|
On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus.
Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
you dont have to trust palin or obama on their knowledge of economics. take a look at their advisers, at their attitudes to the professions of government and policymaking, and other factors informing their role in the decisionmaking process. but really, expecting anything but mroe fo the same on the economic front is unrealistic.
|
Germany / USA16648 Posts
This may sound random to some people, but I just noticed that the election is on a Tuesday... over here elections are always on a Sunday.
|
On October 30 2008 06:22 Carnac wrote:
This may sound random to some people, but I just noticed that the election is on a Tuesday... over here elections are always on a Sunday.
Same, its all meant to turn the large democratic learners from voting because they know the republican zealots will always vote.
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate
Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can.
The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case.
|
On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case.
Nice way of saying nothing.
|
On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case.
You want to take a bet?
Under Mccain US debt will increase or decrease by a maximum of 10%
Under Obama it will decrease with 50% or more.
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 30 2008 06:56 D10 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case. Nice way of saying nothing.
Excuse me?
If you didn't understand what I said, you could have simply told me that I wrote in a too-confusing manner and that you aren't sure what I'm trying to get at. Instead, you are pretending to know what I said better than I do! But it is to be expected, since totalitarian leftist thugs like you aren't interested in actual conversation.
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 30 2008 07:08 KlaCkoN wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case. You want to take a bet? Under Mccain US debt will increase or decrease by a maximum of 10% Under Obama it will decrease with 50% or more.
I don't know about the first one, but I definitely don't believe the second one.
|
On October 30 2008 07:09 HnR)hT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 07:08 KlaCkoN wrote:On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case. You want to take a bet? Under Mccain US debt will increase or decrease by a maximum of 10% Under Obama it will decrease with 50% or more. I don't know about the first one, but I definitely don't believe the second one.
Of course you don't, so whats the stakes? 100 bucks? An official apology for our stupidity posted whereever the winner wants? Or just the right to a "lololol ur stupid" quote?.
Not that neither me nor you will remember it in four years but still.
|
United States22883 Posts
On October 30 2008 04:01 HnR)hT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 03:35 Locke. wrote:
emm... ok first of all I'm sorry for being a little harsh in my descriptions. My words were too generalized and offensive and I can understand why you were offended.
That being said watching things from the outside it really does seem pretty crazy, and it does look like the selection of Sarah Palin is very odd.
I am not saying it from the point of someone trying to ridicule the republican party and support the democrats. In fact in some issues I agree more with the republican's ideas rather than the democrats. More than that, as an Israeli from what I heard Obama I would most likely prefer a republican representative.
What I am saying is that sadly, this things become irrelevant if one of the candidates doesn't know enough about basic issues to stand ground with other intelligent people. It seems that the republicans aren't being represented well in this election and there are a lot of reasons, not related to actual issues why someone would choose not to vote for Palin. I think you are operating under the assumption that both parties want what's best for the country and all of its citizens - as opposed to any noncitizen or only certain subgroups of its citizens. If that were the case, it would be reasonable to conclude that, in the absence of further information, you can't go wrong with the most intelligent-seeming candidate. Having said that, it is true that Sarah Palin's debut on the national stage was either premature or grossly mishandled by the McCain campaign -- even taking into account the savage treatment from the mainstream media. I wouldn't attribute any of this to Palin's intelligence, of which we simply don't have a very good idea right now (other than the fact that she's no genius). "Her lack of fundamental understanding of some key issues was dramatic," said another McCain source with direct knowledge of the process to prepare Palin after she was picked. The source said it was probably the "hardest" to get her "up to speed than any candidate in history."
That's a major indictment.
|
On October 30 2008 07:08 KlaCkoN wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case. You want to take a bet? Under Mccain US debt will increase or decrease by a maximum of 10% Under Obama it will decrease with 50% or more.
I think you're way, way too optimistic on both counts.
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 30 2008 07:17 KlaCkoN wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 07:09 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 07:08 KlaCkoN wrote:On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case. You want to take a bet? Under Mccain US debt will increase or decrease by a maximum of 10% Under Obama it will decrease with 50% or more. I don't know about the first one, but I definitely don't believe the second one. Of course you don't, so whats the stakes? 100 bucks? An official apology for our stupidity posted whereever the winner wants? Or just the right to a "lololol ur stupid" quote?. Not that neither me nor you will remember it in four years but still.
An official apology for stupidity sounds reasonable to me 
|
United States22883 Posts
On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case.
It's highly likely that Obama pulls a handful of his economic advisors from UC.
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 30 2008 07:18 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 04:01 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:35 Locke. wrote:
emm... ok first of all I'm sorry for being a little harsh in my descriptions. My words were too generalized and offensive and I can understand why you were offended.
That being said watching things from the outside it really does seem pretty crazy, and it does look like the selection of Sarah Palin is very odd.
I am not saying it from the point of someone trying to ridicule the republican party and support the democrats. In fact in some issues I agree more with the republican's ideas rather than the democrats. More than that, as an Israeli from what I heard Obama I would most likely prefer a republican representative.
What I am saying is that sadly, this things become irrelevant if one of the candidates doesn't know enough about basic issues to stand ground with other intelligent people. It seems that the republicans aren't being represented well in this election and there are a lot of reasons, not related to actual issues why someone would choose not to vote for Palin. I think you are operating under the assumption that both parties want what's best for the country and all of its citizens - as opposed to any noncitizen or only certain subgroups of its citizens. If that were the case, it would be reasonable to conclude that, in the absence of further information, you can't go wrong with the most intelligent-seeming candidate. Having said that, it is true that Sarah Palin's debut on the national stage was either premature or grossly mishandled by the McCain campaign -- even taking into account the savage treatment from the mainstream media. I wouldn't attribute any of this to Palin's intelligence, of which we simply don't have a very good idea right now (other than the fact that she's no genius). "Her lack of fundamental understanding of some key issues was dramatic," said another McCain source with direct knowledge of the process to prepare Palin after she was picked. The source said it was probably the "hardest" to get her "up to speed than any candidate in history." That's a major indictment.
That's interesting, but not conclusive because a) we don't even know who the quote is from and in what context it was said, and b) now that McCain's coming defeat is obvious to all, we are starting to see the scapegoating in the McCain camp that I suspect we will get much more of in the weeks to come.
|
On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case. LoL
Translation:
McCain has more principle and common sense than Obama because HnR)hT said so.
HnR)hT thinks it is preposterous for a president to seek advice from the scientific community.
You know, maybe you're right! The Bible and Sarah Palin have all the answers.
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 30 2008 07:20 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case. It's highly likely that Obama pulls a handful of his economic advisors from UC.
The ones who subscribe to the Chicago School? I think it is rather doubtful that such people will play a key role in his policy decisions. But that would be a very positive sign 
|
HnR)hT
United States3468 Posts
On October 30 2008 07:25 Phoned wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case. LoL Translation: McCain has more principle and common sense than Obama because HnR)hT said so. HnR)hT thinks it is preposterous for a president to seek advice from the scientific community. You know, maybe you're right! The Bible and Sarah Palin have all the answers.
Translation: Let's reinterpret what hT says to mean something that has nothing whatsoever to do with what he actually says. Did I say anything favorable about McCain anywhere? The context here is this: I am responding to the claim that Palin's supposed lack of knowledge about the technical details of that dreadful bailout package, and about the inner workings of the Washington-Wall Street axis, is necessarily such a bad thing.
|
United States22883 Posts
On October 30 2008 07:30 HnR)hT wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2008 07:20 Jibba wrote:On October 30 2008 06:52 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 06:18 D10 wrote:On October 30 2008 03:46 HnR)hT wrote:On October 30 2008 03:29 fusionsdf wrote:
when it comes to national issues, she basically does know nothing.
I mean I for one trust her to fix the econ-basically its got to be about job creation On the economy, from what I gather Obama would be far worse than a cactus. Damn, vote for the Cactus ! appereantly, hes the best candidate Or the next best thing: someone with enough principle and down-to-earth common sense to resist the temptation to "do something" simply because he can. The economy is far too complex for too-clever-by-half technocrats even when well-intentioned, which is in fact rarely the case. It's highly likely that Obama pulls a handful of his economic advisors from UC. The ones who subscribe to the Chicago School? I think it is rather doubtful that such people will play a key role in his policy decisions. But that would be a very positive sign
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/03/opinion/main4317760.shtml
I think Goolsbee is more of a behavioral economist than a typical UC thinker, but Furman is definitely in that camp.
I think he'll be pulling a lot of people from the two places he's most familiar with: Harvard and UC. I don't expect any Senators to be pulled.
|
Obama's advisors have always been academics rather than lifelong politicians, Its one of the reasons I got interested in him back in december.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
