SeraphicSorcerer

I just thought I would share this little tidbit in regards to who usually leads our country better in times of economy.

Is history siding with Obama's economic plan? - International Herald Tribune

this was the first link, you can always use google for more information.

I just think it's funny how pay inequality usually happens under republican presidents, and we usually get paid more statistically speaking under democrats. I think it's an interesting read. and there is more information. This is more reason I am siding with Obama this election, I want to see if he can fix the economy and actually close these tax loopholes the red side always keeps open.

__________________

Falstaff

pay inequality only happens under Republican presidents?
oh for goodness sake.
there will always be pay issues regardless of who is in charge.
McCain crap or Obama Crap, these problems existed before the economy we live in now and compared to what our buying power was a hundred years ago, things are pretty damn good for anyone that is willing to work and earn a living and save.
Lots of folks regardless of poltiical affiliation know that you have to save for the good times and the lean times, regardless of who is in charge.
You want to know who is running the country? It isnt any particuler Rep or Dem agenda or interests, its pure money, and everybody had their hands dirty.
Oil
Precioius Metals
renewable resources
war
its all there in black and white historically so neither McCain or Obama can promise anything unless they demonstrate they can change the course of the American economy from a fresh point. Drawing the economic azimuth from where we are now is much more revealing than citing old data and issues and problems from the past. In spite of everything I have seen in my 40 plus years that I dont agree with, our quality of life and standard of living is steadily rising.

Obama promises are about as good as McCain promises.
again
the evil of two lessers.

__________________

SeraphicSorcerer

Well then organize a revolution. Seriously. That's the whole reason we have the 2nd amendment. Obama doesn't have his hands dirty, from what I've looked at, he hasn't taken many special interest groups money or voted for them, He's saying he will try and fix pay inequality. Well. He won't get the chance if everyone just says bullshit, Mccain has been in office since you were old enough to vote, what's that say? Not much has changed.

__________________

Falstaff

Obama, McCain, Clinton, Ross Perot, they all are politicians and they and their ilk have to make promises and rally support for their agendas, that is the nature of the beast they feed. They will suckle the great whore of Babylon till the teets are dry and find another teet to drain. Eventually we might elect someone based on pure merit but that day is along day off, I would rather hire a guy for four years that kicks ass on the bad guys, pays the cops and firemen and teachers well and take care of the children. America is overdue for a makeover and I afraid nobody really has a plan, they just want votes.

__________________

SeraphicSorcerer

Well that may be true, but most of the time, it isn't just about the president, if Obama wants to push anything hes going to need the support of congress.... So he'll need majority there too.

As far as the economics side, I was just saying statistically we're better off economically with Dems in office. And to say the repubs are the only ones willing to fight the fight is just plain stupid.

__________________

Sandok

Very true.

Just look at the last Presidents.

Reagan = US deficit
Bush Senior = US deficit
Bill Clinton = US surplus
Bush = US deficit

If ever, the surplus dude was a Democrate Past 20 years and ONLY a Democrate got the US economy into a surplus (which was quickly destroyed by Bush). It's not all Bill's work (Greenspan had a lot to do) but still!

SeraphicSorcerer

Yes, greenspan was an economic genius. However,I do feel that while everyone gives slick willy shit for being a sex hungry mofo, that he ultimately was a better president then both the bush's and he also did order military strikes etc.

Everyone gives him shit for not killing Osama, but he just wasnt willing to kill the wrong man, How many innocent people have been killed, or DETAINED while bush jr. is in office? ;-\

__________________

Falstaff

I am not sure who is telling you that any one party is going to fight for economic prosperity as all politicians would rather promise more rather than having less chickens in every pot. As the mythical character Forrest Gump once said "stupid is as stupid does". Just making a remark about the stupidity of anyone opinion or process is typically based fore knowlege of fact, or profound ignorance as well. I wont challenge your knowlege of politics in America since you have vast resources at your disposal, but consider this, and I will say this for the last time, "Politicians are in the business of Politics".

Its all about power and prestige, and rarely about any noble purpose. Obama or McCain will be elected based on the concensus of the majority whether it is the people or any other mechanism such as the "electoral college", or absentee voting (depending on what you read and you believe).


I am curious about your statistics, because if you googled them or read them only in magazines that support a pro democratic agenda then there may possibly be flaws in your philosophy, but that wont stop you from having an opinion as we have seen with almst everyone that either does or does not vote.

Politicians have not demonstrated their agendas publically until most recently in history.

The statistics used to calculate Economic Prosperity under any president can either be used to support or identify weaknesses in their initiatives. More than one president has used economic politics to get them elected but they in turn suffered terribly attempting to "unwind" or spin problems and issues with doing so.

All presidents and administrations have sought to make dramatic changes in the economic plan for America only to fail most of the time based on some of the caveats to the changes they have made.

Simply put, some have prospered and some have become paupers, but the undenialbe truth is that Americans are better off economically now than say 50 or 60 years ago, but they are more dependent on government now than they every were.

America is becoming more socialized and the silent majority of Americans fear any dramatic economic change lest they bury their money in the yard so to speak. Politicians would rather encourage them to have a more positive view of the future of the economic trends in America, among the poor, middle class and even the rich.

I believe in the new paradigm and prefer to watch very closely of those I vote for and those I dont vote for. Absolutey nothing has changed in the past 40 years that would indicate to me that we are getting anything new with either Obama or McCain.

I am not trying to convince anyone that they should support either candidate having seen the faliures in the democratic process in Europe or any other country, only that citizens get involved in their political processes and vote with their brains and not with their bowels.

__________________

SeraphicSorcerer

True. But until they make the presidency like jury duty, you're never going to get a 100% stank free president. Welcome to life. However, do remember that FDR, was able to pull off economic change, and he was a democrat =P.

People can bury money in the yard all they want to bad it's fastly becoming worthless thanks to our current fiscal and economic policy. I've been all over america, I've seen there are just places that are better off then others. However I disagree with offshoring, I don't mind out-sourcing as long as it stays on American soil. Pretty soon america is going to be a services nation of either the very rich (think wall-street), or the very poor, working at walmart etc.

People do need to vote with their brains, and they need to stop bashing either side. I do find the democrats can be idiots, but I do find Obama to not really drag himself to that level. I have serious problems with John Mccain because of the fact, I know plenty of people in AZ that don't like him, yet they won't vote him out, well who's fault is that?

As far as shit changing, I think we've changed quite a bit, In the wrong direction, the lobbyist are winning, and that pisses me off. When corporations are more powerful then people, fuck congress. they're not doing their job.

__________________

Falstaff

You have to remember that the FDR that you might think of as a Democrat was far from what we know today in terms of the popular agenda. But some things are abundantly true though. Rep or Dem, they typically come from more than modest backgrounds and from families that have a legacy of political involvement. As long as we exploit the resources to feed our energy needs the economy of America wont change very much for the next twenty years. Neither candidates can deny that they are whipped by the economy as much as they wish to "whip" it into shape.

__________________

Sandok

I think we should just force dumb people not to vote and then the smartest candidate would win! (smartest as in most logical).

Take an IQ test, anything below 110 and banned from the polls

Every country needs this system LOL

[hobo]eclipse

anyone care for another point of view?

Campaign For Liberty

SeraphicSorcerer

I like ron paul, he's a true republican, For small government, government accountability, etc. I don't agree with him on every issue, but that's life, but he's not running for president anymore

__________________