Obama Doing A Heck Of A Job---27 Huge Red Flags For The U.S. Economy
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.
The folks looking at the 'Good Old Days' ought to see out a book called 'The Good Old Days Were Terrible'.
There's a reason we have a Food and Drug Administration and an EPA...and it's not because corporations were feeding us healthy food and keeping the air/water clean of their own volition. This stuff is history...not fairy tales.
This is your opinion and you are certainly free to have it; I don't begrudge you that at all. But others have differing opinions. I have two shelves full of books on the social history (everyday life of the commoner) from seventeenth century America through the 1940s in America. As to whether things were "better" at any given time or now, that has to be a decision made by the individual once he/she is familiar with the times in question and their conditions. Some would say yes; some would say no. Totally subjective.
Liberals are almost funny --- they want to proclaim that Obama has created the best economy ever, solved all the problems ---- but they don't want to cut unemployment handouts, food stamps, or get people off the many other welfare handouts.
Oh yeah. Tell this to the many people I know whom under Obama's leadership no other his. Are still unemployed. And cannot find a decent job. Note I said decent with decent pay and benefits.
Can't make this stuff up, these unemployed are out there in record numbers and would like to know exactly how many have just stopped looking.
Tell me this is not true, your a liar. I have seen this close up and personal.
Obama should be called the handout President, but a President with lack of wisdom.
You do realize that the only ways to effectively address those issues is either direct government action, government dictating prices, direct subsidy of goods, and/or raising taxes on higher incomes and capital gains to incentivize reinvestment. And I have a feeling you'd be against most all of those actions.
You are exactly wrong-
The way to reduce poverty and government dependence is to redirect capital from the public sector to the private sector- that is the generator of wealth in the US and always has been. How do you do that? Reduce taxes, reduce regulations, and allow business to choose the best place in the US to prosper.
If you believe otherwise (that the government is better suited to allocate resources), I suggest that you give all of your money to the government and have them decide how best you should spend your money. If you feel you are more capable of spending your own money and resources than the federal government, then perhaps there is hope for you.
Oh yeah. Tell this to the many people I know whom under Obama's leadership no other his. Are still unemployed.
I think you are trying to say they lost their job under Obama...and its all his fault?
Quote:
And cannot find a decent job. Note I said decent with decent pay and benefits.
Can't make this stuff up, these unemployed are out there in record numbers and would like to know exactly how many have just stopped looking.
Tell me this is not true, your a liar. I have seen this close up and personal.
Obama should be called the handout President, but a President with lack of wisdom.
You're confused in thinking the president runs this country like some dictator. While its a convenient to blame him, you really should look towards your house and senate reps. Also welcome to what happens after massive recessions.
As for unemployment...I expect it to get worse over the next 4-5 years as automation begins to bite. Welcome to the future, the birthing pains are going to suck.
All I can say is look up 'Adulterated Food Act' (there are quite a few) to see just what bakers, butchers, and all those other 'healthy' food purveyors were selling in the 19th century...but not just before you eat.
The way to reduce poverty and government dependence is to redirect capital from the public sector to the private sector- that is the generator of wealth in the US and always has been. How do you do that? Reduce taxes, reduce regulations, and allow business to choose the best place in the US to prosper.
We've been aggressively doing that since 1980 and your complaints are a result of the failed neo-liberal economics (Reaganomics) that every administration has embraced since.
Quote:
If you believe otherwise (that the government is better suited to allocate resources), I suggest that you give all of your money to the government and have them decide how best you should spend your money. If you feel you are more capable of spending your own money and resources than the federal government, then perhaps there is hope for you.
I don't believe that the government is better suited to do most things. However, they are the mechanism for allocating resources that are public goods, and is the only means for preventing monopolies within the private sector and creating monetary and tax policy that can create growth.
The middle class as we know it was a direct creation of the US Government. The GI Bill, New Deal policies, higher income tax rates, Pell Grants, FHLB, etc... is what created the middle class, not the near anarcho-capitalism we experienced in the prior centuries.
Care to elaborate on "faulty assumptions"? I made no assumptions. I took the numbers from the most reliable sources I could find on the web and did some math on them. I divided the average price per gallon of gasoline by the median income of the time. Where are any assumptions other than the assumption that the data was correct and that my calculator is functioning properly? I made no further statement other than what I did. I specifically stated what the numbers were and how I used them. Anything beyond is your own assumption.
You are indulging in another logical fallacy as you write this sentence. Bravo. You are attempting to discredit content via semantics. That's fallacy number two for you.
Here is the third of your logical fallacies. Personal attack. I'll tell you one thing you certainly know how to do--use fallacies and engage in personal attacks. That's three of them in two posts. Congratulations.
As for me not knowing what I'm talking about, I'd venture to say that I know far more than you about formal logic. And furthermore, I invite you to compare any formal test of intelligence, standardized assessment, relevant academic achievement, or relevant talents that you may have with that of my own. Feel free to contact me.
And also feel free to make further use of logical fallacies. It's quite amusing.
Why don't you take your numbers and apply them to Electronics, like computers, smartphones, TVs, microwaves, stoves, cars, clothing, etc. Also there are holes in your logic since you can't compare the same bread over the lengthy course of time.
Listen to em now and it's all the **** brothers fault. I think Bush is off the hook now...........well probably not completely.
lol. I think you spelled the name wrong.
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.
