If your considering copy and pasting your latest drive by spam here because you cant find any other place.
DONT!
Oprano has a ZERO tolerance policy for spam. Yours WILL be deleted. If you are looking for more exposure for your product please contact advertising@oprano.com for more information.
Legacy Archived Main BoardBusiness chat and general industry chat. All participation is welcome. Dont post your fucking spam here.
Originally posted by TheEnforcer@Feb 27 2004, 03:30 PM BTW- I am not a Kerry fan by any stretch of the imagination. My hope is that Edwards wins enougn primaries that kerry will be unable to get enough delegates to outright claim the nomination and they end up having a battle at the convention. I hope he could just outright overtake him but that is not likely to happen. Should Kerry gain the nomination I will vote third party or for Edwards as a write-in candidate.
It's a real dog of an election year. Most people agree with that.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
I've voted Democrat for President one time - Clinton's first term.
I was in a very liberal college and doing work on the side counseling drug/alcohol/abuse addicts.
I summarily watched Clinton destroy our defense, lay thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of people off work in the defense industry, and saw my Dad get laid off from his job for simply LOOKING around to see if there was anything better. (Lockheed Martin doesn't like hearing rumors that you're thinking about leaving.)
Thanks to Clinton's cuts, Dad got laid off 3 times in a year and a half and had to move to another state in between.
Now he, Mom, and Hubby are all working for the same defense contractor who just laid off 40 people two weeks ago and the work just isn't there... they're struggling to keep enough work to keep the people that they have.
Vote for Kerry?
Fuck no.
At this time about the *only* thing I can be sure of with Bush is that he won't cut defense even more... everything else he's turned into such an overspending socialist on I can't even believe he's Republican.
I don't know what the hell I'm going to do come November. There truly is no one for *me* to vote for.
__________________
Need a kick-ass design done quickly?
I recommend Sex Creator - they absolutely ROCK.
In six of the 8 years that Bill Clinton was President, the Republicans were in control of both houses of Congress - and they are the ones who approved the budget that included the defense cuts.
Remember the "peace dividend"?
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
The worst part about the whole system is that the current government can spend like drunken sailors AND lower taxes, for a while. Usually about 4 or 5 years. The problem is that the bill comes due sooner or later, and everyone ends up paying.
Deficit spending is deficit spending. If they don't take you now, they will have to tax you PLUS interest later to pay for it all. It is sort of like not having deductions on a paycheck all year - at the end of the year, you end up paying an assload of tax. You felt good all year with that extra cash in your pocket (that you probably spent) but in the end, you have to tighten your belt to the max to pay your taxes.
With the 4 / 8 year presidential cycle, it is easy to set budget problems to blow up after you are gone. Both sides do it.
Buff, "tax and spend liberal" is as approproate a term as "Bush is a ficsal conservative". Don't let preconceived notions block your ability to see the actual numbers for the last 10 years. You would see a trend that would surprise you. Would you like to be taxed $1 now, or $1.10 next week?
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 27 2004, 05:13 PM Don't let preconceived notions block your ability to see the actual numbers for the last 10 years. You would see a trend that would surprise you.
10 years?
US DEBT
09/30/1994 $4.692 T
12/31/2003 $7.001 T
GDP
3rd Q 1994. 7.115 T
4th Q 2003. 11.252 T
DEBT/GDP
1994 65.9%
2003 62.3%
Lower. Surprised? Most people are. They discount how fast the US economy is growing. $11 trillion boggles the mind.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Originally posted by PornoDoggy@Feb 27 2004, 04:51 PM In six of the 8 years that Bill Clinton was President, the Republicans were in control of both houses of Congress - and they are the ones who approved the budget that included the defense cuts.
Remember the "peace dividend"?
I realize that, but I also realize that Clinton was a vetoing and executive ordering madman - so basically nothing got passed unless it fit *his* agenda and would have to get reworked and reworked until it did.
Bush is the other extreme - put it on his desk and he'll sign it. I think if a bill included the terms that his daughters would become Congressional whores to be passed around each week to a new Senator/Representative, he'd still sign it. We can't dare look like we're not working with both sides here.
Sigh. Where's the person in the middle? Someone who will work with both sides but won't run over Congress with his personal vision nor bend over and take it up the ass just to look conciliatory?
__________________
Need a kick-ass design done quickly?
I recommend Sex Creator - they absolutely ROCK.
contrary to certain individual's deluded self-image - no one individually, or collectively here will change shit.
porn peddlers have such a great influence over the people at large...if that's the case larry flynt would actually be governer...sucks to realize yer vote means nothing more than a welfare mom.
" contrary to certain individual's deluded self-image - no one individually, or collectively here will change shit."
You must not have paid much attention during the last Presidential election.
