|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
04/18/2003 01:18:57 AM · #26 |
Actually you're all wrong. :)
The reason why Clinton had a good economy is the fact that Bush, Senior, RAISED taxes and stopped the deficit in its tracks. In turn, he lost the presidency, but it was the right thing to do at the time. Clinton just inherited it, it was only timing.
Anyone who argues that Clinton does something good for the economy doesn't understand economics. Clinton's FIRST TWO years were HORRIBLE, because he advocated leftist policies with Socialized Medicine (remember that? Pharmaceudical companies lost about 35% of their stock value), made by Mrs. Clinton. In turn, the American public got pissed, along with the ban on assault rifles which was thrown into a BUDGET law as a way to circumvent it, voted OVERWHELMINGLY for the Republicans who promptly took control of House and Senate and STOPPED Clinton's spending tactics and his liberal ideals that would have crippled the country.
As far as who is good for the economy, the best economy in the US history was post WWII in 1950s, not 1990s. Growth in 1950s were sustained and kept up in the 60's.
Oh yeah, the biggest HOG in the federal budget, or at least one of the biggest ones, is social security which was an overblown mismanaged pile of dung started by a DEMOCRAT and continuosly supported by Democrats. I lost 12% of my salary per year supporting that BS (6% from me direfctly, 6% from my employer) and I'll bet i won't see a dime when I retire.
Also, let's look at the record here: Post WWII, most wars are started by DEMOCRATS, not Republicans. And nearly all of the Wars that are started by Democrats ended in a stalemate (Korean war) or a devastating loss (Vietnam, though it's not exactly a loss in true military terms, but it crippled the national spirit).
This is not to say I agree with what Dubya is doing with his USA Patriot Act, which both weasels from the Democrats and Republicans alike voted it to remove our freedom. I also have problems with the harrassment people are getting for simply photographing a landmark.
But please, if you want to make arguments that Clinton is the one that gave 1990's a good economics run, get your facts straight first. He NEARLY crippled it in his first two years. After that, he "turned" into a centrist (no choice or he'd lose the 1996 election) beacuse the Republicans forced him to.
The problem with current US foreign policy is actually the French fault. France couldn't stand the fact that US was the dominant major superpower post-Soviet era (at least before China becomes the next contender) and wanted to be able to put the US in check. That's why they didn't support us and goes out of their way to STOP us. It's one thing to not agree with our policy it's another thing to say "No matter what resolution you want, we will veto". Frankly, the war in Iraq might have been avoided if the French supported a version that authorize the use of force if Saddam didn't comply. If the world unites against Saddam and sends a message that in 2 months, unless he shows everything, we will attack and the whole world would support, it wouldn't be an issue. Saddam would comply. Saddam miscalculated it thinking that without the UN, the US will not attack and his dumbass lost :)
See, the problem with French is that they are pretty dumb. They have this French pride even though they have one ofthe worst debt problems in Europe. China, on the other hand, said they don't support the war but they didn't threaten to veto, in other words, privately they supported the war. They got the oil/rebuilding contracts, France will get crap :P And now Sales of French WINE is down 20% (I love that!) Ha ha ha. I think the French will learn a lesson once Paris starts to stink with oversupplied cheese that they aren't able to sell to the US.
But, i'll agree with our Democrats here that i think there has been an over-reaction to 9/11 with regard to our civil liberties. I'd like to photograph the Golden Gate Bridge, the Washington Monument, etc. with a TELEPHOTO lens without having some dumbass cop question my motives.
There's my 2 cent rant.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2003 01:27:11 AM · #27 |
| at least clinton can still get it up |
|
|
|
04/18/2003 07:40:15 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by Ricky Cleave:
at least clinton can still get it up |
haha, fascinating |
|
|
|
04/18/2003 07:44:13 AM · #29 |
"If hypocrisy were gold, the Capitol would be Fort Knox"
- Senator John McCain
"My choice early in life was either to be a piano player in a whorehouse or a politician. And to tell the truth, there's hardly any difference."
- Harry S Truman
"Political promises go in one year and out the other."
- Anonymous
"You can lead a man to Congress, but you can't make him think."
- Milton Berle
|
|
|
|
04/18/2003 10:37:50 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by paganini:
See, the problem with French is that they are pretty dumb. They have this French pride even though they have one ofthe worst debt problems in Europe.
|
Wierd, i was thinking about another counrty that has a pride and debt problem;)... You have to give the french some credit for not being push overs to the US gov. The gov't is suppose to represent the people, and the french people didn't support the war.
