Not difficult but time consuming thats for sure and at the end of it people still cant get the facts thru their thick heads
-
Hey, guys! FreeOnes Tube is up and running - see for yourself!
-
FreeOnes Now Listing Male and Trans Performers! More info here!
Auto industry, seeing new life, is on hiring spree
- Thread starter Hot Mega
- Start date
Not difficult but time consuming thats for sure and at the end of it people still cant get the facts thru their thick heads
You're good but not that good.
Amazing...
1. You made a comment about my point...How on this entire blue planet would/did I then choose to argue different point???:1orglaughThe point still stands in citing Reagan's directly comparable numbers since Obama's numbers are being used to criticize him.
2. I have no idea what Reagan's poll numbers were. But I don't recall seeing ads by his party criticizing the pct. increase in u/e and the debt like is being done against Obama now. Of course as politics go I wouldn't expect to see them but it is (at least sensible and fair) to cite comparable numbers under Reagan since he is regarded as such a success now.
3. I agree wholeheartedly with the notion that it's moronic to side with your guy facts, reason or consistency be damned. So I'm glad I'm not in that category of people since this board is replete with my criticisms of Obama (for example) when I disagree with him.
Contrastingly, some that I've seen here side with Bush (for example) have an almost beat it to fit, paint it to match mentality when he did things inconsistent with their beliefs or positions. Case in point, Bush invades Iraq and the very people cheering him during his no nation building speech had found a way to throw their entire support behind his nation building in Iraq. Conversely, when Obama joined in with a policy against Libya I didn't change my position to fit it, I criticized him roundly.:2 cents:
4. Again, you're good but not that good with your semantical parsing. Of course you didn't argue my facts..I never accused you or anyone else of doing so. You were failing at arguing against the point I used the facts to support. Nice try.Speaking of, he would be proud of your wordsmith attempt here.:hatsoff:
My only repeated statement is that supporting any candidates without seeing their shortcomings is mindless. To that point, I think your comparison to Reagan is flawed because it is steeped in partisan politics. You may be provoked by people on the board on the opposite end of the spectrum, but it is still a political comparison.
My point has been that I don't care about the comparison between the two political idealogogues. Compare the two economic models and how they approach their different problems. Just comparing metrics based on two completely different set of issues is not looking for a solution or measuring performance. It is attempting to make a political statement. That is what you are trying to do in answer to the folks on the other side of the political spectrum.
So, once again, I put all of the Obama-ites and the Reagan-ites in the same bag. The idealogogues are not looking for solutions, they are looking for wins.
(This is the second time you accused my of dishonesty today. I don't appreciate that. I'm honest and if I'm mistaken, I correct it. It tends to be an act of desperation when someone does that.)
I'm going to change my signature. I think I'm done giving you a hard time on this issue. If you haven't at least come to common ground by now, you never will.
josesentme
Banned
Monica, I've been following this thread. Good job on it. You've made your point and actually Hotmega has made your point for you even though he will never admit it.
Seems like you were teasing him lightheartedly through the posts. However, no matter what you do, he will never admit that you're correct. He'll twist and turn.
I would say that he doesn't understand what you are saying, but from his postings, he is clearly intelligent.
I'm going to give you reps, because it was a good exchange.
Like Bush on the aircraft carrier, HotMega will probably declare "Mission Accomplished" even though in my mind, you clearly won the argument.
On the political front, I agree wtih hotmega's comments about the canonization of Reagan. To your point, how does that help the jobless today and tomorrow?
Idk how you have the energy to argue reason with these people mega, its likeevery thread. My hat goes off to you. :hatsoff:
I'm not sure what you meant by "these people". I'm assuming you are implying I'm part of the group of "these people". Could you help me and let me know what group you think I belong to?
:dunno:
True. I was making at an attempt at a political statement. I tried to convince you of that from the word go as I stated over and over again that it was a response to a political statement.:o
Interesting when you consider part of my point was the suggestion that the solutions may already be in the works if Obama's plan is given the same amount of time as Reagan's was. I would have thought that was one of the easier parts of it to get.:dunno:
The stunning irony here regarding Obama is, whatever degree of trouble he may be in politically is because IMO his approach has been more like your approach here and a few others. The failing of Obama to understand how getting to implementing and seeing through effective solutions requires political wins. And that in order to achieve and maintain the capital necessary to push a successful agenda forward he needs to win on point at times. He seems hell bent on compromise, giving even consideration to uneven motivations, etc. just for the sake of trying to play both sides when it's not reasonable or even necessary. In many ways you do the same thing seemingly for the mere sake of what you believe is a neutral bias. The real political world isn't that way and if there was ever a case study for how to effect a political agenda it was in the way GWB's administration went about it. If GWB's policies were any good...he would have gone down as one of the best presidents ever because if nothing else he was able to effect to the letter his agenda. His administration did so by playing the game of political wins.:2 cents:
I can understand Obama's willingness to distinguish himself from many things Bush but his unwillingness to engage has only pushed him closer to Bush policy wise. Because he's unwilling to engage GOPers on the basis of political wins...what happens? He ends up extending Bush's tax cuts on the top 2 pct. 2 and a half years after he vowed to eliminate them.
He ends up with GiTMO open still even though his official order was given to close it 2 days after he was inaugurated (and still stands by the way).
I could go on but if you aren't able to see this by now, you never will.:2 cents:
I think we're onto a better discussion....
To get a second term takes political wins. To fix thinks takes a political martyr. That should not be too much to ask of the president. He shouldn't be their for his career, but for the country.
He has been compromising to stay alive. I don't think he is bough into my blueprint for success. He hasn't called me yet to discuss and he isn't taking my calls for some reason. The things that are going to fix this economy will not get anyone re-elected. That is why they aren't being done.
josesentme
Banned
Well, since I posted before...
I agree with the statements you've made before.
Without Medical Tort Reform, doctors will continue to practice defensive medicine. That drives the cost of medical care through the roof. Obama's health plan creates complexity and tries to drive your healthcare to a GP/Internist. They will not treat the patients, they will continue to push them out. It will drive up costs at the end of the day.
The other thing you keep mentioning is the tax code. True, cut out the corporate loopholes. Good way to drive revenue up and loose your political career.
(Nice job in ignoring the jabs in the last response. How is the air on the high road? I will never know myself.)
I agree with the statements you've made before.
Without Medical Tort Reform, doctors will continue to practice defensive medicine. That drives the cost of medical care through the roof. Obama's health plan creates complexity and tries to drive your healthcare to a GP/Internist. They will not treat the patients, they will continue to push them out. It will drive up costs at the end of the day.
The other thing you keep mentioning is the tax code. True, cut out the corporate loopholes. Good way to drive revenue up and loose your political career.
(Nice job in ignoring the jabs in the last response. How is the air on the high road? I will never know myself.)
(Nice job in ignoring the jabs in the last response. How is the air on the high road? I will never know myself.)
Well, if you followed the (entire) discussion you would have found jabs and high road concessions on both sides.
Just sayin'
After all, Ms. 'Silver' has by implication spent allot of time trying to teach this pig to fly.
Maybe I'll get lucky like the bumble bee. Oink....:tongue:
josesentme
Banned
lolI live on the low road myself and oink quite a bit.
Ms. "Silver" is quite the pig herself...and a racist (I have found out!).
If you are willing to pay the high fee, she will oink like a piggie and do just about anything you ask.
If you are of a certain racist type, you don't have to pay and you don't have to ask.
I live on the low road myself and oink quite a bit.
Ms. "Silver" is quite the pig herself...and a racist (I have found out!).
If you are willing to pay the high fee, she will oink like a piggie and do just about anything you ask.
If you are of a certain racist type, you don't have to pay and you don't have to ask.
Awww, you say say the sweetest things.
Good job boys in bringing this back to wear it belongs...SEX!
It's late in the football season the score is opponent 28, your team 10 half way through the third quarter. You look to another guy you're at the game with and say....this team has blown it...the game is over I'm going home.
The other fan looks at you and says....wait a minute...you shouldn't leave just yet. Remember when we were down by a worse score earlier in the season, started slow but began to move the ball and came back to win? We weren't saying this at the same point during that game and we stayed in spite of being down. Aren't we glad we did now since that come back is now one of the greatest comebacks the team has had?
The first guy replies...you know now that you mention that maybe you're right. Even though this is a different game, we did just come off of a tough loss, were down because of it and started this game flat just like the other game. You know, we are starting to move the ball on them now just like the other game,..WHOA SHIT!!! WE JUST SCORED!!! HELL YEAH....now it's a game again...let's stick around for the whole game to see how THIS ONE turns out too now.:nanner:
Your team eventually comes from behind again and pulls this game out too.
Moral?
:dunno: Okay...
You start off a 'session' with a client and he's just not hitting your spot for about the first half of it....you begin to sour on the experience.
Then lo, in a moment of clarity you hearken back to a former experience with previous client that started almost identically underwhelming at the same point but ended quite well.
Realizing this now, you set aside your reservations and this client begins to hit your "spot". Your 'session' actually ends much better than you'd ever hoped and he actually licks your ass in the end for good measure.
Good thing you had the previous experience to draw from and help you put the current one in a fair perspective.:hatsoff:
Jeez here we go with the spin again. Otrauma's economic policies have been a failure and everything is worse than it was during Reagans term. The economy grew during his 2 years. It's a flatline for Otrauma. Capital is flowing out out of the country. During Reagan it was kept here at home investing in our industries. The Keynesian experiment under O has been a disaster.
No wonder my father's free market workshop under Friedman at U. of Chicago always had the upper hand over the Keynesian backers.
Spin spin spin Meg your side lost and the economy is as flat as a board.
You're a lot like Kevin Bacon's character in Animal House Chip Diller, who does his best/worst crowd control by telling everyone, "All is well!" while all hell is breaking loose.
You're quite the micro manager Meg, so fixated you never grasp the whole picture.
"All is well!"
:spin:<<<<That's me..:yesyes:
(Not that there is a single fact in your response..)BTW Tri....for the benefit of us wanting a good laugh can you please tell us what the title of this thread is again? And based on what circumstance effected by Obama is this a reality?
:bigear::rofl2:
(Psst...Obama has spent on the Auto industry and the nation's infrastructure...Reagan did the same thing but just by investing (overspending) on the military.:2 cents
Last edited:
From what I see GDP was 2.5% for 1981 and -1.9% for 1982...net +.6
GDP was -2.6% in 2009 and +2.9% in 2010...net +.3
Re: "All is well!" Don't forget your helmet.:o
Apparently you don't even know what "investing" in domestic industry means. We did that during Reagan's Presidency and reaped the awards with an economy that soared.
Now we have Otrauma with a near flat economy( a whopping 2% rise), high unemployment, failed stimulus, and the oh so familiar liberal economic malaise.
To lower unemployment we need at minimum a 5% rise..............fat chance. Those jobs that have been added are mostly part time jobs one cannot live off of alone. The amount of hours per week have declined, as are wages. Capital is flowing out of the country and investing in other countries industry not here.
Yeop Meg all is well. You might want to click your heels three times and wake up.
Why the hell are you even comparing Reagan's economic performance to Otrauma's? The general public will always know Reagan for his strong economy he will always be held in higher regard than Otrauma.
Now we have Otrauma with a near flat economy( a whopping 2% rise), high unemployment, failed stimulus, and the oh so familiar liberal economic malaise.
To lower unemployment we need at minimum a 5% rise..............fat chance. Those jobs that have been added are mostly part time jobs one cannot live off of alone. The amount of hours per week have declined, as are wages. Capital is flowing out of the country and investing in other countries industry not here.
Yeop Meg all is well. You might want to click your heels three times and wake up.
Why the hell are you even comparing Reagan's economic performance to Otrauma's? The general public will always know Reagan for his strong economy he will always be held in higher regard than Otrauma.
Last edited:
When did said Reagan economy soar? In two years?? Fuck no! Unemployment was almost 11 pct under Reagan at his 2 year mark...
The rest of what you state just amounts to rambling as you're just prattling how you feel apparently and not supporting what you state with anything relevant or factual.
The fact of the matter is both president's numbers are quite comparable over the same first 2.5 year mark and frankly Obama's are better.
That's why I'm comparing them because they are so similar.
If you and your types have their way it's most assured the general public will have the perception that Obama is failing when if failure is how you characterize Obama's numbers at this point...Reagan should be considered a disaster in his first 2.5 years.:hatsoff:
Sorry 'dent...but I see why you don't like facts...they're not your friend.
After 1983.
His first two years were dealing with stagflation stemming from 1976-1980.
Oh Meg keep spinning.
So...uh, just so we're being consistent....what was Obama's first to years spent dealing with?? Class...help Mr. 'dent pleassse.:bigear::1orglaugh
re: spinning...:yesyes: "Welcome to my parlor said the spider to the fly. It's the prettiest little parlor that you ever did spy.":violent::yesyes:
