NationStates Jolt Archive

As an outsider (being European) I'm quite happy seeing Obama promising lots of changes which, if put into action succesfully, will make the USA a much more pleasent place to work and live. However, I also heard that the USA is going through a tough time, money-wise. Their national debt has become so big it didn't fit on that one counterboard anymore. As far as I know there just ISNT any money to make any of the chances Obama promises!

Don't get me wrong, I agree more with McCain on the moral issues but I do think Obama is the man you'll need to get the country back on track. But how the hell will he pay for all the policies he promises? I watched the 30 minute ad, and it's all about spending money. It's like he'll be throwing bags of money around like he's Santa Claus.

And I'm kind of afraid that, once Obama will be elected, people will be majorly dissapointed with his presidency, simply because he won't be able to make true 90% of all his promises... Obama could be the dissapointment of the century :(

Not everything will be affordable, and some of it will doubtless fail in congress. No President keeps every promise succesfully.

However, Obama plans to pay for it by getting rid of Bush's tax cuts for the rich and pulling most of the troops out of Iraq. Even with the extra 15000 he said would go to Afghanistan, that's some money saved their surely?

He won't be able to, although IIRC if he actually goes and does a proper universal healthcare scheme, it'll save the country money (so long as people chip into national insurance etc.), so that's a wee bit saved.

Magic and graft.

Magic and graft.

Credit card actually.

On that, what does he get to do with all the money raised for his campaign, can he keep it?

OP - And I'm kind of afraid that, once Obama will be elected, people will be majorly dissapointed with his presidency, simply because he won't be able to make true 90% of all his promises... Obama could be the dissapointment of the century

There's an article proposing that if Obama was stock, it would be wise to short it about 2 weeks after the nomination, though I'd probably hold it a month into his presidency myself.

the same way republicans are paying for their phoney wars, by printing phoney money.

actually no. if i'm not mistaken, well we'll just have to see what happens when it does, but a green w.p.a. would be a REAL stimulus 'package'.

Credit card actually.

On that, what does he get to do with all the money raised for his campaign, can he keep it?.

Actually, that's exactly what I meant. The term "magic and graft" was coined by David Remnick in Lenin's Tomb describing how the Soviet economy functioned in the later years of the Brezhnev era, basically floating on easy credit and high oil prices to fund a system that was fundamentally broken.

In fact, the entire Eastern Bloc collapsed first and foremost due to debt.

Paying for his policies?

Couldn't be any worse thatn GWB who has relied on Chinese, Japanese and Korean investment to keep the US economy afloat.

In fairness, the expectations being placed on Obama could be hard to meet.

He won't. He may bring the American dollar to the level of, say, the Zimbabwe dollar (or just slightly under), but in the end, he won't do any better than Johnson did with "guns and butter'' economics. But, you can be certain he'll shift the blame for that to those EEEEVIL Republicans.

He will pay for it like every other thing all lying politicians do. He will raise taxes instead of cutting back on unnecessary and unneeded government projects and funding.

Taxes. They are the price of civilization.

He will pay for it like every other thing all lying politicians do. He will raise taxes instead of cutting back on unnecessary and unneeded government projects and funding.

Such as?

Maybe the defense budget....

the same way republicans are paying for their phoney wars, by printing phoney money.

actually no. if i'm not mistaken, well we'll just have to see what happens when it does, but a green w.p.a. would be a REAL stimulus 'package'.

I agree. It's an untapped part of the economy that could really be expanded.

he could end the war in iraq...

Such as?

Maybe the defense budget....

The military budget rose under Bush. Some of that I believe could be cut. Without significantly causing problems to our military. The US has one of the highest military expendatures in the world. After all a lot of that military spending I know has helped one person get even richer....Dick Chaney. Talk about a conflict in intrest. You let an old defense contractor into the secound highest position in government what do you expect? It's time to cut some of that feeding to Chaney off.

Windfall tax on oil companies

The military budget rose under Bush. Some of that I believe could be cut. Without significantly causing problems to our military. The US has one of the highest military expendatures in the world. After all a lot of that military spending I know has helped one person get even richer....Dick Chaney. Talk about a conflict in intrest. You let an old defense contractor into the secound highest position in government what do you expect? It's time to cut some of that feeding to Chaney off.

Spelled Cheney, btw. I agree that far too much of our money has gone into the pockets of Cheney and his friends.

As LG mentioned, getting out of Iraq would save immense amounts of money.

I suspect Obama's first term will be mostly taken up repairing the damage that the Bush administration has done to this country.

Such as?

Maybe the defense budget....

It's not the defense budget that's the problem, it's the offense budget...

I can exclusively reveal his plan to raise money- Turn the White House into the region's premier brothel. As we all know, he's a Muslim, and thus highly influenced in his own practices by Muhammed's lifestyle. Do you still want "change" if that means the official residence of the President becomes known as the Whorehouse and that there are almost too many First Ladies to count, one being a nine-year old?

Like anyone else would, cutting spending in other areas and/or increasing taxation. That's pretty much how governments work. Well, that and going further into debt.

Like anyone else would, cutting spending in other areas and/or increasing taxation. That's pretty much how governments work. Well, that and going further into debt.

You could not increase taxes enough to pay for:

1. The current bailout.
2. The current deficit.
3. The regular spending (a lot of which is Medicare, etc - defense is not the biggest piece of the pie).


The trillion in programs Obama plans on adding has no valid non-deficit source of funding.

I assume he'll just print money.

he could end the war in iraq...
we have a bigger deficit now than the cost of the war in iraq and afghanistan. so ending iraq wont be enough.

i dont suppose that he will be able to do everything he wants to do given our dire financial situation.

but its enough for me that he is THINKING about the middle class and wants to do right by us. thats a refreshing change from the policies of george bush and promises of john mccain.

he could end the war in iraq...
We're not technically paying for that, yet.

The US has one of the highest military expendatures in the world.
As much as the rest of the world combined, actually.