Message edited by author 2003-04-18 10:38:06.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2003 10:46:32 AM · #31 |
The only difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is that the Democrats allow the poor to be corrupt, too.
-Oscar Lervant
A politician normally prospers under democracy in proportion, as he excels in the invention of imaginary perils and imaginary defenses against them.
It is inaccurate to say that I hate everything. I am strongly in favor of common sense, common honesty, and common decency. This makes me forever ineligible for public office.
-H.L. Mencken
Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.
-P.J. O'Rourke
Everything is changing. People are taking their comedians seriously and the politicians as a joke.
-Will Rogers
Ninety-eight percent of the adults in this country are decent, hard-working, honest Americans. It's the other lousy two percent that get all the publicity. But then, we elected them.
No matter how cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up.
-Lily Tomlin
No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.
There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.
-Mark Twain
A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away.
-Barry Goldwater, U.S. Politician
In general, the art of government consists in taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.
-Voltaire (1764)
Government is the great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.
-Frederic Bastiat, French Economist (1801-1850).
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.
-Winston Churchill |
|
|
|
04/18/2003 11:03:38 AM · #32 |
Paganini, you seem to say that the Vietnam war was started by a Democrat. I thought Eisenhower was a Republican, no? And as far as Somalia, I thought George Bush Sr. was a Republican too...
By my count the Republicans started Vietnam, Granada, Somalia, Iraq I & II... The Democrats started Korea & Haiti... There were arguably several secret wars fought during the Nixon (Cambodia) & Reagan (Nicaragua) administrations, but since they are a secret, I won't bring them up :)
By the way, without social security many elderly Americans would be destitute. You may want to look at how things were going in the 30's before you say Social security is a drain on the budget. Also, if you check into how it is funded, you'll see that Social Security isn't a drain on the federal government.
The fact that you give credit to Republicans for the prosperity in the Clinton years and that you fault Clinton for the economic chaos of the Bush Jr. years doesn't surprise me. It seems a typical Republican stratagy... I'm going to try it at work and see if it works... From now on, any computer with a problem is the fault of the guy that had my job 2 years ago... I just hope my boss is a Republican and buys it :) My wife is a Democrat so I won't be able to blame dirty socks on her first husband...
Last but not least, when you said "The problem with current US foreign policy is actually the French fault." I nearly fell out of my chair laughing... I hope you were joking :) The problem with current US foreign policy is, well, the current US foreign policy :) Republicans want to blame Democrats for all their domestic troubles, and blame the world for foreign troubles... Will they NEVER take responsibility for ANY of their own actions?
|
|
|
|
04/18/2003 03:28:42 PM · #33 |
I am talking more about ECONOMICS debt and their economy in shambles, not the government. Look at how the French manages debt with their companies....
Originally posted by Geocide:
Originally posted by paganini:
See, the problem with French is that they are pretty dumb. They have this French pride even though they have one ofthe worst debt problems in Europe.
|
Wierd, i was thinking about another counrty that has a pride and debt problem;)... You have to give the french some credit for not being push overs to the US gov. The gov't is suppose to represent the people, and the french people didn't support the war. |
|
|
|
|
04/18/2003 03:36:19 PM · #34 |
Vietnam war as not a war until Johnson got a hold of it. The US was only merely advising the south vietnamese in the beginning, it wasn't a full blown commitment until Johnson.
Somalia isn't a war, and if Bush senior was in office, they would have sent tanks into protect the troops. It was a "peace mission" thing that went out of control UNDER the Clinton administration.
The reason why many elderlys will be in destitute is because they didn't save and spend it all when they are younger. Why should i pay for their extravagance when they should've saved? I don't see anything in the US consitution that says we have to guarantee social security, do you?
Democrats are going to lose the 2004 election. Look, if Bush wants to use the Iraq war to win the election, he would've let the French delay it until 2004.
Oh yeah, you've mentioned Reagan -- yes he did increase national debt. However, his 1981 budget proposal was declined by the Democrats which would have balanced the budget AND increased military spending (because he wanted cuts in social security + welfare). We owe a lot of 1990's growth to Reagan. If we were still fighting the Soviets, we wouldn't have this type of growth. Eastern Europe wouldn't be trading with us, and we have much more to worry about.
