Media "Control" of the Elections?

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

ravingdave
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:41 am

Post by ravingdave »

jgarry wrote:Democrats are hardly perfect people. Blago, Burris the list goes on.
However, today's GOP is scum pure and simple.

Well, Arlen Spector, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins are in the scum catagory in my opinion, but beyond that i'm at a loss as to who you could be talking about. I think my Senator Tom Coburn is a man after my own heart. He's the only up there with the guts to fight the idiotic earmarks and the spending of money by those people who did not earn it.

But seriously, what scandals or corruption are you pointing out in the Republicans that isn't 4 or 5 times worse in the Democrat party ?

What criterior are you using to call them scum ?

David

jgarry
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:02 pm

Post by jgarry »

The GOPs stewardship of our economy would be morally equivalent to repealing the DUI laws.

ravingdave
Posts: 650
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:41 am

Post by ravingdave »

jgarry wrote:The GOPs stewardship of our economy would be morally equivalent to repealing the DUI laws.
The GOP stewardship of our government spending has been horrible. George Bush started the out of control spending, and Republicans stuck their snouts in the trough. If that's what you are talking about, I agree.

Arnold Schwarzenegger has been an abomination on taxing, spending, and growing the beuaracracy in California.

Republicans deserved to get kicked out of power during the last two elections, but the country didn't deserve what they were replaced with.
(Nancy Pelosi and crew)

When you find yourself up to your eyeballs in debt, the dumbest thing you can do is to get new credit cards and max them out as well.


David

IntLibber
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 3:28 pm

Post by IntLibber »

Well the cure to pay your current debts is evidently to mortgage your kids futures to pay off some of the present obligations. Thats the cricitism of course.

Then look at who is really buying up these debts: the people we owe the money to in the first place: China, Saudi Arabia, et al. A good default, or, say a few years of inflation, will reduce those obligations significantly.

Obama is going to use the stimulus to trigger some double digit inflation later this year. A good few years of inflation will of course erode the value of our debts significantly (essentially how we came out of WWII with the lowest personal and public debt levels in a long time). 2+ years of 15% inflation will reduce the value of the national debt ~30% (personal debts as well). Will also erode the value of union wage requirements (provided no significant COLAs).

seedload
Posts: 1062
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:16 pm

Post by seedload »

IntLibber wrote:Well the cure to pay your current debts is evidently to mortgage your kids futures to pay off some of the present obligations. Thats the cricitism of course.

Then look at who is really buying up these debts: the people we owe the money to in the first place: China, Saudi Arabia, et al. A good default, or, say a few years of inflation, will reduce those obligations significantly.

Obama is going to use the stimulus to trigger some double digit inflation later this year. A good few years of inflation will of course erode the value of our debts significantly (essentially how we came out of WWII with the lowest personal and public debt levels in a long time). 2+ years of 15% inflation will reduce the value of the national debt ~30% (personal debts as well). Will also erode the value of union wage requirements (provided no significant COLAs).
... and the prospect of this is going to make it a lot more expensive to borrow the money we are going to borrow for this stimulus.

hanelyp
Posts: 2261
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Post by hanelyp »

seedload wrote:... and the prospect of this is going to make it a lot more expensive to borrow the money we are going to borrow for this stimulus.
Borrow? If the objective is inflation the government can just print the money.

Not good for those of us who have managed to save some money.

jgarry
Posts: 109
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:02 pm

Post by jgarry »

Our main problem is to avoid a deflation trap.
However if one were to occur, those of us who have saved would be in a position to buy things such as real estate cheap.
But deflation traps can take years and years to end.
Hopefully Obama and his people can negotiate the rather tricky path ahead.

seedload
Posts: 1062
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:16 pm

Post by seedload »

jgarry wrote:Hopefully Obama and his people can negotiate the rather tricky path ahead.
Well he has just given himself the power to do it however he wants. Part of the stimulus bill is the institution of a panel (which he appoints the chair of) that has the power to tell any and all Inspector Generals to NOT investigate any aspect of the spending in the stimulus that the panel decides should not be looked at. This was inserted by request of the White House.

I ask... why would anyone want the power to tell Inspector Generals (who are supposed to investigate independently) to stop an investigation? Specifically requesting that this be added to the bill. For what reason? It makes no sence.

This is all just one big power grab based on overstating some problems, creating a crisis where there isn't one, and then using the opportunity to expand the hand of government in ways that will dramatically change this great country of ours. This is not change that we need.

regards

Billy Catringer
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 2:32 pm
Location: Texas

Post by Billy Catringer »


IntLibber
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 3:28 pm

Post by IntLibber »

hanelyp wrote:
seedload wrote:... and the prospect of this is going to make it a lot more expensive to borrow the money we are going to borrow for this stimulus.
Borrow? If the objective is inflation the government can just print the money.

Not good for those of us who have managed to save some money.
Buy gold, silver, platinum, and palladium. The value of these will only go up in a serious inflationary environment.