Don't quote me on this; marvellous.

I think if you actually look at his policies, he's quite detailed in what he's looking to do and where he thinks the money might come from. I find a lot of the questions about Barack Obama are down to not bothering to look at what is a fairly comprehensive plan.

It's similar to seeing questions like:

Who is Barack Obama exactly?
Well you could read his 2 autobiographies to start with...

I hear this talk of change, but what does it mean?
He has a website you know, obscure URL of course... www.barackobama.com

He said he was a Muslim, are we really voting in a Muslim?
Well, aside from any issues about this, where people of Muslim faith have fought and died as American soldiers in Iraq, he's actually Christian.

Beyond that, given the choice, he's simply miles ahead of McCain.

The biggest issue is that he's been built up in the minds of those who won't vote for him, those who think 'it's all talk', and they're just waiting to tear him down, and the gloating by those who do support him won't help that.

I hope, deeply hope, that circumstance doesn't shaft him, I hope he's given a fair chance, I hope that what's best for America is debated in the best interests of America despite positions that are determined by party affiliation.

I have some hope that this might be achieved, I have some hope that the traditional media is not as powerful as it used to be, that we do not get our news filtered through the eyes of agenda.

I hope the Internet makes that difference, that the ability to debate issues outside your own circle allows for a wider perspective,

I actually have this song on my i-Pod, I like to listen to it now and again...

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY

Beer cans.

Barack Obama and Kevin Rudd: Because elections aren't about picking the best and most qualified candidate, they're about who's the loudest and hippest. Fuck yeah!

Barack Obama and Kevin Rudd: Because elections aren't about picking the best and most qualified candidate, they're about who's the loudest and hippest. Fuck yeah!

...which would explain 20 out of the last 28 years being Republican presidencies?

Clearly not.

Why not explain in detail why John McCain is the better choice, add some intelligent opinion given you consider everyone else so stupid?

Barack Obama and Kevin Rudd: Because elections aren't about picking the best and most qualified candidate, they're about who's the loudest and hippest. Fuck yeah!
to quote (again) my sister:

"well im sure not going to vote for that old man who walks funny and the alaskan cracker he is running with"


(we're going on vacation together next week. im going to have to tell her the reason why mccain "walks funny".)

Deficit spending, which is exactly what McCain would do. ("Across-the-board spending freeze <except for all the government programs I like and all the ones I'm legally obligated to continue and all the military spending>" isn't actually as tough on spending as McCain makes it sound.)

While neither candidate will address it directly, both are proposing some fairly major deficit spending in the near future. It's still possible to hate debt and like Obama's ideas if you believe that his spending proposals (some of which he'll theoretically pay for with spending cuts) will stimulate the US economy over the longer term.

Evaluating the candidates' fiscal platforms is a highly dodgy business that usually comes down to personal philosophy. Given that we can't really do with the US Government what any reasonable owner would do with a similar investment (make the best of a bad job, negotiate a short sale of all assets to the Chinese, and claim the remaining capital loss on our tax returns,) we're left with the two options of 1) Try to Identify Structural Problems and Spend Money to Fix Them or 2) Reduce Spending Slightly and Hope Things Get Better By Themselves. Both candidates favor some combo of 1) and 2), so it really comes down to who you believe has the better judgement.

neo-hooverism for the fucking lose. times are tough, ramp the deficit spending fucking up!

(though, of course, you have to do it in efficient ways. but obama seems to have that point more or less covered. unlike mccain's "lets give money to bankers" plan)

...which would explain 20 out of the last 28 years being Republican presidencies?

Clearly not.

Unfortunately, Generation Y, or what I like to call the "Lords of the Idiots" generation, is just coming into it's prime.

Why not explain in detail why John McCain is the better choice, add some intelligent opinion given you consider everyone else so stupid?

He's staying in Iraq! He's not going to spend money that the US just doesn't have available to spend! He actually has an ounce of experience!

Why not explain in detail why John McCain is the better choice, add some intelligent opinion given you consider everyone else so stupid?He's staying in Iraq!


epic, nay, catastrophic fail!

Unfortunately, Generation Y, or what I like to call the "Lords of the Idiots" generation, is just coming into it's prime.



He's staying in Iraq! He's not going to spend money that the US just doesn't have available to spend! He actually has an ounce of experience!
mccain seems terribly unspecific in how he is going to balance our (unbalanceable) budget in his first term.

i find his assertions that he is going to do all sorts of things unconvincing without the details on how its going to get done.

epic, nay, catastrophic fail!

What, compared to Obama's "Let's leave tomorrow" strategy?

mccain seems terribly unspecific in how he is going to balance our (unbalanceable) budget in his first term.

by cutting revenue while increasing spending on particularly wasteful policies and spending the same or more on everything else. it seems perfectly clear to me, as long as we assume math is stupid.

You could not increase taxes enough to pay for:

1. The current bailout.
2. The current deficit.
3. The regular spending (a lot of which is Medicare, etc - defense is not the biggest piece of the pie).

The trillion in programs Obama plans on adding has no valid non-deficit source of funding.

Please explain McCain's proposed tax cuts in this same context. Both want to give us something for nothing. Neither has a way to pay for it.

If you're going to slap one candidate over unfunded programs, back it up with how the other guy is different. Otherwise I'll just assume you're bloviating again.

What, compared to Obama's "Let's leave tomorrow" strategy?

you just keep doing your thing, man

That's kind of my question too, to be honest. One concern I have is that although he has some ideals for education, the money will have to come from somewhere. Unfortunately, I don't think it'll come from the right means. Taxing the middle class may as well make the American monetary system have two classes: The upper class and the lower class. It's because of over taxing the middle that even though they're working hard, the poor are put in a position where they have an advantage, but would rather suck the money from welfare. The rich are watching as if it's some sort of game. Kinda ridiculous.

