347 posts
fingers — Jan 18, 2011[quote author=Hookbender link=1293587654/75#94 date=1295319475][quote author=fingers link=1293587654/75#91 date=1295303469][quote author=Hookbender link=1293587654/75#88 date=1295237281]We are on year 2 under Obama and he's said little about the debt. But, he has talked a lot about spending money and cutting taxes.(spending more money)
We are around 14 trillion in debt right now.
It will be much worse if we wait 2 more years to address the debt and out of control spending.
It doesn't take much brilliance to recognize how much trouble we're in right now. It would be easy to explain this to people and the media to put pressure on those willing to fuck us in the ass for 2 more years.
Other than that, I don't know. Apparently Obama and crew don't know either. Thats the problem.
You were on 5 trillion debt in 2000.
Just goes to show what electing to wage two wars and ill conceived tax cuts, a catastrophic "near death" financial crisis and the subsequent bail out and crippling recession does to the finances.
OK. But we know that. That isn't the subject. The subject now is focusing on what steps to take to fix the problems. You can blame people all you want. Doesn't fix anything. Doesn't help anything. The focus should be on the future, not the past.
So no point you constantly bitching and whining about Obama then is there,
it's in the past.
Seems tax cuts for the rich effect the future along with many of his other decisions. So, I may very well continue bitching.
Your obviously effected by my superior logistical skills. ;D ;D
I like the wordage in that one. :D
Hookbender — Jan 19, 2011Your obviously effected by my superior logistical skills. ;D ;D
You have remarkable logistical skills - you are clearly suited to moving objects from A to B. :)
two shovels, take your pick ? might confuse. :)
I see you are now suddenly concerned about the history of decision making in your government.
Seems tax cuts for the rich effect the future along with many of his other decisions. So, I may very well continue bitching. Interesting how history started two years ago.
Maybe in 2 years you won't remember it so well.
And you can be manipulated into voting for Obama again ;D
Getting a natural tea party fodder guy like you to vote for Obama in the last election was pretty remarkable really - it made no material difference to the election - doing the same in marginal States - Hmmm...
It has been funny to watch you in reverse gear ever since.
I don't think he's a natural tea partier. I think he's anti-Obama. He wanted healthcare, then Obama did it, and now he hates it. He wanted tax cuts, then Obama did them, and now he hates them. It's a pretty simple cause-effect relationship. Hell, he probably liked the idea of nuclear arms reduction until Obama did it.
What makes your arguments lame and weak is this.
When I first got here and went through the religion phase, it would have been shameful of me not to change based on the fact that I obtained more knowledge through study, reading, debate.
Now my opinion is being changed in the very same way and I'm wishy washy, arguing for and against the same thing, etc., etc., etc.
Just because you find that my opinion isn't the exact same as yours doesn't mean it's wrong or right, (but especially wrong). I like some of the things Obama has done or attempted to do, I just think the order their being done in is horribly wrong. Obama took advantage of the times by shoving healthcare down our throats in a half ass way at what I think will be a very untrue estimation of cost. It will be much higher. Healthcare was or should have been the last concern considering the massive problems on the table. And he spent an entire year messing with it. And it's still not over. Now the damn republicans are making the same mistake with the repeal crap. A huge waist of time considering the other problems we have.
And yes, I think the Bush tax cuts should be extended, but not for the rich. I don't think I've argued different, correct me if I'm wrong on that one. But it won't change my current stance.
I'm predicting, as I learn more, that I'll change more of my views. And I hate to inform you of this, but that's just fine. That's logical. That's the way I roll. (Dig it Bingy?) ;D
So, if anything, I find some of your views wishy washy, etc. I find some of your logic kinda off, to say the least. And I'm not saying I'm perfectly correct either.
If your opinions were absolutely correct, which it seems to me you think they are, it would be an easy fix. So, go fix it my brothas. Get it did. 8-)
I'll keep thinking outside the box, ya'll stay in it. :D
And I do dig the arms reduction. +1 on that one.
Little off subject, but Iran is quiet lately.??? What's up with that? Or have I missed something?
Hookbender — Jan 20, 2011Little off subject, but Iran is quiet lately.??? What's up with that? Or have I missed something?
Israel nuked them when no one was paying attention. ;)
Hookbender — Jan 20, 2011What makes your arguments lame and weak is this.
When I first got here and went through the religion phase, it would have been shameful of me not to change based on the fact that I obtained more knowledge through study, reading, debate.
