do you want obama to succeed?

Jerrysworld · Mar 4, 2009

Both ways?
You aren't labouring under the impression that the world believes that Bush is further left than Obama, are you?

Of course not. But if Obama is on the right side of world politics, then Bush is on the left side of world politics.

You are creating this huge monolith of an enemy with no real solid justification.

The government constantly seeking power is all the justification one needs. If one denies that further socialist policies would lead to more power in the hands of government, they just have their heads in the sand.

America is not, and never will be "like" Europe. Americans have created a vastly different culture than anything in Europe.

Then why do we always hear how socialism works in Norway and Finland and so it should work here as well, if we're so different?

Thing is, I know we're different. Socialism in America won't work like it does in Norway. It'll be a lot worse than anything we have now.

To think that (boogey man) "Socialism" is going to express itself and have the same effect on US society is presumptuous to say the least. I mean, it's not as though America is EXACTLY like Brittain minus "Socialism". To suggest that (as you do), degrades the rich mileau of both countries.

I never suggested that. I said it would have the similar effect of consolidating government power and resulting in the loss of freedoms, liberty and privacy. These things are already happening in this country without socialism, and would grow worse under socialism. That's undeniable.

Jerrysworld · Mar 4, 2009

Those are the big guns; do you realize the ramifications of those corporations failing? The domino affect it would have on our economy. This is one time where the conservative theory of trickle down economics would really and truly work. So please tell me how it would benefit America to just let these companies fail? I really want to know where you envision America if we allow that to happen.

I don't want all his policies to fail, and by failure, I mean failure to be enacted, as do most who want his policies to fail. I want cap & trade to fail to be enacted. I want most any gun laws he wants to pass to fail to be enacted. I want even more government control of healthcare to fail to be enacted.

When it comes to the banks, I want to get out of this recession and then have them start paying the money back. If they can't, put the ceos in prison for life, dismantle the the corporations, and sell them at firesale rates to get our money back.

praying · Mar 4, 2009

praying said:
For those that want Obama's policies to fail; translate that into what will happens to Americans. Let's say it is 2013, Obama's policies have failed, how do you envision America.?

praying said:
I see no one has addressed this question. Its easy to say, I want the presidents policies to fail and like Rush say it doesnt mean I want America to fail but what does the presidents policy failures really mean for the country? What is the REALITY of the failure?

Just to bring this into some semblance of perspective:

AIG
2007 Employees 116,000

Bank of America
2007 Employees 210,000

GM
2007 Employees 266,000

GMAC
2007 Employees 26,700

CitiGroup
2007 Employees 387,000

Employee data from www.hoovers.com.

Total direct potential jobs lost 1,005,700

Note I did not include the company subsidiaries (which would probably come close to doubling the direct potential job losses) except for GMAC because surely if GM fails there will be no need for GMAC credit.

Those are the big guns; do you realize the ramifications of those corporations failing? The domino affect it would have on our economy. This is one time where the conservative theory of trickle down economics would really and truly work. So please tell me how it would benefit America to just let these companies fail? I really want to know where you envision America if we allow that to happen.

Just quoting myself again, looking for some answers from the I want Obama to fail crowd.

Steve Petersen · Mar 4, 2009

praying said:
Just quoting myself again, looking for some answers from the I want Obama to fail crowd.

Are you contending that
A) nobody should lose their jobs when companies fail, or
B) are you saying that no company should be allowed to fail, or
C) that only small companies should be allowed to fail?

praying · Mar 4, 2009

Steve Petersen said:
Are you contending that
A) nobody should lose their jobs when companies fail, or
B) are you saying that no company should be allowed to fail, or
C) that only small companies should be allowed to fail?

I am not saying any of that, I am asking those who want Obama to fail, envision where that failure will take America.

Sketcher · Mar 4, 2009

praying said:
I am not saying any of that, I am asking those who want Obama to fail, envision where that failure will take America.

Ultimately in the right direction once the people he seduced sober up.

praying · Mar 4, 2009

twistedsketch said:
Ultimately in the right direction once the people he seduced sober up.

That doesn't describe what you envision.

canukian · Mar 4, 2009

Code:

rambot said:
Who gives a crap? Well the people who intelligently discussion Socialism and economics and strive to use precise definitions: They give a great BIG crap.
Bush was not even close to a liberal on the world scale. Not even close.

When people claim that Obama is a Socialist, I wonder if they've spent any meaningful time in countries they would consider "socialist hell holes" (West. Europe, Scandinavia, Canada [to a smaller extent])?

did you know scandinavia has super low corperate tax rates to atract jobs?
so they get high paying jobs and tax workers sky high.
kind of counter intuitive eh?

rambot · Mar 4, 2009

did you know scandinavia has super low corperate tax rates to atract jobs?
so they get high paying jobs and tax workers sky high.
kind of counter intuitive eh?

So, socialist and capitalist principals can work together to create a healthy system?

Sketcher · Mar 4, 2009

praying said:
That doesn't describe what you envision.

Freer markets, more individual liberty, stronger defense, Constitutional governance, real justice, protection of innocent human life.

canukian · Mar 4, 2009

Code:

praying said:
I see no one has addressed this question. Its easy to say, I want the presidents policies to fail and like Rush say it doesnt mean I want America to fail but what does the presidents policy failures really mean for the country? What is the REALITY of the failure?

Just to bring this into some semblance of perspective:

AIG
2007 Employees 116,000

Bank of America
2007 Employees 210,000

GM
2007 Employees 266,000

GMAC
2007 Employees 26,700

CitiGroup
2007 Employees 387,000

Employee data from www.hoovers.com.

Total direct potential jobs lost 1,005,700

Note I did not include the company subsidiaries (which would probably come close to doubling the direct potential job losses) except for GMAC because surely if GM fails there will be no need for GMAC credit.

Those are the big guns; do you realize the ramifications of those corporations failing? The domino affect it would have on our economy. This is one time where the conservative theory of trickle down economics would really and truly work. So please tell me how it would benefit America to just let these companies fail? I really want to know where you envision America if we allow that to happen.

simple
reward sucsess
punish failure
if you do the opposite it is a sure recipe for faiure

rambot · Mar 4, 2009

reward sucsess
punish failure

... and consequences bedamned!

Steve Petersen · Mar 4, 2009

rambot said:
... and consequences bedamned!

Do we protect our children from failure? Most people only really learn by failing.

canukian · Mar 4, 2009

rambot said:
... and consequences bedamned!

the choise is to reward failure and punish suckcess
or visa versa
what seems the right choise to you?

rambot · Mar 4, 2009

the choise is to reward failure and punish suckcess
or visa versa
what seems the right choise to you?

Find a way to punish the individuals involved but keep the institutions solvent. Just cutting out money and letting the institutions fall would be disastrous.

I'm ALL for punishing every single person involved in the creation of the loose mortgage rules but letting all the banks just fall, would be a disaster.

Do we protect our children from failure? Most people only really learn by failing.

The implications of a collapsed and useless financial sector are FAR FAR greater than child with a scraped knee.

Sketcher · Mar 4, 2009

Steve Petersen said:
Do we protect our children from failure? Most people only really learn by failing.

Speaking of children, how about all that debt from unsustainable entitlements that your generation is passing on to mine?

ScottBot · Mar 5, 2009

canukian said:
[/color]

simple
reward sucsess
punish failure
if you do the opposite it is a sure recipe for faiure

I'm not quite sure I would put it in terms of "punishing" failure, but I wouldn't try to stop failure from happening or reduce its consequences. People often learn more from their mistakes than from their successes. Look at Thomas Edison. When inventing the incandescent lightbulb he didn't claim 10,000 failures, but rather: "I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."

Michael Jordan, same thing: "I've missed more than 9000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. 26 times, I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."

Why are liberals so afraid of letting people fail? Failure is part of the price of success, and if you take away people's right and capacity to fail, you also take away their right and capacity to succeed. Succinctly put by George Bernard Shaw: "A life spent making mistakes is not only more honorable but more useful than a life spent in doing nothing."

praying · Mar 5, 2009

Steve Petersen said:
Do we protect our children from failure? Most people only really learn by failing.

The problem with that philosophy in this case is of the potential direct potential jobs lost of 1,005,700 maybe and this is a very big maybe 1000 people had anything at all to do with the bad leadership which led these companies down this path. Then there is the absolutely devastating ripple affect that all of this would have. You know that famous conservative trickle down economic theory which only seems to work in reverse during bad times when the middle and lower classes suffer.

Matthew_18:14 · Mar 5, 2009

romanov said:
He is going to fail. It is just a matter of time. Bush acted just like Hoover. Hoover spent more money on public works in 4 years than the government did in the previous twenty and raised all kinds of tariffs (TAXES.) Then comes Roosevelt with the raw deal. Some claim it was WWII that got us out of the great depression. I say it was post WWII that did it. For how many years was the US the only modern country that had manufacturing plants that did not have bomb craters for floors. Hard to use a lathe that is just chunks of melted and twisted steel.

So, Bush tries his stimulus which amounts to more of the same borrow and spend and not cut spending. Along comes the FDR analogy, Obama, with his borrow, tax, spend, borrow some more, spend some more, print a bunch, tax even more, create new taxes (carbon credits), talk down the economy, tax even more, borrow, give it to Hamas, spend some more, and tell every-one how much the US sucks, then promise to bankrupt an industry, and force another the make what no-one wants, then tax some more, force solvent banks to take bailout money, nationalise the rest, spend some more, and take working capital and give it to those who do not work. Yea, I see that working.

I'll give a big AMEN and an Alleluia to that. Good luck to all those poor people that Mr. President would like to help out. He doesn't really want to help them, he wants to put them on the dole, so that he can gradually take their ambition away. <staff edit>

ahiggs · Mar 6, 2009

rambot said:
Find a way to punish the individuals involved but keep the institutions solvent. Just cutting out money and letting the institutions fall would be disastrous.

I'm ALL for punishing every single person involved in the creation of the loose mortgage rules but letting all the banks just fall, would be a disaster.

The implications of a collapsed and useless financial sector are FAR FAR greater than child with a scraped knee.

i agree that the banks have some fault, but what ever happened to personal responsibility? nobody twisted their arm to make them buy a house they knew they couldn't afford. if you can't afford it today, what really makes you think you can afford it tomorrow?

do you want obama to succeed?

do you want obama to succeed?

yes

no

i don't know

i don't care

Jerrysworld

Guest

Jerrysworld

Guest

Snazzy Title Goes Here

Senior Veteran

Snazzy Title Goes Here

Born Imperishable

Snazzy Title Goes Here

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Born Imperishable

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Born Imperishable

Revolutionary

Snazzy Title Goes Here

Junior Member

Regular Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency