Obama General Discussion, vol. 4 - Page 26 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-07-2012, 01:58 PM   #501
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
mobvok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: boom clap
Posts: 4,435
Local Time: 09:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
High inflation is absolutely and completely disastrous for the middle and working classes - it erodes their limited savings, it makes the cost of living more expensive, obvioiusly, and though there is usually a time lag, at a basic level it makes simple household budgeting a task fraught with difficulty.

By contrast, the upper classes - the 1%'ers as we seem to be calling them these days - get by just fine in periods of high inflation. They have the contacts to pursue a diverse range of investment options and much of their net worth is invested in hard assets like property and commodities in the first place. As for the cost of living, it doesn't matter to them.

There is a very good reason why someone like Hitler arose from the ashes of a high inflation economy and there is a very good reason why Zimbabwe today, is in the mess that its in.
First, you move very smoothly from discussing the perils of "high" inflation (in the US, historically ~7%+) to citing "high" inflation for Hitler's rise. The problem is, Weimar hyperinflation at its peak was 29,500%.

That's like equating the space heater in your room with the surface of the sun. Don't look directly at either!!! They'll both incinerate all living life!!!!!

Second, follow this timeline

1923 - German hyperinflation
1930 - strong German deflation, austerity
1933 - Hitler!

There's an inconvenient bump in the "high inflation caused Hitler" narrative that you try to sand off by vaguely describing how Hitler rose "from the ashes", the problem clearly being that deflation is far closer chronologically to Hitler than hyperinflation. If you try and backpedal by saying the moral here is that 1930 Germans were so scarred by the 1923 experience that they made bad choices the opposite way, the moral of this post has now devolved from "high inflation is bad" to "economic mismanagement is bad", which is a staggeringly dull and banal point.
__________________

mobvok is offline  
Old 07-07-2012, 02:33 PM   #502
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
mobvok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: boom clap
Posts: 4,435
Local Time: 09:48 AM
FWIW*, in American history the working class has benefited from inflation reducing the real value of their nominally-pegged debts (mortgages, medical bills...) making it easier to pay off, while Wall Street and big banks (i.e, creditors) absolutely loathe it for the same reason. As our economy is stalled mainly because it's trying to shake off private sector debt, the benefit of mild inflation would far outweigh the negative effects of higher cost of living. As Canadiens said, inflation is a tool, not a moral issue.

*no pun intended
__________________

mobvok is offline  
Old 07-07-2012, 04:56 PM   #503
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mobvok View Post
First, you move very smoothly from discussing the perils of "high" inflation (in the US, historically ~7%+) to citing "high" inflation for Hitler's rise. The problem is, Weimar hyperinflation at its peak was 29,500%.

That's like equating the space heater in your room with the surface of the sun. Don't look directly at either!!! They'll both incinerate all living life!!!!!

Second, follow this timeline

1923 - German hyperinflation
1930 - strong German deflation, austerity
1933 - Hitler!

There's an inconvenient bump in the "high inflation caused Hitler" narrative that you try to sand off by vaguely describing how Hitler rose "from the ashes", the problem clearly being that deflation is far closer chronologically to Hitler than hyperinflation. If you try and backpedal by saying the moral here is that 1930 Germans were so scarred by the 1923 experience that they made bad choices the opposite way, the moral of this post has now devolved from "high inflation is bad" to "economic mismanagement is bad", which is a staggeringly dull and banal point.
2% is the long term average for the US. It's nothing like 7%, don't know where you're getting that from.

Even if hyperinflation is avoided, if the worst outcome in the coming years is inflation rates of say 7%, then even that is bad for the middle and working classes because even if wages rise, there is always a time lag.
financeguy is offline  
Old 07-07-2012, 05:01 PM   #504
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
Morgan Freeman's opinion should not be discounted.

Most likely he has had the opportunity to stand at a urinal next to the president.
Has he prayed with him? And more importantly, did they pray to the right God?
financeguy is offline  
Old 07-07-2012, 06:06 PM   #505
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:48 PM
Morgan Freeman is God.
BVS is offline  
Old 07-07-2012, 06:41 PM   #506
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Danny Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Harvard Supermodel Activist of the Decade Runner-Up
Posts: 9,557
Local Time: 10:48 AM
Morgan Freeman is Muslim, or at least he was in that Robin Hood movie with Kevin Costner.
Danny Boy is offline  
Old 07-07-2012, 06:44 PM   #507
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danny Boy View Post
Morgan Freeman is Muslim, or at least he was in that Robin Hood movie with Kevin Costner.
In that case, if he sat down and broke bread and prayed with the president, they are both praying to a false god.
financeguy is offline  
Old 07-07-2012, 08:11 PM   #508
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,715
Local Time: 12:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen View Post
And Brad Pitt's mother doesn't like Obama either

Reading the online comments about the woman who died an hour after serving Obama in her restaurant=#1 reason to blow up the internet
Oh, lord, I don't even want to know, do I?
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 07-10-2012, 08:03 PM   #509
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 11:48 AM
Strassel: Obama's Imperial Presidency - WSJ.com

Quote:
Obama's Imperial Presidency
When Congress won't do what he wants, he ignores it and acts anyway.

The ObamaCare litigation is history, with the president's takeover of the health sector deemed constitutional. Now we can focus on the rest of the Obama imperial presidency.

Where, you are wondering, have you recently heard that term? Ah, yes. The "imperial presidency" of George W. Bush was a favorite judgment of the left about our 43rd president's conduct in war, wiretapping and detentions. Yet say this about Mr. Bush: His aggressive reading of executive authority was limited to the area where presidents are at their core power—the commander-in-chief function.

By contrast, presidents are at their weakest in the realm of domestic policy—subject to checks and balances, co-equal to the other branches. Yet this is where Mr. Obama has granted himself unprecedented power. The health law and the 2009 stimulus package were unique examples of Mr. Obama working with Congress. The more "persistent pattern," Matthew Spalding recently wrote on the Heritage Foundation blog, is "disregard for the powers of the legislative branch in favor of administrative decision making without—and often in spite of—congressional action."

Put another way: Mr. Obama proposes, Congress refuses, he does it anyway.

For example, Congress refused to pass Mr. Obama's Dream Act, which would provide a path to citizenship for some not here legally. So Mr. Obama passed it himself with an executive order that directs officers to no longer deport certain illegal immigrants. This may be good or humane policy, yet there is no reading of "prosecutorial discretion" that allows for blanket immunity for entire classes of offenders.

Mr. Obama disagrees with federal law, which criminalizes the use of medical marijuana. Congress has not repealed the law. No matter. The president instructs his Justice Department not to prosecute transgressors. He disapproves of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, yet rather than get Congress to repeal it, he stops defending it in court. He dislikes provisions of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, so he asked Congress for fixes. That effort failed, so now his Education Department issues waivers that are patently inconsistent with the statute.

Similarly, when Mr. Obama wants a new program and Congress won't give it to him, he creates it regardless. Congress, including Democrats, wouldn't pass his cap-and-trade legislation. His Environmental Protection Agency is now instituting it via a broad reading of the Clean Air Act. Congress, again including members of his own party, wouldn't pass his "card-check" legislation eliminating secret ballots in union elections. So he stacked the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with appointees who pushed through a "quickie" election law to accomplish much the same. Congress wouldn't pass "net neutrality" Internet regulations, so Mr. Obama's Federal Communications Commission did it unilaterally.

In January, when the Senate refused to confirm Mr. Obama's new picks for the NLRB, he proclaimed the Senate to be in "recess" and appointed the members anyway, making a mockery of that chamber's advice-and-consent role. In June, he expanded the definition of "executive privilege" to deny House Republicans documents for their probe into the botched Fast and Furious drug-war operation, making a mockery of Congress's oversight responsibilities.

This president's imperial pretensions extend into the brute force the executive branch has exercised over the private sector. The auto bailouts turned contract law on its head, as the White House subordinated bondholders' rights to those of its union allies. After the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the Justice Department leaked that it had opened a criminal probe at exactly the time the Obama White House was demanding BP suspend its dividend and cough up billions for an extralegal claims fund. BP paid. Who wouldn't?

And it has been much the same in his dealings with the states. Don't like Arizona's plans to check immigration status? Sue. Don't like state efforts to clean up their voter rolls? Invoke the Voting Rights Act. Don't like state authority over fracking? Elbow in with new and imagined federal authority, via federal water or land laws.

In so many situations, Mr. Obama's stated rationale for action has been the same: We tried working with Congress but it didn't pan out—so we did what we had to do. This is not only admission that the president has subverted the legislative branch, but a revealing insight into Mr. Obama's view of his own importance and authority.

There is a rich vein to mine here for GOP nominee Mitt Romney. Americans have a sober respect for a balance of power, so much so that they elected a Republican House in 2010 to stop the Obama agenda. The president's response? Go around Congress and disregard the constitutional rule of law. What makes this executive overreach doubly unsavory is that it's often pure political payoff to special interests or voter groups.

Mr. Obama came to office promising to deliver a new kind of politics. He did—his own, unilateral governance.
Imperial is so harsh, let's just call Barack Obama our first post-constitutional president.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-10-2012, 08:17 PM   #510
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 01:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
Strassel: Obama's Imperial Presidency - WSJ.com



Imperial is so harsh, let's just call Barack Obama our first post-constitutional president.
Executive Order has been an increasingly-effective (and abused) tool for bypassing the two other branches since the 1950s.

For someone who enjoys U.S. History quotes for a good old anti-2012 Democratic Party circlejerk so often, you sure love to ignore it when it might undermine your point.
Canadiens1131 is offline  
Old 07-10-2012, 10:10 PM   #511
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 12:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500
Strassel: Obama's Imperial Presidency - WSJ.com

Imperial is so harsh, let's just call Barack Obama our first post-constitutional president.
First?

History and context are a bitch aren't they?
BVS is offline  
Old 07-10-2012, 10:45 PM   #512
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,715
Local Time: 12:48 PM
Not to mention, while I agree that executive orders can be heavily abused and think a discussion of Obama's use of them in and of itself is fine, ever consider the fact that part of the reason Obama's doing this is because he's frustrated with Congress not bothering to agree on a damn thing anymore? Seriously, Congress hasn't done shit lately that's worthwhile, or if they have, it's only after everyone made a big fuss and shamed them into it. So I can understand a president saying, "Fuck it, you guys won't help me, I guess I'll have to try and get things moving myself."

There's also a difference between using the orders to actually get legitimate actions done and using them just because you can for the hell of it, too, so, yeah.
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 07-11-2012, 12:06 AM   #513
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,392
Local Time: 01:48 PM
Republicans suddenly worrying about the rule of law?
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-11-2012, 12:09 AM   #514
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Winterfell
Posts: 3,825
Local Time: 01:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Republicans suddenly worrying about the rule of law?
We have baby Jesus on our side. Why don't you go fry in hell you unAmerican progressive swine.
Steved1998 is offline  
Old 07-11-2012, 08:21 AM   #515
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 01:48 PM
Filibusters rendered Congress useless anyway.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 07-12-2012, 03:44 PM   #516
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Winterfell
Posts: 3,825
Local Time: 01:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilsFan View Post
Filibusters rendered Congress useless anyway.
Filibusters are an American tradition. Read a history book.
Steved1998 is offline  
Old 07-12-2012, 05:28 PM   #517
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 01:48 PM
Yawn
Canadiens1131 is offline  
Old 07-12-2012, 06:38 PM   #518
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 11:48 AM


Personally I look forward to the sequel; "The Romney Cure"

But at least the film accurately portrays the sex life of Republicans.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-14-2012, 06:10 AM   #519
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 288
Local Time: 05:48 PM


~~~

neil c is offline  
Old 07-15-2012, 02:47 PM   #520
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Jeannieco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: If the moonlight caught you crying on Killiney Bay oh sing your song let your song be sung
Posts: 4,992
Local Time: 10:48 AM
^^Breaking news...bashing of our President includes washed up has been country music singers. That really makes me want to vote for mittens...
__________________

Jeannieco is offline  
 

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 12:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×