TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- The Obama thread - Without flaming!
Pages (5): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper And virtually no one did that, Obama or otherwise. I don't think another US politician would have acted differently if they had been in shoes at that time.

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper And virtually no one did that, Obama or otherwise. I don't think another US politician would have acted differently if they had been in shoes at that time. All I'm saying is that it's unfair to pin the TARP, successful or not, on Obama. Wasn't he not even the democratic candidate at that point? If the point of this thread is to discuss his policies and intentions, then do that.

He's not fully to blame but it does just show that he doesn't understand the flawed US economy. He is like most others in Washington that think they have to throw money at the problem instead of fixing it.

Ron Paul understands how the economy works because he follows Mises and Austrian Economics. People who follow Austrian Economics have been predicting this collapse for years.


If you can't understand the problem you cannot fix it and Obama does not. Also congress first voted against TARp.

quote:

Originally posted by SniFFleS Ron Paul understands how the economy works because he follows Mises and Austrian Economics. People who follow Austrian Economics have been predicting this collapse for years.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by SniFFleS He's not fully to blame but it does just show that he doesn't understand the flawed US economy. He is like most others in Washington that think they have to throw money at the problem instead of fixing it.

How would you suggest it "be fixed"? By doing nothing?
If you look back to the depression, when money supply was actually reduced, the economy was in the tank for arguably 10 or 11 years. Are you really saying that by increasing government spending, that 10 or 11 years would have been longer?

While every dollar of government spending during a recession does not equate to a dollar of GDP growth as there is leakage and savings to consider of course, when (aside from after the depression) has the American government acted differently? Every subsequent downturn since then has been handled with increased spending or tax cuts or some combination thereof. I'm not convinced that doing nothing would have yielded better results in those cases.

And by government spending, I do not mean bailing out banks or buying bad assets as the TARP is intended to do.

TARP was voted against initially because it didn't include enough politician pet projects , er, money for main street. NOT because people were fundamentally objecting to the program itself.

'Obamamobile' unveiled

The Cadillac One has only just been unveiled, but it already has two nicknames: 'Obamamobile' and 'The Beast'. And it's ironic that just after Obama advocated a bailout for GM after years of building big, fuel-inefficient cars that nobody wanted, he's now had it build the ultimate one for himself.

Still, President Obama will be a targeted man come January 20th, when he's inaugurated as US President. So, the Cadillac One is shod in three-inch thick bulletproof glass and eight-inch think armour plating, and is hermetically sealed to protect him from a chemical weapons attack. It has a 10-disc CD changer, though, so it's not all doom-and-gloom.

There's a night vision camera in the front, and shotguns and tear gas cannons are stored in the flanks. There's even a few bottles of Obama's blood in there in case he needs an emergency transfusion - though who'll perform the operation is unclear.

The petrol tank is filled with a foam that prevents it from exploding along with a panic button in the Presidential quarters, as well as a satellite phone linking the car directly to the Whitehouse. The tyres are Kevlar reinforced and puncture-resistant, too, and cover wheels that can still work even of the tyres are blown off.

That said, it's never getting anywhere particularly fast, as it has a 0-100 km per hour time of 15 seconds and 3.40km per hour fuel consumption, so at the equivalent of about $534,000 it probably provides the worst price-to-performance ratio of any car ever.

President-Elect Obama Not Giving Up His BlackBerry Without a Fight!

quote:

Originally posted by feelgood Correct, businesses need capital/borrowing money to grow, however true profitability and true growth stem from investing personal capital, not credit. Infusing more government credit into an unstable economy which is built on credit (akin to house built on sand) is just going to prolong and exacerbate the problem and unfortunately, the amount of government sand is finite. Providing businesses with more credit options does nothing to stimulate the economy. Providing more supply, does not provide more demand. While you can argue that it would be foolhardy not to get some sort of government intervention, you have to put the figures into context. Think of what $800b of taxpayer money could do for a health care system, an education system, transportation system... etc. So.. do you panic and drop all this money into a sinking ship, which despite your best efforts is irrepairable. Or do you put this money into something that is universally accepted as a worthwhile investment. Again, Obama's bailout is identical in principle to Roosevelt's new deal which did nothing for improvement as unemployment, gdp and private investment figures show. 0.02$

WHAT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Did you just say that the new deal did nothing for improvement?

wow. just. wow.

