[Pookie]

Incidentally I've always thought that anybody whose voting choice is influenced by a television debate should be automatically excluded from having a right to vote.

[evollove]

^

Yes. Reason #173 why democracy is stupid.

[evollove]

I live in the battleground state of Ohio. It sucks! Glad my vote is so important, but I feel like I'm getting anally probed on a daily basis.

The landscape is littered with political signs. So many they block out the sun.

In addition to the pointless polls and even more pointless robo-calls, I've been getting these calls from various Blahblah for American Whateverthefuck. The message invites me to press "1" to join a conference call that will begin momentarily.

Last week, it was Veterans for a Strong America. Some moderator and a retired CIA agent answered questions from regular folk, ostensibly about veterans issues. Really stupid questions, obviously. "Why do you gentleman think Obama hates the military so much?" a question these "gentleman" took the time to answer.

Last night, some Catholic group. "We are non-partisan. Please press '1' to join the conversation about important issues facing the day." Yeah right. The first question I heard: "If Obama is pro-abortion, doesn't that mean he's okay with killing Americans? Isn't that treason?"

I don't know what's worse: living in, say, LA where the state, county and probably suchfreind's ward will vote democratic. Yawn.

Or living in a place where the vote is so important you get fucked with daily. For at least a month. By everyone.

End rant.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Pookie

Incidentally I've always thought that anybody whose voting choice is influenced by a television debate should be automatically excluded from having a right to vote.

apparently nobody cares about debates:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...-time/?hpid=z2

(not really-- what that says is that debates matter less than pundits make them out to do)

Originally Posted by evollove

[...] rant [...]

lololol

oh man... that sounds terrible. you have my sympathies. just make sure to take daily emetics!

[ilduclo]

Originally Posted by evollove

I live in the battleground state of Ohio. It sucks! Glad my vote is so important, but I feel like I'm getting anally probed on a daily basis.

The landscape is littered with political signs. So many they block out the sun.

In addition to the pointless polls and even more pointless robo-calls, I've been getting these calls from various Blahblah for American Whateverthefuck. The message invites me to press "1" to join a conference call that will begin momentarily.

Last week, it was Veterans for a Strong America. Some moderator and a retired CIA agent answered questions from regular folk, ostensibly about veterans issues. Really stupid questions, obviously. "Why do you gentleman think Obama hates the military so much?" a question these "gentleman" took the time to answer.

Last night, some Catholic group. "We are non-partisan. Please press '1' to join the conversation about important issues facing the day." Yeah right. The first question I heard: "If Obama is pro-abortion, doesn't that mean he's okay with killing Americans? Isn't that treason?"

I don't know what's worse: living in, say, LA where the state, county and probably suchfreind's ward will vote democratic. Yawn.

Or living in a place where the vote is so important you get fucked with daily. For at least a month. By everyone.

End rant.

you've got early voting in Ohio. If you cast your vote now, you won't get many of those calls anymore. They release the fact that you've voted, but not how you cast your vote to the campaigns. so, if you vote, both sides will know it and cease the contacts.

[evollove]

Well, 100 calls a day vs. 125 might be nice.

But partisan hacks, in my experience, don't check the voter rolls before calling.

I like your logic. They don't.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

I was thinking, is Barack Obama the golden boy highschool phenom pampered to much like Lebron James? Lebron could simply do no wrong to anybody for the first several years of his career, and simply wowed people like the President has been since 2004. Perhaps Mr. Obama needs to lose in the Finals to finally get "that look" and take out the drama like Michael Jordan?

the only good thing Barry Obama got going for him is repping the Choom (4:20) Gang in Hawaii, coining the phrase TA (total absorption for inhaling all the smoke), and giving a big up to his herbsman Ray "for all the good times" in his highschool year book. Take that Michael Phelps, you are only the world's SECOND most legitimately successful mainstream stoner yo!

