Obama is a retard. There's no other way to put it.

[kevin21boston]

I'm watching this guy on Letterman. I can't believe he gets away with these lies. Such an idiot.



First he says "If we didn't pass the stimulus then we would have lost an additional 1.5 to 2 million jobs."

-First off, this directly contradicts what he said when he was trying to pass this in January and February when he said that if we pass it then unemployment won't rise above 8% but if we don't pass it it will hit 10%.

-Second, look at the numbers he just gave. 1.5M to 2M additional unemployed people. Let's say those 2M made $50,000 a year. Which they didn't. But for the sake of argument...If you multiply 2M by 50K you get $100,000,000,000 or $100B. That's how much money would be coming out of the economy. So he's saying that we spent $787B to save $100B? FAIL.



-Then he starts attacking TARP. He said that we shouldn't have given hundreds of billions of dollars to banks. What he didn't say was that most of those banks that received money are already making billions of dollars again and are repaying TARP. Funny how he neglected that.





Face it guys, this guy is a failure. All Obama seems to be do is make media appearances, have beer summits, and gallivant around the country trying to pass a bill that people don't want passed. GET TO WORK YOU FCKING BUM.

[TheSphinx 2.0]

I'm watching this guy on Letterman. I can't believe he gets away with these lies. Such an idiot.



First he says "If we didn't pass the stimulus then we would have lost an additional 1.5 to 2 million jobs."

-First off, this directly contradicts what he said when he was trying to pass this in January and February when he said that if we pass it then unemployment won't rise above 8% but if we don't pass it it will hit 10%.

-Second, look at the numbers he just gave. 1.5M to 2M additional unemployed people. Let's say those 2M made $50,000 a year. Which they didn't. But for the sake of argument...If you multiply 2M by 50K you get $100,000,000,000 or $100B. That's how much money would be coming out of the economy. So he's saying that we spent $787B to save $100B? FAIL.



-Then he starts attacking TARP. He said that we shouldn't have given hundreds of billions of dollars to banks. What he didn't say was that most of those banks that received money are already making billions of dollars again and are repaying TARP. Funny how he neglected that.





Face it guys, this guy is a failure. All Obama seems to be do is make media appearances, have beer summits, and gallivant around the country trying to pass a bill that people don't want passed. GET TO WORK YOU FCKING BUM.

I dont know why, but that last sentence made me LOL when I read it. I won't debate the other stuff but I do fear that Obama fatigue will set in after a point. How many times can he be on television before the average person says "enough"?? How many people get his type of exposure and manage to keep that "celebrity status" on lock?? Right now the administration thinks that Obama's personal appeal is one of his greatest assets so they are trying to keep him out there. I understand the strategy of getting him out there if you believe he has the whip appeal on the voting public but you run the risk of using up that capital too fast.

I think the biggest risk of trying to base policy (in part) on people liking the president is that it makes it almost impossible to get anything done when people don't like him (ala Bush).

-TS

[RicoVacilon]

Face it guys, this guy is a failure. All Obama seems to be do is make media appearances, have beer summits, and gallivant around the country trying to pass a bill that people don't want passed. GET TO WORK YOU FCKING BUM.

lol

I've seen lots of complaints about Obama. None of them were that he wasn't a hard worker. You take the cake!

[conviction]

Kev,

The only thing that Obama is working hard for is the corporate elite :p

He doesn't work for you and the average person.

[dsteve]

Kev,

The only thing that Obama is working hard for is the corporate elite :p

He doesn't work for you and the average person.




lol can you please stop listening to alex jones? seriously, this is an intervention. alex jones is a joke.



oh ****....kev doesnt like obama and said get to work you bum....he actually ment to say nigger. RACIST!

[conviction]

lol can you please stop listening to alex jones? seriously, this is an intervention. alex jones is a joke.



oh ****....kev doesnt like obama and said get to work you bum....he actually ment to say nigger. RACIST!

I actually don't listen to Jones myself but you should know that corporate owns the white house.... right?

[RicoVacilon]

Hey kev. . . . might not want to admit to being a total IDEEOT in another thread and bash on the President at the same time.

[sideoutshu]

oh ****....kev doesnt like obama and said get to work you bum....he actually ment to say nigger. RACIST!
He's probably from the South....and believes in god too.:eek:

[Nevada_Ballin]

I'm watching this guy on Letterman. I can't believe he gets away with these lies. Such an idiot.



First he says "If we didn't pass the stimulus then we would have lost an additional 1.5 to 2 million jobs."