The new deal is what created the American middle class. And a strong and healthy middle class is the backbone of a strong and stable economy.

there's so much mis-information in this thread it's sickening...ESPECIALLY when it comes to comments on health care.

simply put: Canada's system > US system...one only needs to look at the fact that leading cause for personal bankruptcy in the US...ARE HEALTH CARE COSTS.

"insurance" in the US only covers so much...get too sick...you're fucked.

As far as the credit crisis...Obama was right to support TARP..and anyone who didnt want to see an immediate global depression was...the top banks in the world held a gun to the governments head...they needed that bridge financing and got it.

was it done with the correct oversight and transparency? hell no.

but that's what happens when you have NO REGULATION of an industry...pretty hard to regulate an out of control monster in a few days.

Things I like about Obama
- Good charisma, he's a likeable person who represents a new generation of American politicians. Out with the old in with the new.
- Biden - this man is smart as a whip when it comes to foreign relations. Go Obiden!


Things I dislike
- Everyone's insanely high expectations of him. A friend of mine in the US told me after the elections it was like the second coming of Jesus. The guy has a lot to clean up so I hope people will go easy on him when he doesn't magically change the world and prove unicorns are real.


Overall I like Obama and wish him the best; he's a smart guy and has been putting together a good team to advise him.

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper How would you suggest it "be fixed"? By doing nothing? If you look back to the depression, when money supply was actually reduced, the economy was in the tank for arguably 10 or 11 years. Are you really saying that by increasing government spending, that 10 or 11 years would have been longer? While every dollar of government spending during a recession does not equate to a dollar of GDP growth as there is leakage and savings to consider of course, when (aside from after the depression) has the American government acted differently? Every subsequent downturn since then has been handled with increased spending or tax cuts or some combination thereof. I'm not convinced that doing nothing would have yielded better results in those cases. And by government spending, I do not mean bailing out banks or buying bad assets as the TARP is intended to do. TARP was voted against initially because it didn't include enough politician pet projects , er, money for main street. NOT because people were fundamentally objecting to the program itself.

Yes "Do Nothing" is better than the government trying to reallocate funds that they don't have. In 2002 Bush told Greenspan to do whatever it took to get them out of a recession(so he could get re-elected) It worked but created a false housing boom because rates were way to low, now this recession is 10 times worse.

The thing is because there was not a proper recession in 2002 we are now feeling the effects.

A recession is a normal part of the economic cycle and it has to happen.

The great depression lasted so long because of years of government intervention. The market can work itself out if given a chance, but when government gets in the way it only takes money away from successful business to failing business. Or print money and create inflation.

I wonder if Tiesto will close...?

quote:

Obama Inauguration Concert A Who's Who Of Top Music Acts Tuesday January 13, 2009 CityNews.ca Staff Beyonce, U2's Bono, Bruce Springsteen - the lineup for an inaugural concert celebrating Barack Obama on Sunday is a who's who of top names in music. In fact appearing on the bill has become a coveted gig - with everyone from John Mellencamp, Usher and Sheryl Crow, to Josh Groban and Stevie Wonder performing. The president-elect and his family will attend the concert at the Lincoln Memorial, and Obama is expected to speak during the events. The theme for the show, titled We Are One, is national unification. The artists have been asked not to perform their hits but songs appropriate for the occasion. One of the tunes on the set list is Sam Cooke's A Change Is Gonna Come - though it's not clear at this point who will be performing it. Other entertainers scheduled to appear are Garth Brooks, Mary J. Blige, Herbie Hancock, Heather Headley, John Legend, and Jennifer Nettles. Denzel Washington, Queen Latifah, and Jamie Foxx will be among those reading historical passages at the event. HBO televises the concert at 7pm, and it's being offered on an open feed to cable and satellite distributors, meaning anyone who wants to watch the show can do so for free. Singer-actress Beyonce arrives at the 66th Annual Golden Globe Awards held at the Beverly Hilton Hotel on January 11, 2009 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images)

source:
http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_30946.aspx

quote:

Originally posted by SniFFleS The great depression lasted so long because of years of government intervention. The market can work itself out if given a chance, but when government gets in the way it only takes money away from successful business to failing business. Or print money and create inflation.

I do not believe the depression was prolonged by government spending. It's the opposite. that's why it lasted so long.

for this reason, there are no other serious recessions in US history to be able to conclude that doing nothing is the better option. No president has been willing to take that chance, to do nothing and hope that's the right move.

