WHAT are the Republicans seeing that nobody else is? - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-22-2008, 10:18 PM   #16
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post


STING, this is your best work yet. Congrats.

If you really think the following makes the Bush years look like tough times for Americans, please explain.

The Average National Federal Debt as a percentage of GDP:
Clinton Years 64.5%
Bush Years 61.9%

Average GDP growth rate:
Clinton Years 5.4%
Bush Years 4.8%

Average Annual Poverty Rate:
Clinton Years 13.3%
Bush Years 12.3%

Average Annual Inflation Rate:
Clinton Years 2.60%
Bush Years 2.69%

Average Annual Unemployment Rate:
Clinton Years 5.21%
Bush Years 5.20%
__________________

__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 10:21 PM   #17
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angela Harlem View Post
The very fact that health insurance is a sign of a comfortable life is a very sad thing. Heath care and education are things you ought to be able to take for granted! They're certainly no privilege. That land of opportunity of yours should demand more. Come join the rest of us some time. We still manage to balance a budget and educate the healthy masses. It just might mean we have to engage in one or two less wars peace-keeping missions.
Its rather easy to afford those things when you let Uncle Sam take care of your security, without which, no nation can survive.
__________________

__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 10:25 PM   #18
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 04:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Thats the stereotypical view many liberals have of conservatives. But its just not true. For example, you realize, Bush's strongest group of support(except for evangelicals) comes from the US military.
Please refer to the boldfaced, italicized line in my post. NONE of the Bush supporters I know have ever been active in the military, or are even close to anyone who has been.

It's nothing personal, most of these people I have in mind are family members and I love them just the same. My dad might be more conservative than President Bush, and I still love and respect him, just don't want him running my country.
__________________
Liesje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 10:33 PM   #19
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 04:02 PM
Yes I suppose invading other countries could be considered "travel."
__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 10:38 PM   #20
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liesje View Post
Please refer to the boldfaced, italicized line in my post.
Well, I hope you see the mistake your making by forming an opinion about other Bush supporters based entirely on the relatively limited number of people you know personally, compared to the millions that support him from every ethnic, religious, career, political, and social background in the country.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 10:43 PM   #21
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 10:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
I know you don't like the chart, but its a fact, a fact that many people in the years to come will look at when doing an assesment of the Bush Presidency when compared to other Presidents. These are basic macro-economic statistics that any historian looks at when assessing what life was like, or what the standard of living was like during a certain administration. These same statistics were used to trumpet the success of the Clinton administration at the end of his time in office.

But far more important than those factors was the necessary removal of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, and the Saddam regime in Iraq as well as rolling up the Al Quada network across the globe. National Security is the most important job of the President, and Bush has succeeded in ways that others have not.
I should tell my economic development professor that he is looking at totally the wrong indicators then, in assessing the standard of living.
As Economist you sure look at those figures as well, but you put them in context, look at the trends, look at previous years and most importantly, don't attribute it all the the current President, but rather take a look at the extent to which the administration of that time plays a role in it, and look at all the other determinants.
So far you really have to look hard to find economists that are applauding Bush for his economic policies, and the days of free market fundamentalists are counted as well.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 10:44 PM   #22
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Yes I suppose invading other countries could be considered "travel."
The idea that the military only travels when it invades another country is absurd. Even in peace time, the US military has personal stationed in dozens of countries around the world providing security that is vital to maintaining peace and stability.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 10:47 PM   #23
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
mobvok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: boom clap
Posts: 4,433
Local Time: 01:02 PM
The main goal of the Republican base is making the rich wealthier. I don't believe income disparity between the peon and the richest 1% has ever been higher: Bush has done his job very well, if that's what you're aiming for.
__________________
mobvok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 10:48 PM   #24
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 10:02 PM
Not to argue against the bases in south Germany or Italy (I really want them to stay as they are also an economic factor), but in some cases the bases are more strategic than vital.
And seriously, most countries in the world, i.e. all the others, don't need to set bases in a country so that their citizens can travel that place.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 11:03 PM   #25
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Vega View Post
I should tell my economic development professor that he is looking at totally the wrong indicators then, in assessing the standard of living.
Even the UN's annual Human Development Index looks at GDP when they assess standard of living. I also think the poverty rate, inflation rate, unemployment rate, and the level of debt relative to the country's wealth are important factors to look at. I don't know many economist who would argue that their not.

Quote:
As Economist you sure look at those figures as well, but you put them in context, look at the trends, look at previous years and most importantly, don't attribute it all the the current President, but rather take a look at the extent to which the administration of that time plays a role in it, and look at all the other determinants.
Oh yes, which involves realizing that the Bush administration had to deal with a recession early in its time in office as well as an event like 9/11. Bill Clinton never had to deal with a recession or an event like 9/11. Yet, despite the 2001 recession and a rise in Unemployment to 6.3%, the Bush administration succeeded in getting unemployment down to as low as 4.4% later on. It also succeeded in keeping poverty low, inflation low, and had a lower level of national debt to GDP than Clinton. The Bush administration succeeded in doing this despite dealing with a recession and fighting two wars, and higher gas prices, something that Clinton did not have to deal with.

Americans responding by re-electing George Bush in 2004 with OVER 50% of the popular vote, the first time any President received 50% or more of the popular vote since 1988. In addition, in being re-elected with over 50% of the popular vote, Bush achieved something that only two other Democratic Presidents had ever done before.

Quote:
So far you really have to look hard to find economists that are applauding Bush for his economic policies, and the days of free market fundamentalists are counted as well.
There are plenty of economist that have supported Bush and his policies over the past 8 years and will be supporting John McCain over Barack Obama in November.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 11:07 PM   #26
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Vega View Post
And seriously, most countries in the world, i.e. all the others, don't need to set bases in a country so that their citizens can travel that place.
That not why the United States has bases in other countries. It has bases in other countries to help protect area's that are vital to global security or key to deploying to other area's of the world.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 11:15 PM   #27
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 10:02 PM
It was meant in reference to your "The army as travel organisation" remark.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-22-2008, 11:51 PM   #28
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Vega View Post
It was meant in reference to your "The army as travel organisation" remark.
I've never stated that the "army is a travel organization". Do to the job that the US military must do, its members often have to travel to many parts of the world.
__________________
Strongbow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 12:44 AM   #29
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 10:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Even the UN's annual Human Development Index looks at GDP when they assess standard of living. I also think the poverty rate, inflation rate, unemployment rate, and the level of debt relative to the country's wealth are important factors to look at. I don't know many economist who would argue that their not.

Oh yes, which involves realizing that the Bush administration had to deal with a recession early in its time in office as well as an event like 9/11. Bill Clinton never had to deal with a recession or an event like 9/11. Yet, despite the 2001 recession and a rise in Unemployment to 6.3%, the Bush administration succeeded in getting unemployment down to as low as 4.4% later on. It also succeeded in keeping poverty low, inflation low, and had a lower level of national debt to GDP than Clinton. The Bush administration succeeded in doing this despite dealing with a recession and fighting two wars, and higher gas prices, something that Clinton did not have to deal with.

Americans responding by re-electing George Bush in 2004 with OVER 50% of the popular vote, the first time any President received 50% or more of the popular vote since 1988. In addition, in being re-elected with over 50% of the popular vote, Bush achieved something that only two other Democratic Presidents had ever done before.

There are plenty of economist that have supported Bush and his policies over the past 8 years and will be supporting John McCain over Barack Obama in November.

It's included, no question. But the final assessment and ranking is much more complicated.
But they don't necessarily tell you if the economic policies of the time are that great, anyways. This current crisis, e.g., is due to policy made since the Reagan administration. Most policy changes rather have long-term effects.

Bush didn't do everything wrong. To the contrary, luckily in part he didn't do anything.
And the world is still shaking their heads how that re-election could have happened.
Monetarists will never go extinct.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-23-2008, 12:46 AM   #30
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 10:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
I've never stated that the "army is a travel organization". Do to the job that the US military must do, its members often have to travel to many parts of the world.

It's called paraphrasing.
__________________

__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   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 04:02 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