Can you give a specific example? I'm not asking for "because he said he wanted to bring all sides together but instead he's just promoting Democratic ideals!" He doesn't have the power to pass laws all by himself. It's also not fair to characterize the divide in Congressional voting as a failure on his part. Republicans have said repeatedly that their grip is with Nancy Pelosi.
Ok, one very specific example is where he said in his campaign he wouldn't sign anything put on his desk for a minimum of 5 days. He said it would be posted online for the public to review and he would review and read it for 5 days after it hits his desk. He signed the SCHIP bill less than 8 hours after it hit his desk, he signed the Spendulous Bill in less than 24 hours, he signed an education bill in less that 24 hours, and now he is about to sign the $410 billion spending bill as soon as he gets his hands on it. That is one promise from his campaign he has broken on every piece of legislation that has come to him since he was elected.
He also promise complete "Transparency" but there has been anything BUT that.
Also he promised there would be NO lobbyists working in his administration and guess what? He has hired MANY of them. I just don't understand how anyone can hanve any faith in the man. Those are just a few examples of where he has mislead the public.
He doesn't have the power to pass laws all by himself.
in a way he kinda does. i mean, not a single Republican has to vote for anything proposed and it could still pass. yes they still have to go through the motions/paperwork, but if obama wants something, all he has to do is get Democrats to pass it.
He doesn't have the power to pass laws all by himself.
in a way he kinda does. i mean, not a single Republican has to vote for anything proposed and it could still pass. yes they still have to go through the motions/paperwork, but if obama wants something, all he has to do is get Democrats to pass it.
but they are not him.. that was my point. If people don't support his ideas, why do they vote in favor of them?
Can you give a specific example? I'm not asking for "because he said he wanted to bring all sides together but instead he's just promoting Democratic ideals!" He doesn't have the power to pass laws all by himself. It's also not fair to characterize the divide in Congressional voting as a failure on his part. Republicans have said repeatedly that their grip is with Nancy Pelosi.
Ok, one very specific example is where he said in his campaign he wouldn't sign anything put on his desk for a minimum of 5 days. He said it would be posted online for the public to review and he would review and read it for 5 days after it hits his desk. He signed the SCHIP bill less than 8 hours after it hit his desk, he signed the Spendulous Bill in less than 24 hours, he signed an education bill in less that 24 hours, and now he is about to sign the $410 billion spending bill as soon as he gets his hands on it. That is one promise from his campaign he has broken on every piece of legislation that has come to him since he was elected.
He also promise complete "Transparency" but there has been anything BUT that.
Also he promised there would be NO lobbyists working in his administration and guess what? He has hired MANY of them. I just don't understand how anyone can hanve any faith in the man. Those are just a few examples of where he has mislead the public.
for all that lack of transparency, a non-political-insider such as yourself seems to know an awful lot about what's going on.
He doesn't have the power to pass laws all by himself.
in a way he kinda does. i mean, not a single Republican has to vote for anything proposed and it could still pass. yes they still have to go through the motions/paperwork, but if obama wants something, all he has to do is get Democrats to pass it.
but they are not him.. that was my point. If people don't support his ideas, why do they vote in favor of them?
They don't. Look at the numbers. The majority of the country was against the Stimulus package but he still passed it. The reason they voted for him was because he wasn't campaigning like the far left liberal he is.
Can you give a specific example? I'm not asking for "because he said he wanted to bring all sides together but instead he's just promoting Democratic ideals!" He doesn't have the power to pass laws all by himself. It's also not fair to characterize the divide in Congressional voting as a failure on his part. Republicans have said repeatedly that their grip is with Nancy Pelosi.
