Global stock market crash in progress - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-17-2008, 12:19 PM   #91
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 03:16 PM
Interesting quote by Hugo Chavez:

Quote:
CARACAS (Reuters) – Socialist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez mocked George W. Bush as a "comrade" on Wednesday, saying the U.S. president was a hard-line leftist for his government's intervention of major private banks in the U.S. financial crisis.

Chavez, who calls capitalism an evil and ex-Cuban leader Fidel Castro his mentor, ridiculed Bush for his plan for the federal government to take equity in American banks despite the U.S. right-wing's criticism of Venezuelan nationalizations.

"Bush is to the left of me now," Chavez told an audience of international intellectuals debating the benefits of socialism. "Comrade Bush announced he will buy shares in private banks."

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
If Obama doesn't reduce spending the lack of revenue the government gets during a recession will just increase the deficit no matter what the tax rate is and 4 years from now his presidency will be challenged.
I'm sure he can cut a few billion a month from Iraq.
__________________

__________________
ntalwar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 12:22 PM   #92
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntalwar View Post

I'm sure he can cut a few billion a month from Iraq.
Exactly, but I've brought that up before to oscar, he doesn't believe that counts as spending...
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 12:35 PM   #93
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Exactly, but I've brought that up before to oscar, he doesn't believe that counts as spending...
It is spending. I think it's a priority for national security and security for the free world. The cuts in spending will have to come elsewhere (health, education). George Bush and the congress MASSIVELY increased entitlements over his reign and many true conservatives were aghast over it. The war expenses aren't what got the U.S. to 10 trillion in deficit by itself. Bush was looking at the popularity amongst older people and retirees who demanded more health spending.

Eventually the war will have to end on grounds that Afghanistan and Iraq will have to run their own country, but leaving when we are getting ground success in Iraq and not applying the same tactics in Afghanistan simply to save money in the next 2 - 5 years is too short sighted. Cut health and education entitlements and reduce earmarks and you can still win the war and balance the budget.

This is a good article that politicians will avoid in their talking points because it's an unpopular truth:

Its the Economy, Stupid by Victor Davis Hanson on National Review Online
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 12:45 PM   #94
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
It is spending. I think it's a priority for national security and security for the free world. The cuts in spending will have to come elsewhere (health, education). George Bush and the congress MASSIVELY increased entitlements over his reign and many true conservatives were aghast over it. The war expenses aren't what got the U.S. to 10 trillion in deficit by itself. Bush was looking at the popularity amongst older people and retirees who demanded more health spending.

Eventually the war will have to end on grounds that Afghanistan and Iraq will have to run their own country, but leaving when we are getting ground success in Iraq and not applying the same tactics in Afghanistan simply to save money in the next 2 - 5 years is too short sighted. Cut health and education entitlements and reduce earmarks and you can still win the war and balance the budget.
Was Iraq a priority to national security? No. Do we leave just to save money? No. But we need to leave as soon as we can.


Cut health and education?! Yes, because that's responsible... Health and education need to be completely overhauled, and yes that will take some money.


Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
This is a good article that politicians will avoid in their talking points because it's an unpopular truth:

It�s the Economy, Stupid by Victor Davis Hanson on National Review Online
Oh yes, the National Review, once again you come with another stellar reliable source...
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 12:49 PM   #95
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntalwar View Post
Interesting quote by Hugo Chavez:

I'm sure he can cut a few billion a month from Iraq.
He needs to find more money through either an increase in taxation without new spending or cutting spending.

Cutting in Iraq is has more to do with wanting to fail in the middle east and to make it harder for the U.S. to ever go to war again, and bash Bush. They know that success in Iraq and Afghanistan will be very popular in the U.S.

Quitting too early will enbolden enemies for sure. For Obama's sake he doesn't want to be in that position because he will be criticized for it. It's easy to criticize but hard to do the cutting and pissing off special interest groups. If he wins the next 4 years will be interesting. If Obama balances the budget he will have to be able to say NO to a lot of people. Maybe if he acts like Clinton and has a conservative congress to push for control in spending it could happen like it did in the '90s. Getting the congress to control spending will be key for a president to get success.

If Obama increases spending and Congress increase spending the tax increase will have to be very large to cover those expenses. If he can't say no to lobbyists then the deficit and debt will increase. No matter what scalpel Obama wants to use he will have to make tough choices. Most presidents have 2 years to fix problems and show some progress because the last 2 years is preparation for elections.

BTW Chavez is a jerk and his idea that Bush is far to the right was wrong. Bush moved to the left at the beginning of his first term and increased spending because he barely won the election and wanted to go the middle ground to not appear far from the popular vote. It shows that if you dally with the left you will get burned and ridiculed in the end. It's best to stay with your principles and not whore yourself for popular vote. Nixon whored himself with wage and price control despite what his economists told him. He got no thanks for it when it naturally failed.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 12:49 PM   #96
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 03:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
It is spending. I think it's a priority for national security and security for the free world. The cuts in spending will have to come elsewhere (health, education). [/url]
But the US does not necessarily have to fund it, even using your assumptions. What about the $70+ billion Iraq oil surplus? A lot of the monthly US outlay for Iraq is probably going into Swiss bank accounts anyway. Billions in funds are unaccounted for. Halliburton no-bid contracts don't exactly provide great value for the money either. Entitlements will be an issue for any candidate, because of the large numbers of baby boomers nearing retirement.
__________________
ntalwar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 12:53 PM   #97
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Was Iraq a priority to national security? No. Do we leave just to save money? No. But we need to leave as soon as we can.


Cut health and education?! Yes, because that's responsible... Health and education need to be completely overhauled, and yes that will take some money.

Oh yes, the National Review, once again you come with another stellar reliable source...
Did you even read the article? Even McCain can't cut taxes or even keep them low without cuts in spending. You don't even need a "reliable source" to understand that concept.

What are more reliable sources to you?
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 12:59 PM   #98
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntalwar View Post
But the US does not necessarily have to fund it, even using your assumptions. What about the $70+ billion Iraq oil surplus? A lot of the monthly US outlay for Iraq is probably going into Swiss bank accounts anyway. Billions in funds are unaccounted for. Halliburton no-bid contracts don't exactly provide great value for the money either. Entitlements will be an issue for any candidate, because of the large numbers of baby boomers nearing retirement.


This is something many have been saying for quite awhile, but for some reason their voices are being drowned out...
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 01:01 PM   #99
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post

Cutting in Iraq is has more to do with wanting to fail in the middle east and to make it harder for the U.S. to ever go to war again, and bash Bush.


You really need to lay off the kool-aid...
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 01:03 PM   #100
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntalwar View Post
But the US does not necessarily have to fund it, even using your assumptions. What about the $70+ billion Iraq oil surplus? A lot of the monthly US outlay for Iraq is probably going into Swiss bank accounts anyway. Billions in funds are unaccounted for. Halliburton no-bid contracts don't exactly provide great value for the money either. Entitlements will be an issue for any candidate, because of the large numbers of baby boomers nearing retirement.
I don't see any problems here that are so massive that it would equal quitting in Iraq and Afghanistan before the war is over. How much would be the cost if we had to go back in there again if they fail.

What are your beliefs for U.S. foreign policy? What should the U.S. do if allies get attacked? There are many areas where the U.S. has to be involved in war because of people like Putin, Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Kim Jong Il, China v.s Taiwan. I don't see failure in the middle east as an option simply to balance the budget.

Dictatorships want to consolidate their power by invading other countries and getting other countries to depend on them economically. Democracies have a duty to prevent this because it challenges the viability of our own democracies. The only way I see a future of no war would be one where every country was a democracy and trading with each other. Until that happens we have to be on guard.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 01:04 PM   #101
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post


You really need to lay off the kool-aid...
You have to admit that political parties act like sports teams and also want to win for their own reasons right?
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 01:05 PM   #102
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ntalwar View Post
Entitlements will be an issue for any candidate, because of the large numbers of baby boomers nearing retirement.
This I agree with.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 01:07 PM   #103
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 03:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I don't see any problems here that are so massive that it would equal quitting in Iraq and Afghanistan before the war is over. How much would be the cost if we had to go back in there again if they fail.
You didn't address the point. If Obama can do with $5 billion what it takes Bush $10 billion a month, that's $60 billion in savings a year right there.
__________________
ntalwar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 01:10 PM   #104
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Did you even read the article? Even McCain can't cut taxes or even keep them low without cuts in spending. You don't even need a "reliable source" to understand that concept.
Yes I read it. And I agree, and I'm not sure why Republican don't understand this, you're right you can't cut taxes and then spend all you want... but that's exactly what we've been doing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
What are more reliable sources to you?
Reliable sources are those that don't include jabs such as "like good liberals do", aren't dripping with partisan rhetoric and advertising.

And reliable sources especially don't include the racist bullshit you tried to push on us last week in the immigration thread...
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2008, 01:16 PM   #105
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
You have to admit that political parties act like sports teams and also want to win for their own reasons right?
Yes, but you suggesting that Democrats want to purposely fail in the Middle East is beyond ridiculous...
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com