I'm not familiar with Tennessee's political machine, have never heard of Clayton.
Care to enlighten me?
Cheers!
Doug
Saving Government Motors.
- Thread starter lonesomebob
- Start date
I'm not familiar with Tennessee's political machine, have never heard of Clayton.
Care to enlighten me?
Cheers!
Doug
Doug we can drown in minutiae if you wish. The point I'm making is that the Democrats will not tolerate anything but the strict party line, as proven by their treatment of Lieberman. He went down the line with pro choice, social programs, etc. But, by supporting our war efforts in Iraq, they cut him off.
Democrats and Our Enemies - WSJ.com
If the link to the article on Clayton isn't enough, I can't help you.
My point is that Republicans are a lot more tolerant of the stances their politicians take. If their constituents don't like what they are seeing, they, eventually, get voted out, but I can't think of any time when the party cut off one of their own because of policy. Maybe you can show me an example;~)
Democrats and Our Enemies - WSJ.com
If the link to the article on Clayton isn't enough, I can't help you.
My point is that Republicans are a lot more tolerant of the stances their politicians take. If their constituents don't like what they are seeing, they, eventually, get voted out, but I can't think of any time when the party cut off one of their own because of policy. Maybe you can show me an example;~)
Guys, a little (recent) historical perspective please...
Recall, when BO came into office there was a very real risk of a full on 1929-style Depression coming on instead of just the severe recession that we ended up experiencing. The incentives given to stimulate consumer spending, and the extensive loans given to many distressed corporations, are exactly the things that staved off a revisit to 1929. That kind of emergency fiscal policy is classic stimulus spending designed to keep the money flow circulating and avoiding the economy falling on its face. It doesn't matter if you're Republican, Democrat, Independent, Alien, blue, green, white or purple, that's what works in the situation.
The good news is that it worked. Pretty well in fact. Today, we're not standing in a bread line, or living in a cave fighting over scraps of meat. At least the vast majority of us aren't.
The thing to do now, is to focus upon putting in place the guard rails to avoid it all happening again. And that means (amongst other things) getting a handle on Wall Street and its excessive practices. Back in '29 (actually '33 and '34) that meant legislating the SEC Acts of '33 and '34, which as you probably know, are the major pieces of legislation that reigned in Wall Street and its craziness. Today, we need updated regulatory legislation to again reign in Wall Street for the changed circumstances since then, but to get that done we need some decent leadership in D.C. that has the balls to take on Wall Street and push through some appropriate regulations. We don't currently have that. I wish Ellliot Spitzer would run for President - he'd get the job done. Who cares if he likes to see a "pro" once in a while.
Recall, when BO came into office there was a very real risk of a full on 1929-style Depression coming on instead of just the severe recession that we ended up experiencing. The incentives given to stimulate consumer spending, and the extensive loans given to many distressed corporations, are exactly the things that staved off a revisit to 1929. That kind of emergency fiscal policy is classic stimulus spending designed to keep the money flow circulating and avoiding the economy falling on its face. It doesn't matter if you're Republican, Democrat, Independent, Alien, blue, green, white or purple, that's what works in the situation.
The good news is that it worked. Pretty well in fact. Today, we're not standing in a bread line, or living in a cave fighting over scraps of meat. At least the vast majority of us aren't.
The thing to do now, is to focus upon putting in place the guard rails to avoid it all happening again. And that means (amongst other things) getting a handle on Wall Street and its excessive practices. Back in '29 (actually '33 and '34) that meant legislating the SEC Acts of '33 and '34, which as you probably know, are the major pieces of legislation that reigned in Wall Street and its craziness. Today, we need updated regulatory legislation to again reign in Wall Street for the changed circumstances since then, but to get that done we need some decent leadership in D.C. that has the balls to take on Wall Street and push through some appropriate regulations. We don't currently have that. I wish Ellliot Spitzer would run for President - he'd get the job done. Who cares if he likes to see a "pro" once in a while.
Ian Anderson
Lifetime Supporter
Cliff
Will your taxes pay back the trillions borrowed and immediately handed out or witll it be left in abeyance to your children, or grandchildren, or great grandchildren?
Net effect is the US government and many others are spending like there is no tomorrow and do not have a plan of how to pay the "loans" back
I am not saying that what they did was incorrect as it certainly assisted in avoiding a depression, however there has been no progress towards getting back to a balanced budget.
Ian
Will your taxes pay back the trillions borrowed and immediately handed out or witll it be left in abeyance to your children, or grandchildren, or great grandchildren?