Ok, one very specific example is where he said in his campaign he wouldn't sign anything put on his desk for a minimum of 5 days. He said it would be posted online for the public to review and he would review and read it for 5 days after it hits his desk. He signed the SCHIP bill less than 8 hours after it hit his desk, he signed the Spendulous Bill in less than 24 hours, he signed an education bill in less that 24 hours, and now he is about to sign the $410 billion spending bill as soon as he gets his hands on it. That is one promise from his campaign he has broken on every piece of legislation that has come to him since he was elected.
He also promise complete "Transparency" but there has been anything BUT that.
Also he promised there would be NO lobbyists working in his administration and guess what? He has hired MANY of them. I just don't understand how anyone can hanve any faith in the man. Those are just a few examples of where he has mislead the public.
for all that lack of transparency, a non-political-insider such as yourself seems to know an awful lot about what's going on.
Then why don't we know what all banks he gave OUR **** MONEY to?
And here's a timely quote from today.. it seems Obama himself is frustrated with the pork in these bills, but there is a time-critical urgency to the legislation. That might also help explain why he has been quick to pass legislation given the state of the economy.
"I am signing an imperfect omnibus bill because it's necessary for the ongoing functions of government," Obama declared. "But I also view this as a departure point for more far-reaching change."
In a sign of his discomfort with the bill, Obama did not sign it in public.
"This piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business."
It's almost as if change can't happen overnight.. and that it takes cooperation rather than mandate to institute change.
money that I earned and they TOOK from me that I should be spending
higher taxes have never been a good idea in a recession
where do they spend it?
on temporary jobs like roads and bridges. this doesnt create real wealth or GDP. it will, in their defense, help give the means to get wealth for yourself. ...but if all that is taxed even more it wont help create wealth either.
And here's a timely quote from today.. it seems Obama himself is frustrated with the pork in these bills, but there is a time-critical urgency to the legislation. That might also help explain why he has been quick to pass legislation given the state of the economy.
"I am signing an imperfect omnibus bill because it's necessary for the ongoing functions of government," Obama declared. "But I also view this as a departure point for more far-reaching change."
In a sign of his discomfort with the bill, Obama did not sign it in public.
"This piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business."
It's almost as if change can't happen overnight.. and that it takes cooperation rather than mandate to institute change.
No, we do not know what all banks got the bailout. We know SOME of them, but they refuse to release the full list and that is bullshit! It is our money they are pissing away on these people and then won't even tell us how it is spent? Try that sometime at work with the cash drawer. Just go buy "supplies" then not show proof of what ya bought and see how well that goes over. I'm PRETTY sure the term for that is embezlement. (sp)
money that I earned and they TOOK from me that I should be spending
higher taxes have never been a good idea in a recession
where do they spend it?
it does not matter where they spend it because its MY money and they arent spending it where i want them to. i would rather keep that money and spur the economy.
if i had the $300+ that they take out of every paycheck, i could go out and buy that new GM car.
THAT would spur the economy. the trillion dollar bail out would be better if the government lost a trillion by not collecting income tax for a year. then i would have that money, AND the economy would take off.
I smell a new twelve step program.....GBA=greedy b@st@rds anonymous
"corporate greed" has given hundreds of millions of people world wide a better quality of life. Profit is the key to progress in an economy. "Corporate Greed" is what develops new and better products that all of us want to have. If something is too expensive in your mind, dont buy it.
I smell a new twelve step program.....GBA=greedy b@st@rds anonymous
"corporate greed" has given hundreds of millions of people world wide a better quality of life. Profit is the key to progress in an economy. "Corporate Greed" is what develops new and better products that all of us want to have. If something is too expensive in your mind, dont buy it.
corporate greed? Corporations are run by people. They do not make decisions on their own. Without personal responsibility, this corporate greed leads to bad business decisions and who eats it? Well right now, the American people.
I smell a new twelve step program.....GBA=greedy b@st@rds anonymous
"corporate greed" has given hundreds of millions of people world wide a better quality of life. Profit is the key to progress in an economy. "Corporate Greed" is what develops new and better products that all of us want to have. If something is too expensive in your mind, dont buy it.
corporate greed? Corporations are run by people. They do not make decisions on their own. Without personal responsibility, this corporate greed leads to bad business decisions and who eats it? Well right now, the American people.