Your feelings on religion are your own, they don't play a part in my life and there are laws to keep that so. Whether you drop or join a religion isn't shameful and no amount of "study, reading, debate" should make it so.
Now my opinion is being changed in the very same way and I'm wishy washy, arguing for and against the same thing, etc., etc., etc.
I don't see much "study, reading, debate" going on...more like repeating the used car salesman shtick (aka lies) of the "conservatives". I try to check out both sides' rhetoric and I recognize where your quotes are coming from. BTW, these "conservatives" sure seem to be ultra-"liberal" with big monied interests.
Just because you find that my opinion isn't the exact same as yours doesn't mean it's wrong or right, (but especially wrong). I like some of the things Obama has done or attempted to do, I just think the order their being done in is horribly wrong. Obama took advantage of the times by shoving healthcare down our throats in a half ass way at what I think will be a very untrue estimation of cost. It will be much higher. Healthcare was or should have been the last concern considering the massive problems on the table. And he spent an entire year messing with it. And it's still not over. Now the damn republicans are making the same mistake with the repeal crap. A huge waist of time considering the other problems we have.
I think BAMMER took advantage of having a senate majority he knew would not last. This issue had been waiting in the wings for a long time and it sort of was it's time. The Dums waste time, the Pubz waste time for the MeParty. Who's left to blame? Oh right, the insurance companies!!! They made sure the pubz, MeParty and conservadems wasted helllllla time. Speaking of which, do you think the pubz will try to get rid of the mandate? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
You never asked for my opinion of the healthcare law. I am for single payer as it makes the most sense to me, but it would destroy a big business. This is ok with me. As for the law itself, I think that the big provisions re:dropping the sick for "preexisting conditions", caps, dropping kids etc. shouldn't have had to be solved by congress...it should have been called fraud and the courts should have dealt with it a long time ago. I also think they didn't go far enough on several things, not dropping the antitrust exemption among them. All of the new people who will be able to, now, get healthcare are funneled through the ins. corps which is lame. I like the exchange idea but again it flow to ins. corps.
Like you said after it went through, "I think it's a good start"
And yes, I think the Bush tax cuts should be extended, but not for the rich. I don't think I've argued different, correct me if I'm wrong on that one. But it won't change my current stance.
Extending the Bush tax cuts is necessarily extending the upper class tux cuts as THEY ARE IN THERE. You did think that these tax cuts brought jobs in December though. This is where you are trying to square what you think is right with the conservoviews which are repeated over and over again in the media. You don't like the upper class cuts and blame BAMBAM but are willing to see an upside which I'm guessing you wouldn't credit to BAMMER.
I'm predicting, as I learn more, that I'll change more of my views. And I hate to inform you of this, but that's just fine. That's logical. That's the way I roll. (Dig it Bingy?) ;D
Just as long as you don't roll with tobacco mixed in, I'll diggit! I would hope that you can start making substantive arguments...actually trying to base it on something other than the views that have been paid for by big business.
So, if anything, I find some of your views wishy washy, etc. I find some of your logic kinda off, to say the least. And I'm not saying I'm perfectly correct either.
If your opinions were absolutely correct, which it seems to me you think they are, it would be an easy fix. So, go fix it my brothas. Get it did. 8-)
I'll keep thinking outside the box, ya'll stay in it. :D
You think outside the box in a Palin kinda way alright!
And I do dig the arms reduction. +1 on that one.
Arms reduction in the nuke vain is a decent start. I personally think our being able to inspect and try to keep track of Russia's loose noox is more important.
Hookbender — Jan 20, 2011Little off subject, but Iran is quiet lately.??? What's up with that? Or have I missed something?
You'll hear about them again when it's politically expedient.
Hookbender — Jan 20, 2011Little off subject, but Iran is quiet lately.??? What's up with that? Or have I missed something?
Iran hasn't been quiet,
The stuxnet virus story has been news in this last week.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/world/middleeast/16stuxnet.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=stuxnet%20&st=cse
And another round of talks are about to resume tomorrow
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/world/middleeast/21iran.html
But as Binge says, the level of media attention given to a subject is usually driven by political agendas.
OK Binge. Show me where my views are the same as Palins. Or, are those just unfounded accusations? Show me.
Healthcare, taxes, the economy, whatever. Prove your point.