Besides, our debt has grown considerably. The war, the bailout, the previous debt... I would love to see some of what Obama has planned come to light, but I also wish to know the cost of something that would help college students out. I also would like to know if it would help fellow non-trads as well.

What, compared to Obama's "Let's leave tomorrow" strategy?

He hasn't said we were leaving tomorrow. You're exaggerating FO. I believe that Obama has said six months. And that's an estimate. I don't actually see everything being pulled out in six months. It takes time to compleatly pull out.

And frankly I am tired of spending money in the sandbox where it could help out here on our own doorstep.

What, compared to Obama's "Let's leave tomorrow" strategy?
its probably going to be a moot point unless the next president is willing to stay in iraq after the government asks us to leave.

the bush administration has negotiated a "combat troops to be removed next year, everyone by '11" agreement but the iraqi parliment hasnt been willing to sign on to it.

He hasn't said we were leaving tomorrow. You're exaggerating FO. I believe that Obama has said six months. And that's an estimate. I don't actually seeing everything being pulled out in six months. It takes time to compleatly pull out.

And frankly I am tired of spending money in the sandbox where it could help out here on our own doorstep.

That's the problem with Americans. They want everything now. "We want to be out of Iraq now, we want money now, we want lower taxes now, we want houses now." Why don't they realise that things take time?

I also wish to know the cost of something that would help college students out. I also would like to know if it would help fellow non-trads as well.

I'd like to know what he has planned for recent college grads who have a nasty student loan to pay back. Well I do have a vested intrest in that. LOL

Unfortunately, Generation Y, or what I like to call the "Lords of the Idiots" generation, is just coming into it's prime.

Again with believing you're the intelligent one.

He's staying in Iraq! He's not going to spend money that the US just doesn't have available to spend! He actually has an ounce of experience!

Both promise to stay in Iraq as required, Barack Obama has put forward a plan to reduce American troops, an actual exit strategy, but maintain a residual force where necessary to support the Iraq government and protect American civilians. The size of that force depends on the situation but at least there's a solid plan.

John McCain has also promised to remove troops as soon as possible but doesn't provide an actual plan any different to the current plan, keep the troops there and wait for Iraq to sort itself out.

How is John McCain not spending money? Beyond that, and something he fails to understand, is that people are worried about having a job next year - being told that the way forward is to cut programs, programs many people think they might have to rely on, is just missing the sentiment of America - people want some help, lower taxes on no income means shit.

It may not be the actual case but it's in tune with what many Americans feel.

Finally, John McCain came second last in his class, he's been a reckless fool for most of his life, he's consistently said one thing and done another. I know people who have 50 years experience of driving yet still manage to crash once a year.

Barack Obama was the first black editor of the Harvard Law Review.

Obama himself graduated with the legal world at his feet. He could have taken a highly paid job at a prestigious law firm, or a year's clerkship with a Supreme Court justice, followed by an even higher-paid job. Instead, he returned to community work for a small firm in Chicago that specialised in housing, welfare and employment and that paid him a modest $167 an hour.

Link (http://www.newstatesman.com/north-america/2008/06/law-review-obama-usa-vote)

Calling him the hip, loud choice is simply ignorant of the person he is.

That's the problem with Americans. They want everything now. "We want to be out of Iraq now, we want money now, we want lower taxes now, we want houses now." Why don't they realise that things take time?

Well....I don't see a six month withdraw being compleatly realistic. But something like within a year to a year and a half. But I know you believe that America should be in for the full haul, which is compleatly unrealistic as well.

America has bankrupted itself for Iraq and with it's loans to every other nation. So it's time to slowly bow out of it.

Muravyets has put it better in another thread by quoting one fine writer:

Dave Sedaris writing in the New Yorker a while ago (sorry I don't have the link handy atm) said that being undecided at this point in this elections is like being a passenger on a plane, and when the flight attendant comes round to take dinner orders and offers you a choice between chicken and a tray full of shit with broken glass in it, you hesitate and then ask how the chicken is prepared.

i hope this wasnt said already. i was too lazy to go back and read the whole thread, but i whatched a program after one of the debates that took each of the canidates policies and how much debt each would create, and they both create substantial debt. hovewer mccains plan was worse by a couple billion dollars.

Paying for his policies?

Couldn't be any worse thatn GWB who has relied on Chinese, Japanese and Korean investment to keep the US economy afloat.

Which is a polite way of saying "selling off US debt to east Asia to the extent that the Chinese could bring the US economy to its knees tomorrow if they wanted to."

In a globalised economy that would admittedly be mutually assured economic destruction, but it's paradoxical that a government (the Bush administration) that so prided itself on national security issues practically gave away the means to destroy the US economy to a strategic rival.

It's the economic version of deciding to increase your military security by giving away nuclear weapons to a strategic rival that previously lacked the means to challenge you as a military equal.


In fairness, the expectations being placed on Obama could be hard to meet.

Agreed. I'm now more worried about the inevitable disillusionment a couple of years into President Obama's term than I am about whether he'll be elected.

I want Obama to win, but please God - no filibuster-proof Senate. Some means of blaming continued Republican obstructionism would be nice.

I want Obama to win, but please God - no filibuster-proof Senate. Some means of blaming continued Republican obstructionism would be nice.

So stunningly American; whenever anything goes wrong, you want to be able to ignore the actual problem and blame it on the Republicans?

Is it wrong that I hope your country continues to go downhill?

I want Obama to win, but please God - no filibuster-proof Senate. Some means of blaming continued Republican obstructionism would be nice.

see, me i'd rather actually accomplish things than have democrats covering their asses. the only thing republican obstructionism is good for is as an argument to get rid of republican obstructionism.

see, me i'd rather actually accomplish things than have democrats covering their asses. the only thing republican obstructionism is good for is as an argument to get rid of republican obstructionism.
yeah. if the repubs obstructed those things that really should be obstructed, it would be OK.

but for the past 2 years they have obstructed everything including a resolution honoring MOTHERS on mothers day.