-First off, this directly contradicts what he said when he was trying to pass this in January and February when he said that if we pass it then unemployment won't rise above 8% but if we don't pass it it will hit 10%.

-Second, look at the numbers he just gave. 1.5M to 2M additional unemployed people. Let's say those 2M made $50,000 a year. Which they didn't. But for the sake of argument...If you multiply 2M by 50K you get $100,000,000,000 or $100B. That's how much money would be coming out of the economy. So he's saying that we spent $787B to save $100B? FAIL.



-Then he starts attacking TARP. He said that we shouldn't have given hundreds of billions of dollars to banks. What he didn't say was that most of those banks that received money are already making billions of dollars again and are repaying TARP. Funny how he neglected that.





Face it guys, this guy is a failure. All Obama seems to be do is make media appearances, have beer summits, and gallivant around the country trying to pass a bill that people don't want passed. GET TO WORK YOU FCKING BUM.

Just as bad as "the fundementals of our economy are fine"

:)

.

[fatbaby52]

-Second, look at the numbers he just gave. 1.5M to 2M additional unemployed people. Let's say those 2M made $50,000 a year. Which they didn't. But for the sake of argument...If you multiply 2M by 50K you get $100,000,000,000 or $100B. That's how much money would be coming out of the economy. So he's saying that we spent $787B to save $100B? FAIL.



I don't know if the money can be characterized as well spent or not, but I can see a flaw in your logic. First of all, the very words you use poke a big hole- $50k/yr. x 2M people means that we saved $100B this year. Presumably, all of those people won't be fired on New Years Day. You also have to consider what will happen in future years.

Secondly, the fact that someone is earning $50k doesn't mean that the economy is getting exactly $50k of utility out of the dude. If someone has earned $50k that means someone else has paid him that much, which means the services he has provided were worth at least that much to the other person. Also, say this person who earns $50k does it by buying widgets, improving them, and selling them. Although he's taking home only $50k, he might be purchasing $70k worth of widgets, which means his supplier has made a little more money.

Further, the point of a "stimulus" is to stimulate the economy. If more people are employed now, more goods are sold, and more jobs are created in the future. So, with an extra million people employed this year, not only will they remain employed next year, but the stuff they buy will lead to another x people being employed next year.

[conviction]

Just as bad as "the fundementals of our economy are fine"

:)

.

We can agree there. This credit structure is bull crap and needs a lot of fixing I will vote for anyone that will fix the structure and spend within our own means.

[kevin21boston]

I don't know if the money can be characterized as well spent or not, but I can see a flaw in your logic. First of all, the very words you use poke a big hole- $50k/yr. x 2M people means that we saved $100B this year. Presumably, all of those people won't be fired on New Years Day. You also have to consider what will happen in future years.

Secondly, the fact that someone is earning $50k doesn't mean that the economy is getting exactly $50k of utility out of the dude. If someone has earned $50k that means someone else has paid him that much, which means the services he has provided were worth at least that much to the other person. Also, say this person who earns $50k does it by buying widgets, improving them, and selling them. Although he's taking home only $50k, he might be purchasing $70k worth of widgets, which means his supplier has made a little more money.

Further, the point of a "stimulus" is to stimulate the economy. If more people are employed now, more goods are sold, and more jobs are created in the future. So, with an extra million people employed this year, not only will they remain employed next year, but the stuff they buy will lead to another x people being employed next year.


Excellent post. I'm glad you're thinking.

The reason I said 50K and 2M was just for simplicity. Just like you said it's not really 50K and that 50K gets spread out numerous times, I will make the point that its not really $787B thats being spent to "stimulate" the economy.

The day the "stimulus" was passed (Feb 17) the national average for gasoline was about $1.99 and the price of oil was about $35. Now that we've had this "stimulus" make its was through our country it has sent the national average of gas to $2.45 and the price of oil $66 (it went as high as $73 a couple of days ago). Why did this happen? Because printing all that money eviscerated the value of the dollar, which causes inflation, which causes people to buy commodities.

So what did the "stimulus" just do? It caused people to pay more for EVERYTHING because of the higher inflation and made it impossible to travel or do business outside of the country because it was such a ripoff.

Basically what the "stimulus" did was somehow in the worst economy since the Great Depression, was cause inflation and make people pay (with money that they don't have) higher prices for necessities.

[JoeJGibbs]

8208
...................

[fatbaby52]

Excellent post. I'm glad you're thinking.

The reason I said 50K and 2M was just for simplicity. Just like you said it's not really 50K and that 50K gets spread out numerous times, I will make the point that its not really $787B thats being spent to "stimulate" the economy.

The day the "stimulus" was passed (Feb 17) the national average for gasoline was about $1.99 and the price of oil was about $35. Now that we've had this "stimulus" make its was through our country it has sent the national average of gas to $2.45 and the price of oil $66 (it went as high as $73 a couple of days ago). Why did this happen? Because printing all that money eviscerated the value of the dollar, which causes inflation, which causes people to buy commodities.

So what did the "stimulus" just do? It caused people to pay more for EVERYTHING because of the higher inflation and made it impossible to travel or do business outside of the country because it was such a ripoff.

Basically what the "stimulus" did was somehow in the worst economy since the Great Depression, was cause inflation and make people pay (with money that they don't have) higher prices for necessities.

As I said above, I'm not totally sold on the stimulus, but I don't think that this statement is necessarily true, either. First of all, using the price of gas as a barometer is ok, but the stimulus can hardly be blamed for the entire increase in price. Avoiding wacky conspiracy theories, the price of gas dipped a few months before the election, and has been slowly creeping up since then. I have to use the expensive stuff, and it was $3.20 the other day, still $1 less than it was about two years ago. So gas is high relative to last year, but not relative to the last two or three years. Also, when speaking of "necessities", I've found that I'm spending a little less at the grocery store than I have been over the past few years. Anecdotal evidence aside, I just think it's important to note that there are a lot of factors other than the strength of the dollar at work in determining the price of gas, and considering that those who have the power to influence this price also have an incentive to make our current president look bad, I would stick to using gas as just a part of the picture.

A better barometer, I believe, is the exchange rate, especially as it speaks directly to the part of your statement that asserts the dollar has been "eviscerated" and it's impossible to do business abroad now. On January 1st, 2008, a US $ bought you .68 Euros. On January 1st, 2009, a US $ bought you .76 Euros. In September, a $ bought .69 Euros. So, relative to the Euro, the Dollar has lost about 10% since before the stimulus, but is actually slightly higher than it was 20 months ago. Obviously, there are a lot of moving parts there (the Euro itself is fluctuating relative to other currencies), but one good thing about the exchange rate is it is very transparent.

Anyway, I appreciate a discussion with someone not typing OBAMA IS TEH SUXORZZ!!!!

[fatbaby52]

8208
...................

wow.......

[YoungVito]

I'm watching this guy on Letterman. I can't believe he gets away with these lies. Such an idiot.



First he says "If we didn't pass the stimulus then we would have lost an additional 1.5 to 2 million jobs."

-First off, this directly contradicts what he said when he was trying to pass this in January and February when he said that if we pass it then unemployment won't rise above 8% but if we don't pass it it will hit 10%.

-Second, look at the numbers he just gave. 1.5M to 2M additional unemployed people. Let's say those 2M made $50,000 a year. Which they didn't. But for the sake of argument...If you multiply 2M by 50K you get $100,000,000,000 or $100B. That's how much money would be coming out of the economy. So he's saying that we spent $787B to save $100B? FAIL.



-Then he starts attacking TARP. He said that we shouldn't have given hundreds of billions of dollars to banks. What he didn't say was that most of those banks that received money are already making billions of dollars again and are repaying TARP. Funny how he neglected that.





Face it guys, this guy is a failure. All Obama seems to be do is make media appearances, have beer summits, and gallivant around the country trying to pass a bill that people don't want passed. GET TO WORK YOU FCKING BUM.

Lol at the idea that you can call a presidency a failure after only nine months. Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

You do realize that a presidential term is FOUR YEARS LONG don't ya?

Since we're on what's supposed to be a sports website, let me use a sports analogy...

The Tennesee Titans are currently 0-2. Is their season a failure? Or better yet, let's do this mathematically...if they go 0-4, should they just pack up and quit? Now, I'm not saying that OUR president's job performance so far is the equivilent...you did. But if what you say is true in such a SHOOOOORT amount of time, then I guess the San Diego Chargers should've just went home instead of coming back, catching the Denver Broncos, and beating the Colts in the first round of the playoffs.

For all you critics out there, can we quit our bi**in and wait til about 2 1/2 years before we sum up the entire term as a failure. Stop crying.

Bet you'd choose to approach a relationship/marriage the same way as well don't ya. "OH WELL, FIRST YEAR SUCKED...I'M THROUGH WITH THIS S***.

Some of you people just slay me. Hahahahahahahahaahahahahahaha!

[YoungVito]

That was my way of saying "HOLD YOUR HORSES...ITS ONLY BEEN LESS THAN A YEAR".

