 
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19406
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, March 14, 2009 - 10:27 am: |    |
THat doesn't make it right (it is not). It also doesn't explain Obama's hypocrisy. |
Vetalalumni
Member
Username: Vetalalumni
Post Number: 1412
Registered: 05-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, March 14, 2009 - 9:52 pm: | |
quote:... earmarks are unnecessary spending ...
If unnecessary, then yes, loss aversion should trump the sunk cost fallacy. Treated like an opportunity cost though. Ultra-transparent decisions with America's money. Similarly however, C-Levels rarely strictly follow all economic theories. |
Jams
Member
Username: Jams
Post Number: 7888
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 14, 2009 - 10:06 pm: | |
quote:If unnecessary, then yes, loss aversion should trump the sunk cost fallacy. Treated like an opportunity cost though. Ultra-transparent decisions with America's money. Similarly however, C-Levels rarely strictly follow all economic theories.
Do you speak English? |
Vetalalumni
Member
Username: Vetalalumni
Post Number: 1414
Registered: 05-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, March 14, 2009 - 10:13 pm: | |
^^^ I do my best. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19432
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Sunday, March 15, 2009 - 3:46 pm: | |
Mumbo jumbo aside...the last thing politicians need is another vehicle for corruption. Obama complicated his dilemma by hypocritically speaking out against earmarks in the recent past. |
Vetalalumni
Member
Username: Vetalalumni
Post Number: 1418
Registered: 05-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, March 15, 2009 - 4:58 pm: | |
quote:Mumbo jumbo aside...
It is not too complicated. Go ahead and refute or correct it. I'm capable and open to being humbled if and when it is warranted. In fact, largely that is part of learning - realizing and accepting "new" information previously unknown. And don't worry, the internets can protect you from any fear associated real life confrontations.
quote:... the last thing politicians need is another vehicle for corruption
To which particular "vehicle" are you referring? |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19454
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Monday, March 16, 2009 - 12:29 am: | |
Earmarks of course. Was that not the topic? |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 8683
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Monday, March 16, 2009 - 10:48 am: | |
Did Obama ever say they would do away with earmarks? I don't think so. reform them yes, do away with some of the truly absurd ones, yes, make it clear who originated them, definitely, but wholesale get-rid-of-them? no. nothing hypocritical about it. hypocritical is the republicans -- who, even in this latest bill, get the lion's share of earmark $$ -- screaming about them |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 4554
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 16, 2009 - 10:51 am: | |
The Republicans screaming about earmarks would much rather waste the time of everyone else by drafting separate legislation, holding committee hearings, and staging separate votes every time Lindsey Graham wants to give Myrtle Beach $950,000 for a convention center. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19479
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Monday, March 16, 2009 - 11:24 pm: | |
Or just do away with them altogether so as to shrink government from its' bloated size. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 4562
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Monday, March 16, 2009 - 11:28 pm: | |
quote:Or just do away with them altogether so as to shrink government from its' bloated size.
So if the government doesn't do anything, what's the point of having a government?
Which specific "bloated" parts of government would you cut, CC? |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 8696
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 8:27 am: | |
anything he disagrees with, anything that can possibly be given to the wealthy to squeeze more money from the middle class. |
Vetalalumni
Member
Username: Vetalalumni
Post Number: 1432
Registered: 05-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 2:48 pm: | |
quote:The fact is that since earmarks are unnecessary spending, this continuing resolution could have been slashed to reflect over budget costs without all the earmarks slipped in. I guess we are supposed to act stupid and accept that this all has to do with last year.
When President Obama received the baton (leadership reins) he was already falling behind. He must allude to the inherited poor situation to stage his way out of it. Rather than cry about it too much and quit, he instead has formulated plans to gain ground over the long term. The Tortoise, and not the Hare, if you will.
Don't just "act stupid and accept". Derive or support better alternatives, market that platform, and help get it elected. Can Sanford, or even Paul make that happen for you?
BTW, good post # 761 (March 08, 2009), Firstandten. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19484
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 4:24 pm: | |
Correct, whining about the past only raises the question of why he (Obama) sought the job if he was unprepared to do it. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 4571
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 4:32 pm: | |
quote:Correct, whining about the past only raises the question of why he (Obama) sought the job if he was unprepared to do it.
You mean, in order to be prepared, Obama should have run at least three companies into the ground, all of which were gifted to him?
Blind adherence to your idiotic ideology has put us in the position we're in. Maybe once we get this shit fixed, we'll all stop pretending we're Gordon Gekko *ahem* and seek to create something a little bit more sustainable, and a little bit more meaningful, than quick money-for-nothing. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19492
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 4:35 pm: | |
No, I mean, don't whine about why you can't do a good job, either do a good job, or don't go after it in the first place. |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 8707
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 4:38 pm: | |
when has Obama whined? |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19498
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 4:40 pm: | |
Blank, blank..."THAT I INHERITED"....whining in a pure form. |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 8709
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 4:42 pm: | |
sorry, last i checked speaking the truth was not the same as whining. it is your bunch who are whining at every turn, trying to blame Obama for bad economic news that was clearly a result of 8 years of failed bushie-neocon-market-fundament alist deregulation. |
Danindc
Member
Username: Danindc
Post Number: 4572
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 17, 2009 - 4:48 pm: | |
quote:Blank, blank..."THAT I INHERITED"....
