WWTBAM Bored

But I tend to agree with this blog entry at The New Republic.

TheCalvinator24 wrote:But I tend to agree with this blog entry at The New Republic.

OK, that settles it.

I'm gonna send that to Plouffe, Biden, and Obama (Michelle) and tell them to quit sending me a fund-raiser E-mail every day.

Not that I ever give them any money anyway.

It can't come soon enough!

christie1111 wrote:It can't come soon enough!

Hey!

Back to the Moratorium Lounge with you!

And for the cynical out there, I am not attempting to lull anyone into a false sense of security and complacency.

I really think the election is out of reach for McCain.

But for the economic meltdown, I would have held out hope, but it appears to me that it's all over but the shouting.

It is truly pathetic where the blame is falling and who will be choosen to fix it.

Just as I was right about oil prices I am right about this. If Obama wins, we will be worse off in 4 years. Probably 8 years as well, whether my $100 contribution to his re-election is successful or not.

Obama hasn't a clue, nor does he care, about how capitalism works. Many here probably think, so what, capitalism isn't all its cracked up to be, it keeps the little guy down and the rich corporations richer. I guess they would rather be driving 45 year-old cars like they do in Cuba or starve like they do in North Korea, or eat and drink tainted foodstuffs like they do in China.

There is no economic model where everyone wins. It is as impossible as the Big Bang (out of nothing came everything, all at once).

But capitalism, with all its warts, does give everyone a chance, if they are willing the work. And it does reward those who produce. And unfortunately, it sometimes rewards those who don't produce (but enough about investment bankers).

We are headed towards socialism. Maybe not pure, but with enough blend that it will hobble the economy so much that is will not recover until the next social revolution, if we make it that far as a country.

Oh, and btw, I predict dire economic crisis in China by year-end. I heard a report today that China has not imported a single barrel of gasoline in a month and will not do so for the next month. Hmmmm.... who was it that predicted something like that a couple months ago?

Call me a nut. I hope I'm wrong.

TheCalvinator24 wrote: I really think the election is out of reach for McCain.

But for the economic meltdown, I would have held out hope, but it appears to me that it's all over but the shouting.

McCain can't win by recycling the old charges about Ayers, Wright, and Rezko, because the public has been willing to give a pass to Obama on them so far.

I've always thought that the Republicans have had more stuff about Obama that they haven't brought out yet. The change in McCain's and Palin's tactics the last couple of days bears this out. They've been hitting Obama hard on character and that's likely to continue during the debate tomorrow. This will get the public thinking at least on some level about Obama's character and background. I expect to see and hear something new shortly after that.

BackInTex wrote:It is truly pathetic where the blame is falling and who will be choosen to fix it.

Just as I was right about oil prices I am right about this. If Obama wins, we will be worse off in 4 years. Probably 8 years as well, whether my $100 contribution to his re-election is successful or not.

Obama hasn't a clue, nor does he care, about how capitalism works. Many here probably think, so what, capitalism isn't all its cracked up to be, it keeps the little guy down and the rich corporations richer. I guess they would rather be driving 45 year-old cars like they do in Cuba or starve like they do in North Korea, or eat and drink tainted foodstuffs like they do in China.

There is no economic model where everyone wins. It is as impossible as the Big Bang (out of nothing came everything, all at once).

But capitalism, with all its warts, does give everyone a chance, if they are willing the work. And it does reward those who produce. And unfortunately, it sometimes rewards those who don't produce (but enough about investment bankers).

We are headed towards socialism. Maybe not pure, but with enough blend that it will hobble the economy so much that is will not recover until the next social revolution, if we make it that far as a country.

Oh, and btw, I predict dire economic crisis in China by year-end. I heard a report today that China has not imported a single barrel of gasoline in a month and will not do so for the next month. Hmmmm.... who was it that predicted something like that a couple months ago?

Call me a nut. I hope I'm wrong.

If Obama does win, I think the economy will really suffer. That will lead to a Republican take over of both houses of Congress in the 2010 elections. I honestly don't see him winning re-election after four years of his Socialist policies...

Full disclosure.

I don't have a lot of confidence that McCain will do what is necessary to fix the economy correctly or quickly. I do think he understands how, I just don't think he is enough of a maverick to do it.

But I don't think his policies will drive it further down. So he gets my vote.

TheCalvinator24 wrote:And for the cynical out there, I am not attempting to lull anyone into a false sense of security and complacency.

I really think the election is out of reach for McCain.

But for the economic meltdown, I would have held out hope, but it appears to me that it's all over but the shouting.

Or as I always say, "The fat lady hasn't sung yet, but she's warming up backstage."

I have always found Howard Wolfson's viewpoints to be extremely slanted to the left. However, even I have to agree with much of what he has posted.

I believe that McCain was on his way to a decisive victory before the economic collapse began. And, even though Obama has more ties to the collapse than McCain does, people have simply become completely fed up with what they perceive to be a failure of the Bush administration. And while Bush is also not really complicit in the toppling of this house of cards, he was at fault for failure to warn the public of the impending disaster. In my opinion, he is a poor leader. Period.

The only poll I have any faith in, the Rasmussen Poll, does not show a pretty picture for McCain right now. But, we are still 4 weeks out and, as we have seen, anything can happen.

McCain will have to pull a proverbial rabbit out of the hat in tonight's debate if he is to convince the American voter than he is still the better man for the job. I believe that he needs to put some serious doubt in the minds of the undecideds (if there are any left) that Obama is simply not the right man for the job. While I don't believe that we have any stars in this presidential election I do believe that McCain will do far less damage than Obama. I believe that if Obama gets elected the country's economy will tank worse than it already has. Obama has no more of a plan to save the economy than McCain does but, like I said, many people are just fed up with the Republican administration's failures. They do want change.

The one shining light, in my opinion, is Palin. If McCain does lose, I look for her to make her own run for the White House in 2012. And, when (not if) Obama tanks this country with his socialist policies, look for her to take 2012.

If Obama does win, I think the economy will really suffer. That will lead to a Republican take over of both houses of Congress in the 2010 elections. I honestly don't see him winning re-election after four years of his Socialist policies...

I can't see anything more Socialist than the government bailing out -- ie, owning -- this country's financial institutions.

dimmzy wrote: I can't see anything more Socialist than the government bailing out -- ie, owning -- this country's financial institutions.

I absolutely agree with you 100% here.

My apologies to the bored if any ruins a shirt by spitting their coffee on themselves.

dimmzy wrote:

If Obama does win, I think the economy will really suffer. That will lead to a Republican take over of both houses of Congress in the 2010 elections. I honestly don't see him winning re-election after four years of his Socialist policies...

I can't see anything more Socialist than the government bailing out -- ie, owning -- this country's financial institutions.

You are absolutely correct. And who is at the top of the list of the sponsors of the bill? Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, etc, etc. The passage of that bill does not surprise me at all. Did you know that the Dems had more than enough votes to pass that bill without requiring any Republicans but didn't want to vote on it until they had enough Republican votes behind them so that if the bill tanked they would not be held as solely responsible for its failure?

Did you know that the Dems had more than enough votes to pass that bill without requiring any Republicans but didn't want to vote on it until they had enough Republican votes behind them so that if the bill tanked they would not be held as solely responsible for its failure?

Well, I guess the Republicans were easier to get than those Palin "pallin'" gals...

dimmzy wrote:

If Obama does win, I think the economy will really suffer. That will lead to a Republican take over of both houses of Congress in the 2010 elections. I honestly don't see him winning re-election after four years of his Socialist policies...

I can't see anything more Socialist than the government bailing out -- ie, owning -- this country's financial institutions.

I agree. I think there were much better alternatives than this bailout.

Sir_Galahad wrote:

dimmzy wrote:

If Obama does win, I think the economy will really suffer. That will lead to a Republican take over of both houses of Congress in the 2010 elections. I honestly don't see him winning re-election after four years of his Socialist policies...

I can't see anything more Socialist than the government bailing out -- ie, owning -- this country's financial institutions.

You are absolutely correct. And who is at the top of the list of the sponsors of the bill? Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, etc, etc. The passage of that bill does not surprise me at all. Did you know that the Dems had more than enough votes to pass that bill without requiring any Republicans but didn't want to vote on it until they had enough Republican votes behind them so that if the bill tanked they would not be held as solely responsible for its failure?

While they sponsored the bill - the bill was oriiginally proposed by Henry Paulson with the backing of Bush and Bernanke.

This is a bippartison screw-up - I don't think you can honestly or fairly pin blame on one side or the other.

Sir_Galahad wrote: And, when (not if) Obama tanks this country with his socialist policies

What is left to be socialized? Heatlh care and education are effectively socialized already. The auto industry just got a bailout - the financail industry got an even bigger bailout.

Government is already all over agriculture and food.

I suppose they could nationalize oil but there really isn't much left other than that for them to take on.


I also think the problems in the economy are bad enough that neither side can fix them. The next four years will be ugly.

gotribego26 wrote:

Sir_Galahad wrote: And, when (not if) Obama tanks this country with his socialist policies

What is left to be socialized? Heatlh care and education are effectively socialized already. The auto industry just got a bailout - the financail industry got an even bigger bailout.

Government is already all over agriculture and food.

I suppose they could nationalize oil but there really isn't much left other than that for them to take on.


I also think the problems in the economy are bad enough that neither side can fix them. The next four years will be ugly.

Change our weak dollar policy to a strong dollar policy (Clinton's Sec of Treasury Rubin was a strong dollar policy advocate) would help some.

Too much fear (and yes some warranted) is out there and a lot of "small" investors have or will now get out of the market. Usually a sign that the bottom is near.

gotribego26 wrote:

Sir_Galahad wrote: And, when (not if) Obama tanks this country with his socialist policies

What is left to be socialized? Heatlh care and education are effectively socialized already. The auto industry just got a bailout - the financail industry got an even bigger bailout.

Government is already all over agriculture and food.

I suppose they could nationalize oil but there really isn't much left other than that for them to take on.


I also think the problems in the economy are bad enough that neither side can fix them. The next four years will be ugly.

I agree with tribe. Whether we admit it or not, government has been entwined with virtually every aspect of the economy.

The bigger problem is what, if anything we could/should do about it. Governmental intervention predates even the earliest socialist governments that wielded any true power. It arose solely because of the fundamental flaw in capitalism - greed. And it will stay around until someone comes up with a way to control greed.

It becomes difficult to defend the system of a free marketplace when, invariably, those who get an upper hand in any market almost invariably exploit that advantage for personal gain without any concern for the destabilization of that very market their actions may cause.

I should stop here to say that I do not support the trend toward ever increasing governmental control that seems to always attach to any initial placement of some controls, because I feel that, warts and all, capitalism is, far and away, the best economic system to date. But it is far from perfect.

While the intentions of the bailout were good, I see the day, quite soon, where it will become part of the problem without solving the initial problem. And it won't go away, because people will say 'Where would we be without it?'

Until we learn to control the greed that always flourishes in good times, there are going to be times like what is immediately ahead. Plus, greed still hasn't loosened its grip. I am incredulous to see that the only way this bailout could get passed was to load it with more pork than in a Super Slam at Denny's.

I hold no optimism for the immediate future.

This is refreshing.

A thread on public policy and no one's gotten cranky.

Of course, we have all been invited to call BiT a nut.

Yo!

BiT!

You're a nut!

I heard a report this morning that the Fed is planning to buy large amounts of "commercial paper" - short term, unsecured debt businesses use to operate on a day to day basis. It's supposed to help free up credit, but I don't see a long-term upside to this, unless the economy picks up quickly. I see the taxpayers getting stuck with this debt.

Oh, well, we'll just add it to the federal debt. It's so big now, what's a few hundred billion more?

I completely agree with Cal. I have McCain/Pailin getting 198 electoral votes, and I think I'm being generous. Four weeks is still a long time, but I don't see any scenario that will turn this election around enough to give McCain a chance. I hope I'm wrong, but I doubt it.

TheCalvinator24 wrote:And for the cynical out there, I am not attempting to lull anyone into a false sense of security and complacency.

I really think the election is out of reach for McCain.

But for the economic meltdown, I would have held out hope, but it appears to me that it's all over but the shouting.

I have found many who agree with you on this. My b-i-l has practically made his concession speech, and fortunately agrees with me that whoever wins will not bring Armageddon with him, whether it's his candidate or not. So all demonizing has stopped. I think it was his 30% pay cut that did it.

He's really down these days, poor guy. At least his Redskins are kicking ass, and I won't tease him if they start losing.