By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Putin: US is economic parasite on the global economy

The best way to solve debt crisis is to turn your currency into Zimbabwe's currency.



Around the Network
richardhutnik said:
osamanobama said:
richardhutnik said:
osamanobama said:

2 words: Super Majority.

Obama had that for the first 2 years of his presidency. it didnt matter what the republicans did, they could have unilaterally voted against anything and everything that obama proposed, and it wouldnt have mattered. they could have got any thing they wanted done, including eliminating tax brakes for so called rich people. they chose not to because they knew it would be political suicide


1 word: Filibuster

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/28/AR2010122803998.html

When Lyndon Johnson was majority leader in the Senate, he needed to file for cloture to end a filibuster only once. During President Obama's first two years, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid filed for cloture 84 times. To put that in perspective, the filibuster was used more in 2009 than in the 1950s and 1960s combined.

Anything Obama tried to do was filibustered duiring the first two years, to the extent a having complete control would do it.  But, anyhow, see whatever you want to see here, it is easier on you.

ummm... filibusters can be stoped, you know with 60 votes, something they had, you know a supermajority, they could stop any filibuster they wanted

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_special_election_in_Massachusetts,_2010

January 2010, the end of the super majority for Democrats.  I guess you can also get on Obama for trying to be more diplomatic to bring change to Washinton also.  Had he played hardball, he might of been able to ramrod things through congress.

actually he wsnt sworn in until febuary, a tactic that the dems used to delay him being a senator.

also he turned out to be a liberal, so it didnt really matter. furthermore there a tons of other liberal republicans

also they still 1 year to do what ever they liked, including destroy our country, something they did in spades



Viper1 said:
I don't disagree it's a large spike in Filibustering, but you mentioned that 2009 had more than all of the 50's and 60's combined. But so did every year of the the 2000's. Also notice that big spike still had Bush in office. So it's not an anti-Obama thing as you suggested.

It is a sign of increased state of partisanship going on.



richardhutnik said:
Viper1 said:
I don't disagree it's a large spike in Filibustering, but you mentioned that 2009 had more than all of the 50's and 60's combined. But so did every year of the the 2000's. Also notice that big spike still had Bush in office. So it's not an anti-Obama thing as you suggested.

It is a sign of increased state of partisanship going on.

Sure, but as you can see, it's been a growing trend regardless of who is in the white house or the majority in congress.

Besides, compromise on some issues makes things much worse and kills the idea of voting on principle.  I'd actually rather see more people in government stick to their guns (the words hat got them elected to begin with) than vote with the flow.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Viper1 said:
richardhutnik said:
Viper1 said:
I don't disagree it's a large spike in Filibustering, but you mentioned that 2009 had more than all of the 50's and 60's combined. But so did every year of the the 2000's. Also notice that big spike still had Bush in office. So it's not an anti-Obama thing as you suggested.

It is a sign of increased state of partisanship going on.

Sure, but as you can see, it's been a growing trend regardless of who is in the white house or the majority in congress.

Besides, compromise on some issues makes things much worse and kills the idea of voting on principle.  I'd actually rather see more people in government stick to their guns (the words hat got them elected to begin with) than vote with the flow.

However, if there is nothing that is considered off-limits and agreed to as needed, where will a nation stand?  There is a problem when everything, even the most tiny of things, is seen as a matter of principle... and this tiny thing has two or more camps that won't budge.  Problem now is that there is increasingly less concensus for anything.  What will happen is, when a crisis is seen, you will get more "Super Congress" actions being proposed and a leaning on a strong man to make tough decisions.  Like, push a constitutional amendment through to required balanced budgets, because individuals in congress can't do this on their own.  Take so much off the table, that you can't agree to anything.  And in all this, there isn't a way to provide outs for your political opponents to compromise.  You want them defeated, so that they are out of power, so you strongarm them into getting what you want, and cause their base to be so disillusioned with them that they lose their ability to vote.  And then, when you are in power, you continue a witch hunt to eliminate every single bit of anyone remotely a political opponent, and find even the most obscure of enemies to name.

As it is now, there isn't even a single break from politicking at all.  Everyone is so partisan, to the extent that, after the Arizona shooting happened, it ended up being, "Oh the Tea Party was behind it!" to "They are persecuting us!".  Thrown in the recent criminal in Norway, and that then becomes another political football to be kicked... need to rush to define the issue, and obviously he is a Christian, or at that it is more proof that the media is out to get Christians.  And the beat goes on.



Around the Network

@osamanobama

I love how the current Republicans are so much anti-Obama that they completely forgot everything that happened before Obama got into office.

