Berkeley Off Christina Romer.

ignorant wrote:

1988RedT2 wrote: science of sound economic policy.

define sound economic policy... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schools_of_economics ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

I'm sorry, there's just no way that we can have a meaningful discussion if you're going to reference "the wiki". It's getting late, and I'm going to sleep. Gotta get up early and make some money.

ignorant wrote:

Toyman01 wrote: Decisions have consequences and the politicians are buying votes by letting people get by without facing them.

umm.. They aren't letting us get away with everything. They're giving us exactly what we voted for...

Quoted for truth. Unfortunately.

Of course I don't think McCain would have been any better.

The worst part is the best and brightest are too smart to run for any kind of office.

I used to think our federal leadership was incompetent, I now believe they are berkeleying things up on purpose.

1988RedT2 wrote:

ignorant wrote:

1988RedT2 wrote: science of sound economic policy.

define sound economic policy... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schools_of_economics ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

I'm sorry, there's just no way that we can have a meaningful discussion if you're going to reference "the wiki". It's getting late, and I'm going to sleep. Gotta get up early and make some money.

No I was merely demonstrating the total number of "schools" economic thought. No more no less.

Do a little research and you'll be surprised. who's ignorant now?

Toyman01 wrote:

ignorant wrote:

Toyman01 wrote: Decisions have consequences and the politicians are buying votes by letting people get by without facing them.

umm.. They aren't letting us get away with everything. They're giving us exactly what we voted for...

Quoted for truth. Unfortunately. Of course I don't think McCain would have been any better. The worst part is the best and brightest are too smart to run for any kind of office.

My big theory about the whole deal is that we, Americans, as a whole don't really want the status quo to change. We may talk a good game, but in the end we don't want anything to change in our daily lives. Relatively, we're pretty comfortable and comfort breeds complacency.

ignorant wrote:

Toyman01 wrote:

ignorant wrote:

Toyman01 wrote: Decisions have consequences and the politicians are buying votes by letting people get by without facing them.

umm.. They aren't letting us get away with everything. They're giving us exactly what we voted for...

Quoted for truth. Unfortunately. Of course I don't think McCain would have been any better. The worst part is the best and brightest are too smart to run for any kind of office.

My big theory about the whole deal is that we, Americans, as a whole don't really want the status quo to change. We may talk a good game, but in the end we don't want anything to change in our daily lives. Relatively, we're pretty comfortable and comfort breeds complacency.

Probably true of the mindless drones. Those of us that think past the moment know better.

Let me ask you a question Iggy. Do you believe the political situation is any better under Obama? Do we have an honest man in the White House, or just another political hack? I'm not trying to trap you with an I told you so or trolling for a chance to spout conservative crap. I honestly would like to know your thoughts. From where I'm standing Obama did the usual song and dance to get elected and then continued party politics as usual. Do you feel the same way? Not just you, but any of you that voted for him. Are you happy with his performance so far and would you vote for him again? Is he too liberal or radical for you?

Looking at how McCain is flopping around trying to save his job I have no doubt he would have done the same. How do we get past all the BS and find a truly honest man to sit in the big chair? Can it even be done? The same goes for the House and Senate. Is it possible to elect people that have more loyalty to the country than they do to the party? Are we stuck with party politics from here on out? Is there no middle ground where we can all be happy with what our elected officials do?

ignorant wrote: Do a little research and you'll be surprised. who's ignorant now?

As a student of economics, I'd say I've done rather a lot of research. Just because there are proponents of a certain economic policy, doesn't necessarily make it valid science. I mean, I could start a "school of economic thought" wherein my followers Paypal me a hundred bucks and I could call it "The Berkeleyin' E36M3 School" and have it listed in Wikipedia.

We can have a difference of opinion on this matter. I've enjoyed it, but I'm done with this thread. Peace!

Toyman01 wrote:

ignorant wrote:

Toyman01 wrote:

ignorant wrote:

Toyman01 wrote: Decisions have consequences and the politicians are buying votes by letting people get by without facing them.

umm.. They aren't letting us get away with everything. They're giving us exactly what we voted for...

Quoted for truth. Unfortunately. Of course I don't think McCain would have been any better. The worst part is the best and brightest are too smart to run for any kind of office.

My big theory about the whole deal is that we, Americans, as a whole don't really want the status quo to change. We may talk a good game, but in the end we don't want anything to change in our daily lives. Relatively, we're pretty comfortable and comfort breeds complacency.

Probably true of the mindless drones. Those of us that think past the moment know better. Let me ask you a question Iggy. Do you believe the political situation is any better under Obama? Do we have an honest man in the White House, or just another political hack? I'm not trying to trap you with an I told you so or trolling for a chance to spout conservative crap. I honestly would like to know your thoughts. From where I'm standing Obama did the usual song and dance to get elected and then continued party politics as usual. Do you feel the same way? Not just you, but any of you that voted for him. Are you happy with his performance so far and would you vote for him again? Is he too liberal or radical for you? Looking at how McCain is flopping around trying to save his job I have no doubt he would have done the same. How do we get past all the BS and find a truly honest man to sit in the big chair? Can it even be done? The same goes for the House and Senate. Is it possible to elect people that have more loyalty to the country than they do to the party? Are we stuck with party politics from here on out? Is there no middle ground where we can all be happy with what our elected officials do?

Not a chance. There's always someone's ox getting gored in any situation meaning they will squeal and whine and block something because they do not want to compromise. Even if it's for the future good of all. Perfect example: ask the AARP about TRUE means testing for Social Security.

And for 99.9999999% of people, altruism is like patience: a trait best observed in others.

In reply to Toyman01:

I voted for Obama as I totally drank the Kool-Aid and thought he was different than your usual ruling class. I've always considered myself a center-right type of individual and while I didn't agree with Obama's politics a 100% I did believe his message of bi-partisanship and transparency.

Boy, was I wrong. First sign of trouble was his "Cap & Trade" plan. Living in a state like Wisconsin where almost every power plant is coal fired this plan would have destroyed what's left of our manufacturing base and triple the average homes electricity rates. When you have local journalists pointing this out to the President and his staff and the response is pretty much "don't care - deal with it" one tends to feel duped.

Second sign of trouble was the health care debate. During the campaign it was all bi-partisan and transparent. Obama even said he would even put the negotiations on C-Span. After the election it was all back door politics and Christmas Eve votes. C-Span was ignored in their requests to broadcast it, Republicans were told their ideas were unneeded, and out came a plan that was written by Harry Reid, Pelosi, and Obama. It gave special interest what they wanted, gave Senators pork projects in exchange for their votes, and it was sold with flat out lies about what it did and what was included in it. Of course nobody knew this because nobody could read it in the amount of time from final writing to the passing vote.

Now with the expiration of the Bush 2001 tax cuts looming I have been reading that I can expect to set aside another $3000 to send to Uncle Sam. So much for not increasing taxes on the middle-class. But of course with 47% of Americans not paying taxes I'm probably considered "upper-class" now with my $50,000 a year salary.

So to answer you question I would not vote for him again.

Toyman01 wrote: Let me ask you a question Iggy.

I'll write you a proper answer when I have time. I want to actually sit down and do some thinking before answering.

I just don't have the time right now. I got beers in the fridge and lobsters ready for the pot.

$4.99/lb at stew leonards this week. 2 weeks ago it was $3.99/lb. Thats one good thing about living up north.

Marty! wrote: Now with the expiration of the Bush 2001 tax cuts looming I have been reading that I can expect to set aside another $3000 to send to Uncle Sam. So much for not increasing taxes on the middle-class. But of course with 47% of Americans not paying taxes I'm probably considered "upper-class" now with my $50,000 a year salary. So to answer you question I would not vote for him again.

Don't forget the healthcare tax as well, and the fact that your employer will likely up your contribution to your care as well.

But guys like you and me, taking $400-500 a month from us, and thus out of the economy won't affect anything..................riiiiight. I'll still be able to pay my bills, put money in my 401k, but all my "fun" money just evaporated if this goes through.

O's just another politician. Problem is, he has the lefties behind him who believe the government is a big ol' money tree they can shake whenever they want a pet project to buy votes from the people dumb enough to believe the crap they spout. That way they can continue to tell each other how important they are.

And I am NOT letting the Repubs off the hook, they are every bit as bad. Given the way they have completely left their conservative small government spending restraint roots and image I am ashamed to have voted that way in the last 2 elections.

Watch 'The Ruling Class' with Peter O'Toole sometime.

Toyman01 wrote: Let me ask you a question Iggy.

Sure! I didn't forget you.

Toyman01 wrote: Do you believe the political situation is any better under Obama?

Nope. But define better. He failed to take control of his party effectively and they argued too damn much. He didn't get done anything he said he would.

Toyman01 wrote: Do we have an honest man in the White House, or just another political hack?

A combo.

Toyman01 wrote: From where I'm standing Obama did the usual song and dance to get elected and then continued party politics as usual. Do you feel the same way?

I am sad that the man couldn't deliver on his promises, such as a single payer health plan. I'm also sad he hasn't closed Gitmo, etc. Also Cap and Trade should be passed, oil is too cheap.

Toyman01 wrote: Are you happy with his performance so far and would you vote for him again? Is he too liberal or radical for you?

no I'm not happy with his performance. Given the choice again, I'd do it. He's too middle of the road for me and too hard to nail down. My wife and I have talked, and were so angered (still angered) by bush, that it would take an act of god to get us to vote "conservative"...

Toyman01 wrote: Looking at how McCain is flopping around trying to save his job I have no doubt he would have done the same.

He should have lost. I think the win showed really how weak/radical the "tea party" canidates are..

Toyman01 wrote: How do we get past all the BS and find a truly honest man to sit in the big chair? Can it even be done?

We won't ever elect an honest guy. Noone will elect a guy who says.. "quit your whining and work harder cause the Indians and Chinese are kicking our ass. Also Shut up about the spending, we need to build roads you tards."

Toyman01 wrote: The same goes for the House and Senate. Is it possible to elect people that have more loyalty to the country than they do to the party? Are we stuck with party politics from here on out? Is there no middle ground where we can all be happy with what our elected officials do?

Loyalty to the country? Are you saying that our politicans are disloyal to the country? Are you accusing treason? I don't mean to be a jerk but thats what it sounds like. I really don't know where you are going with it.

Politics is a team sport. I also believe business(especially publically traded ones) are team sports. Those who cannot build alliances and work together die rather quickly.

As I've posted before, what is happening now in our government is nothing new. It's happened before. Hell they used to have fist fights and knife fights and beatings with clubs in Congress. Senators have shot at other senators.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/77232/the-recovery-act-wasnt-just-about-jobs <--- Read that and understand that a great deal of "stimulus" money really needed to be spent. Seriously, how else do we compete against crap like this http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/10/business/energy-environment/10steel.html?_r=2&hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1284040884-5hvWmtOMnKPJnl/obr2AQw Or fix all the deficient bridges, we just cannot compete in this economy with our crap ass infrastructure.

While I got the talking stick.. Check this out.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129712761

I thought we would be spending more on our taxes, but not really.

Though CT really sucks freaking horrible cost of living with higher taxes and don't get me started on this stupid state.. RAWR!!!! (p.s. linda is a choad same with nuttenthal)...

Wow. I really went off the deep end there. Sorry!

Thanks Iggy, I appreciate your response. It's interesting to try to understand where the other side is coming from. Hard to do in most political discussions. Thanks for the article links too.

We will probably never change each others minds. I'm glad we can at least discuss our differences civilly.

Thanks again.

Toyman01 wrote: Thanks Iggy, I appreciate your response. It's interesting to try to understand where the other side is coming from. Hard to do in most political discussions. Thanks for the article links too. We will probably never change each others minds. I'm glad we can at least discuss our differences civilly. Thanks again.

Been thinking about your "honest politician" idea.

The last truly honest politician I think was carter. He worked to hard to build consensus etc, never got anything done and flopped hard.

I say he's honest because of what he has done after his presidency. All his hours with Habitat prove that the guy was a good solid guy. You didn't see Bush(s) or Regan or Ford or Clinton swinging hammers after they left office. Also the coolest part about him was the destrcution of the Air Force one and Whitehouse gifts. It used to be that when you went to the whitehouse or were on Air Force one you got some china or another expensive gift. He cut that back to a pack of presidential matches. A good move in my book, that really cheesed off a whole bunch of reporters.

Now, when does this 24 hour crazy news cycle system burn itself out..

In reply to ignorant:

In about four days.