 

Then again, for a good while in the dirty south they called herbs that "Billy Clint"

[EVOLghost]

"we go play hoop"

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

I was thinking, is Barack Obama the golden boy highschool phenom pampered to much like Lebron James? Lebron could simply do no wrong to anybody for the first several years of his career, and simply wowed people like the President has been since 2004. Perhaps Mr. Obama needs to lose in the Finals to finally get "that look" and take out the drama like Michael Jordan?

the only good thing Barry Obama got going for him is repping the Choom (4:20) Gang in Hawaii, coining the phrase TA (total absorption for inhaling all the smoke), and giving a big up to his herbsman Ray "for all the good times" in his highschool year book. Take that Michael Phelps, you are only the world's SECOND most legitimately successful mainstream stoner yo!

 

Then again, for a good while in the dirty south they called herbs that "Billy Clint"

what the fuck are yout alkinga bout suchfriends? could you rewrite than in Plain English?

you know, like, for furrners.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

what the fuck are yout alkinga bout suchfriends? could you rewrite than in Plain English?

you know, like, for furrners.

Its my attempt at being gastbot

Lebron James= high school phenom basketball player who entered the NBA at 18 making millions of dollars and putting up all-star statistics even in his first game! He was billed to be the one to dethrone Kobe Bryant who had replaced Michael Jordan as the NBA's greatest player. Basketball was polarized, a lot of people didn't like Kobe (hey here in LA we only liked Jordan because he humiliated our rivals the Seattle Supersonics and the Utah Jazz) so folks put their hopes and beefs on the young Lebron James' shoulders. After all, the kid really could ball it up like he was the next Magic Johnson (and true to form of the Bird-Magic bromance, Magic likes to insist that Lebron is the next Larry Bird ). Moral of the story, Lebron James had some of the greatest performances in NBA history, and yet couldn't get a Championship. He was simply never challenged, and didn't push himself enough. Winning it all isn't about a single player, its about a player who can push an entire team, and Lebron just couldn't do that. He had to get clowned by the veteran San Antonia Spurs (fuck Texas basketball yo!!) in 2007 and then again by the Dallas Mavs in 2011. Finally he realized it takes even MORE work than just being a phenom, just being praised, just being coddled by peoples' instant affection. Lebron realized it was all or nothing, just like a trustfund college kid finally realizes when like the young Saddhartha they finally leave the palace and enter the Darwinian real world. He thrived. He put up a legendary performance, and more importantly, the team thrived, and dominated. Bingo. NBA Championship for the young phenom, who finally had to realize sometimes the chips are down, keep playing your top game. Bill Clinton had to learn this same thing when it suddenly looked like Newt Gingrich (???) was the new golden boy. Pimpin Bill Clinton came back thriving through adversity to pimp another generation of Americans. Now Barry Obama is in the same situation. He was barely a congressmen, even less of a senator ( I mean in experience, not action, he was involved in quite a bit of legislation in his brief tenure there) and just kept jumping the ladder, the way Lebron James was allowed to skip college, skip earning fame and acclaim by consistently winning games and championships. In 2004 people were already say the brotha was going to be the first black president. However, he was green, he hadn't had enough of that ugly experience to understand how government and politics function on the day to day level. There is a reason presidents tend to come from a legislative or government background. It is also the reason why Mitt Romney will not win either, he is greener than Obama. So now that Barry has lost his shine, had his own Lebron James Decision moment where the country started to turn on him, and now has in his first term essentially lost at the Finals, in his reelection bid this is his chance to finally win it all. Just like when the Heat faced the young Oklahoma City Thunder (who in this instance is Mitt Romney), Barry Obama has all the advantages to persuade Americans

[!@#$%!]

ahhhhh... now i understand. YES.

(it probably also helps my reading comprehension that i'm now slightly less wasted--ha!)

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Something that is really starting to piss me off. Whats up with Republicans suddenly pretending that they honestly care anything about debt? They are masquerading their bigotry and prejudice against non-white folks and poor folks under this current banner of "austerity" Who invented sky-rocketing deficit spending? Oh right, Ronald Reagan. Who balanced the books? Oh right, pimpin Bill Clinton. Who got it going in the negative again? Yes sir, Bush II. Now Barry Obama has unfortunately kept it running at essentially the same rate, though given, this is a Depression so debt is a better strategy than it was for Reagan and Bush II..