Clear enough for ya? ;-)

[kevin21boston]

The Tennesee Titans are currently 0-2. Is their season a failure? Or better yet, let's do this mathematically...if they go 0-4, should they just pack up and quit?


actually yes. if they start 0-4 then yes they should pack up and quit considering just 4% of teams that have started 0-3 have turned it around and made the playoffs.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/columnist/2005-09-28-colston_x.htm


for the non sports fluent out there: shut the fck up before you question me.




as for the price of the dollar:

fatbaby- look at the dollar before the stimulus and then after. why are you looking at january 2008? what does that have to do with anything?

here's what you should be looking at:


Dollar to Euro on Feb 17, 2009 (the day the stimlus was passed): $0.79

Dollar to Euro today: $0.69. that is a change of -12.6% in seven months. that is unheard of.



Pound to Dollar on 2/17/2009: $1.42

Pound to Dollar today: $1.62. that is a change of -14.1%.


US Dollar Index ETF on 2/17/2009: $26.53

Today: $22.81. A change of -14%.



here, please look at this chart:

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=UUP#chart1:symbol=uup;range=my;indicator =volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;l ogscale=on;source=undefined


notice how the dollar tops out the day obama gets elected, then takes a nosedive, then climbs back up, then dives again once the stimulus plan was passed.

[mightypharaoh]

Lol at the idea that you can call a presidency a failure after only nine months. Hahahahahahahahahahaha.

You do realize that a presidential term is FOUR YEARS LONG don't ya?

Since we're on what's supposed to be a sports website, let me use a sports analogy...

The Tennesee Titans are currently 0-2. Is their season a failure? Or better yet, let's do this mathematically...if they go 0-4, should they just pack up and quit? Now, I'm not saying that OUR president's job performance so far is the equivilent...you did. But if what you say is true in such a SHOOOOORT amount of time, then I guess the San Diego Chargers should've just went home instead of coming back, catching the Denver Broncos, and beating the Colts in the first round of the playoffs.

For all you critics out there, can we quit our bi**in and wait til about 2 1/2 years before we sum up the entire term as a failure. Stop crying.

Bet you'd choose to approach a relationship/marriage the same way as well don't ya. "OH WELL, FIRST YEAR SUCKED...I'M THROUGH WITH THIS S***.

Some of you people just slay me. Hahahahahahahahaahahahahahaha!


actually yes. if they start 0-4 then yes they should pack up and quit considering just 4% of teams that have started 0-3 have turned it around and made the playoffs.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/columnist/2005-09-28-colston_x.htm


for the non sports fluent out there: shut the fck up before you question me.




as for the price of the dollar:

fatbaby- look at the dollar before the stimulus and then after. why are you looking at january 2008? what does that have to do with anything?

here's what you should be looking at:


Dollar to Euro on Feb 17, 2009 (the day the stimlus was passed): $0.79

Dollar to Euro today: $0.69. that is a change of -12.6% in seven months. that is unheard of.



Pound to Dollar on 2/17/2009: $1.42

Pound to Dollar today: $1.62. that is a change of -14.1%.


US Dollar Index ETF on 2/17/2009: $26.53

Today: $22.81. A change of -14%.



here, please look at this chart:

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=UUP#chart1:symbol=uup;range=my;indicator =volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;l ogscale=on;source=undefined


notice how the dollar tops out the day obama gets elected, then takes a nosedive, then climbs back up, then dives again once the stimulus plan was passed.

gentlemen please discuss the topics and leave the name calling out

thanks

[RicoVacilon]

for the non sports fluent out there: shut the fck up before you question me.

Yea Kevin, how dare we question you. Who do we think we are questioning the almighty JC drop out who wonders if it's entrapment to ask for your driver's license. lol Back the short bus up buddy.

[fatbaby52]

as for the price of the dollar:

fatbaby- look at the dollar before the stimulus and then after. why are you looking at january 2008? what does that have to do with anything?

here's what you should be looking at:


Dollar to Euro on Feb 17, 2009 (the day the stimlus was passed): $0.79

Dollar to Euro today: $0.69. that is a change of -12.6% in seven months. that is unheard of.



Pound to Dollar on 2/17/2009: $1.42

Pound to Dollar today: $1.62. that is a change of -14.1%.


US Dollar Index ETF on 2/17/2009: $26.53

Today: $22.81. A change of -14%.



here, please look at this chart:

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=UUP#chart1:symbol=uup;range=my;indicator =volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;l ogscale=on;source=undefined


notice how the dollar tops out the day obama gets elected, then takes a nosedive, then climbs back up, then dives again once the stimulus plan was passed.