As an outsider (being European) I'm quite happy seeing Obama promising lots of changes which, if put into action succesfully, will make the USA a much more pleasent place to work and live. However, I also heard that the USA is going through a tough time, money-wise. Their national debt has become so big it didn't fit on that one counterboard anymore. As far as I know there just ISNT any money to make any of the chances Obama promises!

Don't get me wrong, I agree more with McCain on the moral issues but I do think Obama is the man you'll need to get the country back on track. But how the hell will he pay for all the policies he promises? I watched the 30 minute ad, and it's all about spending money. It's like he'll be throwing bags of money around like he's Santa Claus.

And I'm kind of afraid that, once Obama will be elected, people will be majorly dissapointed with his presidency, simply because he won't be able to make true 90% of all his promises... Obama could be the dissapointment of the century :(

I think you're partly right. There is no way Obama is going to be able to cut taxes and balance the budget during a recession. Unfortunately, we're still not at that point where the American public is willing to accept the idea that it's better to pay 22 dollars in taxes to cover what you bought and chip some money off the tab rather than 18 dollars and bill the Chinese for the extra two dollars. Moreover, a smart leader always runs a deficit during a recession because it cuts the edge off the worst of the downturn. So no, he isn't going to cut taxes. It remains to be seen whether he'll increase taxes above the Clinton-taxation levels, which are substantially higher but still not all that high.

Where you're wrong, I think, is the idea that we're going to be devastated with disappointment if Obama proves himself to be only human in the pejorative sense of the term. To be honest, I've been waiting for the other shoe to drop with this man since 2007; I think a lot of other people have been thinking the same thing. If I do find that he's got some serious flaws, I'll certainly be disappointed, but to be honest, you're seriously misunderstanding our interest in the man.

Put simply, I'm not voting for Obama because he's some kind of perfected man; I'm voting for him because he represents my interests, he represents the interests of the country I care about, and he offers a return to sanity and sobriety that I still remember as being vaguely a part of government before boomers started electing one of their own to office. If Obama is stepping out on his wife, or turns out to be a Chicago Machiavelli, I'll feel let down, but I'll take feeling let down any day over having to put up with one more ri-damned-diculous discussion in a presidential debate about how one side is more anti-abortion and therefore represents Real America whereas the other side is pro-abortion and therefore isn't wanting a return to feudalism while America crumbles around me. More than anything else, my vote is to end the feeling that I'm a centurion during the waning days of the Roman Empire, watching our enemies close in about us while the once-vaunted Roman citizens idle at Circus Maximus and our leaders jockey for tablescraps.

the only way Obama can support what he purposes is to raise taxes on those he puroses hes going to give a tax cut too.His math doesnt work...

I dunno... Maybe there might be some change lying around once we stop spending 10 billion dollars a month (http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy/securityspending/articles/gwot_spending_burn_rate/)in Iraq...


Just a thought...

You could not increase taxes enough to pay for:

1. The current bailout.
2. The current deficit.
3. The regular spending (a lot of which is Medicare, etc - defense is not the biggest piece of the pie).


If he passes his health plan we won't need Medicare or Medicaid. So there's at least partial funding for his health plan . . .

So stunningly American; whenever anything goes wrong, you want to be able to ignore the actual problem and blame it on the Republicans?

Is it wrong that I hope your country continues to go downhill?

Yes, you know just how Americans think, because youve shown time and time again that you really know so much about America.


Youre getting old, Rusty. You were a cute little troll who amused me every know and then, but its starting to get stale.

I think if you actually look at his policies, he's quite detailed in what he's looking to do and where he thinks the money might come from. I find a lot of the questions about Barack Obama are down to not bothering to look at what is a fairly comprehensive plan.

It's similar to seeing questions like:

Who is Barack Obama exactly?
Well you could read his 2 autobiographies to start with...

I hear this talk of change, but what does it mean?
He has a website you know, obscure URL of course... www.barackobama.com

I dunno. I can think (as many people here have) of alot of sources of where the money is coming from.

but as for your answers to those two questions. all it shows is that you also don't know. I've searched the site, and I see alot of optimistic hopes, but no real plan in the way of Financing.

Please explain McCain's proposed tax cuts in this same context. Both want to give us something for nothing. Neither has a way to pay for it.

If you're going to slap one candidate over unfunded programs, back it up with how the other guy is different. Otherwise I'll just assume you're bloviating again. True, but that's on the assumption that the only other choice is McCain.

the squeeky wheel gets the attention, but it also draws attention away from the other wheels.

and we can have 2 squeeky wheels on any four wheeled vehicle. ;)

He hasn't said we were leaving tomorrow. You're exaggerating FO. I believe that Obama has said six months. And that's an estimate. I don't actually see everything being pulled out in six months. It takes time to compleatly pull out.

And frankly I am tired of spending money in the sandbox where it could help out here on our own doorstep.
I've heard Obama say 21 months, 16 Months, 14 months... infact most of the time he speaks about leaving Iraq, the number of months changes.

He will tax the rich, but come on, you can only tax the rich so much, and his policies call for alot of money.

neo-hooverism for the fucking lose. times are tough, ramp the deficit spending fucking up!


Mr. Foreign creditor, he say no!

Obama will bring change.But I deny him being a Christian and I deny that he will take care of The United States of America.He has broken the rules of election and not a single person cares because they are too excited for a african american president. Other nations need to know ,and I am more concerned for the US allys/Canada,Great Britain/ that they can not see ho many rules he has broken. He registered underage voters and registered people more that once. He recieved tons of cash from a foreign agency that would not state their name. I don't know about everyone else but in th US that is illegal! So no I do not think Obama will be able to keep his policies. This is just my opinion no offense to anyone.

Mr. Foreign creditor, he say no!

