PDA

View Full Version : Economics The problem and the solution


***SPRAYER
11-01-2008, 06:53 PM
I was watching Huckabee on Fox, and his guest, Robert T. Kiyosaki, said that "Republicans borrow and spend, and Democrats tax and spend" but neither party is going to cut spending.

He also said that America's problem is economic, not political, so neither candidate, McCain or Obama, has a solution.

Thoughts?

Friendo
11-01-2008, 07:42 PM
give BO a chance--he's made more than enough conciliatory overtures to deserve that.

headsnap
11-01-2008, 07:50 PM
give BO a chance--he's made more than enough conciliatory overtures to deserve that.


conciliatory overtures? :spock:

that's funny!

Logical
11-01-2008, 07:52 PM
I was watching Huckabee on Fox, and his guest, Robert T. Kiyosaki, said that "Republicans borrow and spend, and Democrats tax and spend" but neither party is going to cut spending.

He also said that America's problem is economic, not political, so neither candidate, McCain or Obama, has a solution.

Thoughts?If he was not such a religious dumbass, he might have a prayer. I could never vote for him.

Donger
11-01-2008, 07:55 PM
give BO a chance--he's made more than enough conciliatory overtures to deserve that.

I wouldn't have a problem with giving him a chance, except for the fact that once our government gets their hands on our health care, they'll NEVER let it go. See your retirement.

That's not a "chance." That's signing a large part of yourself over, willingly and permanently.

No thank you.

Friendo
11-01-2008, 07:57 PM
I wouldn't have a problem with giving him a chance, except for the fact that once our government gets their hands on our health care, they'll NEVER let it go. See your retirement.

That's not a "chance." That's signing a large part of yourself over, willingly and permanently.

No thank you.

so what's your solution...or are we good with the status quo?

Donger
11-01-2008, 07:58 PM
so what's your solution...or are we good with the status quo?

With regard to what? Health care?

Friendo
11-01-2008, 07:59 PM
With regard to what? Health care?

no, the fucking price of fast food:rolleyes:

Donger
11-01-2008, 08:02 PM
no, the ****ing price of fast food:rolleyes:

In that case, I would support the abolishment of pre-existing conditions. Everyone should have access to health insurance, but those at higher risk should have to pat higher premiums, just like any other insurance.

I would also support serious tort reform.

Friendo
11-01-2008, 08:07 PM
In that case, I would support the abolishment of pre-existing conditions. Everyone should have access to health insurance, but those at higher risk should have to pat higher premiums, just like any other insurance.

I would also support serious tort reform.

as would I, but as it currently stands, the middle-class is taking the biggest hit on premiums. PEC doesn't address that. Personally, I'd like to see more competition.

noa
11-01-2008, 08:16 PM
Couldn't agree more. Washington may talk about economic responsibility, but they demonstrate absolutely no will power when it comes to reducing spending, and that applies to both parties. Its really ridiculous, but you sort of have to toss the issue out and vote based on other factors, because when it comes to spending reductions, neither party can or will deliver.

Friendo
11-01-2008, 08:21 PM
Couldn't agree more. Washington may talk about economic responsibility, but they demonstrate absolutely no will power when it comes to reducing spending, and that applies to both parties. Its really ridiculous, but you sort of have to toss the issue out and vote based on other factors, because when it comes to spending reductions, neither party can or will deliver.

sometimes the peeps that irritate me the most are the fence-sitters firing shots
at both sides from a safe distance.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3184

noa
11-01-2008, 08:26 PM
sometimes the peeps that irritate me the most are the fence-sitters firing shots
at both sides from a safe distance.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3184

It's easy to criticize, but there's no real solutions. The people who would be required to implement solutions are the ones entrenched right now, and they won't want to relinquish power.

One idea that comes to mind is term limits, but that would take an amendment. With term limits, though, a member of congress might be more willing to cut spending and not fear an attack ad saying "Rep. Doe cut military spending," or education spending, or anything of importance to voters. Might also be less allied to special interests asking for pork.

Dick Bull
11-01-2008, 08:27 PM
In that case, I would support the abolishment of pre-existing conditions. Everyone should have access to health insurance, but those at higher risk should have to pat higher premiums, just like any other insurance.

I would also support serious tort reform.

I agree and all illegal aliens shouldn't be allowed to have access to medical care.

I'd say that's about the same level of compassion.

Donger
11-01-2008, 08:28 PM
I agree and all illegal aliens shouldn't be allowed to have access to medical care.

I'd say that's about the same level of compassion.

Barack Hussein's own aunt shouldn't have free medical care?

Beast.

Friendo
11-01-2008, 08:29 PM
It's easy to criticize, but there's no real solutions. The people who would be required to implement solutions are the ones entrenched right now, and they won't want to relinquish power.

One idea that comes to mind is term limits, but that would take an amendment. With term limits, though, a member of congress might be more willing to cut spending and not fear an attack ad saying "Rep. Doe cut military spending," or education spending, or anything of importance to voters. Might also be less allied to special interests asking for pork.

B mo-fockin S I say! the spirit of America has and will come alive with win/win. It's the primary reason I enthusiastically support this guy.

RJ
11-01-2008, 08:30 PM
I think Americans generally agree that spending needs to be reduced. The disagreement, obviously, is where the cuts are made. No matter how it's done, some folks are gonna be pissed off. One of the reasons I voted for Obama is that I think he has the balls to piss us off. I hope I'm right.

Donger
11-01-2008, 08:32 PM
I think Americans generally agree that spending needs to be reduced. The disagreement, obviously, is where the cuts are made. No matter how it's done, some folks are gonna be pissed off. One of the reasons I voted for Obama is that I think he has the balls to piss us off. I hope I'm right.

You think that Brack Hussein is going to decrease spending? Why?

noa
11-01-2008, 08:32 PM
B mo-fockin S I say! the spirit of America has and will come alive with win/win. It's the primary reason I enthusiastically support this guy.

Well, to each his own. I'm an Obama guy too, but for different reasons. I'm a cynic when it comes to reigning in spending because I don't think Congress can control itself and adequately protect long-term economic interests. Even when the president is heart-attack-serious about cutting spending.

RJ
11-01-2008, 08:33 PM
Barack Hussein's own aunt shouldn't have free medical care?

Beast.



Meh. She's dad's half sister. Under the bus she goes!

Friendo
11-01-2008, 08:34 PM
Well, to each his own. I'm an Obama guy too, but for different reasons. I'm a cynic when it comes to reigning in spending because I don't think Congress can control itself and adequately protect long-term economic interests. Even when the president is heart-attack-serious about cutting spending.

I think it's a fine balance--look at any small business.

Mr. Kotter
11-01-2008, 08:54 PM
I was watching Huckabee on Fox, and his guest, Robert T. Kiyosaki, said that "Republicans borrow and spend, and Democrats tax and spend" but neither party is going to cut spending.

He also said that America's problem is economic, not political, so neither candidate, McCain or Obama, has a solution.

Thoughts?

I responding solely to the thread starter, not any of the previous incendiary bullshit that you have posted....

On this count, Kiyosaki (and Huckabee...if he agreed, I take it) are correct. In fact...it's the biggest reason the Republican party has lost moderate-conservative/fiscal conservative/libertarian support.

Republicans (especially Neocons) seem convinced we can "debt" our way to scaling back the growth of big government; yet, it seems some Dems finally realize (although NOT the Pelosi-Reid "wing" of the party....the "Obama" wing, it remains to be determined) we cannot throw money at every problem. The real answer is, of course, continued funding for programs and policies that work, yet scaling back and eliminating those that don't work.

Unfortunately, discerning between those programs and policies that work and those that don't....ain't always easy; and, politically, speaking....Americans love being pandered to by pols; add to that, our spend-spend-spend mentality applied to government programs....and Americans possess a champagne taste on a beer budget (we demand filet mignon, but only want to pay for hamburger---'Salisbury' steak?)

McCain and Obama both understand this; both have pandered to their "key" constituent groups to 'shore up the base' while trying to "reach out" to moderate and independent types, who decide the election, and who....try harder than the partisans, to reconcile this paradox.

So here we are, two days to the election....do we trust McCain to "debt" us into fiscal responsibility, or do we give Obama a chance...hoping that he will defy the passion of his base for more spending, but balance it by reasonable and measured (by historical standards) escalation of taxes by those who can most easily afford it???

I'd say that's an easy decision for most Americans, and it's why....despite continued doubts, skepticism, and even....racism, that a majority of Americans will be taking something of a leap of faith on Tuesday.

Republicans had their chance; and the neocon wing of the party pissed it down their leg...for a ill-advised war in Iraq, and for making the rich....richer. Is it really a wonder the American people are gonna kick the party in the groin on Tuesday? I think not.

RJ
11-01-2008, 08:56 PM
You think that Brack Hussein is going to decrease spending? Why?


I believe if he is elected and serves 8 years he will balance the budget. Spending cuts will be a part of that. Some folks are going to be pissed off. I might be among them. But it has to happen, assuming we don't want to just keep amassing debt for our children and grandchildren to deal with.

Ultra Peanut
11-02-2008, 01:18 AM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/C8_XpQ6v2iY&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/C8_XpQ6v2iY&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

***SPRAYER
11-02-2008, 08:12 AM
The solution to the problem is a dictator.

***SPRAYER
11-02-2008, 08:19 AM
I believe if he is elected and serves 8 years he will balance the budget. Spending cuts will be a part of that.

Do we really need a Dept of Education? What do they do, exactly?