Net effect is the US government and many others are spending like there is no tomorrow and do not have a plan of how to pay the "loans" back
I am not saying that what they did was incorrect as it certainly assisted in avoiding a depression, however there has been no progress towards getting back to a balanced budget.
Ian
Like have have said before, I still don't believe the 'true-ness' of the financial system full stop. I also don't think that accepting the fact that these massive borrowings will never be paid back is the same as saying we are selfishly passing the debt on to future generations. It simply wont get paid back, either by us or them. The true system doesn't expect to see it paid back. There is no leverage to be had and no money to be made, unless you hold something over someone.
Keep up with the bailouts. Keep workers in work and spending their wages. Use their taxes to fund more bailouts. Tax em more if they try to save, tax em when they buy and make damn sure they buy from you when they do buy.
Keep up with the bailouts. Keep workers in work and spending their wages. Use their taxes to fund more bailouts. Tax em more if they try to save, tax em when they buy and make damn sure they buy from you when they do buy.
Cliff, your argument is pretty misleading and naive. What you don't know or don't want to remember is that there was a democrat congress and senate since 01/20/2007, you'll notice on the chart that shortly after, unemployment starts to go up. Bureau of Labor Statistics Data Then we have the stimulus, the spending of which is nearly impossible to trace or account for with some going to foreign countries, to stimulate American job growth? BO's infrastructure build to stimulate American jobs. http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/us-bridges-roads-built-chinese-firms-14594513 http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/09/20/san-francisco-oakland-bay-bridge-controversially-made-in-china/ GM http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/general-motors-2q-profit-falls-41-percent-as-european-losses-cut-into-north-american-earnings/2012/08/02/gJQA2zyQRX_story.html Food stamps recipients have gone from 17 million to 46 million http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/29SNAPcurrPP.htm
More government regulations are stifling small business, large business growth and the economy.
And finally, Ellliot Spitzer, really? The morally bankrupt jerk that didn't have the brains to use cash instead of a paper trail credit card. :stunned:
In 1887 Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh ,
had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:
"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent
form of government.
A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can
vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.
From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the
most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finallycollapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."
"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has
been about 200 years.
During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:
From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage."
The Obituary follows:
Born 1776, Died 2012
So my scepticism is nothing new then Tom! I think I may have been able to relate to Mr. Tyler over a wee dram had we met.
One thing he seems to have over-looked in his time-table of events, is Denial, which I would insert immediately after apathy. I think that may be the stage at which we currently sit?
One thing he seems to have over-looked in his time-table of events, is Denial, which I would insert immediately after apathy. I think that may be the stage at which we currently sit?
I agree. Let's just fly a fly a few more miles after "the point of no return" over deep water. Like the suicidal judge Jack Warden in the film And Justice For All.
Tom, as I reminded LB Gee-Dub pursued and signed off on all these TARP type give-aways to the fat-cats to which you refer. He had the power of veto and did not use it, that tells me he was on board with the congress. Hard to blame B.O. for all that when he wasn't even elected until November, 2008...
...to quote Al...we've discussed this before, please try to pay better attention :shocked:
Guess who put them there....the current congress, which IMHO is in gridlock because of Boehner's continuation of the "Tom Delay" cut and gut policies SO prevalent in the political arena these days.
How long has it been since the Republicans have crossed the aisle to help pass a Democratic sponsored bill? IIRC, and that may be a stretch at my age, the Dems have helped the Repubs a bit, where is the payback?
America will never regain our previous status in the world's eyes until we get rid of the self-serving zealots on both sides and try to work for the huge "middle" section of our population...which seems to me to encompass the middle class, not the poverty stricken and not the wealthy.
I did not see any benefit to "trickle down" when we tried it before, I have less than 0% confidence the current Radical Conservative party will make any attempt to see that Main Street gets any benefit now, either...but you can bet that their Fat-cat Wall Street cronies will :veryangry: !
Geez.....:furious:
Doug
How about 1995 when the Republicans worked with Clinton to balance the budget. You talk about the republican congress, 1,200th day since the Democratic-controlled Senate voted on a budget. Ryan And Sessions: 'Unprecedented 1,200 Days' Since Senate Democrats Passed A Budget | Budget.House.Gov
Note to self; Must be more positive and promise to smile at least twice a day. (Witnesses may be useful)
:thumbsup:
Gee...only 4 times? That means that a congress ruled by the Democratic "Super-Majority" upheld his vetoes 67% of the time? I would think that quite generous, considering they could have used that Super-Majority to overturn every one of them. Try to imagine the Republicans of today giving B.O. the same consideration...yeah, not gonna happen.
Selective, aren't we?
You mean you only read and/or respond to responses/postings by certain members? I routinely read every post on threads to which I choose to reply...otherwise posting a response is like trying to chase the clouds from the sky, futile and ineffective.
I might respectfully suggest that if you intend for only one party to read your reply, the PM function is the mechanism to ensure that. Otherwise, posting on the publicly viewable area of the forum seems to invite answers from all participants....at least the last time I checked it was that way.
IMHO Clinton was one of the best presidents of modern times (his moral turpitude notwithstanding, but that didn't seem to keep a very similar JFK from being sanctified, why should it affect Clinton?). IIRC when he left office we were at peace with the rest of the world and had a budget surplus. Blame or credit the Republicans or the Democrats as much as you want, modern history has shown that a President doesn't need congressional approval to initiate a "police action" or whatever other term they want to use for military force, nor does he need congressional approval to spend tax dollars. The fact that Clinton was able to work together with the Republicans rather than forcing his agenda on them through presidential discretion should be a lesson to ALL modern politicians regarding how things should work in D.C.
Shame on them all!
...but more shame on the current, inflexible, radical TEA-Party influenced Republican party.
....IMHO, of course, YOMV!
Doug
No, Doug, the congress draws up a bill, votes on it, the senate debates the bill and either votes against, or for and passes it on to be signed by the president or vetoed. If the president vetoes the bill the congress can re-vote with a 2/3 super majority to make it law. If no action is taken after the presidential veto, the bill is laid to rest. It doesn't mean that they "upheld the veto", it means they 1. can't get a supermajority, 2 don't think it's worth the effort. 33% is high, only 2 presidents were higher with the rest at 18% or lower.
List of United States presidential vetoes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The "balanced budget act" of 1995 was a republican bill, Clinton, wisely passed it for the good of the nation. Clinton was a good president, I voted for him both times
Selective? No, I reply to the post that interest me, I try to be factual and back it up with sources, what prompts you to reply?
Mostly it is just an interest in stimulating interesting discussion regarding these topics. I was a media major in college, understand that any position can be supported by a plethora of information, often from sources that have doubtful veracity. Sources like Fox News(?) Network, which seems to have appointed itself the opposition to the current administration, get no respect from me...I want independent, unbiased, factual information, and having earned a college degree in mass media I know full well that those sources are few and far between.
My point was that the Democrats seem to be much more interested in the welfare of the vast middle class in America. Your analysis of the issue regarding Gee-Dub's 33% veto reversal rate simply served to illustrate that my assertion that even in 4 short years Obamma has been the POTUS the Republican Party has taken such a hard-line stance that it would be impossible for the country to progress if every presidential veto were overturned, and IMHO that is exactly the way Congress would work if the Republicans are in charge...they want to enrich the already rich at the expense of the destitute and the middle class, which may appeal to a vast majority of the participants on this forum (pursuing the dream of building/owning a GT40 is not usually a reality for those whose disposable income falls into the "low to middle" range), but not to the majority of the U.S. population with lesser incomes...I am aware that there may (WILL) be differing opinions and welcome them all in the spirit of vigorous and respectful discussion.
Speculation is just that...speculation. The fact that the Democratic Super-Majority overturned Gee-Dub's vetoes only 33% WAS, in fact, proof to this moderate that they did not force their super-majority status on the Republicans 67% of the time...you can guess all you want at the reason there were only 33% of Gee-Dub's vetoes overturned, but that's mere speculation. Again, I ask if you think the current crop of TEA-Party rage fueled zealots would extend the same rate of courtesy to the Democrats if they were in the same "Super-Majority" position.
I doubt it...can't imagine you could feel differently...:huh:
Cheers!
Doug
Tom, I'll refrain from calling you naive or misleading, and I'll politely ask you for the same courtesy. No need to personalize the dialog.
I am an attorney, a cpa, and have been a public company cfo. The last thing I am is naive about these matters.
Elliot Spitzer is the one guy in recent US history with both the authority and the balls to take on the Wall Street s-heads, and succeed. Nobody, and I mean nobody, has done that in the last 80 years. On the moral side of things, I think I'd go see a prostitute too if I looked like him and was married to his wife.
Last edited:
Ha! You're right I'm sure Tom. I can certainly attest to the cost of the latter, but thankfully (so far at least...) not the former.
Cheers.
Similar threads
- Locked