Yeah, try getting China, India or Japan, all of whom are slowing down themselves, to swallow a $1 trillion deficit...that's equal to 7.1% of our GDP, which is the highest in the past 40 years. We could pull that off during WWII when our citizens financed it out of the savings glut produced by wartime rationing, but we sure as hell can't do it when they're already up to their eyeballs in debt and the credit markets are scrambling to build up cash. Of course, that assumes tax revenues will remain constant, and they're likely to nosedive as stock market losses and economic stagnation take their toll...

Bush left us one hell of a legacy.

He won't be able to, although IIRC if he actually goes and does a proper universal healthcare scheme, it'll save the country money (so long as people chip into national insurance etc.), so that's a wee bit saved.

Indeed. I'd imagine abjuring tax cuts for the wealthy, however, tangentially, surely cannot account for a substantial increase in the fisc? The rich, notably the super-rich, are rather adept at evading, or avoiding, tax.

You could not increase taxes enough to pay for:
3. The regular spending (a lot of which is Medicare, etc - defense is not the biggest piece of the pie).


The trillion in programs Obama plans on adding has no valid non-deficit source of funding.

I assume he'll just print money.

Except every chart I've seen says otherwise (that and you have to note that social security is not actually funded by Income tax. I think it's covered by payroll tax, andit makes money, but is continually borrowed from, hence the risk of insolvency)

The actual bdget looks more like:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/ef/Fy2008spendingbycategory.png/450px-Fy2008spendingbycategory.png

The few other charts I've found agree with this one 100%

Alot easier than John McCain will pay for his, which still isn't saying much.

Except every chart I've seen says otherwise (that and you have to note that social security is not actually funded by Income tax. I think it's covered by payroll tax, andit makes money, but is continually borrowed from, hence the risk of insolvency)

It would probably be eventually insolvent even if no money was borrowed from it. That being said, if no money was borrowed from it, taxes would be a good deal higher since that trust fund currently produces a massive surplus.

Regardless, I'd love to get rid of the current Social Security system or at least opt out of it. Earning a real return of 2.5%, or lower depending on interest rates, is pretty much useless...I could do far better than that with a marginal amount of effort.

They're both idiots about everything.

Right now we can screw the deficit, because if we don't we're in even worse shape, at least we can be fiscally responsible later and deal with it them. Hold taxes where they are. I don't want tax cuts or tax increases. Lock 'em steady...including the Bush tax cuts.

Dump money into the economy. Recapitalize banks, but make the recapitalization conditional. Do they want to survive? Then they get to be more responsible with how they deal with debt.

Cut the fed rates and increase the FDIC insurance. Make sure no one makes a run on their bank, and make sure the banks can get money at next to nothing. Also, make sure prices stay at a reasonable level. If they collapse because of all of the money going out of the system, then we're really talking depression.

Right now, we've got breathing space, and the government (since it's already stuck its nose in) can either make their disastrous, or it can help to avert disaster by allowing the factors that will make it better to make it better. That's about my opinion.

USA will never run out of money. Perhaps they will have less money to spend than now, but there will always be someting to work with.

Obama will bring change.But I deny him being a Christian and I deny that he will take care of The United States of America.He has broken the rules of election and not a single person cares because they are too excited for a african american president. Other nations need to know ,and I am more concerned for the US allys/Canada,Great Britain/ that they can not see ho many rules he has broken. He registered underage voters and registered people more that once. He recieved tons of cash from a foreign agency that would not state their name. I don't know about everyone else but in th US that is illegal! So no I do not think Obama will be able to keep his policies. This is just my opinion no offense to anyone.

Man, stop bogarting the bong man, pass it over and let me have a hit too man. [ /kol hippie]

Except every chart I've seen says otherwise (that and you have to note that social security is not actually funded by Income tax. I think it's covered by payroll tax, andit makes money, but is continually borrowed from, hence the risk of insolvency)

The actual bdget looks more like:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/ef/Fy2008spendingbycategory.png/450px-Fy2008spendingbycategory.png

The few other charts I've found agree with this one 100%

Small chart is small. Do you have a link to a larger version?

Yeah, try getting China, India or Japan, all of whom are slowing down themselves, to swallow a $1 trillion deficit...that's equal to 7.1% of our GDP, which is the highest in the past 40 years. We could pull that off during WWII when our citizens financed it out of the savings glut produced by wartime rationing, but we sure as hell can't do it when they're already up to their eyeballs in debt and the credit markets are scrambling to build up cash. Of course, that assumes tax revenues will remain constant, and they're likely to nosedive as stock market losses and economic stagnation take their toll...

Bush left us one hell of a legacy.
You sure have changed your tune since we first locked horns regarding Bush's spending policies?

http://forums3.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9390089&postcount=114

In regards to the US economy, the pigeons indeed have come home to roost.

In regards to the US economy, the pigeons indeed have come home to roost.

R U saying that it is all going to be Kittens and Butterflies up in America Jr.?

Because it isn't. Anway, it's only partly the US's fault. The rest of the world had rather a massive hand in the global meltdown.

Except every chart I've seen says otherwise (that and you have to note that social security is not actually funded by Income tax. I think it's covered by payroll tax, andit makes money, but is continually borrowed from, hence the risk of insolvency)

The actual bdget looks more like:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/ef/Fy2008spendingbycategory.png/450px-Fy2008spendingbycategory.png

The few other charts I've found agree with this one 100%

Your spending on education and energy are crushingly low.

Your spending on education and energy are crushingly low.

And yet still far too high.

You sure have changed your tune since we first locked horns regarding Bush's spending policies?

http://forums3.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9390089&postcount=114

In regards to the US economy, the pigeons indeed have come home to roost.

Well, it has been three long years since then.

Things have changed a lot since 2005, when the economy appeared to be in a solid uptrend, the housing bubble was strong and commodity prices were still not yet in their bubble phase (not to mention the dollar was far stronger as well). Back then, we were still thinking it was possible to recoup the costs of the Iraq war and that the economy would continue on its rebound for the next several years in line with previous expansions, helping to balance the budget (and it did come pretty close right before housing fell through the floor) and push things back in to the black.

