Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Alex23 on July 28, 2012, 03:49:31 PM
-
Lower taxes.
Bottom up economic growth fueled by pro small businesses environment.
Massive innovation in energy.
End of american socialism and welfare state.
Pro bodybuilding environment.
-
sounds like a good country.
obama promised hope and change, but what has changed? all we have are more entitlements and higher unemployment.
-
Lower taxes.
Bottom up economic growth fueled by pro small businesses environment.
Massive innovation in energy.
End of american socialism and welfare state.
Pro bodybuilding environment.
Sarcasm meter went crazy and exploded.
(Unless I read this wrong, and you mean "after Obama's gone)
-
We haven't had a decent leader with good economic sense in almost 12 years both Bush and Obama have shot there legacies in the foot due to completely retarded policies. Mit Romney is not my best pick by any means but this country is chomping at the bit to blast off and grow if the right policies are implemented and I think Romney will do that. Plus these last four years have been horrible as far as race relations between blacks and whites, I have never seen the race card played as many times or as often as it is now, white people thought that this past election would fill the void between the two races and it did not, if anything its worse and black people fail to understand that every single black person in the US could have voted Obama and he would have lost so it to some whites to get him in there. Obama will get a pass for his horrible presidency because. He's the first from African decent, Bush's legacy is just fucked and should be but it doesn't seem right.
-
We haven't had a decent leader with good economic sense in almost 12 years both Bush and Obama have shot there legacies in the foot due to completely retarded policies. Mit Romney is not my best pick by any means but this country is chomping at the bit to blast off and grow if the right policies are implemented and I think Romney will do that. Plus these last four years have been horrible as far as race relations between blacks and whites, I have never seen the race card played as many times or as often as it is now, white people thought that this past election would fill the void between the two races and it did not, if anything its worse and black people fail to understand that every single black person in the US could have voted Obama and he would have lost so it to some whites to get him in there. Obama will get a pass for his horrible presidency because. He's the first from African decent, Bush's legacy is just fucked and should be but it doesn't seem right.
The only person who should be considered is Ron Paul - only dude who makes any sense yet is completely ignored by the mainstream and seems to be way too intelligent for the average American to understand.
-
The only person who should be considered is Ron Paul - only dude who makes any sense yet is completely ignored by the mainstream and seems to be way too intelligent for the average American to understand.
Ron Paul is the man.
Too bad his own party refuses to give him the time of day, because he doesnt tow their line of bullshit spending, unnecessary wars, and destruction of personal liberty.
-
lower taxes, for who?the rich and multinational corporations?what taxes you mean, income taxes?you naive or something?vat?tax on petrol?you know how the big boys avoid taxes.
bottom up economic growth?you know where the bailout money goes?it doesnt get to the people.try getting a 1million dollar credit and see.
innovation in energy?is that code word for invading another oil rich country?
end of welfare state,ok, socialism, lol.yeah end it, in a nation with 10% unemployed and what, 15% living on food stamps.
pro bodybuilding enviroment?i think usa has bigger concer about overweight population
You aren't American, are you? I can't really understand where you are going with this one.
Doesnt matter who's in power, rich get richer, poor get poorer, those of us in the middle keep fighting for a bigger piece of the pie.
Thats life.
-
You aren't American, are you? I can't really understand where you are going with this one.
Doesnt matter who's in power, rich get richer, poor get poorer, those of us in the middle keep fighting for a bigger piece of the pie.
Thats life.
this^
-
That innovation in energy you referred to would be better defined by Obama giving solydra 500 mil knowing that it would still fail, but still giving it because they donated so much to his campaign.
-
The only person who should be considered is Ron Paul - only dude who makes any sense yet is completely ignored by the mainstream and seems to be way too intelligent for the average American to understand.
You're Asstralian, your opinion means shit.
-
You're Asstralian, your opinion means shit.
You just gotta love how these folks who live in other countries have so much to say about U.S. politics. :-\
-
You just gotta love how these folks who live in other countries have so much to say about U.S. politics. :-\
that's the beauty of it... we never comment nor care about their shitty country but they
have all the opinions in the worlds about ours... semms serious..
-
The economy was good under Bush until the house and the senate went democratic during his term. Then the economy slid downhill. First it was the mortgage mess managed by democrat Frank and Cuomo.
-
Lower taxes.
Bottom up economic growth fueled by pro small businesses environment.
Massive innovation in energy.
End of american socialism and welfare state.
Pro bodybuilding environment.
Riots in urban centers from the freeloaders and paasites.
-
I thought he was going to predict the Mr O winner! Bodybuilding related.
-
If Obama jad a son with a really narrow structure and a boatload of insulin....he could be Mr O.
-
The only person who should be considered is Ron Paul - only dude who makes any sense yet is completely ignored by the mainstream and seems to be way too intelligent for the average American to understand.
LOL!
(http://wonkette.com/assets/resources/2007/11/paultardwar.jpg)
(http://toxichominid.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/manage-a-newsletter-ron-paul.jpg)
-
The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.
The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6% George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH
Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!
Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!
Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA
And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?
OBAMA and the Democrat Congress
So when someone tries to blame Bush..
REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!"
Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party.
Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 &2011.
In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.
For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.
And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.
If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.
-
If Obama jad a son with a really narrow structure and a boatload of insulin....he could be Mr O.
lol best post so far :)
-
http://rt.com/usa/news/dhs-unrest-gear-283
They are already gearing up for riots from the 95ers.
-
The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.
The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6% George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH
Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!
Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!
Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA
And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?
OBAMA and the Democrat Congress
So when someone tries to blame Bush..
REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!"
Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party.
Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 &2011.
In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.
For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.
And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.
If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.
This post = GOLD!!
-
The economy was good under Bush until the house and the senate went democratic during his term. Then the economy slid downhill. First it was the mortgage mess managed by democrat Frank and Cuomo.
quote for fucking truth
-
This post = GOLD!!
platinum
-
Care to respond Benny Buttface?
The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.
The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6% George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH
Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!
Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!
Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA
And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?
OBAMA and the Democrat Congress
So when someone tries to blame Bush..
REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!"
Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party.
Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 &2011.
In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.
For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.
And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.
If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.
-
The day the democrats took over was not January 22nd 2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007 the day the Democrats took over the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the 110th Congress.
The Democrat Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress. At the time:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6% George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB GROWTH
Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!
Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6 TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac FIASCOES!
Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001 because it was financially risky for the US economy.
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA
And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?
OBAMA and the Democrat Congress
So when someone tries to blame Bush..
REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!"
Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress and the party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party.
Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009 as well as 2010 &2011.
In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on spending increases.
For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely, passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.
And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who voted for the budgets.
If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell, what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th.
Do you have a link to this so I can share it with the world?
-
Lower taxes.
Bottom up economic growth fueled by pro small businesses environment.
Massive innovation in energy.
End of american socialism and welfare state.
Pro bodybuilding environment.
Delusional...
-
I can't believe anyone is blaming either party for the economic meltdown.
I told everyone in 2004 that the current housing market HAD to crash... It was just a matter of time... and it did crash. Taking tons of money and melting down the entire banking sector along with housing and destroying the credit markets.
It was not the Democrats nor the Republicans... It was the people taking stupid loans that they could never repay and not thinking twice about it and it was the banks dumb ass faults for giving them those stupid loans.
If you want to blame anyone, blame the citizens... The people who took those shitty loans are to blame... Why everyone always wants to point fingers is beyond me when it's OUR OWN FUCKING FAULT.
We the people ruined the economy... Not Reid. Not Pelosi. Not Bush. Not Obama.
Everyone moron is busy trying to point the finger at someone saying it's not their fault... bullshit. It's all of ours.
Every time I heard of someone getting an ARM or an Interest only loan, I should have slapped them in the face for being idiots.
-
Lower taxes. for the wealthy, increased taxes for the poor
Bottom up slight, short term economic growth fueled by pro small businesses environment. the wealthy and enjoyed mostly by the wealthy
Massive innovation in energy.the finance sector, meaning new ways to scam investors
End of american socialism and welfare state for the poor and middle class, increased socialism/socialized risk/welfare subsidies for the wealthy
Pro bodybuilding environment. absofuckinglutely
couple more things you missed.. another recession due to repealing regulations that prevent business from taking risks that will cause massive private sector debt, which will be bailed out by the working man's tax dollars.. increased rate of global destruction due to repealed environmental regulations.. decreased quality of education and public infrastructure meaning long term economic decline..
an engineering degree is great for building flight simulators, but doesnt do much to educate you on the interactions betwee government policy and economic propserity ;D
-
You're talking about 2016 right? That's when he will be out of office.
-
I can't believe anyone is blaming either party for the economic meltdown.
I told everyone in 2004 that the current housing market HAD to crash... It was just a matter of time... and it did crash. Taking tons of money and melting down the entire banking sector along with housing and destroying the credit markets.
It was not the Democrats nor the Republicans... It was the people taking stupid loans that they could never repay and not thinking twice about it and it was the banks dumb ass faults for giving them those stupid loans.
If you want to blame anyone, blame the citizens... The people who took those shitty loans are to blame... Why everyone always wants to point fingers is beyond me when it's OUR OWN FUCKING FAULT.
We the people ruined the economy... Not Reid. Not Pelosi. Not Bush. Not Obama.
Everyone moron is busy trying to point the finger at someone saying it's not their fault... bullshit. It's all of ours.
Every time I heard of someone getting an ARM or an Interest only loan, I should have slapped them in the face for being idiots.
I agree with you, to a point.
I'm not sure I know anyone who isn't leasing or making car payments. My buddy bought a new boat and had to take a mortgage on it-literally- in order to afford the payments. He can call my boat ' a piece of shit' all he wants, but I bought it with 4k cash.
Loan for this loan for that, 10 different credit cards. But what happens when you get into financial trouble and you cant make those payments? Who Care's its the American way.
somebody will bail you out right? <-----ding ding. whos to blame for that?
-
I agree with you, to a point.
I'm not sure I know anyone who isn't leasing or making car payments. My buddy bought a new boat and had to take a mortgage on it-literally- in order to afford the payments. He can call my boat ' a piece of shit' all he wants, but I bought it with 4k cash.
Loan for this loan for that, 10 different credit cards. But what happens when you get into financial trouble and you cant make those payments? Who Care's its the American way.
somebody will bail you out right? <-----ding ding. whos to blame for that?
Sure, people take loans... That's life, but the loans of an individual will not collapse an entire economy if they are left to lapse.
However, if you have a large number of major banks and those loans are lapsed, whatever we DO have happen with the economy, will most likely be 10000 times worse.
Now, you could argue that it would just be over and done with then, and we would work on rebuilding, as opposed to what we have now, where we have bailed out some banks and industries and are dealing with a lessened collapse of many more years.
Was one better than the other, I don't know... but it's what we've got.
-
I can't believe anyone is blaming either party for the economic meltdown.
I told everyone in 2004 that the current housing market HAD to crash... It was just a matter of time... and it did crash. Taking tons of money and melting down the entire banking sector along with housing and destroying the credit markets.
It was not the Democrats nor the Republicans... It was the people taking stupid loans that they could never repay and not thinking twice about it and it was the banks dumb ass faults for giving them those stupid loans.
If you want to blame anyone, blame the citizens... The people who took those shitty loans are to blame... Why everyone always wants to point fingers is beyond me when it's OUR OWN FUCKING FAULT.
We the people ruined the economy... Not Reid. Not Pelosi. Not Bush. Not Obama.
Everyone moron is busy trying to point the finger at someone saying it's not their fault... bullshit. It's all of ours.
Every time I heard of someone getting an ARM or an Interest only loan, I should have slapped them in the face for being idiots.
well is mostly the people in the banking /lending industry who are to blame.. but yeah theres a whole lot of blame ot be put on the backs of people who took loans for houses they couldnt afford.. but in reality those were usually adjustable rate mortgages that they were told were going to be able to refinance before the rates went up because home prices were going to keep rising.. predatory lending.. the lenders were making money on every loan they made.. regardless of whether or not the loan was good or not.. however.. your right.. its not really the fault of any individual or any ideology.. it was the fault of greed, plain and simple.. and also a little bit of government policy that encouraged banks to make subrime loans because fannie and freddie would buy them ...
but.. heres the question.. would republican policies or democrat policies be better suited to prevent this kind of thing from happening in the future/.. republicans who thinkg deregulation is best, that the market can regulate itself.. or democrats who believe in making irresponsible / risky business behaviors illegal ??? hmm ???
-
well is mostly the people in the banking /lending industry who are to blame.. but yeah theres a whole lot of blame ot be put on the backs of people who took loans for houses they couldnt afford.. but in reality those were usually adjustable rate mortgages that they were told were going to be able to refinance before the rates went up because home prices were going to keep rising.. predatory lending.. the lenders were making money on every loan they made.. regardless of whether or not the loan was good or not.. however.. your right.. its not really the fault of any individual or any ideology.. it was the fault of greed, plain and simple.. and also a little bit of government policy that encouraged banks to make subrime loans because fannie and freddie would buy them ...
but.. heres the question.. would republican policies or democrat policies be better suited to prevent this kind of thing from happening in the future/.. republicans who thinkg deregulation is best, that the market can regulate itself.. or democrats who believe in making irresponsible / risky business behaviors illegal ??? hmm ???
I don't have that answer... I will say that we had a very largely unregulated market for a long time and as such, it's ok to try the other way for now... If that doesn't work, then we get to work on a happy medium.
-
happy medium is what i always advocate.. largely free and open markets.. capitalism is wonderful.. never any government ownership of any industry .. just necessary regulations to prevent economic oppression, basic worker rights, prohibit irresponsible behaviors that can have significant negative systemic effects, and prohibit environmental destruction.... outside of these things.. the market truly can regulate itself.. and is best left untouched..
-
couple more things you missed.. another recession due to repealing regulations that prevent business from taking risks that will cause massive private sector debt, which will be bailed out by the working man's tax dollars.. increased rate of global destruction due to repealed environmental regulations.. decreased quality of education and public infrastructure meaning long term economic decline..
an engineering degree is great for building flight simulators, but doesnt do much to educate you on the interactions betwee government policy and economic propserity ;D
why do you insist in making bs comments about complex things you have zero background about?
"increased rate of global destruction due to repealed environmental regulation", lol
-
well is mostly the people in the banking /lending industry who are to blame.. but yeah theres a whole lot of blame ot be put on the backs of people who took loans for houses they couldnt afford.. but in reality those were usually adjustable rate mortgages that they were told were going to be able to refinance before the rates went up because home prices were going to keep rising.. predatory lending.. the lenders were making money on every loan they made.. regardless of whether or not the loan was good or not.. however.. your right.. its not really the fault of any individual or any ideology.. it was the fault of greed, plain and simple.. and also a little bit of government policy that encouraged banks to make subrime loans because fannie and freddie would buy them ...
but.. heres the question.. would republican policies or democrat policies be better suited to prevent this kind of thing from happening in the future/.. republicans who thinkg deregulation is best, that the market can regulate itself.. or democrats who believe in making irresponsible / risky business behaviors illegal ??? hmm ???
Or how about conservatives who believe in self responsibility,less government? Or the liberals who say 'don't worry Uncle Sam's got your back'?
Why not take the loan for the new car and the bigger house, you just get bailed out. Who cares if you fuck off at work, you'll get unemployment. Even better why not just go on welfare for the rest of your life?
We simply have too much government in every aspect of our lives. A government that promotes reliance and laziness.What is it now 40% of Americans recieve some sort of Government assistance?The way I see it, the less Government, the better off we'll be. We need to go back to our roots before its too late. Eventually we'll have to because at the rate were going there will be nothing left.
-
Care to respond Benny Buttface?
Good one.
What's next? Mr. Poopypants?
-
Or how about conservatives who believe in self responsibility,less government? Or the liberals who say 'don't worry Uncle Sam's got your back'?
Why not take the loan for the new car and the bigger house, you just get bailed out. Who cares if you fuck off at work, you'll get unemployment. Even better why not just go on welfare for the rest of your life?
We simply have too much government in every aspect of our lives. A government that promotes reliance and laziness.What is it now 40% of Americans recieve some sort of Government assistance?The way I see it, the less Government, the better off we'll be. We need to go back to our roots before its too late. Eventually we'll have to because at the rate were going there will be nothing left.
Which roots? you mean the decemation of peoples and culture? we are still doing that. even if its 'just' being supported in the middle east.
-
Which roots? you mean the decemation of peoples and culture? we are still doing that. even if its 'just' being supported in the middle east.
-
why do you insist in making bs comments about complex things you have zero background about?
"increased rate of global destruction due to repealed environmental regulation", lol
if you have a rebuttal of somekind or a point youd like to make go ahead and do so..
Or how about conservatives who believe in self responsibility,less government? Or the liberals who say 'don't worry Uncle Sam's got your back'?
Why not take the loan for the new car and the bigger house, you just get bailed out. Who cares if you fuck off at work, you'll get unemployment. Even better why not just go on welfare for the rest of your life?
We simply have too much government in every aspect of our lives. A government that promotes reliance and laziness.What is it now 40% of Americans recieve some sort of Government assistance?The way I see it, the less Government, the better off we'll be. We need to go back to our roots before its too late. Eventually we'll have to because at the rate were going there will be nothing left.
self responsibility and less government. lo. repeal copyright and patent laws and see how easy it is to make a profitable business. get rid of the public infratsurcture and education system and see if you can sustain a company of any size. take away the anti-trust laws and see if its possible to be competitive in any industry. lol.
-
I can't believe anyone is blaming either party for the economic meltdown.
I told everyone in 2004 that the current housing market HAD to crash... It was just a matter of time... and it did crash. Taking tons of money and melting down the entire banking sector along with housing and destroying the credit markets.
It was not the Democrats nor the Republicans... It was the people taking stupid loans that they could never repay and not thinking twice about it and it was the banks dumb ass faults for giving them those stupid loans.
If you want to blame anyone, blame the citizens... The people who took those shitty loans are to blame... Why everyone always wants to point fingers is beyond me when it's OUR OWN FUCKING FAULT.
We the people ruined the economy... Not Reid. Not Pelosi. Not Bush. Not Obama.
Everyone moron is busy trying to point the finger at someone saying it's not their fault... bullshit. It's all of ours.
Every time I heard of someone getting an ARM or an Interest only loan, I should have slapped them in the face for being idiots.
Awesome post.
Fact of the matter is, "we the people" fucked up a couple of times. Difference is from lesser nations, "we the people" got up every single time and rebuilt, corrected what was wrong and moved forward.
There's not reason why we can't do it again and well under way.
AmericanSpeed. We put a man on the moon, invented microchips, pop culture, the internets (no homo), modern bodybuilding, engendered tu_holmes, king23, McFarland and other great posters... to name a few... and that's just in the last 41 years!!!!
and let's not forget....
GETBIG IS AMERICAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
thats the right attitude but without regulations on business to prevent the kind of disaster we just had were going to be stuck in a cyclical boom and bust cycle that never ends... plus we need to focus on updating our public infrastructure and revamping our education to better suit our modern economy's demands.. these are democratic policies..
-
self responsibility and less government. lo. repeal copyright and patent laws and see how easy it is to make a profitable business. get rid of the public infratsurcture and education system and see if you can sustain a company of any size. take away the anti-trust laws and see if its possible to be competitive in any industry. lol.
I'm not talking about education, infrastructure..etc.. I'm talking about taking over private businesses, handouts,bailouts, taxes on everything,telling us what we cant eat and drink,welfare,health care,regulating everything we can do, ignoring the constitution.
Plus the more Government you have the more waste and corruption there is. I work for the Feds so I know. I can give you a list of 100 jobs in my agency of people that make insane money that do nothing. In my building we have an athletic trainer. No shit a fucking athletic trainer. An administrative building for a LE agency has an athletic trainer that nobody has ever seen do shit,that makes 80k a year. I could go on and on, but its just the way Government works. We need less of it.
-
I'm not talking about education, infrastructure..etc.. I'm talking about taking over private businesses, handouts,bailouts, taxes on everything,telling us what we cant eat and drink,welfare,health care,regulating everything we can do, ignoring the constitution.
Plus the more Government you have the more waste and corruption there is. I work for the Feds so I know. I can give you a list of 100 jobs in my agency of people that make insane money that do nothing. In my building we have an athletic trainer. No shit a fucking athletic trainer. An administrative building for a LE agency has an athletic trainer that nobody has ever seen do shit,that makes 80k a year. I could go on and on, but its just the way Government works. We need less of it.
I never support government ownership or any industry (taking over private business). thats a communist position, not a liberal one.
handouts? do you mean social programs that tax payers pay into so they can draw out of them when necessary ? safety nets so that no one goes hungry or without shelter or medial care ?
bailouts? i agree.. thats not really a liberal or conservative issue however.. you had people on both sides of the aisle supporting bailououts..
taxes are necessary to support the military, the police, the fire department, the public education system, our public infrastructure, our regulating bodies, etc.
telling us what we can eat and drink? i suppose your refering to attempts to fight obesity that are supported by liberals? i somwehat agree but also you have to see the other side of the equation.. healthcare costs are tied to the issue.. i think bloombergs idea ofl imiting soda cup size to 16 ounces, but not allowing as many refills as you want.. is a good policy.. it allows personal freedom to consume what you want and as much as you want.. but at the same time will inevitably reducce the amount of soda/sugar/calories consumed because some people just drink whats in their cup, regardless of how big it is..
bt more on the telling us what to eat and drink.. how about telling us what we can put in our bodies ?? its conservatives who support the illegalization of drugs, steroids, etc.. not liberals.. and its conservatives who oppose gay marriage, and other social, private , personal decisions that a person should be allowed to make on their own.. not liberals..
healthcare .. well.. we require everyone to buy auto insurance dont we ? why not require everyone to have health sinsurance ? seems perfectly logical way of keeping healthcare on the open market and a private industry..without the mandate you couldnt have coverage of people with pre existing conditions.. nor could you subsidize the poor so they can have insurance.. other good things from the affordable care act.. children can stay on their parents plans till they are 26.. individuals can get group rates.. etc...
constitution? fuck the constituiton. i dont give a fuck about some hundred years old document. our economy has changed, our way of life has changed, the founding fathers knew jack shit about modern day. and even if they did, who are they to tell us what to do ? if a policy is good and we support it, fuck off constitutuioon we are enacting it. period.
waste and corruption? sure, but that happens in private sector as well. maybe not to the degree as in the public sector. but whatever. this is an argument for better government, not less government.
-
I'm not talking about education, infrastructure..etc.. I'm talking about taking over private businesses, handouts,bailouts, taxes on everything,telling us what we cant eat and drink,welfare,health care,regulating everything we can do, ignoring the constitution.
Plus the more Government you have the more waste and corruption there is. I work for the Feds so I know. I can give you a list of 100 jobs in my agency of people that make insane money that do nothing. In my building we have an athletic trainer. No shit a fucking athletic trainer. An administrative building for a LE agency has an athletic trainer that nobody has ever seen do shit,that makes 80k a year. I could go on and on, but its just the way Government works. We need less of it.
and it seems you missed my point entirely. copyright/patent laws. anti-trust laws. government regulations that protect competitors, innovators, and provide a framework for which business can operate and be successful. protections against the wealthy from stealing ideas, from monopolizing the market, from forcing employees to accept horrible pay, unsafe working conditions, and long hours.. etc. it is ONLY because of government that our modern economy is even possible. thats an idea conservatives who support deregulation really dont seem to understand, and that is extremely obvious by the way they tried to attack obama from saying "if you have a successful business, you didnt do that".. because he is absolutely right. without the centuries of innovators and proper government that paved the way and provided you with all the technology and progress that lead to your business and all the protections against the more wealthy and all the public infrastructure your business must use on a daily basis it would be completely impossible for you to have a business in the first place. this is something you have to understand.
-
you should not be concerned with the size of government, you should be worried about the quality of government. a whole lot of shitty government is a whole lot of shitty. a whole lot of good government is a whole lot of good. on the other hand, in the absence of government, to quote thomas hobbes, "the life of man is nasty brutish and short".. the answer is we need government, and we need it to be good government, and the more good government, the better. period.
-
Awesome post.
Fact of the matter is, "we the people" fucked up a couple of times. Difference is from lesser nations, "we the people" got up every single time and rebuilt, corrected what was wrong and moved forward.
There's not reason why we can't do it again and well under way.
AmericanSpeed. We put a man on the moon, invented microchips, pop culture, the internets (no homo), modern bodybuilding, engendered tu_holmes, king23, McFarland and other great posters... to name a few... and that's just in the last 41 years!!!!
and let's not forget....
GETBIG IS AMERICAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
All of this is very true... We The People will always rise up against adversity... Always.
We will always correct our course... We are doing so right now. This is how this country works... It's what makes us successful.
We pick ourselves up and we move forward.
-
The blame for the world wide economic collapse is far and wide. It is not do to one problem. People who through the media felt they were "entitled," took out loans which they had no possibility of repaying.This inflated the housing market. Banks and many fly-by-night mortgage lenders extended loans to ignorant people which had no hope of ever being re-payed. And government regulations of the banking industry were/are lapsed allowing for this to happen. The result is everyone suffers financial loss.
Beyond this, throughout history the economy has risen, peaked and fallen. As much as we would like to insulate ourselves from this, we cannot. Like it or not, we all could be a lot worse off then we are. Everything is relative.
-
Lower taxes.
Bottom up economic growth fueled by pro small businesses environment.
Massive innovation in energy.
End of american socialism and welfare state.
Pro bodybuilding environment.
LOL!
-
We need Obama out of office ASAP!!!
If he remains in power....We will have to deal with Socialism.
My 2 cents.
-
Everything that's happening is happening by design. People need to be controlled. How do you do this? Controlling them by brute force went away with the industrialization age. Control them with debt. Flush cheap goods bought with an unbacked fiat currency onto the market and let human nature do its thing. Devalue the money slowly so personal debt creation moves from being a luxury item (80s), to everyday tool (90s), to necessity to live (2000s).
Debt is slavery.
-
Everything that's happening is happening by design. People need to be controlled. How do you do this? Controlling them by brute force went away with the industrialization age. Control them with debt. Flush cheap goods bought with an unbacked fiat currency onto the market and let human nature do its thing. Devalue the money slowly so personal debt creation moves from being a luxury item (80s), to everyday tool (90s), to necessity to live (2000s).
Debt is slavery.
There was debt in the 1950's and 1960's. There have been many recessions over the years as well.
Don't believe everything you read in the media. I live in Oregon, which is reported to be one of the hardest hit states with continuing high unemployment. About a mile from my house is this year's Street of Dreams http://www.streetofdreamspdx.com/ (http://www.streetofdreamspdx.com/). Almost all of these million dollar plus houses were sold before they were even completed. A little closer to me is another housing development where the house prices range from $450,000 to $650,000. The development is about a year old. All but one lot has been built or being built on and is sold. A couple of weeks ago my wife and I went to a new upscale restaurant for brunch. We had to wait almost an hour to get in because it was that crowded. Apparently, people are doing pretty well on unemployment or perhaps not as many people are unemployed as the media would have us believe.
-
Everything that's happening is happening by design. People need to be controlled. How do you do this? Controlling them by brute force went away with the industrialization age. Control them with debt. Flush cheap goods bought with an unbacked fiat currency onto the market and let human nature do its thing. Devalue the money slowly so personal debt creation moves from being a luxury item (80s), to everyday tool (90s), to necessity to live (2000s).
Debt is slavery.
I agree. But who is running this calculated system?
-
There was debt in the 1950's and 1960's. There have been many recessions over the years as well.
Don't believe everything you read in the media. I live in Oregon, which is reported to be one of the hardest hit states with continuing high unemployment. About a mile from my house is this year's Street of Dreams http://www.streetofdreamspdx.com/ (http://www.streetofdreamspdx.com/). Almost all of these million dollar plus houses were sold before they were even completed. A little closer to me is another housing development where the house prices range from $450,000 to $650,000. The development is about a year old. All but one lot has been built or being built on and is sold. A couple of weeks ago my wife and I went to a new upscale restaurant for brunch. We had to wait almost an hour to get in because it was that crowded. Apparently, people are doing pretty well on unemployment or perhaps not as many people are unemployed as the media would have us believe.
I lived in central Oregon for years before moving to Texas in 2012. The economy was tanking because the California money that rolled in in the 90's pulled back leaving mom and pop home contractors holding their nuts. All business was retail. just went back to visit, fat white people at every stop light with their hand out. Commercial leasing available signs everywhere. DIdn't get to enjoy the high state income tax though....
-
I lived in central Oregon for years before moving to Texas in 2012. The economy was tanking because the California money that rolled in in the 90's pulled back leaving mom and pop home contractors holding their nuts. All business was retail. just went back to visit, fat white people at every stop light with their hand out. Commercial leasing available signs everywhere. DIdn't get to enjoy the high state income tax though....
Yeah, I see those folks at freeway on ramps looking for a handout. There's this one fellow whose been working the on ramp to the 205 right near Clackamas Town Center for the past 5 years. He's probably in his 20's or 30's, always wears green and stashes his bicycle in the bushes near where he's hustling folks for spare change. He must do alright or he is just nuts to keep showing up everyday for all this time.
-
I lived in central Oregon for years before moving to Texas in 2012. The economy was tanking because the California money that rolled in in the 90's pulled back leaving mom and pop home contractors holding their nuts. All business was retail. just went back to visit, fat white people at every stop light with their hand out. Commercial leasing available signs everywhere. DIdn't get to enjoy the high state income tax though....
Sounds serious. You should move to Ashland.
-
You aren't American, are you? I can't really understand where you are going with this one.
Doesnt matter who's in power, rich get richer, poor get poorer, those of us in the middle keep fighting for a bigger piece of the pie.
Thats life.
It's always been this way and it always will be...
-
You aren't American, are you? I can't really understand where you are going with this one.
Doesnt matter who's in power, rich get richer, poor get poorer, those of us in the middle keep fighting for a bigger piece of the pie.
Thats life.
When you look back through history, every so often, like with the French revolution, the poor get fed up with the rich and all hell breaks loose. So just because it seems like the rich have always gotten richer, the poor poorer and those in the middle just kept fighting, don't count on this always being the case. Supposedly the middle-class is ever shrinking. Were do these people go? I suspect most didn't suddenly become rich, which means there are more poor people....angry poor people.
-
Anyone who uses "socialism" to describe Obama or his policies both 1. Doesn't know what "socialism" is, 2. Doesn't know anything about Obama, and 3. Is a certified idiot who should be dismissed without further consideration.
-
Anyone who uses "socialism" to describe Obama or his policies both 1. Doesn't know what "socialism" is, 2. Doesn't know anything about Obama, and 3. Is a certified idiot who should be dismissed without further consideration.
LOL.
Correct - I prefer Communism or Neo-Fascism to be honest.
Choomer in Chief has to go.
-
LOL.
Correct - I prefer Communism or Neo-Fascism to be honest.
Choomer in Chief has to go.
January of 2017 will be the time that your misery will end, PEA BRAIN. That is, if you don't kill yourself first! ;)
Posting on getbig does not qualify as employment. Get off the government dole and GET A JOB! >:(
:D ;) :P
Mitt Romney’s Path To Electoral College Victory Is Still Very Narrow
Doug Mataconis · Monday, July 30, 2012
(http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Mitt-Romney-Barack-Obama-570x320.jpg)
As of today there are 99 days left until Election Day and, just as was the case several months ago, while the national polls remain tight and there are signs that the state of the economy continues to hurt the President, the path to victory for Mitt Romney remains very precarious and, some might say, unlikely:
President Obama has an overall edge in the 12 decisive battleground states that is measurably greater than his advantage in national polling.
The dynamic, which may reflect a combination of lower swing-state unemployment rates and demographic advantages for the president, is causing stirrings of unease among Republicans, even as they emphasize that it is important not to read too much into the state of the race right now.
“Obama is concentrating his considerable early resources and messaging in the swing states, and it’s had an impact,” said Mark McKinnon, who served as a media adviser for President George W. Bush’s presidential campaigns.
(…)
The crucial battleground states number about a dozen: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.
Taking the polling averages used by Nate Silver in the New York Times, the president is ahead in 10 of the 12 vital states. If those polls were borne out on Election Day, Obama would coast to victory with 332 electoral college votes. Only 270 votes are needed to win the presidency.
Awarding Obama only the states in which he now leads by 3 percentage points or more in the polling averages still sees him safely home.
By that measure, as of last Friday, he would win 8 of the 12 battlegrounds, for a total of 290 electoral votes.
Romney victories in Florida, Missouri, North Carolina and Virginia would leave the Republican marooned on 248 electoral votes.
Indeed, based on my own calculations, Romney would need to reverse the current trend and win at least 8 of the 12 battleground states discussed here. Some of them, likeColorado, Pennsylvania, and New Mexico seem like unlikely places for a Republican victory this time around unless there is a major change in the polls. The others (Ohio, Florida, Virginia, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, and North Carolina) are at least possibilities but by no means easy ones if current polling trends continue in the same manner that they’ve been going. Romney’s ties to New Hampshire may be enough for him to pick up those four electoral votes, the growing evangelical movement in Iowa may be enough to push that state into the Republican camp, and Nevada’s Mormon population could well prove decisive although Romney will have problems there thanks to his problems with Hispanic voters. However in all three of those states, RCP shows Obama with a lead. In Iowa it’s a small 1.3 point lead, but in Nevada it’s a fairly strong 5.3 point lead, while in New Hampshire the President leads by an average of three points. North Carolina remains close in the polls, but I think Obama will be unable to repeat his narrow 2008 victory there this time around and would give that state to Romney for now. The rest of the swing states are all going to be massive battlegrounds and Romney would need to win all of them in order to get a 270 vote majority and right now Romney is behind in the crucial states of Ohio and Virginia. Even if Romney wins these states, though, it would leave him with the slimmest of majorities, as slim as only a 6 point majority and in any case no larger than a 12 point gap. That leaves almost no margin for error, it also depends on the polls moving in Romney’s direction as we move into August and September, as well as a good debate showing by Romney in October’s three debates. There’s very little that can go wrong, and the problem the Romney campaign has is that they’ve shown us several times is that they are very capable of doing the wrong thing.
Based in part of polling and in part on intuition and history, here’s where I see the race right now, courtesy of a map I made at 270towin.com. There’s no ability to create “Leans” states, which would be helpful, so I’ve essentially given to each respective candidate the swing states they are leading in right now regardless of how small the lead might be:
(http://p.twimg.com/AyxbM2RCUAAFX2v.jpg)
This puts us at Obama 299 Romney 239, slightly better for the President than where I saw things when I did this three months ago. Romney would need to pick off at least 31 Electoral Votes just to get to 270. The good news for Romney is that some states, like Virginia, are very close right now and still very much capable of being picked off. Other states, however, such as Ohio, seem to be becoming more and more Pro-Obama. If he’s going to win, Romney needs to find a way to pick away at least 31 Electoral Votes from the President. That would require wining Ohio and Virginia, which would give him 270 Electoral votes and make him the next President. That’s not going to be easy, especially given the way current trends are going in this race.
There are several factors that can change between now and Election Day that could shift this election in a direction more to Romney’s advantage, not the least of them being the state of the economy. However, we’ve been stuck in a very narrow band for most of this year and there’s every reason to think it will stay that way at least until after the conventions. At that point, the question will become whether or not Romney will be able to give voters a reason to fire the incumbent President and, in the process, pick up enough Electoral Votes to win the election. Given the advantages that President Obama has in that regard, though, the odds are not in Romney’s favor at the moment.
(http://www.phawker.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Folder_7/Romney_Clown.jpg)
-
LOL.
Correct - I prefer Communism or Neo-Fascism to be honest.
Choomer in Chief has to go.
Holy Shit...
"Communism" or "Neo Fascism"? Haha. Good God man take a politics class! The differences between Communism and Fascism is the difference between night and day. You can't be "Communist and Fascist" anymore than you can be a short tall guy. Or a blonde brunette. Communism is on the opposite side of the political spectrum as fascism. Communism can be "totalitarian" but not fascist.