WOW Skipper you are so fuckin delusional, I really haven't seen a Canadian so blind like you. Of course you don't like to answer the questions I asked you here or reply to anything that I have said. Only thing you love to do is to manipulate things to your liking so the end result of everything will be Bush administration is the evil and they only care for the banks and Obama is the next Jesus who's gonna save the middle class and other bullshit like that. The only reason why you live in your little world and the only reason why you act the way you do is because you have put all your faith into Obama, but sadly soon you'll find out that things won't be the way you now think they will be and you'll end up where pro-bush's are now, in hiding.

I don't see the point of arguing with your brainwashed ass anymore, but there are few things I like to mention knowing that I won't get your response.

1. Paulson proved that you can do anything with the TARP money. Now we have Obama who has half of the TARP money and he can do anything he thinks is the right thing to do with this money. So stop the BS that Obama is not responsible for how the second half of TARP is spent simply because TARP was a "Product of Bush"!!!

2. Nobody is saying that the U.S government should do nothing. There are many actions that government should take but if those actions are not involved spending the lefties call it doing nothing...

3. It's a myth that if Hoover & Roosevelt didn't spend so much money the depression would have been a lot longer say maybe 20 years? The depression was created because of what Hoover & Roosevelt did, otherwise it would have been a normal recession which could have taken up to 2-3 years. You are not hallucinating nor am I, I know what we were told in the school about this subject, but like I just said if we led the free market function there wouldn't have been a depression in the first place. Go figure

quote:

Originally posted by dEsidEL I wonder if Tiesto will close...?

everyone knows Obama is a Jazzy Jeff man

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper I do not believe the depression was prolonged by government spending. It's the opposite. that's why it lasted so long. for this reason, there are no other serious recessions in US history to be able to conclude that doing nothing is the better option. No president has been willing to take that chance, to do nothing and hope that's the right move.

1. If the government did nothing in 2002 there would not be this huge problem right now.

2. Roosevelt came into power and said he was going to do nothing but interfered in the market and prolonged it. Look up all the programs he started.

3. Why are there recessions? The Fed creates all these bubbles and we look to them to get use out.

If there wasn't such interference in the market we would not see such huge fluctuations in economic and market cycles.

quote:

Originally posted by spolitta 3. It's a myth that if Hoover & Roosevelt didn't spend so much money the depression would have been a lot longer say maybe 20 years? The depression was created because of what Hoover & Roosevelt did, otherwise it would have been a normal recession which could have taken up to 2-3 years. You are not hallucinating nor am I, I know what we were told in the school about this subject, but like I just said if we led the free market function there wouldn't have been a depression in the first place. Go figure

Exactly

quote:

Originally posted by infinity HiGH It'll be a great Hollywood story for America's democracy that Obama won but in the end he'll be a politician with his hands tied up by various corporations and other powerful individuals. Anyone that truly thinks Obama will save the world is delusional.

I like how you've already set it up in your mind such that he can't possibly fail of his own volition. If he doesn't live up to the hype, it'll be the fault of the corporations and power brokers, and would obviously have nothing to do with him making promises he can't possibly keep, for example, or having near-zero experience with economic and social policy, or just making poor choices in office.

That is the difference between Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. - they are both biased and partisan, but when a Republican president fucks up, Republicans vote him out, whereas when a Democrat fucks up, Democrats pooh-pooh it or find a scapegoat.

quote:

Originally posted by spolitta WOW Skipper you are so fuckin delusional, I really haven't seen a Canadian so blind like you. Of course you don't like to answer the questions I asked you here or reply to anything that I have said. Only thing you love to do is to manipulate things to your liking so the end result of everything will be Bush administration is the evil and they only care for the banks and Obama is the next Jesus who's gonna save the middle class and other bullshit like that. The only reason why you live in your little world and the only reason why you act the way you do is because you have put all your faith into Obama, but sadly soon you'll find out that things won't be the way you now think they will be and you'll end up where pro-bush's are now, in hiding. I don't see the point of arguing with your brainwashed ass anymore, but there are few things I like to mention knowing that I won't get your response.

Easy there. lets keep it a rational discussion.

quote:

Originally posted by SniFFleS Yes "Do Nothing" is better than the government trying to reallocate funds that they don't have. In 2002 Bush told Greenspan to do whatever it took to get them out of a recession(so he could get re-elected) It worked but created a false housing boom because rates were way to low, now this recession is 10 times worse. The thing is because there was not a proper recession in 2002 we are now feeling the effects. A recession is a normal part of the economic cycle and it has to happen. The great depression lasted so long because of years of government intervention. The market can work itself out if given a chance, but when government gets in the way it only takes money away from successful business to failing business. Or print money and create inflation.

quite the opposite. the depression lasted long because the government did NOTHING. stopped spending when it should have,etc,etc...

where do you guys come up with this stuff?

the REASON the credit crisis and everything else is happening is because of a LACK OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION.