Yes, Obama did inherit this mess. Unless, of course, in your usual style, you can demonstrate that the economy was chugging along just fine until noon on January 20. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19511
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - 4:46 pm: | |
Even if true (and it may be..but inherited from Barney Frank, Carter and Clinton), a true leader, and effective productive individual does not whine about it, they do an exeptional job without copping out. |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 8715
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - 4:47 pm: | |
sorry, bats, you once again provide blather with neither insight nor factual back up |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19513
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - 4:48 pm: | |
Still apologizing Rb?? |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19514
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - 4:49 pm: | |
Maybe you think it makes your empty comments relevant? |
Detroitej72
Member
Username: Detroitej72
Post Number: 1337
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - 7:14 pm: | |
Bats, the fact that you can claim Carter is to blame for this mess tells me you are either a comedian or not playing with a full deck.
If any of Carter's policies were that bad, they would have been changed under 12 years of Reagan and Bush the Elder. And if they both were so blind, then surly your boy Bush the Jr. would have crushed them.
You are becoming a blind apoligist of the neo-con's agenda. |
Detroitej72
Member
Username: Detroitej72
Post Number: 1338
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - 7:15 pm: | |
Bats, the fact that you can claim Carter is to blame for this mess tells me you are either a comedian or not playing with a full deck.
If any of Carter's policies were that bad, they would have been changed under 12 years of Reagan and Bush the Elder. And if they both were so blind, then surely your boy Bush the Jr. would have crushed them.
You are becoming a blind apoligist of the neo-con's agenda. |
Flanders_field
Member
Username: Flanders_field
Post Number: 1831
Registered: 01-2008
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - 7:41 pm: | |
quote:Even if true (and it may be..but inherited from Barney Frank, Carter and Clinton), a true leader, and effective productive individual does not whine about it, they do an exeptional job without copping out.
A Republican POTUS would absolutely have claimed inherited problems, and you would have defended it by stating that Bush's socialism was to blame, along with any and every ex-Democrat POTUS and high ranking congressman since FDR was in office.
Too easy. |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 8721
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 19, 2009 - 8:27 am: | |
Actually, Bats has repeatedly done exactly that -- going so absurdly far as to blame the whole mess on CARTER. That is why I find him so amusing |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19531
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 19, 2009 - 4:22 pm: | |
Not the whole mess. Liberals over the last 80 years or so...including Carter in a larger way than most (but not all) of the villains in this story. |
Jams
Member
Username: Jams
Post Number: 7909
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, March 19, 2009 - 4:50 pm: | |
Of course, Cc ignores the fact that Republicans held the White House for over 42 of those 80 years.
And since 1960, The President was a Republican for 28 of those years, yet he blames Carter, who served 4 years.
Doesn't speak well of Republican leadership, that they had all those years to negate Carter's policies. |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 8729
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, March 19, 2009 - 4:51 pm: | |
funny how nothing remotely like this happened at the height of liberal thinking in the US, but the same thing happened twice at the height of the anti-regulation right-wing "thinking" in the US. funny how this happened in very liberal countries ONLY after a 6-8 year program of deregulation of banking
the proximate cause is clear -- market mayhem caused by gross negligence on the part of the conservative deregulators |
Detroitej72
Member
Username: Detroitej72
Post Number: 1369
Registered: 05-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, March 19, 2009 - 5:54 pm: | |
From 1938 until the 80's we never had a run on banks, and they were regulated by the government.
Since Reagan started deregulation, we had the savings and loan mess that Neil Bush was a large part of and the current disaster.
Notice all the years without any problems were the years of REGULATION. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19559
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Friday, March 20, 2009 - 6:27 pm: | |
This run on the banks is a direct result of the liberal agenda for socialized housing and fraudulent assets (toxic assets). |
Rb336
Member
Username: Rb336
Post Number: 8740
Registered: 02-2007
| | Posted on Monday, March 23, 2009 - 8:43 am: | |
bats in full parrot mode
where, exactly, is this run on banks occurring? your premises are faulty, so your analysis is meaningless |
Oladub
Member
Username: Oladub
Post Number: 1342
Registered: 08-2006
| | Posted on Monday, March 23, 2009 - 11:50 am: | |
There is plenty of blame to be found in each party. Until that is established, no reform can be accomplished. Just blaming the other party is counter-productive.
H.R.1207, The Federal Reserve Transparency Act of 2009, is a modest attempt to at least allow Congress to audit the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is a rogue collection of private banks which has largely monopolized our country's monetary police, created bubbles, and inflation. Last Monday, for instance, it dumped $1,25T into the banks and billed taxpayers. Yet, our elected representatives had no say in the matter and cannot even audit or demand answers from the Federal Reserve. It isn't that Congressional Democrats and Republicans are trustworthy but at least we can replace them as they are accountable to us.
HR 1207 will at least allow Congress to have a look at the Federal Reserve and proceed from there. HR1207 now has 39 sponsors. I encourage everyone ask their Representative to co-sponsor this one page bill. This is a first step toward regulating banking policy that is now outside of the law. |
Ccbatson
Member
Username: Ccbatson
Post Number: 19606
Registered: 11-2006
| | Posted on Monday, March 23, 2009 - 3:45 pm: | |
I agree with a qualifier Oladub. The "blame" for Republicans is not for being true to conservative principles, but rather for selling it out in favor of liberal and socialist actions. |
New threads cannot be started on this page. The threads above are previous posts made to this thread.