"sucks to realize yer vote means nothing more than a welfare mom."
A welfare mom's vote, you mean.
And it shouldn't - each vote counts the same.
Larry Flynt for President? HAHAHAHA
Only in the dreams of uneducated misled GFYers... thank god.
__________________
Need a kick-ass design done quickly?
I recommend Sex Creator - they absolutely ROCK.
Originally posted by Carrie@Feb 27 2004, 03:45 PM " contrary to certain individual's deluded self-image - no one individually, or collectively here will change shit."
You must not have paid much attention during the last Presidential election.
"sucks to realize yer vote means nothing more than a welfare mom."
A welfare mom's vote, you mean.
And it shouldn't - each vote counts the same.
Larry Flynt for President? HAHAHAHA
Only in the dreams of uneducated misled GFYers... thank god.
my spelling sucks - sue me - I don't rely on message boards to the point I'll take the time needed to check for spelling or grammatical errors - that's just idiotic - anyone that anal is just fucked & probably part of the reason bill gates created spell check...once I got out of the high school teacher slavery mentality - I realized...spelling means shit - it's presenting a position that counts...
End 1999 Debt: 5.656T
End 2003 debt: 7.001T (your number)
End 1999 GDP: 9.268T
End 2003 GDP: 11.252T
Increase in debt: 1.345T
increase in GDP: 1.984T
Ratio of debt increase to GDP increase (1999-2003):
67.7%
Go the other way:
1994 debt: 4.692T
1999 debt: 5.656T
199 GDP: 7.115T
End 1999 GDP: 9.268T
Increase in debt: .964T
Increase in GDP: 2.153T
Ratio of debt increase to GDP increase (1994 to 1999): 44.7%
The numbers speak clearly for themselves. that is where the "look over the last 10 years" tells a whole story.
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 28 2004, 03:02 AM The numbers speak clearly for themselves. that is where the "look over the last 10 years" tells a whole story.
The only thing that is clear is that four years is not ten years. ;-)
Yes, in the last 10 years debt as a percentage of GDP decreased and then increased and ended lower than where it started. What you're really saying though is "look over the last 4 years" which is not much of a trend at all. If you want to look at four years, it is up. If you want to look at ten years, it is down a little.
I guess you could say look over the last 20 years and then you would see a clear trend up. Or you could say, compare to 1946 and then you would see it is now much lower.
You could also compare to the other large economies of the world (say the G7 countries) and you would find that the US debt/GDP ratio is pretty much the same as that of France and Germany and much less than that of Italy or Japan. The US debt ratio is not remarkable in any way compared to the G7 average. In fact it is completely average. What is remarkable in comparison is not the US debt but the size of the US economy.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Colin, that isn't the point. Look at 10 years. 6 years of only 44% ratio, and the last 4 years of 67% ratio. It doesn't matter if the GDP is growing if the debt is growing almost as fast. That is something that in the long run can cripple an economy (see Italy, Japan). It is even more significant that this is happening during economic growth... the GDP growth for those two time frames are similar, but the debt increases are VERY different.
If 4 years is a short time to judge things, then 2 quarters ain't nothing important!
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 28 2004, 12:56 PM Colin, that isn't the point. Look at 10 years. 6 years of only 44% ratio, and the last 4 years of 67% ratio. It doesn't matter if the GDP is growing if the debt is growing almost as fast. That is something that in the long run can cripple an economy (see Italy, Japan). It is even more significant that this is happening during economic growth... the GDP growth for those two time frames are similar, but the debt increases are VERY different.
If 4 years is a short time to judge things, then 2 quarters ain't nothing important!
Alex
There's no evidence whatsoever that a constant debt/GDP ratio of around 60% is harmful to an economy. You have it backwards anyway. There has been solid economic growth partly because of deficit spending not in spite of it. Look at the history of the US economy in the 20th century (it's the one I am mostly familiar with) and there are plenty of examples. The strongest growth the US experienced this century occured during World War II. The US economy grew a whopping 22% in one year in 1943 at the same time as a massive surge in US debt nearly doubling the total debt in one year. Debt up 88%. in one year! Economy roars to life. Surprising? No, Expected. Meanwhile, attempts to balance the budget during slow times have done nothing but harm the economy. Look at the balanced budget attempts throughout the depression. They were obsessed with balancing the budget. What happened? Spend less money, GDP shrinks. You attempt to balance the budget and spend less so less money went into the economy and this shrinks the economy further. Repeat that a few times and you have 1929-1932. Start deficit spending and BOOM! Immediate economic recovery.
What do we have to show for our recent deficit spending? Well, the economy has taken off. GDP is up more in the last six months than any other period during the last 20 years. The US cut taxes and spent lots of money and now it's economy roars to life. Amazing, huh? No, Simple.
