh, please. I'm pro-life, but even I know your first paragraph is crap. Obama believes differently than we do. What do we want, a President who posts a public opinion poll every time he makes a decision? Do I think abortion should be legal? No. But that doesn't mean I believe people who are pro-choice are anti-life or evil, or hate children or something. They simply don't believe what I do: Life begins a conception. I wish it were otherwise, but it's not, and moping about it isn't gonna change anything. How about we work with the new administration to reduce the number of abortions instead of clamping our hands over our ears and saying "NYAH-NYAH-NYAH?"

As for Limbaugh: What the hell? Where did Obama say he was going to take Limbaugh off the radio? Maybe he said he wishes Limbaugh was off the air because he's an idiot and too many people with an IQ under 100 don't use any critical thinking skills when listening to him blather on and on. The only people who bring up the Fairness Doctrine are Republicans because it's the boogeyman they use to scare up donor money.
 
Archangel said:
Oh, please. I'm pro-life, but even I know your first paragraph is crap. Obama believes differently than we do. What do we want, a President who posts a public opinion poll every time he makes a decision? Do I think abortion should be legal? No. But that doesn't mean I believe people who are pro-choice are anti-life or evil, or hate children or something. They simply don't believe what I do: Life begins a conception. I wish it were otherwise, but it's not, and moping about it isn't gonna change anything. How about we work with the new administration to reduce the number of abortions instead of clamping our hands over our ears and saying "NYAH-NYAH-NYAH?"

As for Limbaugh: What the hell? Where did Obama say he was going to take Limbaugh off the radio? Maybe he said he wishes Limbaugh was off the air because he's an idiot and too many people with an IQ under 100 don't use any critical thinking skills when listening to him blather on and on. The only people who bring up the Fairness Doctrine are Republicans because it's the boogeyman they use to scare up donor money.
Click to expand...


Perhaps you didn't read carefully. I said my taxpayer dollars are going to something that is against my moral judgement. I never said pro choicers are evil now did I? I am very uncomfortable about this. To Obama's credit though I do remember him saying what you just said about reducing abortions.

And I didn't say that Obama wants to remove Limbaugh. But he did say to ignore him. Which is dumb.

And the Fainess Doctorine is bad news. Mainly because It would hault progress all over. For one, You would have to address all sides of the issue. Like i dont know...science class. Anybady who has an opinion would have to be heard.
 
Personally, I don't see what's wrong about Obama saying to ignore Limbaugh. I mean - we should.

As for taxpayer dollars going to something you don't like... Well... Welcome to America.

The Fairness Doctrine: Yes, anybody who has an opinion would have to be heard. Almost like a freedom of speech kind of thing. Maybe they should make an Amendment for that. Oh, wait... Besides, as I said - the only people who bring it up now are Republicans to scare money out of people.
 
Gods-Spartan said:
And the Fainess Doctorine is bad news. Mainly because It would hault progress all over. For one, You would have to address all sides of the issue. Like i dont know...science class. Anybady who has an opinion would have to be heard.
Click to expand...
There's reality, then there's Fox news. We can do without Fox news.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back