The reason for January of 2008 was to show that it's not like the dollar was at a historic low against the Euro. It was there for some perspective. If I just choose two dates- 1/1/08 and then 7/1/08 (both pre-Obama), in that six month period the Euro-to-Dollar rate dropped from .684 to .634. That's slightly less than a 10% drop, but it does show that, even absent a gigantic stimulus things can fluctuate.

Also, even using the numbers you suggest above (leaving any attempt at perspective out), the dollar has only dropped by 10-15%. In your initial gas example, the price difference was 22.5%.

Sorry if this is wandering and difficult to understand, but my points are mainly-
1. Economic indicators are just that-indicators. It's difficult (if not downright foolish) to look at one number and one event and assume that the event is 100% responsible for the number. The roughly 10% drop in the first six months of 2008 shows that the recent change (coinciding with the stimulus) is hardly out of whack with typical movements.

2. Even if we were to just assume that the stimulus is 100% to blame for this inflation, that's not necessarily a bad thing. Obviously I'm a unique case, but with 30+ working years ahead of me and nearly $200k in student loans and another $250k in a mortgage and car loans, I'm all for the dollar becoming as weak as possible. For other, less extreme cases, inflation can stir activity.

(Sorry, I can't resist) 3. A police officer pulling you over and asking for your license is not entrapment. God I hope you were kidding with that question.

[fatbaby52]

Also, I just took a look at a longer term graph of dollar vs. Euro, and the hypothesis that the stimulus is responsible for an "unheard of" drop is flat out wrong. First of all, on 3/9/09 (weeks after the stimulus passed), the dollar was back up to .79 Euros.

On 10/26/2000, the dollar was worth 1.21 Euros, on 1/11/2001, the dollar was worth 1.05 Euros. There, in the span of 2 1/2 months, the dollar dropped 13%.

The sky is not falling.

[fatbaby52]

Finally, I will respect the rule of no personal attacks, but I would like to urge you to do some self reflection- The title of this (your title) is "Obama is a retard". To be a "retard", you need a sub-60 IQ. Assuming you were being as generous as possible, that means you think Obama's IQ is 59. I'm going to assume that the other poster is incorrect in calling you a JC dropout, but check Obama's CV out when you get a chance. BA from Columbia, JD from Harvard, worked for a few years as an attorney and then as a lecturer at Chicago. If that is what someone w/ an IQ of 59 does, would you say that you're above 60?

[sanantonio]

Finally, I will respect the rule of no personal attacks, but I would like to urge you to do some self reflection- The title of this (your title) is "Obama is a retard". To be a "retard", you need a sub-60 IQ. Assuming you were being as generous as possible, that means you think Obama's IQ is 59. I'm going to assume that the other poster is incorrect in calling you a JC dropout, but check Obama's CV out when you get a chance. BA from Columbia, JD from Harvard, worked for a few years as an attorney and then as a lecturer at Chicago. If that is what someone w/ an IQ of 59 does, would you say that you're above 60?

Now that's what I call a personal attack with a silencer lol. At any rate anyone who worships at the alter of Rajon Rondo deserves it. :p

[YoungVito]

gentlemen please discuss the topics and leave the name calling out

thanks

You're right. I apologize.

[YoungVito]

But seriously, how can you make an honest and true assessment of ANY presidency in less than a year?

Unless of course, you already had some preconceived notions?

[RicoVacilon]

To be fair, it's kind of late in the convo to ask for limits on name calling when "retard" is in the subject. :confused:

[YoungVito]

To be fair, it's kind of late in the convo to ask for limits on name calling when "retard" is in the subject. :confused:

Duly noted, but I don't want to be a contributer to the problems with the political threads on here. Whereby someone who disagrees with you MUST be attacked on a personal level. Such things are just plain asinine.

And NO, I am NOT just talking about Conservatives...so don't you all get your panties in a bunch. I'm talking about anyone who takes it to the next level. You know who you are? Some of you are reading this post right now, thinking of ways to respond to me without giving me the satisfaction of proving my point. Just kills you inside doesn't it? LOL

[theanalogkid]

as for the price of the dollar:

fatbaby- look at the dollar before the stimulus and then after. why are you looking at january 2008? what does that have to do with anything?

here's what you should be looking at:


Dollar to Euro on Feb 17, 2009 (the day the stimlus was passed): $0.79

Dollar to Euro today: $0.69. that is a change of -12.6% in seven months. that is unheard of.



Pound to Dollar on 2/17/2009: $1.42

Pound to Dollar today: $1.62. that is a change of -14.1%.