I'm not saying that your views are the same. You guys are both willing to repeat things without further thought or explanation and call it "thinking outside the box". It's like DOUBLETHINK to me in that you guys believe that you are thinking differently while just regurgitating something that a writer with an agenda has come up with to sell an idea from monied interests and power seekers. You act like you are having innovative new thinking while spouting ancient and unoriginal schemes. When you are challenged, or even just asked for more information, you can't come up with anything beyond slogans or buzzwords ie. spending, defecit/debt, jobs etc. Just explain your thought process and what it is based on a bit more to escape the Palin zone...
You don't have to BTW. It's all entertaining!
Hookbender — Jan 20, 2011Healthcare, taxes, the economy, whatever. Prove your point.
From your posts I think your views would be:
Healthcare - Repeal and replace with something (?) perhaps involving the dropping people/kids and somehow (?) bringing your costs down. Not spend any money. Seems like the same as Palin. Your view seems to have changed since the law was started and signed to today.
Taxes - Your view seemed to be "don't tax me" throughout but you started with 250k is small business. I wasn't sure if you meant that the limit should be raised or that everyone should continue to get cuts. The vote for raising the limit to 1mil didn't go so well in the senate.
Now it seems like you like you are ok with 250k+ tax increases. This was the "liberal" position. You went from Palin to Sanders.
Economy - FIX IT! JOBS! (although not so much anymore) DEFECIT/DEBT! REAL ESTATE MARKET! WASTES TIME! SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENDING! STOP!!!!!!!!
Basically the same as Palin...juss talking shit. She doesn't add anything about how to do these things either but I don't expect you to try to solve these things. She's putting herself out the as the voice for a segment of society and needs to do this in some form.
charger posted this thread
http://www.chargermusic.com/wh/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1289850365
where you could play gov - why didn't you give it a go and post the results.
It would give an idea of your thought process and priorities.
for example
1. Obama campaigned on healthcare reform - You bitch as he carried it out
2. Obama campaigned on extending tax cuts for the less the 2% income - you bitch as he hasn't carried it out.
If the reverse had happened - you would still be bitching.
It's a position based entirely on opposition - devoid of any constructive input, any detailed argument to do something else.
Don't just say cut spending - do chargers link and cut the spending, make sense of it for yourself.
BINGEWOOD — Jan 21, 2011Economy - FIX IT! JOBS! (although not so much anymore) DEFECIT/DEBT! REAL ESTATE MARKET! WASTES TIME! SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENDING! STOP!!!!!!!!
That's what makes me laugh most about old Hook.
His naive "Alice in Wonderland" view of the possible.
It is child like :)
Support the housing market and let the financial system collapse as tax payers should never ever have to bail out banks
erm... because the - housing market collapse and the financial system collapse are entirely unrelated ;D
hilarious
It defnee makes it hard to "get the point" of the view presented.
BINGEWOOD — Jan 21, 2011[quote author=Hookbender link=1293587654/100#113 date=1295567801]Healthcare, taxes, the economy, whatever. Prove your point.
From your posts I think your views would be:
Healthcare - Repeal and replace with something (?) perhaps involving the dropping people/kids and somehow (?) bringing your costs down. Not spend any money. Seems like the same as Palin. Your view seems to have changed since the law was started and signed to today.
Taxes - Your view seemed to be "don't tax me" throughout but you started with 250k is small business. I wasn't sure if you meant that the limit should be raised or that everyone should continue to get cuts. The vote for raising the limit to 1mil didn't go so well in the senate.
Now it seems like you like you are ok with 250k+ tax increases. This was the "liberal" position. You went from Palin to Sanders.
Economy - FIX IT! JOBS! (although not so much anymore) DEFECIT/DEBT! REAL ESTATE MARKET! WASTES TIME! SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENDING! STOP!!!!!!!!
Basically the same as Palin...juss talking shit. She doesn't add anything about how to do these things either but I don't expect you to try to solve these things. She's putting herself out the as the voice for a segment of society and needs to do this in some form.
Healthcare-It's done. Forget it for now. To much time has been waisted on that already. And the things that are good the healthcare law provides could have been done quickly without all the bullshit overhaul they did. Half assing in other words. So your wrong there.
My view on taxes has been the same. Extend or don't raise taxes on lower class or middle class. Raise taxes on the wealthy. Pretty simple to understand. Wrong again. I didn't go from anything to anything. I consider 250 plus to be wealthy, maybe not rich depending on where you live, but that sounds like a good place to start the debate. Again, how is my view like Palins? It isn't. Wrong again. Palin spouts shit to get elected. I want things done to better the country, with the countries interest in mind. That's why I would have preferred that Obama didn't give in to anyone pushing for the Bush tax rates to stay the same for the wealthy.
