How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 ..And in the Eighth Year.....   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

..And in the Eighth Year.....

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


0 posted 10-21-2008 03:11 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

It seems to be the keyword these days to speak of the "past eight years of the Bush disasterous economic policies".  All is being blamed on that right now. It is Obama's pet phrase that he works into every speech. We even have people here in the Alley who use the "past eight years....." as reasoning behind our current economic crisis so many times I want to hold my breath until I turn blue. Either these people have a faulty memory or they are counting on people being too stupid to remember that the economy was actually very good through much of the Bush administration, with unemployment at all-times lows and many other exceptional economic levels. When Obama began campaigning there was no talk of the economy. It was all about Iraq and immigration, since that was the news of the day on American minds. Now there is NO talk about any of that because what is on American minds is the economy, therefore Obama and democratic supporters are jumping on that bandwagon. What has affected the economy the most at this time? Certainly forclosures and failed banks has it's share of the situation. Is that due to Bush failed economic policies over the past eight years? Let me quote a learned gentleman who makes a very good argument......

Actually, a certain amount of our difficult economy is probably due to plain old fashioned business cycles, over which we have limited to zero control, to my mind.  But there is a certain amount of responsibility to be apportioned here, at least in recent years.  The Republicans have been systematically selling off pieces of the government, not funding them to the point of collapse, and deregulating them with fairly predictable results.  There has been some Democratic complicity in this, I'm ashamed to say.  The deregulation of Savings and Loans lead to one of the biggest fiscal crunches in the history of the country.  The deregulation of the banking industry has lead us to the sub-prime mortgage crunch.  The deregulation of the credit card companies and the bankruptcy laws is hanging over us now like a bad dream.
(Bob K -4/25/2008)

   If this case, the impetus was, I believe from President Clinton, who sponsored the legislation that deregulated the mortgage industry.  If anybody has better or more exact information, please let me know; this is the way that I remember it and the way some recent looking at old papers seems to push my memory.  All corrections accepted, sometimes with small growls, but generally happily.  This is actually one of those situations where I think you can actually say Clinton did it.  I think he did.
Heaven knows why; perhaps because he's a "new democrat," whatever those are.
(bob K - 04/28/2008)


Right you are, Bob, so could we perhaps cut down the amounts of "Due to the past eight years of....."?

I will also quote from the wizard himself..

Personally, I don't think our dismal economy is the fault of either the Republicans or the Democrats. The fault, rather, lies squarely with the American people. Collectively, we tend to be short-sighted and greedy, and our elected leaders get elected because they play to that greed and lack of vision. Bread and circuses still play well, it seems.
(Ron....4/25/2008)


There are certainly enough things to lay on Bush's doorstep, including excessive spending, but the whole "past eight years.." chant is really getting old, not to mention inaccurate.


Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


1 posted 10-21-2008 04:01 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


Mike,

Ever heard the phrase “fur coat and no knickers”?

It’s a well used term in Lancashire and refers to someone who looks like they’re doing well but who, in reality,  can’t even afford the basics. Bush paid for the fur coat feel good factor on a credit card and now you, and every other American, has to either pay it off or watch the debt grow until your economy goes bang.

Your government has to either raise tax revenue or drastically cut government spending or both, something Bush has avoided for the last 8 years.

quote:
Personally, I don't think our dismal economy is the fault of either the Republicans or the Democrats. The fault, rather, lies squarely with the American people. Collectively, we tend to be short-sighted and greedy, and our elected leaders get elected because they play to that greed and lack of vision. Bread and circuses still play well, it seems.


I don’t think that’s quite right Ron, I think you’re spot on with where the solution lies, the people but I’m not sure they deserve all the blame. I believe that if the American people were told the depth of the problem and were given the option of fixing it or leaving it to fester they’d make the right choice however severe the consequences. When it comes to belt tightening and putting their backs to the wheel the American people have few peers. The problem is that the politicians are all saying that there isn’t a debt problem and proving it by buying another fur coat, you can’t blame the people for not accepting the responsibility for something they don’t even know about.

rwood
Member Elite
since 02-29-2000
Posts 3797
Tennessee


2 posted 10-21-2008 04:21 PM       View Profile for rwood   Email rwood   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for rwood

Ok.

So he didn't mastermind the crisis/es. But a war isn't cheap. So he certainly put a strain on the gravy train.

So when did things truly begin getting troublesome?

Upon the birth of usury and avarice?

Upon the creation of the Federal Reserve?

goes so far back there are no records.

not long ago, a hand shake and a man's word was good enough.

I'm with Ron. No more "bread and circuses."


Ron Carnell 2012.

poetic even.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


3 posted 10-22-2008 03:31 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Not long ago, Regina?? You have a strange sense of time!
rwood
Member Elite
since 02-29-2000
Posts 3797
Tennessee


4 posted 10-22-2008 09:03 AM       View Profile for rwood   Email rwood   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for rwood

I have a strange sense of everything

As long as my daddy is alive, I know there is at least one man that's true to his word.

And my 86 year old grandmother still has fresh memories of her sharecropping days. There was never a formal contract or a lease agreement. When my grandfather died, leaving her a young widow, the whole community showed up to help her bring in the tobacco. As poor as they were, their name brought strangers to the field to help her have a record harvest that year. She turned laundry, canning and quilts out her door during crop rest, and she still works circles around me.

And my 85 year old grandmother still remembers how the communities, not the gov, took care of the widows, the poor, and the sick. She educated as many as she could in math, history, and English, as well as etiquette and home economics, for free. She never earned a wage outside the homestead. She didn't have time to with 5 kids, a farm, and her civic and christian duties. My Grandfather, who left this world last Dec., was a Navy veteran and retired truck driver of 35 years. He was her toughest pupil, never learning to read past a 3rd grade level. Mostly because he loved her reading to him, though he memorized the map of the U.S. He paid cash and shook hands on every penny. If the dog didn't hunt or the mule didn't plow. He took it up with the man he shook hands with. The word "attorney" was never spoken.

I know things aren't like that, now. But it's fresh on the minds and in the blood of many.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


5 posted 10-22-2008 09:54 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I couldn't agree with you more. Those were the people and those were the standards that made America great. Actually, in some small towns you can still find it, except that in these days it's the exception and not the rule.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


6 posted 10-22-2008 07:20 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Mike,

           Are you trying to represent the quote from me as a representation of what I think about the economy as a whole and what I think about the policies of the Bush administration in general" over the past eight years?"

     If that's the case, please say so.

     If that's not the case, please, at least briefly, attempt to give a fair representation of the other side, as I believe I did in the section of text that you quoted out of context above.  While I do disagree with you on many issues, I try to make an effort to quote you in context and will continue to do so.

     If you were able to find this quotation of mine, then you are also aware that I have been speaking about the danger of the Bush economic policy for as long as you have known me.  You will no doubt remember that while I did and do believe the material I am quoted as saying above, I also believe that much of the excessive spending and support for his cronies — such as the drug companies being able to charge what they wanted for drug benefits under the elder drug plan rather that having it be put up for competitive bids as they must do under law for the VA — was disastrous for the economy.  I was critical of the way he was spending money, and called his spending policies for the attempt to break the bank that they were.

     You may also recall that I thought the economy was in trouble when you thought it was going very well indeed.
I even went off on a research expedition to see what my fellows here in southern California thought of the economy at your behest.  The actual collapse of the stock market and the housing market made my report moot.

     You, my friend, thought everything was wonderful, and were giving all the credit to the Republicans and the Republican administration as I recall.  Do I recall incorrectly?  

     And surely there can be nothing that would have happened that would have changed your mind about such a basic issue in so short a time?  