If I could cash out of my online business right now, it would all be going into those metals.

IntLibber
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 3:28 pm

Post by IntLibber »

jgarry wrote:Our main problem is to avoid a deflation trap.
However if one were to occur, those of us who have saved would be in a position to buy things such as real estate cheap.
But deflation traps can take years and years to end.
Hopefully Obama and his people can negotiate the rather tricky path ahead.
Were already in serious deflation. Oil has deflated 75%. gasoline by 50%, food, clothing, appliances, everything is on fire sale prices right now. Nobody has disposable income.

Primary reason: this past year the sovereign wealth funds that were buying our public and private debts stopped and started manipulating energy and other futures prices in order to shock the country into voting for Obama and punish us for the Iraq War by stripping everyones disposable income with insanely and artifically high oil/gasoline prices. They made a killing, and killed our economy.

FTC is stonewalling on the investigation of these funds, which used strawman traders at four brokerages to hide their activities.

tomclarke
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 4:52 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Post by tomclarke »

It is a free market. If a country relies on other countries to buy its debt there should be no complaint when they decide (for whatever reasons - economic, political, etc) to stop.

Nothing needs to be investigated here except the willingness of US consumers and politicians to risk high personal & institutional debt.

The current crisis was precipitated by individuals having innappropriate high debts (mortgages). Easy to blame the sellers - but in an imperfectly regulated free market it is caveat emptor. And I doubt anyone things perfect regulation is possible, or desirable!

Islam - as the most recent of the three interlinked "book" religions - has still an enlightened, rather old-fashioned, view of debt. That it is morally corrupting to both lender and debtor. But I don't see many people taking notice of this.

Best wishes, Tom

IntLibber
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 3:28 pm

Post by IntLibber »

tomclarke wrote:It is a free market. If a country relies on other countries to buy its debt there should be no complaint when they decide (for whatever reasons - economic, political, etc) to stop.

Nothing needs to be investigated here except the willingness of US consumers and politicians to risk high personal & institutional debt.

The current crisis was precipitated by individuals having innappropriate high debts (mortgages). Easy to blame the sellers - but in an imperfectly regulated free market it is caveat emptor. And I doubt anyone things perfect regulation is possible, or desirable!

Islam - as the most recent of the three interlinked "book" religions - has still an enlightened, rather old-fashioned, view of debt. That it is morally corrupting to both lender and debtor. But I don't see many people taking notice of this.

Best wishes, Tom
LOL, amazing to see a liberal decry debt. And yes, the current crisis was precipitated by Democrats passing a law that required banks to lend inappropriately high amounts of money to people based on things like race and zip code rather than things like credit score and whether the borrower had a job and sufficient income.

Of the last three recessions, I've been able to track the cause back to some law written by Democrats that attempted to violate basic and sensible rules of economics.

1989-91: Caused by Democrats forcing Bush to appoint a banking regulator who pushed up S&L then bank reserve ratios so high that they forced banks into insolvency and mass recall of loans that forced mass bankruptcies of many real estate projects and homeowners.

2001: Caused by a Democrat negotiated amendment to the Telecom Reform Act of 1996 that sabotaged the act's intent to help telecoms fulfill the 'last mile' of fiber optic to everyones homes. The amendment said that any telecom that ran fiber to a home had to provide access to that customer to their competitors for less than their cost. The telecoms said no way and refused to invest in fiber for over a decade thereafter. This failure to complete the last mile made the investment of tens of billions of dollars in fiber backbone by Enron, Worldcom, and Global Crossing useless, and that backbone fiber remained dormant for a decade, and forced those three companies into bankruptcy. Enron's failure was compounded by California defaulting on their energy debts to Enron and Enron's attempt to hide its losses via accounting schemes that were normally used to hide profits from the IRS. The collapse of the last mile also forced thousands of startup dot coms that were relying on that high bandwidth to consumers homes for their own business models to work.

Today: Community Reinvestment Act forced banks to lend irrespective of credit score, and attempts by republicans like John Sununu to end these bad practices were blocked by democrats in 2005-2006. These practices forced other banks to adopt similarly loose policies in order to compete (see WaMu for example). These bad mortgages poisoned the mortgage securities put out on the capital markets, and the associated credit default swaps underwritten by AIG and other major underwriters (of course AIG losing its AAA rating also negatively impacted their ability to back their CDOs).

tomclarke
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 4:52 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Post by tomclarke »

Intlibber -

What makes you think I am a liberal? And do you mean social liberal or economic liberal?

When playing Monopoly with my sister as a child I used to be winning, and lend her increasing amounts of money to perpetuate the winning situation. She realised that was a mugs game when she reached 7 years old.

Disliking debt perhaps means I have Marxist sympathies - since it is linked to exploitation of the workers, or is it just old fashioned?

Best wishes, Tom

MSimon
Posts: 14335
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Under capitalism man exploits man. Under Marxism it is the opposite.

So the question then is: where are the exploited doing better?
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

Post Reply