I'll grant you that this country and many people have prospered under capitalism, but i'm talking about personal greed, with implications.
I smell a new twelve step program.....GBA=greedy b@st@rds anonymous
"corporate greed" has given hundreds of millions of people world wide a better quality of life. Profit is the key to progress in an economy. "Corporate Greed" is what develops new and better products that all of us want to have. If something is too expensive in your mind, dont buy it.
corporate greed? Corporations are run by people. They do not make decisions on their own. Without personal responsibility, this corporate greed leads to bad business decisions and who eats it? Well right now, the American people.
You are right, under the Obama administration the American people do eat it. It should not be this way though. In a true capitolist society the corporations that get too greedy and make bad moves go under. They are no longer around to make those bad decisions. It doesn't make any sense to watch the government keep throwing money at people who fail so they can watch them piss it all away.
In all honesty, it wasn't just the banks fault though. There were a ton of people out there that knew damn well they couldn't pay the morgage on a $500,000 house but did it anyway. Now they are acting angry because the house is being forclosed on.... Another case where Capitolism would straighten things out.
irresponsible spending and borrowing got us into this mess. more of the same wont help.
it wouldnt be a good idea to pay off your credit cards with other credit cards. you dont get anywhere, you dont create wealth. you always lose in that situation. If that strategy worked, why dont we spend a trillion a day? that way we will get back one and a half trillion.
we are spending so much money right now its scary we shouldnt be eating it. the government is forcing us to eat it.
corporations are run by people. bad business decisions run them out of business. thats when "greed" backfires. they get weeded out in economic Darwinism. Those companies go under, new better stronger ones take over. the people will work there and move on with life. it isnt greedy to pay thousands of people for a good or service and take profit as you do it. its good business.
[There were a ton of people out there that knew damn well they couldn't pay the morgage on a $500,000 house but did it anyway.
GBA material too
My only point was that when it all comes crashing for this corps...for the people who's $500,000 were foreclosed on...They'll need a fellowship where they can learn a new way....GBA will be there. I can here them now, My name is Brandon and I'm a greed b@stard...
money that I earned and they TOOK from me that I should be spending
higher taxes have never been a good idea in a recession
where do they spend it?
on temporary jobs like roads and bridges. this doesnt create real wealth or GDP. it will, in their defense, help give the means to get wealth for yourself. ...but if all that is taxed even more it wont help create wealth either.
OK.. so we spent it on "temporary jobs like roads and bridges"... what did the road- and bridge-builders do with that money?
i would rather keep that money and spur the economy.
This is a self-contradicting sentence
No it's not. If he keeps the money instead of the government taking it, he will spend it and spur the economy. It's a pretty easy concept.
How very Micro-Econ of you. The major gap between economists and the Republican Party is their ability to grasp Macro-Economics. I think I will start calling them the Micro Party and the Macro Party.
i would rather keep that money and spur the economy.
This is a self-contradicting sentence
No it's not. If he keeps the money instead of the government taking it, he will spend it and spur the economy. It's a pretty easy concept.
How very Micro-Econ of you. The major gap between economists and the Republican Party is their ability to grasp Macro-Economics. I think I will start calling them the Micro Party and the Macro Party.
Call it what you want, but it works. If everyone out there gets to keep more of their money, they will spend that money. The rich will create better products and expand their companies and create more jobs and that will decrease un-employment which will give more people jobs which will create more money being pumped into the economy...
Give a poor slob $20.. where does the money go?
It goes to the liquor store.
What does he buy?
Cheap (domestic) beverages
How much of that money was saved (in other words, removed from the economy)?
Zero
How much of that money leaves our economy to go to a different economy (via imports)?
Zero
----
Give a rich man $20.. where does the money go?
Into his bank account
Why?
Because he's saving so he can help stimulate the economy later
Where does it eventually go when he gets around to saving up what he feels is sufficient?
It goes toward the purchase of a luxury (imported) vehicle
How much of that money had to sit around inactive for a period of time?
All of it
How much of that money subsequently left our economy?
All of it
---
Now, I bid you all to employ your cognitive dissonance and micro-economic principles to explain why the above scenarios are flawed. My argument is simple -- taxing and spending makes money move. The only thing keeping our economy from dissolving entirely is the amount of money being thrown around by the federal government.
Comments
higher taxes have never been a good idea in a recession
He also promise complete "Transparency" but there has been anything BUT that.
Also he promised there would be NO lobbyists working in his administration and guess what? He has hired MANY of them. I just don't understand how anyone can hanve any faith in the man. Those are just a few examples of where he has mislead the public.
And here's a timely quote from today.. it seems Obama himself is frustrated with the pork in these bills, but there is a time-critical urgency to the legislation. That might also help explain why he has been quick to pass legislation given the state of the economy. "I am signing an imperfect omnibus bill because it's necessary for the ongoing functions of government," Obama declared. "But I also view this as a departure point for more far-reaching change."
In a sign of his discomfort with the bill, Obama did not sign it in public.
"This piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business."
It's almost as if change can't happen overnight.. and that it takes cooperation rather than mandate to institute change.
...but if all that is taxed even more it wont help create wealth either.
time for tough love. help them help themselves.
if i had the $300+ that they take out of every paycheck, i could go out and buy that new GM car.
THAT would spur the economy.
the trillion dollar bail out would be better if the government lost a trillion by not collecting income tax for a year. then i would have that money, AND the economy would take off.
corporate greed? Corporations are run by people. They do not make decisions on their own. Without personal responsibility, this corporate greed leads to bad business decisions and who eats it? Well right now, the American people.
In all honesty, it wasn't just the banks fault though. There were a ton of people out there that knew damn well they couldn't pay the morgage on a $500,000 house but did it anyway. Now they are acting angry because the house is being forclosed on.... Another case where Capitolism would straighten things out.
it wouldnt be a good idea to pay off your credit cards with other credit cards. you dont get anywhere, you dont create wealth. you always lose in that situation. If that strategy worked, why dont we spend a trillion a day? that way we will get back one and a half trillion.
we are spending so much money right now its scary
we shouldnt be eating it. the government is forcing us to eat it.
corporations are run by people. bad business decisions run them out of business. thats when "greed" backfires. they get weeded out in economic Darwinism. Those companies go under, new better stronger ones take over. the people will work there and move on with life. it isnt greedy to pay thousands of people for a good or service and take profit as you do it. its good business.
GBA material too
My only point was that when it all comes crashing for this corps...for the people who's $500,000 were foreclosed on...They'll need a fellowship where they can learn a new way....GBA will be there. I can here them now, My name is Brandon and I'm a greed b@stard...
kinda like "Surrender to win"
Give a poor slob $20.. where does the money go?
It goes to the liquor store.
What does he buy?
Cheap (domestic) beverages
How much of that money was saved (in other words, removed from the economy)?
Zero
How much of that money leaves our economy to go to a different economy (via imports)?
Zero
----
Give a rich man $20.. where does the money go?
Into his bank account
Why?
Because he's saving so he can help stimulate the economy later
Where does it eventually go when he gets around to saving up what he feels is sufficient?
It goes toward the purchase of a luxury (imported) vehicle
How much of that money had to sit around inactive for a period of time?
All of it
How much of that money subsequently left our economy?
All of it
---
Now, I bid you all to employ your cognitive dissonance and micro-economic principles to explain why the above scenarios are flawed. My argument is simple -- taxing and spending makes money move. The only thing keeping our economy from dissolving entirely is the amount of money being thrown around by the federal government.