"Economy - FIX IT! JOBS! (although not so much anymore) DEFECIT/DEBT! REAL ESTATE MARKET! WASTES TIME! SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENDING! STOP!!!!!!!!"
Lets look at this foolish statement. Economy-I can give opinions on various portions of the economy, but I don't know how to fix the entire economy. If I did, I wouldn't be talking on this board. But the people in the white house are educated and have all the experts advice at their finger tips. They should be expected to do a better job and make sensible decisions.Jobs-Give breaks to small business, I like that. Not to big corporations. They don't need breaks. The fuckers in the white house work harder to extend unemployment benefits than they do to fix the damn problem. Benefits without oversight is worthless. Debt- No need to explain this again. Look at Obama's spending record. Look at Bush's spending record. Etc., etc. Government spends to damn much money. Raising taxes today would do nothing but give them more money to piss away. Until spending gets under control and the assholes doing the spending are held accountable, no tax hikes are gonna do much good at all. Not even the ones I'm for on the rich. One must remember, I want the tax rates for the rich brought back to previous levels. That really isn't a tax increase, it's simply getting tax rates for the rich back in line to a more reasonable level. Real Estate- just look at the market. Need I say more? Waste time-The healthcare thing should not have been Obama's first concern. Period. And he spent, wasted, a entire year fucking with it and it's just getting started. More time will be wasted now by republicans.
What's talking shit is your incredible sorry attempt to give any evidence for your accusations. First I'm like Palin, then I'm not exactly like Palin. Make up your mind. And if your gonna accuse someone of something it's up to you to prove your point. You didn't. Your just talking shit. Which is why I usually don't respond to your questions.
But you don't have to prove your case, I kinda find it entertaining. ;) :)
fingers — Jan 21, 2011charger posted this thread
http://www.chargermusic.com/wh/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1289850365
where you could play gov - why didn't you give it a go and post the results.
It would give an idea of your thought process and priorities.
for example
1. Obama campaigned on healthcare reform - You bitch as he carried it out
2. Obama campaigned on extending tax cuts for the less the 2% income - you bitch as he hasn't carried it out.
If the reverse had happened - you would still be bitching.
It's a position based entirely on opposition - devoid of any constructive input, any detailed argument to do something else.
Don't just say cut spending - do chargers link and cut the spending, make sense of it for yourself.
You don't read my post, how would you have any clue as to what I've said? You've proven that with your funky post and accusations.
fingers — Jan 21, 2011[quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1293587654/100#115 date=1295571012]Economy - FIX IT! JOBS! (although not so much anymore) DEFECIT/DEBT! REAL ESTATE MARKET! WASTES TIME! SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENDING! STOP!!!!!!!!
That's what makes me laugh most about old Hook.
His naive "Alice in Wonderland" view of the possible.
It is child like :)
Support the housing market and let the financial system collapse as tax payers should never ever have to bail out banks
erm... because the - housing market collapse and the financial system collapse are entirely unrelated ;D
hilarious
Again, complete dreamland full of accusations based on nothing. What's wrong with you? I'm not sure I want to take the time to respond to your post anymore. I usually learn a lot from your post and find them real interesting and mostly well thought out. What the hell man????? :)
Hookbender — Jan 21, 2011
Healthcare-It's done. Forget it for now. To much time has been waisted on that already. And the things that are good the healthcare law provides could have been done quickly without all the bullshit overhaul they did. Half assing in other words. So your wrong there.
But what are the things you like about the law and what are the things you don't like about it? I think the "bullshit overhaul" was the only thing that could get past the entire "I'm just a bill" process. I think it set a precedent which can be worked on. Mebee get better, mebee get werser. I think the Legislative and Executive branches worked with insurance corps etc. to make this. Republicans and Democrats both worked on this and held it up in the senate no matter what the vote was. I know filibusters held up lots of legislation in the senate. Much of which never went through at all though...they passed in the house. "Done quickly" doesn't happen with an opposition minority. I know you hate "bathtub boy" but check this out and skip past his corny shtick to 1 min in if you want:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/ns/msnbc_tv-countdown_with_keith_olbermann/#41183711
The examples shown were for non issues let alone big issues. The rules are set up to waste time and they change over time. We'll see what this current house/senate do with the rules. The last group of pubs played a fucked game in the senate IMO and got rewarded for it. Well mebee I think of it more like the nation saying that the pubs in the house need to start working on the bills as well and the senate should work together in harmony. HAHAHAHAHA! I thought they should have been working from the 'git.