Ultra Peanut
11-02-2008, 08:20 AM
Do we really need a Dept of Education? What do they do, exactly?Yeah, what DO they provide that we couldn't get from a bunch of tiny schoolhouses and churches?

Bill Parcells
11-02-2008, 08:21 AM
The solution to the problem is a dictator.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/aH6cK3GaiH0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/aH6cK3GaiH0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

***SPRAYER
11-02-2008, 08:25 AM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/aH6cK3GaiH0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/aH6cK3GaiH0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>



LMAO

Hey, I thought you were in Buffalo?

Bill Parcells
11-02-2008, 08:27 AM
LMAO

Hey, I thought you were in Buffalo?

Nah, canceled. too much coin to go up there. I'm done with road trips for the year. but Bob and Guns are going to the Bills home game, so you have to show up to commiserate with them. :evil:

banyon
11-02-2008, 08:28 AM
Do we really need a Dept of Education? What do they do, exactly?

Do you think we are in a globally competitive marketplace for labor?

***SPRAYER
11-02-2008, 08:30 AM
"Hey, Blubberhead. See doze?"

-Moe

***SPRAYER
11-02-2008, 08:30 AM
Do you think we are in a globally competitive marketplace for labor?

What does the Dept of Education do?

banyon
11-02-2008, 08:37 AM
What does the Dept of Education do?

Not enough, but here:

Total 2009 Budget $59.2 billion (Compare with 2008 DOD budget + Iraq/Afghanistan $1 trillion, or the ED budget is .05 percent of the DOD budget, the biggest such disparity in the world.)

Key priorities in the 2009 budget include the following:

$14.3 billion, an increase of $406 million or 2.9 percent, for a reauthorized Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies program that would more fairly distribute Title I resources to the high school level, strengthen assessment and accountability in our high schools, provide more choices to students and parents, and encourage more effective restructuring of chronically low-performing schools. The 2009 request is an increase of $5.5 billion, or 63 percent, over the 2001 level.

$491.3 million, the same as the 2008 level, for a reauthorized Title I School Improvement Grants program that would help build State and local capacity to identify and implement effective interventions to turn around low-performing schools. The rapid growth in funding for this program, from the initial fiscal year 2007 appropriation of $125 million, is justified by the increase in the number of schools identified for fundamental restructuring reforms.

$1 billion for Reading First State Grants, an increase of $607 million, to restore funding for this program that has proven its effectiveness in using research-based instructional methods to improve the reading skills of students in high-poverty, low- performing elementary schools.

$800 million for a reauthorized 21st Century Learning Opportunities program (replacing 21st Century Community Learning Centers) that would transform the current program into a scholarship fund enabling poor students in low-performing schools to enroll in high-quality after-school and summer school programs aimed at increasing student achievement.

$300 million for Pell Grants for Kids, a new K-12 scholarship program that would allow low-income students attending schools in restructuring or that have high dropout rates to transfer to local private schools or out-of-district public schools.

$200 million for the Teacher Incentive Fund, an increase of $102.7 million, to encourage States and school districts to reform compensation plans to reward principals and teachers who raise student achievement, close achievement gaps, and work in hard-to-staff schools.

$175 million, an increase of $131.5 million, for programs aimed at improving math and science instruction in K-12 schools as part of the President's American Competitiveness Initiative.

$11.3 billion for Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Part B Grants to States, an increase of $337 million that would maintain the Federal contribution toward meeting the excess cost of special education at about 17 percent of the national average per pupil expenditure (APPE). Under the request, combined NCLB and IDEA funding would total $36.9 billion in 2009, an increase of $12.1 billion, or 49 percent, since 2001.

$16.9 billion for Pell Grants, an increase of $2.6 billion that, together with mandatory funds, would raise the maximum Pell Grant award to $4,800. The request level reflects an increase in total Pell Grant funding since 2001 of $10.1 billion, or 116 percent, that funded a 28 percent increase in the maximum award, from $3,750 to $4,800, and a 33 percent increase in recipients, from 4.3 million to 5.8 million

http://www.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget09/summary/edlite-section1.html

Plus, obviously, the Federal Student loan programs for college.

Now answer my question.

***SPRAYER
11-02-2008, 09:12 AM
I like the part where Moe and Larry put the beans inside the cannon!

BucEyedPea
11-02-2008, 09:57 AM
I was watching Huckabee on Fox, and his guest, Robert T. Kiyosaki, said that "Republicans borrow and spend, and Democrats tax and spend" but neither party is going to cut spending.

He also said that America's problem is economic, not political, so neither candidate, McCain or Obama, has a solution.

Thoughts?

I agree. Both are part of the problem.
Neither want to cut spending in the areas they value.
Elect Ron Paul.

BucEyedPea
11-02-2008, 09:59 AM
The solution to the problem is a dictator.

Depends on the dictator. A benign despot who will cut spending and let both sides cry would be fine with me, temporarily.