Instead, the economy peaked in January of 2007, inflation exploded and both have basically deteriorated steadily and rapidly since then. Had commodities prices not risen, or had the economy not gone in to a tailspin over the past two years, we might not be in this bad of a situation...all big ifs that are now pretty irrelevant. The only good thing right now is that commodities have fallen again, removing pressure on the inflationary side for the time being; I think that might end up doing more to boost the economy than all the monetary stimulus on Earth.

I think it just goes to show that even a relatively short period of time can produce massive economic changes.

You could not increase taxes enough to pay for:

1. The current bailout.
2. The current deficit.
3. The regular spending (a lot of which is Medicare, etc - defense is not the biggest piece of the pie).


The trillion in programs Obama plans on adding has no valid non-deficit source of funding.

I assume he'll just print money.

Well, he may not be able to afford to do it, but that's how he or McCain or any other leader would go about funding their policies.

He could get a second job, maybe a paper-round or something like that.

Not everything will be affordable, and some of it will doubtless fail in congress. No President keeps every promise succesfully.

However, Obama plans to pay for it by getting rid of Bush's tax cuts for the rich and pulling most of the troops out of Iraq. Even with the extra 15000 he said would go to Afghanistan, that's some money saved their surely?

That would be important--but would hardly cover the costs.

Please explain McCain's proposed tax cuts in this same context. Both want to give us something for nothing. Neither has a way to pay for it.

If you're going to slap one candidate over unfunded programs, back it up with how the other guy is different. Otherwise I'll just assume you're bloviating again.

Other guy? There are more than two candidates, I just wish voters, newspapers, and television would wake-up and see that.

Other guy? There are more than two candidates, I just wish voters, newspapers, and television would wake-up and see that.
There are two viable candidates due to the electoral system.

There are two viable candidates due to the electoral system.

Even that *%#$ing system would not interfere if magazines had better covers. *sigh* At least Obama will be "decent".

Even that *%#$ing system would not interfere if magazines had better covers. *sigh* At least Obama will be "decent".
when a 3rd party runs a charismatic sane candidate s/he will get plenty of magazine covers. until then, there is no sense to waste the cover on someone no one cares about.

when a 3rd party runs a charismatic sane candidate

Like the Republicans?

Like the Republicans?

Lincoln was a charismatic sane candidate.


When a 3rd party runs a candidate who isnt an idiot, people will pay attention to them.

Nadar gets a lot of attanetion. Problem is, people dont like his policies and dont like him.

Windfall tax on oil companies

Bad Idea, Corporations here are already taxed at a 21% marginal rate, one of the highest in the world.


I assume he'll just print money.

Just like all the presidents would do before him.


i dont suppose that he will be able to do everything he wants to do given our dire financial situation.

but its enough for me that he is THINKING about the middle class and wants to do right by us. thats a refreshing change from the policies of george bush and promises of john mccain.

Obama couldn't afford doing almost anything that he wants to do in this situation, he wants to tax only a certain ammount of people heavly that are already jumping ship by moving overseas or moving into retirement (that pay 40% of the nations taxes). He wants to tax corporations that are moving overseas due to the high coporate tax rate (2nd highest in the world). AND he wants to give out checks to the poor by adding a trillion dollars in spending to medicare, social security, and government housing. All the while cutting taxes for the middle class? His figures don't add up.

mccain seems terribly unspecific in how he is going to balance our (unbalanceable) budget in his first term.

i find his assertions that he is going to do all sorts of things unconvincing without the details on how its going to get done.

Now this I agree with, McCain has not been very specific on these issues, and I would like for him to talk more about his spending policy other than earmarks and freezing spending....

That's the problem with Americans. They want everything now. "We want to be out of Iraq now, we want money now, we want lower taxes now, we want houses now." Why don't they realise that things take time?

Because were fast moving people (unlike our French counterparts...:p)


America has bankrupted itself for Iraq and with it's loans to every other nation. So it's time to slowly bow out of it.

This is true, the war in Iraq could have been spent on repaying old debts that we still owe to other nations from almost a century's past.

Tax increases. Next question? :p

Tax increases. Next question? :p

Basicly what I was saying....darn you and your less complicated answer....;)

Not everything will be affordable, and some of it will doubtless fail in congress. No President keeps every promise succesfully.

However, Obama plans to pay for it by getting rid of Bush's tax cuts for the rich and pulling most of the troops out of Iraq. Even with the extra 15000 he said would go to Afghanistan, that's some money saved their surely?

After raising the white flag of surrender, he will raise the taxes on everyone paying taxes to unbearable levels to pay for his crap. Otherwise he would be unable to redistribute wealth to those not paying taxes. More money will be spent on the war on terror under his administration, mainly because the batlles will probably be on our own soil now because he is a limp dick.

More money will be spent on the war on terror under his administration, mainly because the batlles will probably be on our own soil now because he is a limp dick....What?

After raising the white flag of surrender, he will raise the taxes on everyone paying taxes to unbearable levels to pay for his crap. Otherwise he would be unable to redistribute wealth to those not paying taxes. More money will be spent on the war on terror under his administration, mainly because the batlles will probably be on our own soil now because he is a limp dick.

Ah, the penis method of political analysis.

As an outsider (being European) I'm quite happy seeing Obama promising lots of changes which, if put into action succesfully, will make the USA a much more pleasent place to work and live. However, I also heard that the USA is going through a tough time, money-wise. Their national debt has become so big it didn't fit on that one counterboard anymore. As far as I know there just ISNT any money to make any of the chances Obama promises!

Don't get me wrong, I agree more with McCain on the moral issues but I do think Obama is the man you'll need to get the country back on track. But how the hell will he pay for all the policies he promises? I watched the 30 minute ad, and it's all about spending money. It's like he'll be throwing bags of money around like he's Santa Claus.

And I'm kind of afraid that, once Obama will be elected, people will be majorly dissapointed with his presidency, simply because he won't be able to make true 90% of all his promises... Obama could be the dissapointment of the century :(

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain...

Yeah we have to now worry about who put the turtle on the pole.

This just in. Obama sold his soul to the devil(Cheney) for unlimited non deficit funding for his programs. Be sure to thank Obama for the cash he paid such a price for.

This just in. Obama sold his soul to the devil(Cheney) for unlimited non deficit funding for his programs. Be sure to thank Obama for the cash he paid such a price for.

Yes but upon clarification it was only laundered by cheney from unknown sources in china and the clinton campaign.

Yes but upon clarification it was only laundered by cheney from unknown sources in china and the clinton campaign.

Needless to say Cheney is now in control of the government again.

Yeah we have to now worry about who put the turtle on the pole.Not anymore. In a few weeks, we finally get to take that poor turtle down.

He'll use stolen nazi and spainish gold

Not anymore. In a few weeks, we finally get to take that poor turtle down.

Well I would never advocate that kind of action against a president elect.

After numerous rounds of 'We don't even know

if Osama is still alive,' Barrack Obama has now been

telling everyone he will capture Osama Bin Laden now

that he has been elected.

Osama Bin Laden sent Barrack Obama a letter in his own handwriting to let him know he was still

in the game.

Obama opened the letter and it contained a single line of

coded message:



370H-SSV-0773H



Obama was baffled, so he e-mailed it to Chairman Howard Dean. Dean and the DNC experts had no clue either, so they sent it to Joe Biden.

Joe Biden utilized all his savvy and renowned insight but could not unravel the code so it was sent to the FBI and the CIA.

Eventually after both agencies were unable to decipher the message, they asked John McCain and his staff to look

at it.

And within minutes McCain's staff e-mailed Obama's

staff with this reply: "Tell Obama he's holding the

message upside down."

Q: How will Obama pay for his policies?

A: Bake sale. :)

He's staying in Iraq!

In and of itself, that makes him a moron and a criminal.

But I deny him being a Christian

Even if that mattered, which it doesn't, not one iota, who are YOU to deny him being a Christian? Are you a god? Do you know the inner workings of reality? Have you ever seen other planes of existance, altered reality as you saw fit, or met those who control destiny?

No? Then you are not a god. You are not one to say who is or is not a Christian.

Do you know why I don't deny YOU being a Christian? Because I'm not a god either. But I at least have the sense to realize it.

After raising the white flag of surrender, he will raise the taxes on everyone paying taxes to unbearable levels to pay for his crap. Otherwise he would be unable to redistribute wealth to those not paying taxes. More money will be spent on the war on terror under his administration, mainly because the batlles will probably be on our own soil now because he is a limp dick.

Hello.

I see you are trying to convince me that you don't know what you're talking about.

Good job.

After raising the white flag of surrender, he will raise the taxes on everyone paying taxes to unbearable levels to pay for his crap. Otherwise he would be unable to redistribute wealth to those not paying taxes. More money will be spent on the war on terror under his administration, mainly because the batlles will probably be on our own soil now because he is a limp dick.

I see. Will this be before, or after, he magically transforms into a Muslim x-tremist, blackity-blackity-black supremacist who hates whitey and opens concentration camps for Republicans?

I see. Will this be before, or after, he magically transforms into a Muslim x-tremist, blackity-blackity-black supremacist who hates whitey and opens concentration camps for Republicans?

You forgot the part where he puts Wright in charge of Education. :p

You forgot the part where he puts Wright in charge of Education. :p

No, see, Wright is going to be made High Pope of Allah in the National Synagogue of That Brown Dude Who Talked With God, because William Ayers will reveal that he's actually Malcom X in disguise and take over the education system to teach us all how to predict the weather and blow things up.

Well I would never advocate that kind of action against a president elect.
We didn't elect W.

We didn't elect W.

Well we do not actually elect a president in the USA because of the electoral college. Bush did receive more electoral votes than Gore so he was legally elected.

I realize this will escape your ability to comprehend but it is a fact.

Hello.

I see you are trying to convince me that you don't know what you're talking about.

Good job.

LOL You are pretty funny. So politics is not something you understand?

I see. Will this be before, or after, he magically transforms into a Muslim x-tremist, blackity-blackity-black supremacist who hates whitey and opens concentration camps for Republicans?

Wow. I am just amazed. You really are very delusional.

Concentration camps for republicans or democrats are just a bit over the top. Might want to get your parent to post since you are babbling incoherently.

Wow. I am just amazed. You really are very delusional.

Indeed, one might say that about anyone holding such beliefs. OF course, one might also include those who believe that Obama is a closet socialist who will magically lose the war on a few poorly organized guys hiding in the mountains of Pakistan.

Concentration camps for republicans or democrats are just a bit over the top. Might want to get your parent to post since you are babbling incoherently.

Parody. Look it up sweety. It's kinda like Parity, but not.

Bush did receive more electoral votes than Gore so he was legally elected.
He "received" them, but he was not legally entitled to them.

He "received" them, but he was not legally entitled to them.

Though you could make a argument that since the popular vote went to Gore, the American people didn't elect him.

I would also say that the Floridian people did not elect the electors awarded to Bush.

He lied, flat out. He won't even DO anything he's said he will. That's how it works over here in the good 'ol Fascist States of America. And then the idiots fall for it in another 4 years. Ralph Nader or Bob Barr, Gloria La Riva, or anyone else besides the totalitarian fringe candidate that ran would be better and would actually try to do things they'd proposed, than Chocolate Vanilla Twist or Diaper Baldy.

He "received" them, but he was not legally entitled to them.

The electors vote how they want, its in the Constitution, and is, sadly, a horrible loophole. Although, I have to say even after 8 years of this, I prefer both Bush's to Clinton and Gore, and if Bush jr. hadn't been elected, the 2nd ammendmant would be history by now.

The electors vote how they want

The "electors" who voted in the name of Florida were not entitled to be voting at all.
if Bush jr. hadn't been elected, the 2nd ammendmant would be history by now.
Rubbish. Not that I would care if that were true, but it isn't true in any case.

Hello redistribution of wealth and socialism, goodby wealth prosperity and freedom

Stupidity

Epic fail. You quite clearly don't understand what socialism is, you silly fool, and also, please explain how freedom will be taken.

Hello redistribution of wealth and socialism, goodby wealth prosperity and freedom

Back it up, or GTFO and spew your right wing talking points elsewhere.

Back it up, or GTFO and spew your right wing talking points elsewhere. Agreed. I would love for some of these "Obama is a socialist" people to back it up with a few...well, you know, those things. What are they called? Oh, yeah. Facts.

Doubling up? :p
Just teasing, anyways. I would love for some of these "Obama is a socialist" people to back it up with a few...well, you know, those things. What are they called? Oh, yeah. Facts.

Oops, I just failed. But don't be unreasonable, it's hard to expect these silly right wingers to back up their claims with facts when there are no facts to support them.

The national debt is something like 60% of the GDP according to the official numbers but is probably more. Social Security is being drained faster than it can be filled. Medicare/Medicaid are essentially unfunded mandates. Our economy is going into a major depression.

Now, on top of that, Obama wants to increase government spending even more. The only way he can do that is by increasing the debt, inflating the currency even more, and taxing the middle class. "The Rich" are the boogeyman of the Democrats - but did you notice that Wall Street overwhelmingly backed Obama? He isn't going to repay THEM with more taxes. The greatest wealth in the US is in the hands of the average middle-class working americans. Guess who will be asked to pay. If you have more than one car and live in a house, you are probably "the rich".

The greatest wealth in the US is in the hands of the average middle-class working americans. ...Do I even need to make a comment, other than to highlight this particular sentence?

The national debt is something like 60% of the GDP according to the official numbers but is probably more. Social Security is being drained faster than it can be filled. Medicare/Medicaid are essentially unfunded mandates. Our economy is going into a major depression.

Now, on top of that, Obama wants to increase government spending even more. The only way he can do that is by increasing the debt, inflating the currency even more, and taxing the middle class. "The Rich" are the boogeyman of the Democrats - but did you notice that Wall Street overwhelmingly backed Obama? He isn't going to repay THEM with more taxes. The greatest wealth in the US is in the hands of the average middle-class working americans. Guess who will be asked to pay. If you have more than one car and live in a house, you are probably "the rich".

Back it up, or GTFO. Sources, not randomly spewed talking points. (We'll just ignore McCain was adding almost 2 trillion more to the debt than Obama as well)

Back it up, or GTFO. Sources, not randomly spewed talking points. (We'll just ignore McCain was adding almost 2 trillion more to the debt than Obama as well)

very well, I shall provide sources in response to your most polite request for information.

Budget:
revenues: $2.568 trillion
expenditures: $2.73 trillion (2007 est.)

Public debt:
60.8% of GDP (2007 est.)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html

And for more information, I direct your attention to http://perotcharts.com (http://perotcharts.com/home/)

In essence, there is no way either cadidate can sustain the current system. We are reaping the rewards of nearly a century of mismanagement and fraud. I do not back either party - I'm a Ron Paul Republican or a Dennis Kucinich Democrat, and not in the mainstream of either party. IMHO, This cannot be fixed under the current system no matter how much is tweaked or adjusted. REAL change requires a radical reduction in spending, a complete change in every idea of what government is to do, and a reassignment of government responsibilities toward more state/local/individual power and less federal control.

very well, I shall provide sources in response to your most polite request for information. That does nothing to prove this.

Originally Posted by Lord Tothe
The greatest wealth in the US is in the hands of the average middle-class working americans.
I'd rather like to see you produce a study/chart that shows that the middle class has a higher percentage of wealth distribution than the rich do. :p

he could end the war in iraq...
But he wants to up the war in Afghanistan and at least said he'd be open to going to into Pakistan to 'hunt the terrorist' he thinks are being sheltered there. Obama is not by any fucking definition anti-war, he'll just shift the focus from one to another.

LOL You are pretty funny.

Why, thank you. So are you.

So politics is not something you understand?

Oh, I understand it perfectly. You don't.

Hello redistribution of wealth and socialism, goodby wealth prosperity and freedom

Hello, troll, goodbye your ability to write correctly.

But he wants to up the war in Afghanistan and at least said he'd be open to going to into Pakistan to 'hunt the terrorist' he thinks are being sheltered there. Obama is not by any fucking definition anti-war, he'll just shift the focus from one to another.
On this one, I tend to agree with you and it is the one thing that scares the heck of me when it comes to Obama's foreign policy.

Hello, troll, goodbye your ability to write correctly.

How is that trolling? Obama is on video saying he wants to "spread the wealth".

Obama is on video saying he wants to "spread the wealth".
And making it clear what that means. Do you think this country would be better if everyone was impoverished except for a small superwealthy class? Or if everyone was reasonably well-off? There are ways to move toward the latter outcome other than the grand-theft-and-giveaway fantasy that you have in your head.

And making it clear what that means. Do you think this country would be better if everyone was impoverished except for a small superwealthy class? Or if everyone was reasonably well-off? There are ways to move toward the latter outcome other than the grand-theft-and-giveaway fantasy that you have in your head.

Pfft. Go back to Russia, Commie!

And making it clear what that means. Do you think this country would be better if everyone was impoverished except for a small superwealthy class? Or if everyone was reasonably well-off? There are ways to move toward the latter outcome other than the grand-theft-and-giveaway fantasy that you have in your head.

Most of us are reasonably well-off. And the line for "superwealthy" kept descending - initially at 250,000/year, and randomly walking down to 42,000/year.

You do realize that for a family of 4, that's not far above the poverty line. So it's easy to see that at that definition of superwealthy, the idea indeed is to impoverish everyone.