Like I've asked before, how much of this do you think is "real" and how much is "theater". It seems like a weird combo to me. This "waste time" argument also assumes that nothing else was being worked on.
Hookbender — Jan 21, 2011 view on taxes has been the same. Extend or don't raise taxes on lower class or middle class. Raise taxes on the wealthy. Pretty simple to understand. Wrong again. I didn't go from anything to anything. I consider 250 plus to be wealthy, maybe not rich depending on where you live, but that sounds like a good place to start the debate. Again, how is my view like Palins? It isn't. Wrong again. Palin spouts shit to get elected. I want things done to better the country, with the countries interest in mind. That's why I would have preferred that Obama didn't give in to anyone pushing for the Bush tax rates to stay the same for the wealthy.
But why do you think that you should get a middle class tax cut? I don't know about rich vs wealthy. When we talked about this before Fingz brought up a more incremental system instead of a few groups. This made sense to me. I think we should pay more taxes...the upper class and the middle class. The lower class already puts all of their money back into the economy and from what I understand the lowest rate would have gone from 10% to 15% if the tax cuts would have expired. The rest of us need to start paying for the wars. This includes the corporations many of which pay NO TAXES. I can see where keeping the tax cuts for the middle class for two years could help spending while the economy is rebuilding but we need to start paying for the wars and the tax cuts themselves.
Many of us wanted BAMMER to "man up" to the pubs but it doesn't seem to have been possible by the rules of the day....but then again we come back to the reality/theater question. You seem to want to think of BAM BAM as the same as Bush but on this one I don't think that you would have been disappointed that Bush didn't "fight the upper class tax cuts".
Hookbender — Jan 21, 2011Economy - FIX IT! JOBS! (although not so much anymore) DEFECIT/DEBT! REAL ESTATE MARKET! WASTES TIME! SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENDING! STOP!!!!!!!!"
Lets look at this foolish statement. Economy-I can give opinions on various portions of the economy, but I don't know how to fix the entire economy. If I did, I wouldn't be talking on this board.
No one can fix the economy. Lots of factors are involved. We can take notice of what's going on and comment. That's about it. Like I've said before, if you want to help the economy go and buy things locally from from small businesses. Buy American where possible. It will cost more though. I build effects pedals and you can't really buy many parts to even make a true "AMERICAN MADE" pedal. We just don't make many components any more. We make less and less of everything and seem to be in a transition period in what we do as a country.
Hookbender — Jan 21, 2011But the people in the white house are educated and have all the experts advice at their finger tips. They should be expected to do a better job and make sensible decisions.Jobs-Give breaks to small business, I like that. Not to big corporations. They don't need breaks. The fuckers in the white house work harder to extend unemployment benefits than they do to fix the damn problem. Benefits without oversight is worthless. Debt- No need to explain this again. Look at Obama's spending record. Look at Bush's spending record. Etc., etc. Government spends to damn much money. Raising taxes today would do nothing but give them more money to piss away. Until spending gets under control and the assholes doing the spending are held accountable, no tax hikes are gonna do much good at all. Not even the ones I'm for on the rich. One must remember, I want the tax rates for the rich brought back to previous levels. That really isn't a tax increase, it's simply getting tax rates for the rich back in line to a more reasonable level. Real Estate- just look at the market. Need I say more? Waste time-The healthcare thing should not have been Obama's first concern. Period. And he spent, wasted, a entire year fucking with it and it's just getting started. More time will be wasted now by republicans.
This is the:
FIX IT! JOBS! (although not so much anymore) DEFECIT/DEBT! REAL ESTATE MARKET! WASTES TIME! SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENDING! STOP!!!!!!!!
I mean you added a couple of more words but...
What are the actuals forces that control these issues and what are their motivations as you see it?
Hookbender — Jan 21, 2011 talking shit is your incredible sorry attempt to give any evidence for your accusations. First I'm like Palin, then I'm not exactly like Palin. Make up your mind. And if your gonna accuse someone of something it's up to you to prove your point. You didn't. Your just talking shit. Which is why I usually don't respond to your questions.