We had a SURPLUS when Clinton left. A FUCKING SURPLUS. Then from 2001 to 2008 the Republicans did everything in their power to massively grow government and triple the national debt. Why the hell weren't they clamoring for cuts back then to increase our way to a debt free nation? Why the hell was the first thing they did was to lower revenue and kill any chance we had at ridding the nation of this debt?

A completely pointless war.
A massive reduction in our personal rights.
A completely unnecessary and pointless tax cut that primarily helped the rich and the corporations.

Then when the economy collapsed due to many other conditions, Bush and the republicans started the windfall of payouts. They were already penned and ready to be cashed BEFORE Obama came into office. He only continued them as all the economists as well as people on both sides of the isle kept saying it was the right choice. Well, history hasn't said y or n on that one yet.

Now, all you guys scream is how its all Obama's fault. He was given the biggest shit position possible in the last, I am not even sure how many presidencies, yet its his fault?!

All I've seen since he came into office is a massive increase in Republican partisanship, extremism, and hatred. This last debt debacle proves this perfectly as Obama has continuously tried to be flexible and back of his original desires to make Republicans happy. Yet, even when they produced a one-sided argument it didn't pass their own extremist group.

I'm agree we need some big cuts and reform. However, the reforms needed will never pass the rich-protecting Republicans. On top of that we must remove the idiotic cuts from 2000 to greatly increase our revenue.

I don't see how you can claim it won't help, when it was giving us a surplus in 2000. Times have changed and republicans have massively grown the government. However, those increased revenues will also even that out.

I bet you still think Obama was born in Kenya and a secret Muslim, huh?



superchunk said:
@osamanobama

I love how the current Republicans are so much anti-Obama that they completely forgot everything that happened before Obama got into office.

We had a SURPLUS when Clinton left. A FUCKING SURPLUS. Then from 2001 to 2008 the Republicans did everything in their power to massively grow government and triple the national debt. Why the hell weren't they clamoring for cuts back then to increase our way to a debt free nation? Why the hell was the first thing they did was to lower revenue and kill any chance we had at ridding the nation of this debt?

first of all he had a surplus for one year, not when he left office. overall clinton added lots to our debt. he also didnt have any major wars going on. on to top it off we had the .com era, which turned out to be a bubble. learn your history.

A completely pointless war.

debatable, nearly everyone left irag had WMD including dems, clinton, etc. and guess what we freed their people while we were at it, getting rid of a terrorist government.
A massive reduction in our personal rights.

no argument here, but also nothing obama hasnt done or isnt doing.
A completely unnecessary and pointless tax cut that primarily helped the rich and the corporations.
actually it helped middle class the most. and it created  thousands of jobs, and spurred lots of economic growth, until the housing bubble.
Then when the economy collapsed due to many other conditions, Bush and the republicans started the windfall of payouts. They were already penned and ready to be cashed BEFORE Obama came into office. He only continued them as all the economists as well as people on both sides of the isle kept saying it was the right choice. Well, history hasn't said y or n on that one yet.

yep, a huge mistake here.

Now, all you guys scream is how its all Obama's fault. He was given the biggest shit position possible in the last, I am not even sure how many presidencies, yet its his fault?!

Bush had us drive off the road, obama took the wheel and slammed on the gas taking  us of a cliff

All I've seen since he came into office is a massive increase in Republican partisanship, extremism, and hatred. This last debt debacle proves this perfectly as Obama has continuously tried to be flexible and back of his original desires to make Republicans happy. Yet, even when they produced a one-sided argument it didn't pass their own extremist group.

what extremism and hatred, whats extreme about people fighting for a less intrusive goverment. how is the tea-party extreme. like a said they are the only reason people are even talking about the debt, without them debt ceiling would have come and gone being risen without any question. democrats and establishment republicans would have thought nothing of it. thank God tea party has brought some sanity to washington.

I'm agree we need some big cuts and reform. However, the reforms needed will never pass the rich-protecting Republicans. On top of that we must remove the idiotic cuts from 2000 to greatly increase our revenue.

greatly increase our revenue, dont make me laugh. tell me this has raising taxes ever created a job, do businesses say, hey if i have to pay more taxes spending more money, i think im more likely to hire someone now. even keynesian economics says not to raise taxes in a depression, an economic theory obama adheres to.

I don't see how you can claim it won't help, when it was giving us a surplus in 2000. Times have changed and republicans have massively grown the government. However, those increased revenues will also even that out.

yes both parties are to blame, but perhaps you forget that most of the debt aquired by bush was under a democratic congess led by nancy pelosi, creating more debt under her watch than ever before. but like i said, a significant portion of the republican party isnt your GOP of yesteryear, they are actually sticking to their fiscal principles, ron paul is largely responsible for starting that.