These Republican dudes keep talking about deficits and debt like (a) at any time in their history they have ever substantively done anything about it and (b) like it wasn't a total crock of shit. Debt is part of doing business, period, whatever the scale. The country has always been in debt, it always will be in debt. Now deficit spending, that is different, and that is a long-term problem if it is structural (like it was under Reagan and now clearly under Bush II/Obama) so that needs to be rightfully addressed. Come on over to California and see what two decades of deficit budget spending does to a once beautiful place.

However, when these guys say they want to cut debt, they are being manipulative. Further, there are these bullshit statements you hear from everyday folks who say, "If our household income declines, we have to tighten our belt, not get into more debt." That is simply bullshit, Americans LIVE on debt, for cars and houses and credit cards and all kinds of things. Essentially, the government and the national debt (including the concept of the ceiling) is the same thing. The government routinely borrows and repays monies to pay its bills. When revenue is strong, everything is fine, when revenue is down, then it adds to long-term debt. However, we will always be borrowing, and will always repay our current debts with priority. To say that when Americans are short of cash they don't also borrow is simply ridiculous and further is not a fair comparison to government borrowing and spending. Lying assholes

[h8kurdt]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

Something that is really starting to piss me off. Whats up with Republicans suddenly pretending that they honestly care anything about debt? They are masquerading their bigotry and prejudice against non-white folks and poor folks under this current banner of "austerity" Who invented sky-rocketing deficit spending? Oh right, Ronald Reagan. Who balanced the books? Oh right, pimpin Bill Clinton. Who got it going in the negative again? Yes sir, Bush II. Now Barry Obama has unfortunately kept it running at essentially the same rate, though given, this is a Depression so debt is a better strategy than it was for Reagan and Bush II..

These Republican dudes keep talking about deficits and debt like (a) at any time in their history they have ever substantively done anything about it and (b) like it wasn't a total crock of shit. Debt is part of doing business, period, whatever the scale. The country has always been in debt, it always will be in debt. Now deficit spending, that is different, and that is a long-term problem if it is structural (like it was under Reagan and now clearly under Bush II/Obama) so that needs to be rightfully addressed. Come on over to California and see what two decades of deficit budget spending does to a once beautiful place.

However, when these guys say they want to cut debt, they are being manipulative. Further, there are these bullshit statements you hear from everyday folks who say, "If our household income declines, we have to tighten our belt, not get into more debt." That is simply bullshit, Americans LIVE on debt, for cars and houses and credit cards and all kinds of things. Essentially, the government and the national debt (including the concept of the ceiling) is the same thing. The government routinely borrows and repays monies to pay its bills. When revenue is strong, everything is fine, when revenue is down, then it adds to long-term debt. However, we will always be borrowing, and will always repay our current debts with priority. To say that when Americans are short of cash they don't also borrow is simply ridiculous and further is not a fair comparison to government borrowing and spending. Lying assholes

Bullshit.

You seem to think that any debt is good debt and acceptable. There is good debt but the debt most countries are in is crippling. You only have to look Spain, Greece and Portugal to see what debt is doing.

And the fact is that one of the reasons we're (Brits and Americans alike) in so much debt and the recession has hit so hard is that people were borrowing more than they could ever afford.

Whilst the republicans idea of clearing the debt is basically lower taxes and have huge swathes of cuts mostly affecting the poor and middle class is a bad idea and has been proved to not work (you only have to look at the stumbling Britain's economy is going through). You can't just spend willy nilly in the hope something will get better.

[Pookie]

Originally Posted by h8kurdt

Bullshit.

You seem to think that any debt is good debt and acceptable. There is good debt but the debt most countries are in is crippling. You only have to look Spain, Greece and Portugal to see what debt is doing.

It's the austerity programmes that are crippling these countries, not debt.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Pookie again.

Originally Posted by h8kurdt

Bullshit.

You
seem to think that any debt is good debt and acceptable. There is good debt but the debt most countries are in is crippling. You only have to look Spain, Greece and Portugal to see what debt is doing.

And the fact is that one of the reasons we're (Brits and Americans alike) in so much debt and the recession has hit so hard is that people were borrowing more than they could ever afford.

Whilst the republicans idea of clearing the debt is basically lower taxes and have huge swathes of cuts mostly affecting the poor and middle class is a bad idea and has been proved to not work (you only have to look at the stumbling Britain's economy is going through). You can't just spend willy nilly in the hope something will get better.

I am not necessarily saying debt is good or bad, just that it is part of doing business. Spain and Greece have a different situation than the US, they accumulated a higher proportion of debt in a shorter time frame than the US has. Further, the US in the long arc will bounce back and begin to sort out its budget gaps. My real beef is not to say "debt is good or debt is bad" but to criticize hypocritical politicians who manipulate the narrative as if (a) trickle down economics isn't the problem with our revenue streams and (b) they ever substantively planned to do anything about it

What is worse, the common analogy that Americans tighten their belts when the chips are down is a farce. Americans still have mortgages, car loans, student loans, credit cards, and all kinds of other debt obligations to pay, chips down or not. Often times when folks are paycheck to paycheck, its the credit card. When folks can't exactly afford the car they'd like, its the car loan. Dreaming big for a house? Mortgage. Need to repair or add on? Refinance. See what I mean? Debt is part of doing business. Structural budget gaps/deficits contribute to long term debt, true, but that is a separate issue than just talking about the national debt in general.

How do small business grow? Bank loans, investors, even venture capitalists. See, borrowing and spending is reality. The problem is that right now corporations are sitting on $ TWO TRILLION in capital and the government is short about 1 TRILLION a year, so clearly we see where the money went

[h8kurdt]

Originally Posted by Pookie

It's the austerity programmes that are crippling these countries, not debt.

See the last paragraph.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Predatory lending is the fault of the lenders, not solely the victims. Further, the European situation is not comparable to the US. European countries are in staggering debt because those countries overplayed their hands during several concurring economic bubbles, and as a nation, never had the level of economic output to sustain such over the long term. The US IS such a nation that can easily afford its long term obligations at the rates it pays. No lenders or investor are balking at the the change to get involved in US debt, so clearly it is not an issue. Should we keep deficit spending by a 1 TRILLION a year? Of course not. However, we shouldn't be using the National Debt in that discussion, it is quite literally irrelevant. The US pays its debts on time routinely. No investors are complaining. We are not in an economic situation where we can suddenly try to double down on our National Debt, just like a family losing a significant source of income, can't suddenly decide to pay off their credit cards. Rather, we are going to have to like grown ups seriously sort out our priorities in the short and long term to solve our budget gaps. It is not just a tax and spend idea, it is a radical assessment of our values as a society and community. For example, business is booming, why can't we have short term high tax rates (say for 1-3) years which will draw in revenues and yet will not be a long term or systemic threat to business. Corporations are quite literally BOOMING, if there was ever a time for them to be paying 37-39% like in the Clinton era it is today, and if there was ever a time when the government was so short on the revinue it is now. Trickle down economics through the combination of the Bush II tax cuts, several business tax loop holes, and the crippling effects of free trade agreements have gutted revenues for the government, hence 4 years of nearly TRILLION dollar deficits. We need revenues, and that is simply not going to happen by MORE trickle down. Corporations couldn't have any more capital available unless we continued to just print more money, and even then, they'd get the lions' share. However we sort out our next few budgets, they have to be substantive, not 9 consecutive stop gaps. We need to get to work, not bicker over political pandering. Lets be honest, the Democrats had compromised on a lot of issues, there was a good plan last year that was simply shot down by Republicans who insist on this silly no tax pledge. Fuck corporations if their desire is to continue to pay less wages, provide less benefits, AND not pay their fair share in taxes to pick up the slack when government has to provide those same services that employers used to or should be providing?

[h8kurdt]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Pookie again.



I am not necessarily saying debt is good or bad, just that it is part of doing business. Spain and Greece have a different situation than the US, they accumulated a higher proportion of debt in a shorter time frame than the US has. Further, the US in the long arc will bounce back and begin to sort out its budget gaps. My real beef is not to say "debt is good or debt is bad" but to criticize hypocritical politicians who manipulate the narrative as if (a) trickle down economics isn't the problem with our revenue streams and (b) they ever substantively planned to do anything about it

What is worse, the common analogy that Americans tighten their belts when the chips are down is a farce. Americans still have mortgages, car loans, student loans, credit cards, and all kinds of other debt obligations to pay, chips down or not. Often times when folks are paycheck to paycheck, its the credit card. When folks can't exactly afford the car they'd like, its the car loan. Dreaming big for a house? Mortgage. Need to repair or add on? Refinance. See what I mean? Debt is part of doing business. Structural budget gaps/deficits contribute to long term debt, true, but that is a separate issue than just talking about the national debt in general.

How do small business grow? Bank loans, investors, even venture capitalists. See, borrowing and spending is reality. The problem is that right now corporations are sitting on $ TWO TRILLION in capital and the government is short about 1 TRILLION a year, so clearly we see where the money went

People do and should tighten their belts of they fall on hard times.

I can't afford to have a brand spanking new car or to get a loan out to buy a huge 40 inch tv. I'd like to but there's no way I could afford to pay back the loan bills and I know in this current situation many, many more people are in the same boat. Would you rather I get into more debt and risk getting turfed out of my place? It's a shitter especially when you know that the rich/poor divide is only gonna get worse.

You seem to be making out that even if someone can't afford a loan they shold take on out anyway.

As for small business loans I'm a painter and decorator by trade, but when I got laid off my last employer due to lack of work nearly a year ago I had to go on the dole. A few months later of unemployment and nobody hiring I said fuck it and decided to try and go and do it on my own.
Thing is I knew I needed a loan. It worked out I would've needed 2 grand to buy a van etc. I ended up having a meeting with my bank asking for a loan, and lo-and-behold as they have done to many more people wanting to set up a business I got denied.
If I had been approved and I had been able to build up a good steady level of customers I could've a)paid the loan back easily and b)had a hell of a lot more disposable income. As it stands I'm now in a shitty warehouse job with bare minimum level of disposable income.

I more than understand that banks and the government should be giving more help people set up businesses.

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by h8kurdt

People do and should tighten their belts of they fall on hard times.

I can't afford to have a brand spanking new car or to get a loan out to buy a huge 40 inch tv. I'd like to but there's no way I could afford to pay back the loan bills and I know in this current situation many, many more people are in the same boat. Would you rather I get into more debt and risk getting turfed out of my place? It's a shitter especially when you know that the rich/poor divide is only gonna get worse.

You seem to be making out that even if someone can't afford a loan they shold take on out anyway.

As for small business loans I'm a painter and decorator by trade, but when I got laid off my last employer due to lack of work nearly a year ago I had to go on the dole. A few months later of unemployment and nobody hiring I said fuck it and decided to try and go and do it on my own.
Thing is I knew I needed a loan. It worked out I would've needed 2 grand to buy a van etc. I ended up having a meeting with my bank asking for a loan, and lo-and-behold as they have done to many more people wanting to set up a business I got denied.
If I had been approved and I had been able to build up a good steady level of customers I could've a)paid the loan back easily and b)had a hell of a lot more disposable income. As it stands I'm now in a shitty warehouse job with bare minimum level of disposable income.

I more than understand that banks and the government should be giving more help people set up businesses.

When people are broke, its not brand new cars and 40" TVs that the are putting on debt, it is groceries, electric and phone bills, kids' clothes and school needs, etc etc..

Further and again, you are right, the government could afford to tighten its belt, but on that bloated military and police-state spending (the local police agencies absorb between 60-80% of local revenues and have huge federal subsidies) and those greedy corporate tax loop holes

Oh.. Bush II tax cuts cost about $5 TRILLION in lost revenues, and the war(s) are $1-1.5 TRILLION (yeah, war is ugly like that, the margin for error is $500,000,000,000 not to mention), and all kinds of other silly things and what do you have? Trickle Down economics 2.0. By the way, how much does all this looking tuff and blowing shit up around the world cost the US in the past ten years?

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...94 .01_894.97

(the answer is $6 TRILLION on defense spending )

[evollove]

Originally Posted by Pookie

It's the austerity programmes that are crippling these countries, not debt.

How does this happen?

I'm not saying it doesn't. I'm just asking.

I'm one of the few people who will fess up and admit I don't understand how complex economic systems work.

So how do austerity measures hurt the overall economy?

Look, I'm not saying they don't. Chill. Hey, it's just a question. Fuck you, I'm just trying to figure it out. No need to call me that. Oh, bite me.