Whether you want to look at 10 years, 20 years, 30 years or 40 years what you will see if that the US economy has grown at a very strong clip. There's not even a record to compare it to. The US economy is 10x larger than the 5th largest economy. No one has found a better way.
Last edited by Colin at Feb 28 2004, 03:55 PM
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Colin, the discussion isn't about what causes a recession, there are many things not related to deficit reduction that cause recessions, you know it, I know it. Not the issue.
The question is simple:
With a democrat in the whitehouse, the economy expanded more than twice as fast as the debt.
With a republican in the whitehouse, that number has changed dramatically, even during an almost exact dollar for dollar increase in the GDP. The GDP is only growing 1/3 faster than the debt.
Just one of those things. I won't keep going back and forth, I just see it as a little weird, thats all.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by RawAlex@Feb 28 2004, 05:52 PM Colin, the discussion isn't about what causes a recession, there are many things not related to deficit reduction that cause recessions, you know it, I know it. Not the issue.
The question is simple:
With a democrat in the whitehouse, the economy expanded more than twice as fast as the debt.
With a republican in the whitehouse, that number has changed dramatically, even during an almost exact dollar for dollar increase in the GDP. The GDP is only growing 1/3 faster than the debt.
Just one of those things. I won't keep going back and forth, I just see it as a little weird, thats all.
Alex
I dont think either President can accept much blame or credit for the overall growth.
A chimp could've been in office during the Clinton years, and he would've enjoyed the same explosive growth of the economy due primarily to technology. The most intelligent move Clinton made during that time was the move he didn't make. He made the decision to NOT do anything to inhibit growth of the internet including NOT taxing ecommerce to the chagrin of most of the rest of the democratic party.
The dot bomb exploded in March of 2000, that was still on Bill's watch. By the time George W. inherited it in January 2001, the economy was already a mess. And again, I dont care who was in office on 9/11/2001, the economy was dealt a knockout blow.
But if you're going to give President's credit...or blame....it's worth pointing out that the current economic upturn started at the same time George W. cut taxes...
I don't think it was all his fault, but that economy under him was one people want to go back to.
I think one of his main faults as far as the economy was sweeping problems under the rug to create a fantasyland where there was no problems in the world and people can sit back and merrily buy overvalued techstocks.
Originally posted by benc@Feb 29 2004, 08:21 AM I don't think it was all his fault, but that economy under him was one people want to go back to.
I think one of his main faults as far as the economy was sweeping problems under the rug to create a fantasyland where there was no problems in the world and people can sit back and merrily buy overvalued techstocks.
the ONLY way to get back to THAT Economy is
NEW TECHNOLOGOCAL/Biological/etc
REVOLUTION,
like railroads were,
automobiles were,
computers were
internet was....
EVERY BOOM in US Economy was acompanied by invention
Collapsed? 8 solid years under Clinton and the worst that happened was a very minor recession after he left office. Increasing the size of the economy by 50% and only having it drop 1% or so in the recession after is phenomenal - not a collapse. He also had the good sense to reduce the deficit as the economy grew. Something which George Bush hasn't planned to do. If we're going to deficit spend during slow times we should have the sense to reduce it during good times. That is the idea anyway. Borrow now to smooth out the down economic periods and pay it back during good times.
And if you're talking about the stock market people were, in Greenspan's words, "Irrationally exuberant". Not Clinton's fault.
__________________ Almighty Content. Your one stop for live content.
Colin, on this we agree, I don't see that the Bush way of doing things has any "recovery" to get the debt back in line in the future, rather a continued increase in the size of government, the number of agencies, department heads, and such... You can only buy a good economy for a while before the problems start again. Please see Japan for more on what happens after a bubble bursts, interest rates drop to nothing, and the government no longer has any leverage with which to work on the economy.
I am starting to wonder if the VERY right wing policies and ideas are not being played to try to get Bush to average back to the middle, considering his fiscal policies (not in theory, but in practice) see to lean to the big government extreme left view of the world.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
Originally posted by Torone@Feb 27 2004, 05:30 AM Why the hell, if this country is so damned bad, do so many people want to get here so badly?
my first guess is so they won't be in a country on some list to be invaded and occupied by the US military?
and as for your statement "bush and us conservatives" you might want to spend a moment reading carrie's post about what bush has accomplished and ask yourself if any of those policies could be considered 'conservative'.
anyone that is truly conservative nowadays is more likely to consider themselves a libertarian or a constitutionalist. the republicans and the democrats are just the far right and the right wings of the big corporation party.
when the government and the corporations were partners in the past the history books called this 'fascism'. since the US media is owned by the big corporations now they use euphemisms like "democracy" or "capitalism" to describe the current state of things, but anyone with the slightest historical knowledge knows the real deal.
02-27-2004
Linear Mode
