On April 20 2012 07:50 BionicWaffle wrote: Dear America,
I see you have once again forgotten your only hope at survival, Ron Paul
Sincerely, Rest of the fucking world.
I love Ron Paul's liberty message, and have been a huge supporter of his for many years. I disagree with Austrian Economics with a passion, though. Although the president doesn't have exclusive control over fiscal policy, I feel it would be better to give my vote to another candidate. That said, everything in elections is so clouded, my best vote would go to Ron Paul. (and yes, I have read end the fed, among other books of his, and I'm also an economics graduate, so I am well aware of how these systems work)
On April 20 2012 08:06 Playguuu wrote: I guess this is what happens when you promise free health care (which no one has to pay for right?) to the uninformed 20-somethings.
My problem is that I don't believe that our country lacks the funding to provide health care, so much that it is in the inability of the people to refuse to buy everything that they want. There is no more savings in this country, we have become corn-fed fat, and so our premiums and costs of healthcare have risen (sure there is greed involved, but our own decisions are just as bad if not worse). Doctor's pay is getting cut so that students no longer desire to become doctors, the middle class bears the burden of taxation, and the Obamacare did nothing to solve any of these problems. I'm all for healthcare, but there's nothing wrong with allowing it to be private, personally funded, with federal regulations capping the costs. On the other hand, us Americans need to grow up and take care of our bodies and our wallets and stop being gluttons. It saddens me that 20-something year olds in my generation are too ignorant or stupid to see this.
On April 20 2012 06:22 Hinanawi wrote: Voted Obama in 2008, will not be voting in 2012. Well, I will go to vote on the California propositions and such, but I'll probably leave the President section blank, or write in my own name.
Philosophically I'm still closer to Obama than to Romney, but I can't in good conscience vote the 'lesser of two evils' when even the lesser of two evils still set the precedent of trial-less assassinations of US citizens, and continues to make America into Israel's dog, draining our resources and the lives of our soldiers over something that doesn't concern us.
Of course, Romney is just as bad or worse on most of those points, but again, I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils when there's so much evil in both.
I get this, but the problem is that this kind of attitude brought to the world stage George W Bush. People need to vote democrat.
GWB wasn't that bad of a president, I hate it when people spout that bullshit.
I think he did a bad job when it came to tax cuts (he should have been going the other way on taxes), but otherwise I don't think it was that bad. I think Obama has done better but both have been good presidents.
spout that bullshit?
Lets see dumb things that he did: 1) Invaded Iraq by making up lies, setting his lackeys on people who opposed the invasion because...there was no good reason for the invasion. 2) Two tax cuts that helped to accelerate the trend of income inequality, turned a budget surplus into a historic deficit 3) Cut back on financial regulation, setting up the crisis in 07 very nicely while pushing for a 'home ownership' society that pushed more and more people into buying homes. 4) extra judicial torture is a o k! 5) Tried to put his personally lackey on the Supreme Court, a move so egregious even his own party opposed it. 6) Sat on his hands while oil prices went from under 50 dollars a barrel to 168 [and hey why not, his friends in the oil industry appreciated the help!] 7) Sat on his hands while China de-industralized America, watched passively while a historic trade deficit widened further than ever 8) Encouraged Israel to engage in highly aggressive behavior that did nothing for America, well most of America, the defense contractors who got rich obviously appreciate that Israel used up its advanced munitions very rapidly so new orders could be filled 9) No child left behind act. Jerry rigged a system that encourages 0 actual educational improvement but promotes teaching a standardized test 10) Packed the Supreme Court with political justices that have no problem seeing corporations as people but think the healthcare mandate of all things is unconstitutional
This is just off the top of my head. Bush will go down in history as the worst American president post WW2, easily.
1) True
2) True
3) You really can't pin this on Mr. Bush. Both sides, as well as non-politicians had their hands in it.
4) True
5) True
6) I don't know about sat on his hands - perhaps attacking Iraq had something to do with it but you also can't accuse them man of obstructing the quest for additional supply, either. I'd say half true.
7) Describe for me the economic conditions in the US the last five times we have had a trade surplus. Name the three countries in the world that import the lowest percentage of their goods internationally and explain to me which protectionist policies have made their lives so wonderful. 8) I don't recall him asking Israel to attack anyone, nor do I recall Israel needing to be asked, historically...
