Promote your business or product on 700level.com. For
more information about advertising with us CLICK HERE!

F_B, that link does not really single out any particular President for their harmful economic policy.

Um, yeah because maybe you HAVE TO SEE THE MOVIE instead of watching the trailer for your review

Anyway, is there an alarm being sounded by prominent economists?

Matter of fact I believe someone in the trailer mentions "The system".

Okay?

Right, but the original question was on the difference in Economic Policy between Obama and McCain. If it's "the system" then it won't really matter.

Dude, I guess you didn't notice the obvious role that Dubya and Darth Vader are gonna play in this film... Especially when Lord Vader is quoted as saying "Deficits don't matter" (politically)

Perhaps. But Uber seems to put a lot more cause/effect to the health of the economy on Presidential Policy than I seem to recall ever hearing before.

That was before I saw the effects of tax cuts for the ultra-rich and an expensive war in Iraq. You're aware that the national debt doubled in the past eight years, right? That's debt that your kids are going to have to deal with.

As for economists who have warned about this, there are many. Including this guy, the former senior economist of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers.

The world is changing. It's a different situation than it was 10 or 20 years ago, and now we're not talking about destroying your future. We're talking about destroying your kids' future. How much are you willing to bet on our current economic trajectory, because we've borrowed so much we're now playing with our kids' money.

Don't worry Uber, GlennGoBlue, the economic/math genius, has it all figured out.

I just maintain that I don't think there will be a tremendous difference in what happens in this arena between the two Candidates.


I don't necessarily like the debt but I really have a hard time believing that any tax cut given to a wealthy person, when the rates involved are far above what the middle class pays, will severly influence the size of the debt.



The problem is on the spending side and I think something like 50% of that is entitlements and therefore out of the control of Congress (which must approve every expenditure, hence part of my reason for saying I don't think Presidential Policy makes much difference to this overall issue). Congressman earn re-election by telling their constituents what they achieved in their time in Congress, most of the time the easiest thing to quantify involved the spending of money. Not many succesful re-election Campaigns have been waged on a Platform of how much money they didn't spend.



THAT'S the system that, IMO, drives up the debt.

Fred, perhaps you could do away with the ignorant (in the literal sense of the word) jabs and make an attempt to actually participate in the discussion.

that implies intellect- next youre goin to tell me he can use rocks as tools, and can make fire...

Obviously, Glenn you haven't recognized the "ignorant jabs" were a deliberate impersonation of you.

Ok, I'm fine with bringing this back to an intellectual level, free from barbs.

Are you at all interested in seeing this movie? The reason I posted it was that I remembered hearing about it before, and then saw the author's of the book (on which the documentary is based) on CNN tonight. And they mentionned "The Fall Of Rome", which I knew you'd "get a kick out of"...


736, you are impertinent as always- I salute you.

you have a thesaurus out, don't you?

HA!

NTFF

That is not an impersonation of me in the least.


Anyway, I'd check the movie out probably, but won't get too, too worked up about it.



I still maintain my point that the borrowing and the National Debt are being driven up more by entitlements for Medicare and Social Security than by the War or tax cuts. And therefore the Election won't solve any fiscal problems quickly.

And therefore the Election won't solve any fiscal problems quickly


Now who in the world suggested that?

I think what Uber mentioned previously was that we are at a crossroads, and a continuation of current economic policy is going to lead him to start buying gold and foreign currency.

Truth be told, I think his post spoke more to you than to me- I don't have any kids.

But if I did/do in the future, I'd hate to think that I ruined their future before they were born.

Ok, I'm fine with bringing this back to an intellectual level, free from barbs.

but then you didn't. seriously fred, there is something fishy about how quick you are with the insults/jabs, but you almost never back up your statements with anything of substance. really not trying to jump on you, but its the truth.

glenn is dead on with this one.

oh, flesh. Shut UP

ok, fred, whatever you say.


sigh.

Your comment about how I "have no substance" and "but then you didn't"- are pretty fucking stupid when you read back, flesh.



Whatever, man, I don't hold it against you

fred, i'm not the only one to make that claim against you, but thanks for not holding it against me.

your comments tend to run much heavier on telling others how stupid they are than on providing actual evidence to support your point of view. god knows youre quick to post a link or better yet, a youtube clip, but not so great when you have to put it in your own words.

just the facts, jack.

What ever flesh.

I've been through the ringer with Glenn, Seth, and KB and had plenty of facts, evidence and corroboration all all sorts, so don't even try it.

Talk about revisionist history.


If you want I can go back and see if I can find plenty of long winded discussions, but truth be told, they kind of bore me anymore.

As is this challenge from you on my ability to debate.

Anyone who's been here for a while, knows that I'm not a copy and paster.

For you to insinuate as much speaks more about you than it does me, friend.

I still maintain my point that the borrowing and the National Debt are being driven up more by entitlements for Medicare and Social Security than by the War or tax cuts. And therefore the Election won't solve any fiscal problems quickly.

The top four expenses:

1. Defense
2. Social Security
3. Medicare
4. Interest on the national debt

If you look at those, we're pretty committed to having to pay for 2 and 3 even though our generation isn't going to see much of that. When I'm running numbers for retirement planning, I assume that I'm going to get zero dollars in social security. It sucks, but I can sleep at night knowing that it's helping people even if only a little bit.

And I think I got a little too focused on national debt here. The point that I was going after was overall economic health and I think I was using the rapidly increasing national debt as a measure of the result of some bad decisions we made as a voting public.

I think we're in a bad economic position right now and there's a very real chance that it's going to get worse if we continue in the same direction. That was my point. I'm not saying that it's unrecoverable, but I don't see the political willpower to make the changes that will be required for long-term health.

Oh, and I forgot the epic battle with f-d in the bleeds, but I guess I copied and pasted that too

" but I don't see the political willpower to make the changes that will be required for long-term health."


I thought that was pretty much what I said a few posts back. And therefore the choice of the next President won't make much difference in this regard. But I thought this discussion started with your post about how the McCain economic policy is an extension of the same policies that are driving the debt up, and therefore the Obama vote is the smarter fiscal vote? Or did I miss something (Cue quip by F_B)?

I think you missed the part about "overall economic health", Glenn.


Uber's point was that "trickle down economics" hasn't done anything but make a few people rich and specifically, Bush's eight years has doubled down on this by driving up the debt-

I will concede that Americans' attitudes towards credit, savings and spending can't all be blamed on Bush. That would be stupid. But you can't ignore the fact that Bush turned around what was a previously solvent economy at the time, (balanced budget?) and his vision of "corporate greed" has been a major contributor to the credit crunch we now face.

I thought that was pretty much what I said a few posts back. And therefore the choice of the next President won't make much difference in this regard. But I thought this discussion started with your post about how the McCain economic policy is an extension of the same policies that are driving the debt up, and therefore the Obama vote is the smarter fiscal vote? Or did I miss something (Cue quip by F_B)?

That's what I'm saying. I think Obama's plan has a better chance of succeeding, but there is a sizeable contingent that will paste him as a socialist and not really listen to what he's saying. That contingent is making some very short-sighted decisions that unfortunately affect us all, but them most of all.

Uber, please elaborate on "them".


Are these the same people who cling to guns and religion?


Hee Hee

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 
61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76  77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 
121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 
151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 
181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207