I'm not trying to accuse you of anything. I'm sure I come off more dickish than I'm intending. I was trying to say that Palin "thinks outside the box" like you said you do. She's said it before. I don't see outside the box thinking, that's all. You asked me to compare you to Palin or at least say what I think the similarities are between you two. I don't know that I was that far off with my response.
Hookbender — Jan 21, 2011 But you don't have to prove your case, I kinda find it entertaining. ;) :)
Well that's why I'M here...for entertainment. I just find it funny when you keep just blaming BAMMER for everything when there are so many people and forces at work. You can also never top my buddy's dislike of OBAMAH...but he thinks that BAMMERZ a CIA plant like the rest of the presidents for a while and sees much darker forces at work everywhere. I tend to see it as lil more chaotic tho.
But,
THAT'S ENTERTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAINMENT!
Hookbender — Jan 21, 2011[quote author=fingers link=1293587654/100#117 date=1295572772][quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1293587654/100#115 date=1295571012]Economy - FIX IT! JOBS! (although not so much anymore) DEFECIT/DEBT! REAL ESTATE MARKET! WASTES TIME! SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENDING! STOP!!!!!!!!
That's what makes me laugh most about old Hook.
His naive "Alice in Wonderland" view of the possible.
It is child like :)
Support the housing market and let the financial system collapse as tax payers should never ever have to bail out banks
erm... because the - housing market collapse and the financial system collapse are entirely unrelated ;D
hilarious
Again, complete dreamland full of accusations based on nothing. What's wrong with you? I'm not sure I want to take the time to respond to your post anymore. I usually learn a lot from your post and find them real interesting and mostly well thought out. What the hell man????? :)
I was talking about you not to you
there was no need to respond though it added to the hilarious picture.
Hookbender — Jan 21, 2011[quote author=fingers link=1293587654/100#116 date=1295572131]charger posted this thread
http://www.chargermusic.com/wh/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1289850365
where you could play gov - why didn't you give it a go and post the results.
It would give an idea of your thought process and priorities.
for example
1. Obama campaigned on healthcare reform - You bitch as he carried it out
2. Obama campaigned on extending tax cuts for the less the 2% income - you bitch as he hasn't carried it out.
If the reverse had happened - you would still be bitching.
It's a position based entirely on opposition - devoid of any constructive input, any detailed argument to do something else.
Don't just say cut spending - do chargers link and cut the spending, make sense of it for yourself.
You don't read my post, how would you have any clue as to what I've said? You've proven that with your funky post and accusations.
stop being a pussy and go do chargers test
for the record you don't appear to have any clue as to what you have said.
"stop being a pussy and go do chargers test"
honest responses on this one would be much more interesting:
http://www.strategicbusinessinsights.com/vals/presurvey.shtml
innovator/achiever
http://www.strategicbusinessinsights.com/vals/results/1-4.shtml
interesting as that test is - the charger link is not a really a personality test it's more an exercise in making choices to reduce the deficit.
yeah, I know, I'm just not that interested in what you guys would do to fix the deficit since you'll never have the opportunity to implement anything.
I am kinda interested in where he (hook) comes out on that test though. for science, etc. ;)
I don't think it means too much other than what kind of advertising they think will work on you. still, it's fascinating.
The deficit fixing thing - yeah obviously it doesn't matter practically.
but it does make sense of the politics going on,
Lots of people complain about the deficit, but are also against the fixes and will complain against the attempt to cut things or raise taxes.
as these people are voters - enough of them influence the politicians.
So what do politicians do - they stick to talking tough on the deficit while not actually intending to do anything substantial about it as it is political suicide.
yep, I get it.
I think I'd learn something from hook's test results... from his deficit reduction ideas, not so much.
no need to defend the activity itself - you guys find it fun/rewarding and that's all that's required.
I'm kinda interested in the typology behind some of the things I've read here. just curiosity.
maybe it's a hijack, but since the discussion is the deficit in a thread titled "healthcare"... I thought there was sufficient leeway. ;)
fingers — Jan 22, 2011innovator/achiever
http://www.strategicbusinessinsights.com/vals/results/1-4.shtml
interesting as that test is - the charger link is not a really a personality test it's more an exercise in making choices to reduce the deficit.
I'm the same as Fingers is. I also wasn't allowed to cut as much using Charger's link as I wanted to.
I was thinker/innovator.
the NYT's deficit thing... meh, it's a glorified push poll, honestly.
ironsheep — Jan 22, 2011the NYT's deficit thing... meh, it's a glorified push poll, honestly.
Explain ?
fingers — Jan 23, 2011[quote author=ironsheep link=1293587654/125#131 date=1295734110]the NYT's deficit thing... meh, it's a glorified push poll, honestly.
Explain ?
it's an exercise where you are to select among the options they want you to be thinking about and ignore the entire premise.
asking me pick among some reporter's ideas for how to save medicare presumes that I think it's worth saving.
you can pick whatever color you want so long as it's black.
Obviously all these tests have a question bias
Doesn't seem extreme to me - maybe it needs a button to cancel an entire program.
be real easy to cut the deficit then - just hit cancel the military.
Like Sheep I was thinking similar things. For example, if a Government job is currently paying twice as much as the same job in the private sector, then cutting the wage by 5% is pretty insignificant. Getting people to realize that 100% of that inflated salary is being paid out of the taxes of the guys making half-as-much is far more important. Plus I'm willing to bet that the guy in the private sector is working a lot harder for that pay as well.
outright deletion of the military would only cut the deficit by about half.
it's staggering.
and not only how large the deficit is but that we're not serious about addressing it.
we're cutting taxes... raising spending... making new commitments... adding new programs... it's surreal.
According to this
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki?search=2010+United+States+federal+budget
under discretionary spending the miltary budget + overseas contingency (I.e wars) about covers the
deficit
could add in veteran affairs.
I don't see the need to do Chargers little thingy as it limits the outcome or possibility of answers. It's unfairly guided.
When I get time, I'll take them both though to be fair.
And you guys are real good at missing my points. It isn't really about thinking outside the box, I was kidding around. And there isn't anything new about my ideas except for the will to do it or follow through with the ideas. It's really common sense shit. Just basic stuff that needs implemented. If you can't do the basic stuff, which is where I usually start when problem solving, how in the world can one expect to fix complicated things? Sometimes simple stuff is passed by when you put very intelligent people in charge of problem solving. Palin does have a few good points because she intends to make people aware of these simple places to start. She just happens to be a dumbass, who makes money and headlines by feeding off other dummies. She really has no clue.
The NYT thing is not a test as such it is more an exercise in making choices, get familiar with the choices
and if you think it is unfairly guided then you can say where and why.
It doesn't really matter what choices you make, it's not a test with a right or wrong answer.
Gets things down to specifics -
so far the so called common sense ideas have amounted to "stop spending".
Palin does have a few good points because she intends to make people aware of these simple places to start
Point us to where Palin outlines these good points, I can't find any, just the usual political rhetoric about "stop spending" with no substance
The only specific has been the tax cut extensions.
Palin stands for full and permanent extension of them.
Is that one of the Good points she makes ?
Also on the perceived bias of the NYT thing, here is the related article
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/weekinreview/14leonhardt.html?_r=1
The looming federal deficits are so large that they are likely to occupy much of Washingtons attention for years. Arguably, this new deficit obsession what some are calling the Age of Austerity began this month. The midterm elections ushered in a Republican House majority pledging to shrink government, and on Wednesday the leaders of the bipartisan panel released the outline of a deficit-cutting plan for the panels members to debate.
Like that panel, The New York Times has conducted its own analysis of the federal budget, but with a different final product. Rather than making recommendations, we are laying out a menu of major options, so that readers can come up with their own plan. We have received help along the way from the deficit panel, from Congressional and White House aides and from liberal, conservative and centrist budget analysts. The deficit puzzle on The Timess Web site is the result.
This is the recomendations from the bi-partisan deficit commission,
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/11/us/politics/11fiscal.html?scp=11&sq=deficit%20commission&st=cse
according to the NYT
(if) They decided to cut the pay of federal workers over the next several years, close military bases, reduce foreign aid, eliminate earmarks, expand the payroll tax and cut Social Security benefits for high earners, as the chairmen of a bipartisan commission recommended last week.
Democrats also accepted the plan from John Boehner, the presumptive House speaker, to make large cuts to social programs. Republicans accepted President Obamas proposal to let the Bush tax cuts expire on income above $250,000.
If the two parties managed to do all of this, how much of the countrys long-term deficit would they eliminate?
About one-third of it.
And one of these options has already been voted off the table - i.e. the tax cut expiry - for two years at least.
It's clearly going to painful, but has to be done in such a way that it doesn't completely fuck up the economic recovery, which is the single biggest weapon in reducing deficits
No point cutting a program or raising taxes if it has the effect of adding to the deficit by it's effect on the economy,
Which is where this NYT test is a gross simplification - taking into account the economic effects
But that is political anyway - there are republicans that act as if they believe the laffer curve still works all the way down to zero tax.
Palin has a couple of good points. ;)
(Yeah, it's probably a fake picture, but whatever. ::) )
hehh heh You know that multi mommy body is all fucked up.
Probably fake ;D - whatever :P
CraigBert — Jan 23, 2011Like Sheep I was thinking similar things. For example, if a Government job is currently paying twice as much as the same job in the private sector, then cutting the wage by 5% is pretty insignificant. Getting people to realize that 100% of that inflated salary is being paid out of the taxes of the guys making half-as-much is far more important. Plus I'm willing to bet that the guy in the private sector is working a lot harder for that pay as well.
Ok - so how common are these massively inflated salaries in government jobs ?
Are you including the big private sector corps that have inflated and ludicrously lucrative contracts with government as well ?
The likes of Haliburton for example ?
ironsheep — Jan 22, 2011I was thinker/innovator.
the NYT's deficit thing... meh, it's a glorified push poll, honestly.
I am also thinker/innovator.
The interesting thing about that test was that it made me think about what the testers were thinking. They asked the same questions, slightly reworded, three or four times each... to try to trip people up maybe?
I wouldn't call the NYT test push polling. I would say it grossly oversimplifies budget cutting. For example, if you reduce the size of the military by, say 15%, that doesn't just cut the budget and save you money. That puts those people out of a job, and then that reduces your tax revenue. Same for everything. Any program you cut that reduces or freezes salaries, or cuts jobs, is going to at a minimum reduce tax revenue, and more likely add to unemployment rolls and spending. Some of those people will get jobs right away, some will get them in 6 months, some will be out of work for years.
And of course, the X factor is what it really means to cut a program. None of us have been lobbied by an industry that desperately wants to keep its jobs or funding, and have any idea what kind of pressure that is. Or to cut a budget number that then translates to a factory closing that then devastates a town somewhere in the midwest... all these things seem so easy on paper.
It is gross simplification
It is just a move on from the the even more gross simplification of "stop spending"
The so called "common sense" argument that intelligent people apparently miss according to Hook.
As for the VALS test - it has a very limited set of outcomes, a reverse double of 6 and 2 in gambling parlance.
which - in my head - is only 24 possibilities.
But probably fewer in fact - as there is a top half and bottom half bias in the questions.
So it could probably be more like 12.
Which fits marketing - make two groups and split them into threes.
Then sell to them -
The idea of an Innovator/Survivor - how about the latest TV with a 10 year payment plan :)
I was Innovator/Survivor as a student - would have told them where to shove that deal.
In contrast - The NYT test has far more possibilities.
I can't be bothered to count the number of decision points n - but it will be 2 to power of n at least roughly as there are some questions that are not binary but trinary.
Which means is will have more possible outcomes than the VALS test if there are 5 or more binary questions.
charger — Jan 24, 2011The interesting thing about that test was that it made me think about what the testers were thinking. They asked the same questions, slightly reworded, three or four times each... to try to trip people up maybe?
Yep - "do you blah blah with your church" - Nah!
those repeated questions were noticible
If it changed as it went along
"do you blah blah with your Mosque" - Nah!
"Buddhism" - Nah!
"Your not a fucking Jedi are you?" - Nah!
It would work better :)
charger — Jan 24, 2011 I wouldn't call the NYT test push polling. I would say it grossly oversimplifies budget cutting. For example, if you reduce the size of the military by, say 15%, that doesn't just cut the budget and save you money. That puts those people out of a job, and then that reduces your tax revenue. Same for everything. Any program you cut that reduces or freezes salaries, or cuts jobs, is going to at a minimum reduce tax revenue, and more likely add to unemployment rolls and spending. Some of those people will get jobs right away, some will get them in 6 months, some will be out of work for years.
The part I highlighted in red above is interesting because I believe it to be the exact opposite. We're talking about government jobs here so 100% of their salary comes from tax revenue! Sure, they may return 28-33% in their own taxes, but that still means Joe Tax Payer is picking up the tab for the other 67-72%.
Now if those SAME people had to go find work in the private sector, even if they were making less, they would now be ADDING to the tax revenue instead of taking away from it.
Or are you trying to imply that government workers somehow get paid with non-tax dollars and I just never knew about it?