I bet you still think Obama was born in Kenya and a secret Muslim, huh?

wow, way to try to demonize any one who disagrees, with you. i have said nothing even hinting at that. and for the record i neer thought obama was born in Kenya, and no, i think he is mostly a-religious. heis mostly very secular, but shares some beliefs of christians, some of islam, and probably others to. its very clear he greatly values islamic believes, but no he is neither christian nor muslim. 

and the point of claiming this was what?


and none of this stuff pertains to the stuff i corrected you on about your previous post



Vladimir Vladimirovich has been known for his trollish attitude as of late, now he goes wordlwide! Was surprised to see >10K comments about this single quote on some western tabloid.

He obviously right if we forget about how and why exactly current global economy was created in it's form and shape. Have said that I've remembered one of Lem's short satirical stories (the one from collection of Memoirs of Ijon Tichy) about some giant Worm people feed and worship. Kinda fits.



Time to raise those taxes, it's the only way. Taxes revenue off the U.S. is only about 25% of GDP, while most other developed countries like Germany, Great Brittain etc. are at around 40% GDP.(with the exeption of Japan). Based on the U.S. GDP of 14.7 trillion a year(yes their public debt is now 100% of their GDP) that difference of taxe revenue acounts for 2 trillion A YEAR. I know those two can't be swapped one on one that easily but it's clear it is something the government has to work on. Because a higher taxe revenue combined with the defense budget cut is really all they need to prevent the debt from increasing.



superchunk said:
@osamanobama

I love how the current Republicans are so much anti-Obama that they completely forgot everything that happened before Obama got into office.

We had a SURPLUS when Clinton left. A FUCKING SURPLUS. Then from 2001 to 2008 the Republicans did everything in their power to massively grow government and triple the national debt. Why the hell weren't they clamoring for cuts back then to increase our way to a debt free nation? Why the hell was the first thing they did was to lower revenue and kill any chance we had at ridding the nation of this debt?

A completely pointless war.
A massive reduction in our personal rights.
A completely unnecessary and pointless tax cut that primarily helped the rich and the corporations.

Then when the economy collapsed due to many other conditions, Bush and the republicans started the windfall of payouts. They were already penned and ready to be cashed BEFORE Obama came into office. He only continued them as all the economists as well as people on both sides of the isle kept saying it was the right choice. Well, history hasn't said y or n on that one yet.

Now, all you guys scream is how its all Obama's fault. He was given the biggest shit position possible in the last, I am not even sure how many presidencies, yet its his fault?!

All I've seen since he came into office is a massive increase in Republican partisanship, extremism, and hatred. This last debt debacle proves this perfectly as Obama has continuously tried to be flexible and back of his original desires to make Republicans happy. Yet, even when they produced a one-sided argument it didn't pass their own extremist group.

I'm agree we need some big cuts and reform. However, the reforms needed will never pass the rich-protecting Republicans. On top of that we must remove the idiotic cuts from 2000 to greatly increase our revenue.

I don't see how you can claim it won't help, when it was giving us a surplus in 2000. Times have changed and republicans have massively grown the government. However, those increased revenues will also even that out.

I bet you still think Obama was born in Kenya and a secret Muslim, huh?

The problem is, you are easily as anti-Republican as osamanobama is anti-Democrat. First, you laud Clinton for giving us a surplus (what, no love for the Republican Congress who forced his hand?), but the only way we ever ran a "surplus" under Clinton was to raid Social Security. Debt that the government owes itself is still debt, and from 1998-2000 when the budget was "balanced" our debt still did nothing but increase, albeit at a slower rate.

Then, Bush and teh Republikkkinz created this massive shitstorm for poor Obama to inherit despite the fact that (1) at his big spending worst, Bush was dealing with a Democratic Congress, one which (2) included Obama who, as a guy who unfailingly voted the party line, joined the majority of Democrats in voting for all the bad shit Bush wanted, and (3) these problems were hardly foisted on Obama anyway, as he basically begged and pleaded for the nation to give him the chance to solve all the problems with his Constitutional Scholar brilliance and astonishing lack of real world work experience.

I won't even get into how Democrats helped Republicans hollow out civil liberties, or how with their supermajorities in Congress they failed to restore any of them despite all their pissing and moaning about 1984 this and police state that. Suffice to say, the problem with Obama isn't that he is a secret Muslim but rather that he's an explicit incompetent in the mold of his predecessor.