Originally posted by myqyl:
Paganini, you seem to say that the Vietnam war was started by a Democrat. I thought Eisenhower was a Republican, no? And as far as Somalia, I thought George Bush Sr. was a Republican too...
By my count the Republicans started Vietnam, Granada, Somalia, Iraq I & II... The Democrats started Korea & Haiti... There were arguably several secret wars fought during the Nixon (Cambodia) & Reagan (Nicaragua) administrations, but since they are a secret, I won't bring them up :)
By the way, without social security many elderly Americans would be destitute. You may want to look at how things were going in the 30's before you say Social security is a drain on the budget. Also, if you check into how it is funded, you'll see that Social Security isn't a drain on the federal government.
The fact that you give credit to Republicans for the prosperity in the Clinton years and that you fault Clinton for the economic chaos of the Bush Jr. years doesn't surprise me. It seems a typical Republican stratagy... I'm going to try it at work and see if it works... From now on, any computer with a problem is the fault of the guy that had my job 2 years ago... I just hope my boss is a Republican and buys it :) My wife is a Democrat so I won't be able to blame dirty socks on her first husband...
Last but not least, when you said "The problem with current US foreign policy is actually the French fault." I nearly fell out of my chair laughing... I hope you were joking :) The problem with current US foreign policy is, well, the current US foreign policy :) Republicans want to blame Democrats for all their domestic troubles, and blame the world for foreign troubles... Will they NEVER take responsibility for ANY of their own actions? |
|
|
|
|
04/18/2003 05:19:57 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by paganini:
The reason why many elderlys will be in destitute is because they didn't save and spend it all when they are younger. Why should i pay for their extravagance when they should've saved? I don't see anything in the US consitution that says we have to guarantee social security, do you? |
Out here in the Bay Area, the rent for a studio apartment starts at around $800/month. If you work full-time at the Federal minimum wage you will make -- BEFORE taxes -- about $990/month ($5.75x40hrx4.3wks). Now, what extravagances do you suppose these people are frittering away their retirement on?
Preamble the the U.S. Constitution: (emphasis added)
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
I believe ordinary "christian" charity says (and the Founding Fathers would agree) that you don't let human beings die on the street from starvation, diaease, or exposure, no matter how disturbed or irresponsible they may be...
Besides, it needn't say it in the Constitution to be the law of the land...Social Security was duly passed into law by our elected representatives. Of course, that's only because our beneficent investor/inductrialist class somehow overlooked providing for the retirement of such of their workers who survived to retirement age...
I can't wait to hear someone argue that if we'd just cut taxes, corporations would have enough money to "take care" of the workers. I can think of only two times corporations have seen their workers through hard times on a large scale, and it's so astounding an economic anomaly that documentary films are made about it... |
|
|
|
04/18/2003 05:42:02 PM · #36 |
[quote=GeneralE][quote=paganini]
Out here in the Bay Area, the rent for a studio apartment starts at around $800/month. If you work full-time at the Federal minimum wage you will make -- BEFORE taxes -- about $990/month ($5.75x40hrx4.3wks). Now, what extravagances do you suppose these people are frittering away their retirement on?
I'd say they should not live in the Bay Area
Preamble the the U.S. Constitution: (emphasis added)
We the People .........[b] promote the general Welfare,
quote]
The word is "promote", NOT "Provide"
|
|
|
|
04/18/2003 05:56:28 PM · #37 |
[quote=GeneralE]
I believe ordinary "christian" charity says (and the Founding Fathers would agree) that you don't let human beings die on the street from starvation, diaease, or exposure, no matter how disturbed or irresponsible they may be...
I am not a Christian, however, in principle, i wouldn't disagree with this statement. It's Utopian though in practice. Take Europe, for instance, and let's pick The Netherlands which is such a responsible country. The taxes over there are sky high to pay for all that "christian responsibility". What you see though over the last ten years or so is a growing number of homeless people and rampant crime. What i'm saying is that just socking it to the rich isn't necessarily going to give you your solution.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2003 05:57:27 PM · #38 |
| I'm open to suggestions for promoting the welfare of destitute, starving, homeless, ailing people which do not involve providing food, shelter, and basic medical care. Or perhaps you're just a strong believer in evolution, and think we should just let starvation, disease, and predators cull the herd... |
|
|
|
04/18/2003 06:16:10 PM · #39 |
| section 8 housing projects allow people making 900 a month to afford housing |
|
|
|
04/18/2003 06:23:48 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by paganini:
Oh yeah, you've mentioned Reagan -- yes he did increase national debt. However, his 1981 budget proposal was declined by the Democrats which would have balanced the budget AND increased military spending (because he wanted cuts in social security + welfare). We owe a lot of 1990's growth to Reagan. If we were still fighting the Soviets, we wouldn't have this type of growth. Eastern Europe wouldn't be trading with us, and we have much more to worry about. |
Since 9/11 i have come to appraise Reagan in a much more favorable light. Sure, it's great the Cold War is over and that the Soviet Union collapsed. To say however that "we have much more to worry about" if that hadn't happened is painting a very rosy picture. The world has become very unstable after the demise of the Soviet Union (just think, for instance, of all those unemployed Russian nuclear scientists scurrying around to make a living). Odd though it may seem now, there was a pleasant degree of stability during the Cold War because the Soviet Union was in essence a "rational" opponent. The new opponent, Terrorism, operating out of the shadows and out of caves, is not "rational". The fact that the Soviet Union no longer exists, accounts for part of the prevailing anti-American sentiments. The world is desperately in need of a new MO (as well as overhauling the UN); trying to get there the frogs' way by trying to cut the only remaining superpower down to size is just stupid and dangerous.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2003 06:35:24 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
I'm open to suggestions for promoting the welfare of destitute, starving, homeless, ailing people which do not involve providing food, shelter, and basic medical care. Or perhaps you're just a strong believer in evolution, and think we should just let starvation, disease, and predators cull the herd... |
Just gave you an example of no matter how much money and other resources you throw against the problem, the problem may diminish but it won't go away. About culling the herd, i am a strong believer in population control. And if you have a minimum wage job (to quote you form a previous post) one should a) not put (more) children in this world if one can barely take care of oneself b) try to better oneself so that one can command more than a minimum wage salary. You might say that i advocate survival to the fittest but i would call it taking personal responsibility. |
|
|
|
04/18/2003 08:07:34 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by Damitriel:
There seems to be at least one american left who uses his brain...
Clinton Blasts US Foreign Policy
Agence France-Presse
Wednesday 16 April 2003
Former US president Bill Clinton today blasted US foreign policy adopted in the wake of the September 11 attacks, arguing the United States cannot kill, jail or occupy all of its adversaries.
"Our paradigm now seems to be: something terrible happened to us on September 11, and that gives us the right to interpret all future events in a way that everyone else in the world must agree with us," said Clinton, who spoke at a seminar of governance organised by Conference Board.
"And if they don't, they can go straight to hell."
The Democratic former president, who preceded George W Bush at the White House, said sooner or later the United States had to find a way to cooperate with the world at large.
"We can't run," Clinton pointed out. "If you got an interdependent world, and you cannot kill, jail or occupy all your adversaries, sooner or later you have to make a deal."
He said he believed Washington overreacted to German and French opposition to US plans for military action against Iraq and suggested that the current administration had trouble juggling foreign and domestic issues.
"Since September 11, it looks like we can't hold two guns at the same time," Clinton said. "If you fight terrorism, you can't make America a better place to be." |
the only brain he uses is the one in his lower appendage... not only that but he is the biggest crook we have ever had in office... I am ashamed to say he was our president
|
|
|
|
04/18/2003 10:32:46 PM · #43 |
Originally posted by achiral:
section 8 housing projects allow people making 900 a month to afford housing |
But that's (a form of) welfare. I'm asking for a DIFFERENT solution, in concept, not just degree. |
|
|
|
04/18/2003 10:39:06 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by Anachronite:
...the only brain he uses is the one in his lower appendage... not only that but he is the biggest crook we have ever had in office... I am ashamed to say he was our president |
God gave men both a penis and a brain, but unfortunately not enough blood supply to run both at the same time.
-Robin Williams
However, I will still contend that Richard Nixon's crimes were far more serious and damaging to the Presidency and the US political system than anything Bill Clinton did. I'm not a big fan of Slick Willie, just can't agree he's the BIGGEST crook to occupy 1600 Pennsylvania Ave... |
|
|
|
04/18/2003 11:54:20 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by achiral:
section 8 housing projects allow people making 900 a month to afford housing |
But that's (a form of) welfare. I'm asking for a DIFFERENT solution, in concept, not just degree. |
will never happen, not possible |
|
|
|
04/19/2003 01:34:06 AM · #46 |
Originally posted by Damitriel:
"Since September 11, it looks like we can't hold two guns at the same time," Clinton said. "If you fight terrorism, you can't make America a better place to be." |
LOL, Clinton really said this? You can't make America better by fighting terrorism? WTF?! Yeah I guess if we let extremist Muslims attack the US and US interests abroad, without doing a thing about it, America will be a much better place to live, right Clinton? What a wimp he is.
The reason 9/11 happened is because Clinton was a spineless wimp who did nothing to fight terrorism when he was in office. The arab world saw this as a sign of weakness and attacked us because of EIGHT YEARS of a degenerate, spineless president, and thought they would "give us a try". But now (thanks to Bush) they know that if that happens again, Bush will find the country that supports them, and kick their ass. Simple as that, all they respect/understand is force and power.... So if that's what it takes, we'll give it to them. :)
Message edited by author 2003-04-19 01:48:15. |
|
|
|
04/19/2003 07:00:57 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by ChrisW123:
LOL, Clinton really said this? You can't make America better by fighting terrorism? WTF?! Yeah I guess if we let extremist Muslims attack the US and US interests abroad, without doing a thing about it, America will be a much better place to live, right Clinton? What a wimp he is.
The reason 9/11 happened is because Clinton was a spineless wimp who did nothing to fight terrorism when he was in office. The arab world saw this as a sign of weakness and attacked us because of EIGHT YEARS of a degenerate, spineless president, and thought they would "give us a try". But now (thanks to Bush) they know that if that happens again, Bush will find the country that supports them, and kick their ass. Simple as that, all they respect/understand is force and power.... So if that's what it takes, we'll give it to them. :) |
LOL brilliant thanks for that i had a good laugh....hahahaha.... wow your funny!
Message edited by author 2003-04-19 07:07:41. |
|
|
|
04/19/2003 10:04:46 AM · #48 |
Originally posted by achiral:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by achiral:
section 8 housing projects allow people making 900 a month to afford housing |
But that's (a form of) welfare. I'm asking for a DIFFERENT solution, in concept, not just degree. |
will never happen, not possible |
Exactly my point...so we agree that we either callously let people die or have a form of welfare. NOW we can talk about applying welfare in a form which is more fair and effective that the system we have now... |
|
|
|
04/19/2003 11:12:34 AM · #49 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by achiral:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by achiral:
section 8 housing projects allow people making 900 a month to afford housing |
But that's (a form of) welfare. I'm asking for a DIFFERENT solution, in concept, not just degree. |
will never happen, not possible |
Exactly my point...so we agree that we either callously let people die or have a form of welfare. NOW we can talk about applying welfare in a form which is more fair and effective that the system we have now... |
how about no welfare at all, none... if they want money they get a job and work.. even if it is cleaning government buildings... there is plenty to do... lots of work... we can find something... shutting down the illegal immigration would help too.. then there would be more jobs available... bottom line though... nothing should be free... they need to get off of their duffs and do something... |
|
|
|
04/19/2003 01:04:40 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by achiral:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by achiral:
section 8 housing projects allow people making 900 a month to afford housing |
But that's (a form of) welfare. I'm asking for a DIFFERENT solution, in concept, not just degree. |
will never happen, not possible |
Exactly my point...so we agree that we either callously let people die or have a form of welfare. NOW we can talk about applying welfare in a form which is more fair and effective that the system we have now... |
you make no sense. section 8 housing is one of the most powerful tools that the government has to put people that couldn't afford to live in a place like chicago or san francisco, and in a good neighborhood at that. i have seen every project torn down here in chicago in the last few years. every single one of those people now can afford to live in affluent cities and receive better education, social services and other benefits because the government is willing to cover 70% of their housing expenses until they are able to make enough money to support themselves. section 8 is more about empowerment then welfare as far as i'm concerned and your dismissive attitude towards it is really disturbing. you will never reach perfection in any society, there will always be people that are left behind. a lot of that isn't the government's fault either. you need to get off the high horse and realize that there are things that are working right now, and new programs are always in the works to try and fix welfare problems, but having the attitude that everyone else is wrong except for you is really tasteless and pointless.
Message edited by author 2003-04-19 13:07:34. |
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 01:10:44 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/03/2025 01:10:44 PM EDT.
|