     Why aren't you now bragging about everything the Republican administration and congress — were you willing to share credit for what you saw as this current boom?  I honestly don't remember — had done to bring about this unprecedented American boom?  You couldn't do enough to claim credit only a few short months ago.

     I am unwilling to call the democrats faultless.  I am unwilling to say that business cycles were not involved.  I believe that there are good-hearted Republicans who actually, like you, don't agree with me.  Things aren't black and white.  I still believe that the majority of the problems the Republicans have this time around have to do with them veering very far to the right and losing track of the center in American politics, where I believe the majority of Americans still live.

     The BK theory, at present?

     We live in a country split between two visions of the state.  Vision One is The Security State.  Vision Two is The Welfare State.  Unfortunately both sides see themselves as mutually incompatible, and we are having more and more hysterical bids for power from representitives from either side.

     My thought is that we need to have both safety and security for people in this country, in a balance that encourages both and yet doesn't stiffle either.

     What do you think, folks?  Is that plain stupid, or is it worth looking at in more depth?  Or something else entirely?

Curiously enough,

Bob Kaven



Sincerely, Bob Kaven


      

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


7 posted 10-23-2008 02:33 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I even went off on a research expedition to see what my fellows here in southern California thought of the economy at your behest.

Yes, Bob, you did but that last I heard of it was "I'm still working on it", which was several weeks ago, as I recall.

I did not quote you out of context at all. Those are you complete comments with no cutting, pasting or alterations. You may consider it unfair to use your exact statements to prove a point but....they ARE your comments and I must assume you meant them. Once you put something in writing, it's hard to say you are being misrepresented.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


8 posted 10-23-2008 09:51 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Mike,

          You really should read the postings in their entirety.  You in fact took the part you replied to out of context.  And you apparently didn't read enough of what I said to understand that you'd done so.

This is what I said:

quote:


           Are you trying to represent the quote from me as a representation of what I think about the economy as a whole and what I think about the policies of the Bush administration in general" over the past eight years?"

     If that's the case, please say so.

     If that's not the case, please, at least briefly, attempt to give a fair representation of the other side, as I believe I did in the section of text that you quoted out of context above.  While I do disagree with you on many issues, I try to make an effort to quote you in context and will continue to do so.

     If you were able to find this quotation of mine, then you are also aware that I have been speaking about the danger of the Bush economic policy for as long as you have known me.  You will no doubt remember that while I did and do believe the material I am quoted as saying above, I also believe that much of the excessive spending and support for his cronies — such as the drug companies being able to charge what they wanted for drug benefits under the elder drug plan rather that having it be put up for competitive bids as they must do under law for the VA — was disastrous for the economy.  I was critical of the way he was spending money, and called his spending policies for the attempt to break the bank that they were.

     You may also recall that I thought the economy was in trouble when you thought it was going very well indeed.
I even went off on a research expedition to see what my fellows here in southern California thought of the economy at your behest.  The actual collapse of the stock market and the housing market made my report moot.

     You, my friend, thought everything was wonderful, and were giving all the credit to the Republicans and the Republican administration as I recall.  Do I recall incorrectly?  

     And surely there can be nothing that would have happened that would have changed your mind about such a basic issue in so short a time?  




     You might even notice that I said that I stood by the part that you quoted.

      I was not objecting to being misquoted.  I was objecting to having my views mischaracterized and distorted by leaving out major parts of what I think and feel that are in basic disagreement with you.

     Those people who haven't followed our conversations may actually believe you have characterized them accurately and fully, when in fact you have simply selected those parts of what I think that acknowledge and agree with what you think.

     All you have to do is ak me if I agree with these things and I'll be pleased to tell you where I do and don't agree.  If you remind me of what I've said before, I will be happy to acknowledge it.  If my thinking has changed, I'll say so.


     Yes, your quote is accurate.

     It is also a terrible description of my thinking overall.  To have picked this as a description of my thinking is like saying all Republicans love everything Bush has done over the last eight years.  Or me saying that you do.  

     Give me a break.


Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


9 posted 10-23-2008 11:02 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

"Your quote is accurate and a terrible description of my thinking overall"

Quite a synopsis, Bob. I didn't reproduce the comments to belittle or embarrass you in any way. They are your comments....period. Are you saying that there is something somewhere else said that would make these statements lies or invalid in some way? I don't understand your problem with standing by your own comments. They don't insinuate you love or even support Bush. They simply stated that, by you own opinion, the impetus of this mess we are in was Bill Clinton. They are your words. Are you now denying them or asking people to believe you didn't really mean them? They are statements that stand on their own, regardless of anything that either preceded them or followed them.

Yes, I understand that they are detrimental to your argument that the "past eight years of economic disaster" is what caused all of this mess but - once again - they are your own words. Sometimes you just can't have it both ways....
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


10 posted 10-24-2008 03:04 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



Dear Mike,

          I have made a point of saying, Mike, that the past eight years of economic disaster has been terrible for the country.  I have gone into great and specific detail on that.  Please feel free to quote me on that, because it's true.

     I have also faulted Clinton where I thought it appropriate.  I have no problem doing both, because both are true.

     While I think that vast majority of the problems over the past eight years may be laid at the foot of the Republican administration and The Republican Congress,
The Republican Control of Congress During The Clinton Administration and the Clinton Administration itself both had contributions to make.  I also believe that the current democratic congress is ineffectual in many respects and lacks backbone.

     Of the three to four major points in the above paragraph that compromise my position as a whole, you have chosen one point to quote me about.  You have chosen that quote accurately.  To represent that as my whole opinion is, however, a distortion both of what I am saying and who I am.

     So I guess I need to ask what the political point is that you are trying to make here?

     I am willing to listen to whatever political point you may have to offer, but I have yet to be able to identify one.
Perhaps you are trying to convince me that President Clinton bears blame for some of the stuff going wrong?
I said before that I didn't agree with his economic policy, and you have quoted me on this.  If you are trying to convince me that I don't believe that President Bush and his Republican allies in the House and Senate don't bear the lion's share of the blame for the past eight years of economic giveaways to the rich and the current collapse of this latest bubble,not only do I remain unconvinced, but I point out to you that while I have acknowledged what I believe is appropriate blame for the Democrats, I have also continuously warned about the liklihood of this current situation, despite your disbelief and occasional mockery.

     So what is the political point that you seek to argue?

     That everything in the world isn't the fault of the Republican party over the past eight years?

     I don't think it is.  I think the spinelessness and ineffectuality of the democrats have helped the Republicans enormously over the past eight years.  I think the Democratic administration made mistakes over the eight years before that, helped along by the Republican majority for most of that time.

     I think there's more than enough idiocy to go around.

     Nor do I think there's a total downside to acknowleding mistakes and responsibility.  If you had responsibility, then you can respond differently in the future and change the outcome.  If it was all the other guy the last time, you have to change the other guy before you have any hope of changing the situation.  And who knows if you can do that?

     I'd rather take responsibility, myself, at least for the things it's clear I've done.

     And as much as anything, Mike, I don't like to be crammed into little pigeonholes.  I don't fit there and my thinking doesn't fit there either.

threadbear
Senior Member
since 07-10-2008
Posts 729
Indy


11 posted 10-24-2008 02:53 PM       View Profile for threadbear   Email threadbear   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for threadbear

Glad you brought up this topic, Balladeer.  Everytime I hear about the "failed Bush economic policies", I cringe.  There is a never a substantiation of this claim, except to say 'tax cuts for the wealthy.'  Oh good gosh, Dem's:  are you capable of any proof besides talking points?

The truth is, Bush's tax cuts benefited EVERYONE, and the percentage of taxes cut for the wealthy was LESS than the % cut for the middle class.  

Proof:
The lowest income tax rate was lowered from 15% to 10%, the 27% rate went to 25%, the 30% rate went to 28%, the 35% rate went to 33%, and the top marginal tax rate went from 39.6% to 35%.  

That's ACROSS THE BOARD people, not just tax cuts for the wealthy as Dem talking points falsely lie about.  I Say LIE - because all of the politicians know everyone got a tax cut, as well as a rebate for those paid taxes above the $25k income level.  I didn't see ONE middle income person RETURN that mandatory rebate.  

Bush tried to implement a law that would have stopped the Fannie Mae debacle right in its tracks, but Dem's let it die, not even letting it come up for a vote.  

Bush policies advocate 'free trade' policies.  What is wrong with that?  I don't see the 'failure' in that either.  After all, it was Clinton that implemented the NAFTA rules that killed our trade with close neighboring countries.

It was Clinton who sent our technologies to China, helping them catch up decades in a few short years.  

When a recession was predicted in 2000, the tax cuts had an almost immediate effect, and stopped the bleeding almost immediately.  Dem's refused to give Bush credit for this, but had ZERO explanations on how the economy turned around.

Let's be frank about something:  Clinton was blessed to be in office during the computer age boom; and was fortunate to get out right when chip technology moved to Asia.  He didn't do a damn thing to make the boom happen:  it was technology, pure and simple.  As a matter of fact, Clinton tried to curry favor with our competitors by actually giving them free reign to copy our chips.  How did he do this?  By failing to prosecute even a SINGLE CASE of illegal dupliction by China, Malaysia or Taiwan.  

So I ask again:  What Failed Bush Economic Policies are Democrats referring to?  As this is the most important issue of the election, I think the question deserves a thoughtful answer.  
tBear
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Caelestus
since 06-25-99
Posts 67715
Listening to every heart


12 posted 10-24-2008 04:43 PM       View Profile for Sunshine   Email Sunshine   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Sunshine's Home Page   View IP for Sunshine

Regina,

If things keep going the way they are, you can likely build upon your family's heritage and "start it up again" because your family was much like mine and my husband's, and thank goodness I know how to take the egg to the chick to the hen to the broiler. I'm sure you do too! It's time to start being responsible for ourselves, take a page out of Ramsey's book, and remind ourselves that bartering and a handshake keeps a lot of $$$ in one's pocket.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


13 posted 10-25-2008 03:13 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

tbear, the "Bush failed economic policies" is simply a mantra Democrats hum when trying to avoid facts...that's all. Gasoline is too expensive? Bush's economic policies!!! Sam Swartz got laid off last week? Bush's failed economic policies! The rain ruined the twon picnic last week? Bush's failed economic policies!!

That's all they know how to do. When trapped they simply scream out Bush's failed economic policies!! and pretend they have said something poignant.

I would go into more detail but Bush's failed economic policies are preventing me from doing so!
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


14 posted 10-25-2008 03:30 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

I had a friend in California who made $25,000 a month through most of the Nineties. In 1998, however, he filed for bankruptcy.

Economics isn't just about how much you make.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


15 posted 10-25-2008 03:45 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


Dear Threadbear,

         Here are some responses to your request for actual details on criticisms for Bush’s failed economic policies.  I tried to spread them out somewhat.  I wanted to offer some fairly early critique from 2003, and then an evaluation of the 2004 tax cuts and their effect on the economy after the year and a half that the administration predicted it would take for them to take effect comparing their actual effect against their predicted effect.

     I also thought that some comments from the defense establishment might be in order.  I will be happy to supply you with more, should you wish, but I thought these might be an interesting start for you.  The Paul Krugman Op-Ed piece is From The New York Time, which will I suspect make you unhappy.  He is also a Nobel Prize winning economist.
http://www.workinglife.org/wiki/New+Congressional+Report+Blasts+F ailed+Bush+Economic+Policies+(Sept.+4,+2003)  http://www.truthdig.com/report/page2/20081006_republican_economic_theories_dont_add_up/   http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/18/opinion/18krugman.html  http://www.nsnetwork.org/node/976  http://www.njpp.org/pr_newjobs12.html


     I hope some of this might prove interesting.

     I find that if I click on the http part of each of the links, they seem to connect.  Give it a try that way.

Sincerely yours,

Bob Kaven
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


16 posted 10-25-2008 08:37 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Sounds like you friend made quite a nice living, Ron, like over 2 million in 7 years...not bad.


I remember when Wayne Newton filed for bankruptcy, too. Of course that didn't touch his houses, properties, or stable of Arabian horses. It simply allowed him to get away from paying a lot of bills.

I'm certainly not saying that's what your friend did, but bankruptcy is not what it used to be. I hope your friend was able to hold onto some of that small fortune.
threadbear
Senior Member
since 07-10-2008
Posts 729
Indy


17 posted 10-25-2008 10:16 AM       View Profile for threadbear   Email threadbear   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for threadbear

Hi, Bob.  Just what I was looking for....let me digest these.

But let's be clear on something:
Psychology and Economics

two subjects that have their scholars in polar opposite camps.  Why?  Because they're both totally unproven sciences.  They're theory-based science, with the final results analysis and their causes highly debatable.
I lost all faith in economics when pundits started debating the 'trickle-down' theory.  It works, regardless of what people say.  I've yet to find someone who worked for a 'poor person.'  They just don't run businesses.  You kill off the business owners, and we ALL lose jobs.  
Yet, how often have you heard in the past month, an Econ expert spout off that the banking crisis was caused by this ONE thing.  Simpletons!  It was a combination of several things, including partisan politics, bad loans to the poor, wealth and greed, power and no penalities, etc.   One may have been more disastrous than others, but it took ALL of these factors to really tank the system.  By the way:  the banking crisis has been renamed by the media this week to:
WORLD RECESSION
(did ya notice that?)
Jeff
rwood
Member Elite
since 02-29-2000
Posts 3797
Tennessee


18 posted 10-25-2008 11:08 AM       View Profile for rwood   Email rwood   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for rwood

Sunshine,

I sure can, I sure do, and it sure does! I’m with you!

Homemade cooking is now the unconventional method of prep. Not to mention within the home, but in our schools, eldercare facilities, and hospitals. And we wonder why we have so many issues with having a healthy diet.

But there are many modern things I’m grateful for. Such as medicine, tools, equipment, technology, engineering, the right to vote and own property, etc.

Can you imagine the decisions boiling down to:

“But daddy! Mules are ugly! Why can’t I have the mustang?”

“Work your mule, child, then go out and buy your own mustang."
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


19 posted 10-25-2008 11:25 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
I had a friend in California who made $25,000 a month through most of the Nineties. In 1998, however, he filed for bankruptcy.


How much did he spend per month Ron?

Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


20 posted 10-25-2008 06:28 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
It seems to be the keyword these days to speak of the "past eight years of the Bush disasterous economic policies".



It seems you may be right Mike, even McCain is at it now:

"We cannot spend the next four years as we have much of the last eight, hoping for our luck to change at home and abroad."

What some people will say to try to win an election.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


21 posted 10-26-2008 12:49 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

True enough, grinch. Politicians say many things like that. McCain distancing himself from Bush, Obama distancing himself from his record of voting against tax relief for the middle class while assuring them he is for them, Biden distancing himself from calling Obama "not ready to lead". The world of politics.

I've said before and I'll state it again. I am not a very strong supported of John McCain. There are only two reasons he will get my vote..(1) He is not Obama and (2) the prospect of a democratic president and a democratic congress led by the likes of Pelosi and Reed, especially with three supreme court justices ready to retire, is scary.

Personally, I think McCain handled it all wrong. Instead of throwing Bush under the bus, I would have reminded the American people of the positives of the Bush administration. Yes, believe it or not, there have been one or two. I would have reminded them that we have not been attacked in the past seven years, even though the same terrorist group responsible for 9/11 have declared there would be more. I would have brought out the economical figures of the country before the oil price-raising and the Freddie/Fanny and real-estate fiasco took hold. I would have shown how the tax rebates re-kickstarted the economy. Instead of letting the democrats and the biased media use "McCain would be another four years of Bush" chant, I would have taken it away from them, I would have  called them on it and taken it away from them.

McCain, unfortunately, did none of those things. Instead of supporting his president for the good things, he threw him under the bus and tried to distance himself from him. That does not show a lot for his character, i'm afraid. When polls dictate what you claim to stand for, it shows your weakness. Obama has that same weakness, allowing the polls to dictate his speech and promises. Now, at the end of the road with the election overwhelmingly in his grasp. only now is Obama hedging his bets and warning that there may need to be "readjustments" to what he has steadfastly claimed he would do, namely because what he has claimed he would do has always been an impossibility. The taxes generated from taxing "only the rich" and raising capital gains ceiling would not even come close to his "health coverage for all", for example and everyone who takes three seconds to think about it or look at the figures would realize it for the bull it is. Obama, now feeling confident the Oval Office is his, is dropping hints that he may have to go back on some of his promises, which he undoubtedly has known all along he could not deliver. Of course, that will not be his fault, either. He has Bush to throw that on, too.

We have two weak candidates to choose from. Not a pleasant situation.....
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


22 posted 10-26-2008 01:35 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


Mike,

I agree I think Obama will be your next President, if I were a betting man I’d put my money on him gaining around 375 electoral votes.

However I don’t share your pessimism about what sort of a job he’ll do when he gets there. I’ve listened carefully to both candidates, I’ve studied their policies and I think Obama shades it as the best man for the job. Granted he’s going to have to amend those policies but both candidates have already admitted that the policies they’re pushing were developed many months before the current financial crisis and that they’ll need some serious amending come 2009.

There are several ways to deal with the recession, however odd it sounds cutting taxes and raising taxes are both valid game plans, I could supply a convincing argument for either. I could also do the same for cutting government spending and raising government spending. The only constant is the seemingly paradoxical fact that you have to increase consumer spending. I think Colin Powell is right, I think Obama has a handle on the best way to do that.

threadbear
Senior Member
since 07-10-2008
Posts 729
Indy


23 posted 10-26-2008 02:51 PM       View Profile for threadbear   Email threadbear   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for threadbear

Hi, Bob:  the links you provided have some major intrinsic flaws, namely that they fail to provide a good solid example of MAJOR policy that negatively affected the Economy.

Let’s go thru these traditional Dem talking points and point out the weakness:
“For nearly three years, the president and the Republican Congress have failed to take decisive action on behalf of millions of Americans whose jobs, economic security and retirement savings have been ravaged.”
What?? the House and Congress with a Dem majority she means?  Does she not know about the 2003 Republican oversight and financial correction law that was nixed by Dem’s?  Selectively using a time period to make a weak pt.

New Overtime laws – not even in effect or passed!  How could this influence our present economy?

“Miller's report notes that after the $1.35 trillion tax cut of 2001 virtually ignored lower- and middle-income Americans, the $330 billion giveaway of 2003 willfully disregarded some 12 million children, whose parents won't receive the same $400 per-child tax credit that wealthier households enjoyed.”
That statement really ticks me off:  The 12 million children she’s talking about are people who pay NO TAXES and she’s mad that the household didn’t get a rebate.  She uses the term:  children instead of household to play the ‘child persecuted card.’  Snore.    Why should we offer rebates or tax cuts for people who don’t pay taxes?  I don’t get this insanely goofy logic I hear in Dem talking points.
The same tax cuts reduced ALL taxes for ALL taxpayers, and i’m sick of hearing the lie that they didn’t benefit them.  
That’s just a lie, and the Dem leaders know it.  Across the board, EVERY paying tax group benefited by 4-12% in less taxes.

“Bushies haven't stopped at wages. They're also targeting workers' pensions by refusing to help recover millions in lost retirement savings”
The term “Bushies” lets you know the poster is an immature writer.  First of all, it is NOT the government’s job to recover private firm pensions!  Again, what the h*ll!    This writer must believe in true Socialist philosophies.    Why would the government do something that controversial that the public isn’t even asking for yet?

I’m not going to discuss minimum wage issues.  That’s indeed a labor issue, but I believe it’s up to the employer to set their wage schedules.

----
Truthor Dig post:
“Since George W. took office, corporate profits have soared, while workers’ wages and benefits have been flat. That shows just who is the object of Bush’s conservative compassion.”
gosh, i wonder why:  Bush didn’t establish the huge CEO salaries:  it was the board members that actively recruited these high price CEO’s and paid them like rock stars.  Bush had ZERO to do with this.    Consequently, if you overpay the CEO, to compensate the company will UNDERPAY their workers.  

There is NO evidence that the deficit was caused by tax reductions.  Actually, the amount of money the IRS collected WENT UP after the tax cuts.  You won’t hear that stat quoted anywhere by the media.    The deficit was caused by two things:  1) excessive spending and earmarks across the board for all politicians, and 2) the most expensive war ever waged in terms of money.  Same war also has the lowest ‘casualty’ rates of any war fought in the past 200 years (compared in days/vs./casualty ratios.)

Again, the article offers commentary on trickle-down, claims to have evidence, but doesn’t present it.  Besides, I can always get another econ professor to say just the opposite.
-------------------------------------------

NYTimes was an op-ed with just supposition theories, no evidence, no facts.  

-------------

“The approach that characterized the Bush Doctrine in foreign policy also aptly characterizes the Bush administration’s approach to the economy – creating or worsening the skyrocketing budget deficits and indebtedness, lax corporate oversight, credit and housing market crises that plague us today.”
Let’s look at that:  Bush tried to pass legislation that would have created corp oversight, and the credit oversight, and housing oversight.   Looks to me like the Dems dropped the ball on that one.  They didn’t react until the crisis actually hit, then blamed it on the Republicans for not doing anything proactive (See Barney Frank.)

Foreign policy overreach:  How is Bush’s office responsible for private firms selling and trading assets to China??

“Now, evidence is mounting that the Bush administration’s policies in both arenas are reckless and unsustainable”
uh.....where?  Why didn’t the writer reference what he is talking about?  Let’s throw out a claim, and if said often enough, people will believe it, huh?

“Turmoil on Wall Street”- excuse me:  what part of the Government IS Wall street?  exactly none
The real story is the European market has been in a tailspin AS WELL for the past 6 years, their own fault,
for consolidating power without letting competition drive the market.  Europe is currently in an inflationary period with inflated Euro worth, no demand for goods, exports flat.    No competition to even the playing field.

Let's talk plainly here:  the Democrats have had 8 years to nail Bush specifically to Econ problems, but don't have any bullets in their guns to point to anything that had a direct effect on anything.  The tax cuts WERE beneficial to all middle class, and the CEO overpayment is something the company themselves should be held accountable for, not Bush.
T.bear
threadbear
Senior Member
since 07-10-2008
Posts 729
Indy


24 posted 10-26-2008 02:56 PM       View Profile for threadbear   Email threadbear   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for threadbear

Mike, just for your information:

Obama is the LEAST experienced politician EVER to run for President in the past 75 years.  (Just a little under 3 years national experience)

(Truman (2 years experience) took over for FDR when FDR passed away, so he didn't initially 'run' for office.)

You have to go allllll the way back to Lincoln to find a more inexperienced candidate.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> ..And in the Eighth Year.....   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors