Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 226

Thread: Presidential Debate #2

  1. #201
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,408
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    Of course its obtainable, to a degree where an educated guess can be made. Lets see the model before we propose that this is the cornerstone to the solution that will fix the economy. The model should include the environmental risks and costs to those directly effected.
    The model is already up and running in Canada, North Dakota and basically anywhere drilling is happening. Oil service workers in Canada make upwards of $120,000 yearly while living in remote regions with very low living expenses. Those areas are booming economically. The Country (Canada) is benefiting. The Canadian economy largely avoided the recession of 2007-2009 because of their oil and gas economy.

    No study anyone could present here will ever convince you of anything so it would be worthless bother but reality is better than studies.

  2. #202
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Trickle down means less taxes, leaving money available in private hands to be used by those who rightfully earned/posess it.

    Trickle up means more taxes, free handouts and entitlements, all paid for by "the rich", a group growing day by day and will soon (it seems) include every houshold making at or over $100,000/year.

    Trickle Up, or as it's actually called "stealing from someone who earned it, and giving it to those who did not".

    It may work....who knows.....but that doesn't make it right or rightious. For example, the economy MIGHT be better off if I took half YOUR paycheck each period PK.....does that mean I should?

    Taken to it's logical extreme, a system where Govt. takes 100%, and gives back (equally tio everyone) only as much as they can spend, well, that would be the "best" system, right? Every penny earned is spent, and everyone has the same, right? Regardless of effort or labor that created it.
    More, past a certain level, it's impossible to implement in a country that allows freedom of movement. No reason the rich can't simply move out of the US, escaping taxation entirely.

  3. #203
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,039
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by isired View Post
    If Nike, Apple, etc. thought they could get those prices and maximize profit, those would be the prices - regardless.
    What does that have to do with anything? The problem is that new costs could actually drive some products outside of profitability so companies would stop making them all together. Sometimes margins are low so companies have to rely on quantity to make their money. That is why Apply doesn't make 5 iPhones a year @ $1 billion each, they maximize profitability by reducing costs that allow them to provide a product at a price people are willing to pay. There is a curve between supply and demand along with costs and profit that help find that sweet spot. Until you can bring costs down there will be little to no market. This is easily seen in the solar panel market. When solar panels were expensive to produce and not all that efficient they were basically niche items. China floods the market with cheap panels and then there is magically a market that even the government couldn't force my subsidizing the domestic industry.

  4. #204
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    That also is an extreme position and no one is suggesting that govt is THE answer to EVERY question and EVERY peeny the govt spends is justified.

    You are saying that, no one else is
    The position that government cannot be cut - which is implicit in the argument that wanting to cut government is extreme - is itself extreme.

  5. #205
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    Of course its obtainable, to a degree where an educated guess can be made.
    Then why open your post with "[b]ut there is no way you can accurately guess the economic impact"?

    Lets see the model before we propose that this is the cornerstone to the solution that will fix the economy. The model should include the environmental risks and costs to those directly effected.
    So then what does the CBO saying that the leases will bring in 7B in revenue - which is what you started this discussion with - have anything to do with anything?

  6. #206
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    9,930
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Liberalism, and Social Welfare Collectivism, in a nutshell.

    All Govt. is sacred, it must never be cut.

    Sorry Ken, the only exteme I see is a side who feels Govt. is teh answer to every question, and every penty the Govt. spends is justified and defendable.
    Boom. Amen to that Warfish.

  7. #207
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    13,179
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    The model is already up and running in Canada, North Dakota and basically anywhere drilling is happening. Oil service workers in Canada make upwards of $120,000 yearly while living in remote regions with very low living expenses. Those areas are booming economically. The Country (Canada) is benefiting. The Canadian economy largely avoided the recession of 2007-2009 because of their oil and gas economy.

    No study anyone could present here will ever convince you of anything so it would be worthless bother but reality is better than studies.
    Canada also has national health care so workers aren't tied to their crappy jobs. They also don't inflate home prices by creating demand through encouraging people to take on debt they can't afford.

  8. #208
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    7,115
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    The model is already up and running in Canada, North Dakota and basically anywhere drilling is happening. Oil service workers in Canada make upwards of $120,000 yearly while living in remote regions with very low living expenses. Those areas are booming economically. The Country (Canada) is benefiting. The Canadian economy largely avoided the recession of 2007-2009 because of their oil and gas economy.

    No study anyone could present here will ever convince you of anything so it would be worthless bother but reality is better than studies.

    Not arguing with your points about a booming Canadian oil boom, but they largely avoided the recession b/c they didn't and don't give out $400,000 mortgages to janitors up there.

  9. #209
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    18,677
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by brady's a catcher View Post
    Not arguing with your points about a booming Canadian oil boom, but they largely avoided the recession b/c they didn't and don't give out $400,000 mortgages to janitors up there.
    Thats what happens when the gov't believes it is everyone's right to own a home.

  10. #210
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,408
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Winstonbiggs View Post
    Canada also has national health care so workers aren't tied to their crappy jobs. They also don't inflate home prices by creating demand through encouraging people to take on debt they can't afford.
    I'll take national health care over the flawed disaster that is Obamacare. Obamacare is essentially the worst of both worlds as far as health insurance goes. The reason Canada boomed while the US, Europe and most of the world were busting was specifically tied to the Oil and Gas fields in their North.

    The housing crisis was caused by easy money plain and simple. When the mortgage eligibility rules were relaxed and income verification/downpayments/creditworthiness downplayed the result was exactly what any rational person would have expected. The question is what caused the standards to be relaxed. Regardless when I hear people blame Bush for the housing collapse I chuckle. I always have the same response, I ask them what specifically did Bush do to cause the housing collapse. No one has ever been able to answer the question.

  11. #211
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,408
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by brady's a catcher View Post
    Not arguing with your points about a booming Canadian oil boom, but they largely avoided the recession b/c they didn't and don't give out $400,000 mortgages to janitors up there.
    That explains why they didn't have a housing bust, but the Canadian economy has always been closely ties to the US economy. They are our largest trading partner. When we slow they should slow. Their Oil Boom shielded them.

  12. #212
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    6,118
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by HessStation View Post
    I don't even blame him for being vague at the time. I only blame him for lying DURING the debate by saying he wasn't being vague...by saying he called it the next day...when he clearly wasn't at the time.
    I can only blame Obama only so much for all the slack the media gives him; the lack of media accountability is damaging the political process.

  13. #213
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,648
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    The position that government cannot be cut - which is implicit in the argument that wanting to cut government is extreme - is itself extreme.
    No one is taking the position that the government cannot be cut. Of course it can be cut. And no its not implicit in the argument that wanting to cut govt is extreme. How did you conclude that?

    The question is does cutting govt help the economy. If you look at the countries ranked ahead of us World economic forum's global competitive rankings, the nations that are doing better than us all have more govt involvement. So the stance that the reason why we are doing poorly stems from too much govt involvement, makes little sense. Therefore being dogmatic about cutting the govt to help our economy is really an extremist position.

  14. #214
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    9,930
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by sackdance View Post
    I can only blame Obama only so much for all the slack the media gives him; the lack of media accountability is damaging the political process.
    It's kind of like, insane. They're all fact checking Romney's female hires instead. There is NO such thing as bipartisan news on either side anymore. It's very sad imo. As I've been watching CNN, Fox, MSNBC etc, you can even pick up where each and every single host is leaning just by how they ask the questions and facial expressions towards the people answering them. Not following politics on a regular basis except for a couple months every 4 years, imo, it has gotten much worse.

  15. #215
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    7,648
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by doggin94it View Post
    Then why open your post with "[b]ut there is no way you can accurately guess the economic impact"?



    So then what does the CBO saying that the leases will bring in 7B in revenue - which is what you started this discussion with - have anything to do with anything?
    All the CBO does is (as you point out) show that the money received directly from the lease is very little.

    My opening statement was incorrect. What I should have said is you can not assume that what is happening in Canada and ND will hold true in the rest of USA and use that as your economic platform.

  16. #216
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    9,930
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by kennyo7 View Post
    No one is taking the position that the government cannot be cut. Of course it can be cut. And no its not implicit in the argument that wanting to cut govt is extreme. How did you conclude that?

    The question is does cutting govt help the economy. If you look at the countries ranked ahead of us World economic forum's global competitive rankings, the nations that are doing better than us all have more govt involvement. So the stance that the reason why we are doing poorly stems from too much govt involvement, makes little sense. Therefore being dogmatic about cutting the govt to help our economy is really an extremist position.
    2+2=5
    Last edited by HessStation; 10-18-2012 at 04:49 PM.

  17. #217
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    21,933
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    The problem with trickle up or "redistribution" is that it discourages productivity. The concept would work in a lab environment or as a paper handed in for your poly sci class but it has been tried and failed. Marxism is a "bad word" around here but the original intention of communism was very much a positive and well intentioned idea. Like most left wing proposals they fail to take real world factors into account. President Sortero once quipped when asked what his major weakness was that he had to fight the urge to be lazy. He went on to say that growing up in Hawaii he had a laid back attitude and he needs to work to suppress the urge to be lazy.

    Well human nature works this way. People that are handed a somewhat comfortable lifestyle can become unmotivated. They will often choose the easy road. This is true across the economic spectrum. People in communist Russia were not motivated to work hard or be productive because there was no reward for such behavior. The challenge for societies is to strike the right balance between a safety net/compassion and going too far as to demotivate large swaths of society effectively rendering them dependent and helpless.
    People that are handed a comfortable lifestyle become unmotivated, huh?

    Is that why Mitt Romney sucks so much?


    Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...

  18. #218
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,408
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    People that are handed a comfortable lifestyle become unmotivated, huh?

    Is that why Mitt Romney sucks so much?


    Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...
    Actually that's why Romney is so impressive. I am equally impressed the Trump kids and others in that mold that don't squander their opportunities. It is a stark contrast to people like Paris Hilton and the kids of celebrities that are in the papers daily for their antics or overdosing.

  19. #219
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    21,933
    Post Thanks / Like
    Our country's best economic times were when unions were strongest.

    Silver spooned freaks who borrowed money from their moms isn't the answer.


    Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...

  20. #220
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    21,933
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by chiefst2000 View Post
    Actually that's why Romney is so impressive. I am equally impressed the Trump kids and others in that mold that don't squander their opportunities. It is a stark contrast to people like Paris Hilton and the kids of celebrities that are in the papers daily for their antics or overdosing.
    Wow.

    You're impressed with someone who was handed 10 million dollars and made money from it but foam at the mouth when someone is handed 200 dollars a month to buy food.

    Kokoa! Beam me to the Garden!


    Sent from my Double-Wide using Semaphore...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us