Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Historians ranked Hoover a below average president (29th).....
Yes...he was not good. Google: Hoovervilles. He was the president who let the nation slip into the Great Depression. I don't care if there were some people who "liked" him, or though he was "ok"...in my eyes he was one of the absolute WORST.
You can't "fix" the economy. It's a constant up and down cycle, you just have to deal with it until it goes up again ... and accept the fact that it will go down again as well. It will get better and then someday it will get bad again.
Being a Marxist thug and going down the path of Stalin, Lenin, and Mao isent going to fix anything.
You can't "fix" the economy. It's a constant up and down cycle, you just have to deal with it until it goes up again ... and accept the fact that it will go down again as well. It will get better and then someday it will get bad again.
Being a Marxist thug and going down the path of Stalin, Lenin, and Mao isent going to fix anything.
Hyperbole and exaggeration much?
Text book economic models work when you are talking about small, medium, and even most large businesses.
When you start talking about huge multi-nationals and megalithic banks that are bigger than most governments on earth, your widgets, supply and demand curves, and cycles start to lose their basis.
When you have huge actors an industry that gamble themselves into insolvency, but who are so big that if they suffer the fate they SHOULD(bankruptcy) in the "free market" for taking that big a risk, would bring down the economy and cause a lot of suffering..than those actors have become "too big to fail". Too big period. They need to be broken up, they shouldn't be allowed to buy up more banks with taxpayer money, making themselves even bigger.
This system is perverse, yet when you criticize it, some guy whips out his eco 101 textbook and compares it to some banana stand on the corner, which is completely absurd.
I don't think Obama is a Marxist. However, he does have clear signs of being a socialist. I know that is a nasty word here in the US, but it's true.
Thus far, he's been a huge failure. He pushed through a horrible stimulus package, tried to push for cap & trade, bailed out an auto industry that should have been left to go bankrupt and reorganize itself without the union mandates, waffled on Afghanistan, and spent the better part of the year pushing through a 1 trillion dollar welfare program called Obamacare. This was all being done at a time when unemployment reached 10%.
He's single handedly making Bush look good as a President. Now, that is quite an accomplishment.
Given that, I don't think Obama is going to do much for Long Island. As others have said, that help has to come from state and local government. Unfortunately, they are riddled with so much corruption and ineptitude, that it is difficult to have much hope.
Send back all the illegals, then concentrate on educating our children to become the leaders of tomorrow, get rid of all the excess waste in government, give raises to those who can maintain status quo within budgets, and lower property taxes. its killing us.
...Republicans...social policies suck, too--very busy trying to force poor women to have babies they don't want and can't afford. Forget it. I ran from that party in 2000 and never looked back.
If someone doesn't want to have a baby, they can use prophylactics or excercise self control. No one is forcing anyone to have a baby. People need to be accountable for their own actions as opposed to expecting the rest of us and our government to be.
Abortion is not birth control yet too many women use it as such.
FWIW -- I support Roe v Wade and abortion rights as I do not want to see any woman condemned to a back alley abortion. Yeah, sort of flies in the face of the Republican party. This past year I sat down and revisited my beliefs and realized Republican is a bad fit for me, as is Democrat.
To answer the OP's query:
The POTUS can enforce immigration law. No amnesty. We need jobs for American citizens. If people are out of work, how can they afford healthcare? How can they contribute to stimulating the economy? How can they pay their mortgages, their rent?
The illegal, undocumented immigrant might be "doing the jobs Americans won't" but when someone has been out of work long enough, any job is better than none. Putting taxpaying American citizens into these jobs will bring more money back into the government's coffers, and deporting undocumented aliens will be removing them from receiving any benefits they currently enjoy.
We have hospitals closing around the country which can not afford to operate given the losses in revenue. You or I show up with no health insurance and a SSN -- they will pursue us for payment. An illegal shows up, and the taxpayers are left holding the tab.
We have unscrupulous employers circumventing tax laws by hiring illegals. How many millions of tax dollars are lost each year because of this?
We have a festering wound which the government -- both parties -- opts to ignore in favor of this or that pet project.
Today's Newsday headline said something about "What LIers want to hear" from the POTUS tonight. Words are cheap and I've heard enough. Most of the regulars on the board know I wasn't an Obama supporter during the elections. He is our President and I will respect his position as such. It is my 'hope' that he will 'change' from a clever orator spouting 'what people want to hear' to a powerful President who will reverse the damage done by previous bad policies -- both Democratic and Republican.
Yes...he was not good. Google: Hoovervilles. He was the president who let the nation slip into the Great Depression. I don't care if there were some people who "liked" him, or though he was "ok"...in my eyes he was one of the absolute WORST.
Many moons ago, a social studies teacher cited "HardingCoolidgeHoover" as a root cause of the Great Depression.
Digging around the internet -- in an effort to remember why -- I found this on a Coolidge website and thought other would find it either interesting or hogwash. Enjoy!
The Harding/Coolidge Prosperity of the 1920's (http://www.calvin-coolidge.org/html/the_harding_coolidge_prosperit.html - broken link)
The biggest problem I have with Roe v. Wade is that it is not a LAW. It was a judicial decision. Only legislators are allowed to make laws under our Constitution...not judges.
Therein lies the problem. The Supreme Court created law. Even pro-choice legal scholars are dismayed by the decision. It creates this fake and expansive "right of privacy" to an abortion that simply did not exist in the Constitution in any way shape or form.
What should have happened is for the court to leave the decision up to each state and its legislators. Instead, not only did it create law, but it went about in detail drafting the conditions of when an abortion would be allowed (ie. the trimester tests).
From a Constitutional Law perspective, it is one of the most shameful decisions in our history. Perhaps the public got what it wanted, but it should have happened through proper legislation on a state-by-state basis.
Any chance POTUS is reading this board for pointers on what to do?
I hope he doesn't talk about more "handouts".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