9) I would think that if a politican with a (D) after his name had set federal standards for state education and increased the size of the department of education by 50% in his first three years in office, you might have a different opinion.
10) I don't even know how to respond to this other than to say that you are mashing together so many different issues that this doesn't even make sense.
George Bush bankrupted many of the companies he ran, he was a poor student, and, by his own admission, doesn't care for details, and made all sorts of brash foreign policy decisions believing that his view of right and wrong outweighed any potential consequences. He has been reckless and irresponsible his entire life.
Barack Obama, who had never managed anything prior to his presidency, has had an unclear and inconsistent foreign policy. Despite having the political will, he chickened out of closing Guantanamo. He ran against gay marriage and Hillary Clinton's healthcare mandate because he was too much of a coward to take the politically difficult stand, but then, immediately after being elected, congress drafted a bill, with no input from him, which contained a mandate, and which he proudly signed. He was too afraid to veto the extension of the Bush tax cuts. He has been to afraid to cut any spending anywhere to pay for them. He has not been a leader at any point in his life. He's not been a bad president, just ineffectual.
Mitt Romney got a perfect score on his SAT and graduated with honors from Harvard Business and Harvard Law SIMULTANEOUSLY. He invested huge amounts of money in small companies like Staples, Domino's, Brookstone, Sealy, and Sports Authority. After he retired, Bain was struggling financially and begged him to come back and turn them around, which he did. He then made the scandal-plagued, debt-ridden over-budget 2002 Winter Olympic games the ONLY PROFITABLE WINTER GAMES IN HISTORY. He then took a huge budget deficit in Massachusetts and turned it into a surplus, all while managing the "Big Dig" scandal and making Massachusetts the first US state with universal healthcare. He has given a large percentage of his income to charity his entire life, not just once he began running for president, he was a Mormon bishop and oversaw a huge welfare program and interviewed and counseled people seeking financial assistance.
Its a pattern of behavior. No matter what someone says, actions are better indicators of who they are.
But you don't want to watch TV with Mitt Romney because he's kind of weird. I get it.
On April 20 2012 07:50 BionicWaffle wrote: Dear America,
I see you have once again forgotten your only hope at survival, Ron Paul
Sincerely, Rest of the fucking world.
Seriously, people need to start realizing that all the other politicians are bought out and the only person that isn't and WILL bring real change is Ron Paul. Hes been consistent on his view points for the past few decades, hes been right on many huge issues that have happened, and hes the only one that will actually follow the constitution.
Here's a video of Ron Paul pretty much saying what would happen in the past decade.
On April 20 2012 06:22 Hinanawi wrote: Voted Obama in 2008, will not be voting in 2012. Well, I will go to vote on the California propositions and such, but I'll probably leave the President section blank, or write in my own name.
Philosophically I'm still closer to Obama than to Romney, but I can't in good conscience vote the 'lesser of two evils' when even the lesser of two evils still set the precedent of trial-less assassinations of US citizens, and continues to make America into Israel's dog, draining our resources and the lives of our soldiers over something that doesn't concern us.
Of course, Romney is just as bad or worse on most of those points, but again, I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils when there's so much evil in both.
I get this, but the problem is that this kind of attitude brought to the world stage George W Bush. People need to vote democrat.
GWB wasn't that bad of a president, I hate it when people spout that bullshit.
I think he did a bad job when it came to tax cuts (he should have been going the other way on taxes), but otherwise I don't think it was that bad. I think Obama has done better but both have been good presidents.
spout that bullshit?
Lets see dumb things that he did: 1) Invaded Iraq by making up lies, setting his lackeys on people who opposed the invasion because...there was no good reason for the invasion. 2) Two tax cuts that helped to accelerate the trend of income inequality, turned a budget surplus into a historic deficit 3) Cut back on financial regulation, setting up the crisis in 07 very nicely while pushing for a 'home ownership' society that pushed more and more people into buying homes. 4) extra judicial torture is a o k! 5) Tried to put his personally lackey on the Supreme Court, a move so egregious even his own party opposed it. 6) Sat on his hands while oil prices went from under 50 dollars a barrel to 168 [and hey why not, his friends in the oil industry appreciated the help!] 7) Sat on his hands while China de-industralized America, watched passively while a historic trade deficit widened further than ever 8) Encouraged Israel to engage in highly aggressive behavior that did nothing for America, well most of America, the defense contractors who got rich obviously appreciate that Israel used up its advanced munitions very rapidly so new orders could be filled 9) No child left behind act. Jerry rigged a system that encourages 0 actual educational improvement but promotes teaching a standardized test 10) Packed the Supreme Court with political justices that have no problem seeing corporations as people but think the healthcare mandate of all things is unconstitutional
This is just off the top of my head. Bush will go down in history as the worst American president post WW2, easily.
Barack Obama, who had never managed anything prior to his presidency, has had an unclear and inconsistent foreign policy. Despite having the political will, he chickened out of closing Guantanamo. He ran against gay marriage and Hillary Clinton's healthcare mandate because he was too much of a coward to take the politically difficult stand, but then, immediately after being elected, congress drafted a bill, with no input from him, which contained a mandate, and which he proudly signed. He was too afraid to veto the extension of the Bush tax cuts. He has been to afraid to cut any spending anywhere to pay for them. He has not been a leader at any point in his life. He's not been a bad president, just ineffectual.
Not to mention he missed an opportunity to re-regulate the financial system during his early presidency, and chose not to. (Note that the deregulation came during the later stages of the Clinton administration in some late night voting in the Senate, which helped lead to the lending practices that gave us the recession we have. The blame does not solely belong to Bush for this economic struggle, and is the fault of congress during Clinton's presidency, and his willingness to approve)
On April 20 2012 08:06 Playguuu wrote: I guess this is what happens when you promise free health care (which no one has to pay for right?) to the uninformed 20-somethings.
...this is what happens when you conveniently and maliciously paraphrase an entire debate into a single sentence for cheap, irrelevant political gain?
On April 20 2012 08:06 Playguuu wrote: I guess this is what happens when you promise free health care (which no one has to pay for right?) to the uninformed 20-somethings.
My problem is that I don't believe that our country lacks the funding to provide health care, so much that it is in the inability of the people to refuse to buy everything that they want. There is no more savings in this country, we have become corn-fed fat, and so our premiums and costs of healthcare have risen (sure there is greed involved, but our own decisions are just as bad if not worse). Doctor's pay is getting cut so that students no longer desire to become doctors, the middle class bears the burden of taxation, and the Obamacare did nothing to solve any of these problems. I'm all for healthcare, but there's nothing wrong with allowing it to be private, personally funded, with federal regulations capping the costs. On the other hand, us Americans need to grow up and take care of our bodies and our wallets and stop being gluttons. It saddens me that 20-something year olds in my generation are too ignorant or stupid to see this.
I doubt not taking care of your bodies has much to do with your insane increase in HCC. It's not like Americans are that much unhealthier, however you have unhealthy incentives created by the insurance market. Particularly subsidies for employer provided health insurance and over-regulation of coverage.
On April 20 2012 07:50 BionicWaffle wrote: Dear America,
I see you have once again forgotten your only hope at survival, Ron Paul
Sincerely, Rest of the fucking world.
Seriously, people need to start realizing that all the other politicians are bought out and the only person that isn't and WILL bring real change is Ron Paul. Hes been consistent on his view points for the past few decades, hes been right on many huge issues that have happened, and hes the only one that will actually follow the constitution.
On April 20 2012 06:22 Hinanawi wrote: Voted Obama in 2008, will not be voting in 2012. Well, I will go to vote on the California propositions and such, but I'll probably leave the President section blank, or write in my own name.
Philosophically I'm still closer to Obama than to Romney, but I can't in good conscience vote the 'lesser of two evils' when even the lesser of two evils still set the precedent of trial-less assassinations of US citizens, and continues to make America into Israel's dog, draining our resources and the lives of our soldiers over something that doesn't concern us.
Of course, Romney is just as bad or worse on most of those points, but again, I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils when there's so much evil in both.
I get this, but the problem is that this kind of attitude brought to the world stage George W Bush. People need to vote democrat.
GWB wasn't that bad of a president, I hate it when people spout that bullshit.
I think he did a bad job when it came to tax cuts (he should have been going the other way on taxes), but otherwise I don't think it was that bad. I think Obama has done better but both have been good presidents.
spout that bullshit?
Lets see dumb things that he did: 1) Invaded Iraq by making up lies, setting his lackeys on people who opposed the invasion because...there was no good reason for the invasion. 2) Two tax cuts that helped to accelerate the trend of income inequality, turned a budget surplus into a historic deficit 3) Cut back on financial regulation, setting up the crisis in 07 very nicely while pushing for a 'home ownership' society that pushed more and more people into buying homes. 4) extra judicial torture is a o k! 5) Tried to put his personally lackey on the Supreme Court, a move so egregious even his own party opposed it. 6) Sat on his hands while oil prices went from under 50 dollars a barrel to 168 [and hey why not, his friends in the oil industry appreciated the help!] 7) Sat on his hands while China de-industralized America, watched passively while a historic trade deficit widened further than ever 8) Encouraged Israel to engage in highly aggressive behavior that did nothing for America, well most of America, the defense contractors who got rich obviously appreciate that Israel used up its advanced munitions very rapidly so new orders could be filled 9) No child left behind act. Jerry rigged a system that encourages 0 actual educational improvement but promotes teaching a standardized test 10) Packed the Supreme Court with political justices that have no problem seeing corporations as people but think the healthcare mandate of all things is unconstitutional
This is just off the top of my head. Bush will go down in history as the worst American president post WW2, easily.
3) You really can't pin this on Mr. Bush. Both sides, as well as non-politicians had their hands in it.
4) True
5) True
6) I don't know about sat on his hands - perhaps attacking Iraq had something to do with it but you also can't accuse them man of obstructing the quest for additional supply, either. I'd say half true.
7) Describe for me the economic conditions in the US the last five times we have had a trade surplus. Name the three countries in the world that import the lowest percentage of their goods internationally and explain to me which protectionist policies have made their lives so wonderful. 8) I don't recall him asking Israel to attack anyone, nor do I recall Israel needing to be asked, historically...
9) I would think that if a politican with a (D) after his name had set federal standards for state education and increased the size of the department of education by 50% in his first three years in office, you might have a different opinion.
10) I don't even know how to respond to this other than to say that you are mashing together so many different issues that this doesn't even make sense.
George Bush bankrupted many of the companies he ran, he was a poor student, and, by his own admission, doesn't care for details, and made all sorts of brash foreign policy decisions believing that his view of right and wrong outweighed any potential consequences. He has been reckless and irresponsible his entire life.
Barack Obama, who had never managed anything prior to his presidency, has had an unclear and inconsistent foreign policy. + Show Spoiler +
Despite having the political will, he chickened out of closing Guantanamo. He ran against gay marriage and Hillary Clinton's healthcare mandate because he was too much of a coward to take the politically difficult stand, but then, immediately after being elected, congress drafted a bill, with no input from him, which contained a mandate, and which he proudly signed. He was too afraid to veto the extension of the Bush tax cuts. He has been to afraid to cut any spending anywhere to pay for them. He has not been a leader at any point in his life. He's not been a bad president, just ineffectual.
Mitt Romney got a perfect score on his SAT and graduated with honors from Harvard Business and Harvard Law SIMULTANEOUSLY. He invested huge amounts of money in small companies like Staples, Domino's, Brookstone, Sealy, and Sports Authority. After he retired, Bain was struggling financially and begged him to come back and turn them around, which he did. He then made the scandal-plagued, debt-ridden over-budget 2002 Winter Olympic games the ONLY PROFITABLE WINTER GAMES IN HISTORY. He then took a huge budget deficit in Massachusetts and turned it into a surplus, all while managing the "Big Dig" scandal and making Massachusetts the first US state with universal healthcare. He has given a large percentage of his income to charity his entire life, not just once he began running for president, he was a Mormon bishop and oversaw a huge welfare program and interviewed and counseled people seeking financial assistance.
Its a pattern of behavior. No matter what someone says, actions are better indicators of who they are.
But you don't want to watch TV with Mitt Romney because he's kind of weird. I get it.
I think Obama's foreign policy has been extremely clear and very well thought out and executed so far. While there's no clear 'the national interest beats everything'-policy anymore, Obama manages to strike a balance between maintaining US interests while not being overly assertive in both rethoric and action at the same time. The way Bush performed foreign policy there was only one outcome: escalation. He managed to inflame the muslim world even further and managed to piss off even European nations to a point where leaders being seen with him was more of a liability than an asset.
He'll forever be remember as a terrible president, if only because of the damage he has done to the long term US strategic interests in the world.
On April 20 2012 08:06 Playguuu wrote: I guess this is what happens when you promise free health care (which no one has to pay for right?) to the uninformed 20-somethings.
My problem is that I don't believe that our country lacks the funding to provide health care, so much that it is in the inability of the people to refuse to buy everything that they want. There is no more savings in this country, we have become corn-fed fat, and so our premiums and costs of healthcare have risen (sure there is greed involved, but our own decisions are just as bad if not worse). Doctor's pay is getting cut so that students no longer desire to become doctors, the middle class bears the burden of taxation, and the Obamacare did nothing to solve any of these problems. I'm all for healthcare, but there's nothing wrong with allowing it to be private, personally funded, with federal regulations capping the costs. On the other hand, us Americans need to grow up and take care of our bodies and our wallets and stop being gluttons. It saddens me that 20-something year olds in my generation are too ignorant or stupid to see this.
I doubt not taking care of your bodies has much to do with your insane increase in HCC. It's not like Americans are that much unhealthier, however you have unhealthy incentives created by the insurance market. Particularly subsidies for employer provided health insurance and over-regulation of coverage.
One of the biggest parts of the growth in healthcare costs was also in regard to specialty visits to doctors. There was large examinations into how often people were sent to specialists that PCPs could handle. The insurance market is a part as well, but I know much less about this. If you have more information regarding the formation of these incentives, that would be wonderful to get a PM with, as I only know some of the beginnings of it.
As in Canada, ive been watching the race over on CNN, etc.and I honestly cannot see Romney winning this, and if he does I don't know what will happen. But Obama hasn't done anything stupid yet and im hoping he can get elected again!
On April 20 2012 08:33 lethal111 wrote: As in Canada, ive been watching the race over on CNN, etc.and I honestly cannot see Romney winning this, and if he does I don't know what will happen. But Obama hasn't done anything stupid yet and im hoping he can get elected again!
not doing anything stupid and doing something smart are two different things.
On April 20 2012 07:50 BionicWaffle wrote: Dear America,
I see you have once again forgotten your only hope at survival, Ron Paul
Sincerely, Rest of the fucking world.
Seriously, people need to start realizing that all the other politicians are bought out and the only person that isn't and WILL bring real change is Ron Paul. Hes been consistent on his view points for the past few decades, hes been right on many huge issues that have happened, and hes the only one that will actually follow the constitution.
Here's a video of Ron Paul pretty much saying what would happen in the past decade.
I'm really sick of this shit, amongst others, being shoved in my face. Enough with Ron Paul
I'm surprised that you're not sick of the constant lies that every single one of your presidents bring to the plate, instead you're sick of someone that is actually trying to bring America back from it's economic crisis. At this point to say enough with Ron Paul and his ideals is like saying enough with America. When it's all said and done, Ron Paul will be the one standing there saying I told you so, and everyone will agree.
On April 19 2012 17:46 Jay Chou wrote: * Many of the MSM polls in the US are hopelessly biased in favour of the Democrats and Obama. Many have +D weightings in excess of the +7 that Obama scored in 2008 – a high water mark for his party. The results in 2010 have made a mockery of these weightings. The polls that have the D/R/I weightings somewhat between the split in 2008 and 2010 (a fair indication of current relative party strength IMO) have Romney leading Obama.
* Head to head nationwide polls this far out have little bearing on the final result – so much can happen in 7 months plus the Presidency is decided state by state not by the nationwide party vote as in NZ. Carter led Reagan by 20 points at this same distance out from 1980 and we know how that turned out for Carter. Ditto Bush 41 over Clinton.
When reading polls, it's also important to always pay attention to who is included in the sample. There are generally three sample types:
1) Adults 2) Registered Voters 3) Likely Voters
Since young people and minorities are less likely to vote than old people and whites, Democrats tend to do much better in type 1 and slightly better in type 2 than they actually do in elections. Polls of likely voters should be the closest estimate of what will happen in the general election.
This year we also have a lot of new voter ID laws that will likely, whether as an unintended consequence or by design, further hamper youth and minority turnout. It's anyone's guess how much of an impact this will have... if I were trying to model the election, I might assume it sways things by D-1%.
Lots of polls that are out right now are of Adults (which are almost useless) and Registered Voters (which aren't good but not completely useless).
EPT