US Dollar Index ETF on 2/17/2009: $26.53

Today: $22.81. A change of -14%.



here, please look at this chart:

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=UUP#chart1:symbol=uup;range=my;indicator =volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;l ogscale=on;source=undefined


notice how the dollar tops out the day obama gets elected, then takes a nosedive, then climbs back up, then dives again once the stimulus plan was passed.

Maybe that just means people are starting to have more faith in other countries so they are going to buy their currency. People ran for the dollar when Bear Sterns and Lehman Brothers both went under. Now it's not so much of an issue. The weakening dollar is more than just what Obama is doing. The money supply shot up pretty quickly over the past few months, and rates have been historically low for months now too. Not like the Dollar was a record highs when Bush was in office or before the collapse last year. In fact they were advocating a weak dollar to try and increase exports, despite the fact that inflation kicks in and corrects behavior like that.

Anyway, I had already told you the dollar was going to weaken in the coming months, months ago. Kevin, I hope you're not educating yourself by watching financial entertainment shows like Mad Money.

[mightypharaoh]

You're right. I apologize.


Duly noted, but I don't want to be a contributer to the problems with the political threads on here. Whereby someone who disagrees with you MUST be attacked on a personal level. Such things are just plain asinine.

And NO, I am NOT just talking about Conservatives...so don't you all get your panties in a bunch. I'm talking about anyone who takes it to the next level. You know who you are? Some of you are reading this post right now, thinking of ways to respond to me without giving me the satisfaction of proving my point. Just kills you inside doesn't it? LOL


Big problem especially in this section. It's why I locked the other thread. I have unlocked it.

[conviction]

Maybe that just means people are starting to have more faith in other countries so they are going to buy their currency. People ran for the dollar when Bear Sterns and Lehman Brothers both went under. Now it's not so much of an issue. The weakening dollar is more than just what Obama is doing. The money supply shot up pretty quickly over the past few months, and rates have been historically low for months now too. Not like the Dollar was a record highs when Bush was in office or before the collapse last year. In fact they were advocating a weak dollar to try and increase exports, despite the fact that inflation kicks in and corrects behavior like that.

Anyway, I had already told you the dollar was going to weaken in the coming months, months ago. Kevin, I hope you're not educating yourself by watching financial entertainment shows like Mad Money.

As long as we keep printing money past the production we are able to produce (haven't seen the dollar strengthen in my lifetime) the dollar will continue to weaken. In times of hardship and we pump money into the system it should be no surprise to anybody that the dollar has lost a lot of value.

Plus we pump most that money into stupid expenditures and what do you get, a crippled taxpayer

[FootballMecca]

I'm watching this guy on Letterman. I can't believe he gets away with these lies. Such an idiot.



First he says "If we didn't pass the stimulus then we would have lost an additional 1.5 to 2 million jobs."

-First off, this directly contradicts what he said when he was trying to pass this in January and February when he said that if we pass it then unemployment won't rise above 8% but if we don't pass it it will hit 10%.

-Second, look at the numbers he just gave. 1.5M to 2M additional unemployed people. Let's say those 2M made $50,000 a year. Which they didn't. But for the sake of argument...If you multiply 2M by 50K you get $100,000,000,000 or $100B. That's how much money would be coming out of the economy. So he's saying that we spent $787B to save $100B? FAIL.



-Then he starts attacking TARP. He said that we shouldn't have given hundreds of billions of dollars to banks. What he didn't say was that most of those banks that received money are already making billions of dollars again and are repaying TARP. Funny how he neglected that.





Face it guys, this guy is a failure. All Obama seems to be do is make media appearances, have beer summits, and gallivant around the country trying to pass a bill that people don't want passed. GET TO WORK YOU FCKING BUM.
__________________
You are racist.

[YoungVito]

Big problem especially in this section. It's why I locked the other thread. I have unlocked it.

Which other thread are you talking about?

[YoungVito]

You are racist.

Don't go there man. You ALREADY know what kinda response this will get.

[resnor]

90% of people who disagree with Obama are mad that a black man is in office. I don't believe Kevin is one of them but I figured out throw it out there before someone else did.

Are you being serious? Even CLINTON gets that the peoe who disagree with Obama would disagree with a white President who was doing the same things.

Doesn't calling someone a racist fall under the category of calling people names? You know, that thing that was just warned about in this thread?

[FootballMecca]

Sarcasm dude.

[sanantonio]

Are you being serious? Even CLINTON gets that the peoe who disagree with Obama would disagree with a white President who was doing the same things.

Doesn't calling someone a racist fall under the category of calling people names? You know, that thing that was just warned about in this thread?


Not really because one could actually be a racist whereas using the "N" word, "A" hole, or any other derogatory term is just name calling based on nothing.

[YoungVito]

We're not gonna sit here and argue about the anatomy of namecalling are we? C'mon now....

[sanantonio]

We're not gonna sit here and argue about the anatomy of namecalling are we? C'mon now....

May as well have some ground rules rather then everybody walking on egg shells in here.

[RicoVacilon]

Doesn't calling someone a racist fall under the category of calling people names? You know, that thing that was just warned about in this thread?

Calling out racism is not equal to calling names. You panty wearing dimwit. :P (see the difference?)

[YoungVito]

May as well have some ground rules rather then everybody walking on egg shells in here.

Slippery slope my friend. Trust.

[YoungVito]

Calling out racism is not equal to calling names. You panty wearing dimwit. :P (see the difference?)

Well see, that depends. I mean lets face it...we're on the internet. So at the end of the day, we can never REALLY know what context these statements made on here are in. At the same time, we also can't be stupid and fall for the trap that's being set by a lot of these instigators on here who know good and well that something is racist, but will sit on here and try to "piss on our boots, and tell us its raining". (I.E. I never seen anything racist at these rallies. Show me.)

Some folks on here know what's gonna get people all riled up. Why to you think they're usually the ones who start to posts with something wild like "Obama's a retard"?

Make's sense don't it...now make dollars.

[XxsourdieselxX]

yall was all on his wood a year ago

[resnor]

Calling out racism is not equal to calling names. You panty wearing dimwit. :P (see the difference?)

I agree. But, I also think that there are people on the boards who throw out the racist tag when it doesn't apply. It's kinda like if someone makes a crazy statement, I don't think calling them an idiot is wrong. It's name calling when the person is not an idiot, they just disagree with you. Just the same, if someone is saying derogatory things about minorities, fine, call them a racist, it fits. But when they aren't saying such things, calling them a racist is simply calling them names, and trying to marginalize them.

[fatbaby52]

(1)As long as we keep printing money past the production we are able to produce (haven't seen the dollar strengthen in my lifetime) the dollar will continue to weaken. In times of hardship and we pump money into the system it should be no surprise to anybody that the dollar has lost a lot of value.

Plus we pump most that money into stupid expenditures and 2.what do you get, a crippled taxpayer


1. Are you just talking about inflation here, or do you mean the dollar has weakened relative to other currencies? Because, on its own, inflation isn't even bad thing- I don't think an economy (outside of those communist or socialist ones that everyone is scared to death of) can function without it. On a very basic level, just think about a world where there's annual inflation of 100%. If you have $1M, you can either buy a $1M home today, knowing that it will be worth $2M nominally next year ($1M in today's dollars), or you can let the money sit in the bank, knowing that you're going to essentially lose half every year. Unless you're a dummy, you'll spend or invest the money asap. Then, someone else has the money, and has the same decision to make- he'll spend it asap. By the end of the year, 100 people might have earned and spent that $1M, which means that a lot of work has been done, and lots of things have been created. Compare that to a world where there's no inflation, or where there is deflation (say the dollar is becoming twice as valuable every year). There, you might be willing to loan the money, but you wouldn't be able to take any collateral as security, because it would be in people's interest to default (kind of like the housing market today). Plus, people wouldn't want to buy anything, because they would know that things will be cheaper next year.

Sorry for the crude, simplified, and inaccurate example- it is just meant to hopefully show that when Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity is shouting about all that's wrong with America, inflation isn't something that's clearly bad 100% of the time.

If you're talking about the dollar "weakening" as being worth less vs. other currencies, then either you are not quite crawling yet or it has strengthened in your lifetime.

2. What do you mean by "a crippled taxpayer"?

[Paydirt404]

1. Are you just talking about inflation here, or do you mean the dollar has weakened relative to other currencies? Because, on its own, inflation isn't even bad thing- I don't think an economy (outside of those communist or socialist ones that everyone is scared to death of) can function without it. On a very basic level, just think about a world where there's annual inflation of 100%. If you have $1M, you can either buy a $1M home today, knowing that it will be worth $2M nominally next year ($1M in today's dollars), or you can let the money sit in the bank, knowing that you're going to essentially lose half every year. Unless you're a dummy, you'll spend or invest the money asap. Then, someone else has the money, and has the same decision to make- he'll spend it asap. By the end of the year, 100 people might have earned and spent that $1M, which means that a lot of work has been done, and lots of things have been created. Compare that to a world where there's no inflation, or where there is deflation (say the dollar is becoming twice as valuable every year). There, you might be willing to loan the money, but you wouldn't be able to take any collateral as security, because it would be in people's interest to default (kind of like the housing market today). Plus, people wouldn't want to buy anything, because they would know that things will be cheaper next year.

Sorry for the crude, simplified, and inaccurate example- it is just meant to hopefully show that when Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity is shouting about all that's wrong with America, inflation isn't something that's clearly bad 100% of the time.

If you're talking about the dollar "weakening" as being worth less vs. other currencies, then either you are not quite crawling yet or it has strengthened in your lifetime.

2. What do you mean by "a crippled taxpayer"?

That was fairly easy for me to follow, greatly appreciated.

I'd like to see the yearly income of some of some our political posters.

[levdgg]

You're right. I apologize.






Conversely, you decided to go the vulgar route and prove yourself to be a "mildly informed ingnoramus" who clearly does not have enough confidence in him/herself to realize that although he/she did make an error in communicating what their original post was, it could easily be rectafied. Instead, you had to go the route that you chose. The fact of the matter is this...YOU ARE NO ONE OF IMPORTANCE HERE ON VG. IF YOU WERE, YOU WOULD KNOW BETTER THAN TO USE PROFANITY IN YOUR LITTLE "THREAT" THAT "OUR VG DAYS WOULD BE OVER". SO KNOCK IT OFF, YOU PETULANT CHILD, AND LET THE GROWN-UPS TALK.
.

I will consider accepting your apology as well. I took a lot for you to do that. I will also consider accepting your use of the word "rectafied."

[dsteve]

1. Are you just talking about inflation here, or do you mean the dollar has weakened relative to other currencies? Because, on its own, inflation isn't even bad thing- I don't think an economy (outside of those communist or socialist ones that everyone is scared to death of) can function without it. On a very basic level, just think about a world where there's annual inflation of 100%. If you have $1M, you can either buy a $1M home today, knowing that it will be worth $2M nominally next year ($1M in today's dollars), or you can let the money sit in the bank, knowing that you're going to essentially lose half every year. Unless you're a dummy, you'll spend or invest the money asap. Then, someone else has the money, and has the same decision to make- he'll spend it asap. By the end of the year, 100 people might have earned and spent that $1M, which means that a lot of work has been done, and lots of things have been created. Compare that to a world where there's no inflation, or where there is deflation (say the dollar is becoming twice as valuable every year). There, you might be willing to loan the money, but you wouldn't be able to take any collateral as security, because it would be in people's interest to default (kind of like the housing market today). Plus, people wouldn't want to buy anything, because they would know that things will be cheaper next year.

Sorry for the crude, simplified, and inaccurate example- it is just meant to hopefully show that when Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity is shouting about all that's wrong with America, inflation isn't something that's clearly bad 100% of the time.

If you're talking about the dollar "weakening" as being worth less vs. other currencies, then either you are not quite crawling yet or it has strengthened in your lifetime.

2. What do you mean by "a crippled taxpayer"?



so you buy the house for 1 mil, then its worth 2 mil but isnt 2 million dollars today, worth the exact same as 1 mil yesterday? arent the numbers just relative to the time?


the problem is that our money isnt backed by anything like GOLD thanks to the federal reserve. when they print useless paper, it makes the paper you have in your pocket worth less than what it was when you earned it. Thats why everyone is freaking out about inflation right now. they have vaults and vaults of printed money sitting unused, waiting for the right time to put it in circulation which will cause everything to go ape ****.

[fatbaby52]

so you buy the house for 1 mil, then its worth 2 mil but isnt 2 million dollars today, worth the exact same as 1 mil yesterday? arent the numbers just relative to the time?


the problem is that our money isnt backed by anything like GOLD thanks to the federal reserve. when they print useless paper, it makes the paper you have in your pocket worth less than what it was when you earned it. Thats why everyone is freaking out about inflation right now. they have vaults and vaults of printed money sitting unused, waiting for the right time to put it in circulation which will cause everything to go ape ****.

The point in my admittedly crude example is that inflation punishes you for sitting on money. If you know it's going to decrease in value, it becomes a hot potato. Yeah, you break even by buying the house, but it beats the alternative of having cash worth half as much.

As to money not being backed by gold being a problem, I disagree. I know that the right-wing talk radio guys love to promote the idea of returning to a "gold standard", but I don't think that anyone currently seriously thinks that would be a good idea. I don't think that there's one country who actually follows a gold standard.