That's exactly why the Canadian banks and housing arent imploding the way the US is. because we stayed regulated...even when our banks were whining about how over regulated we are...its what saved us.

Regulation controls greed.

One of the proposed fixes for all that's going wrong stateside is MORE REGULATION.

quote:

Originally posted by spolitta WOW Skipper you are so fuckin delusional, I really haven't seen a Canadian so blind like you. Of course you don't like to answer the questions I asked you here or reply to anything that I have said. Only thing you love to do is to manipulate things to your liking so the end result of everything will be Bush administration is the evil and they only care for the banks and Obama is the next Jesus who's gonna save the middle class and other bullshit like that. The only reason why you live in your little world and the only reason why you act the way you do is because you have put all your faith into Obama, but sadly soon you'll find out that things won't be the way you now think they will be and you'll end up where pro-bush's are now, in hiding. I don't see the point of arguing with your brainwashed ass anymore, but there are few things I like to mention knowing that I won't get your response.

If you want to talk about discouraging an actual discussion in here, I suggest you look no further than your own post.

We have a difference of opinion, and experts are in fact widely divided on the appropriate government response to economic recessions. Just because someone doesn't agree with you or interprets the evidence a different way doesn't mean they are delusional.

I don't believe that Obama is jesus. I simply believe that government intervention is necessary in the US economy. Obama happens to agree. If McCain were president elect and did the same thing, I would agree with him too. This isn't about my fanaticism over Barack Obama, it's my opinion about fiscal policy.

i like Obama.

i hate the recession.

i hope that the same thing that happened in Japan doesn't happen in the states. we can't have this go on for a decade.

What the US can learn from Japan?:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazin...16000324539.htm

quote:

Originally posted by darcnight the REASON the credit crisis and everything else is happening is because of a LACK OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION. That's exactly why the Canadian banks and housing arent imploding the way the US is. because we stayed regulated...even when our banks were whining about how over regulated we are...its what saved us. Regulation controls greed. One of the proposed fixes for all that's going wrong stateside is MORE REGULATION.

Yes regulation could have stopped the credit crisis, but there would have been no sub prime mortgage problem in the first place if it wasn't for Greenspan having the rates low for so long and then raising them.

More regulation could have prevented it but regulation was not what caused it.

You could say more regulation for anything in that case. "If there was more regulation going into The Guvernment less people would do drugs"

Who would you blame? The drug dealers who sold drugs to people before? or The Guvernment security?

quote:

Originally posted by darcnight quite the opposite. the depression lasted long because the government did NOTHING. stopped spending when it should have,etc,etc... where do you guys come up with this stuff?

The new deal came out in 1932 , the great depression lasted until 1939 and ended because of Hitler. The new deal pretty much just got the government involved in everything.

Roosevelt also increased tariffs, which is a horrible move. He pretty much tried to keep prices high when the depression was trying to bring prices back down to reasonable levels, he kept interfering and invoked price controls. That's why it lasted so long, the recession was the cure for the overinflated market/economy of before the crash.

It's actually similar to what we see now, if Obama wants to keep prices high and stop home prices from falling then this recession is going to last a long time.

quote:

Originally posted by darcnight The new deal is what created the American middle class. And a strong and healthy middle class is the backbone of a strong and stable economy.

Remember the phrase "10% of the population own 90% of the money? (paraphrased)" How is it that a healthy middle class can drive the economy.

quote:

Originally posted by darcnight simply put: Canada's system > US system...one only needs to look at the fact that leading cause for personal bankruptcy in the US...ARE HEALTH CARE COSTS.

You clearly havent ever been in an emergency room in Canada, or had a relative who's needed surgery, or a friend needing cancer treatment. Three things of which i have experienced first hand, and can firmly say that our health care system is trash. Why does Jack Layton go to a private hospital in the states if our medicare is so good?

At least in the states, if i want health care i can get it right now if i pay for it.


Anyways.. we'll discuss healthcare someother time.

quote:

Originally posted by SniFFleS Yes regulation could have stopped the credit crisis, but there would have been no sub prime mortgage problem in the first place if it wasn't for Greenspan having the rates low for so long and then raising them.

Low interest rates didn't cause the subprime mess. It was the lenders, who have total control over the terms of the agreement and the rates they charge.

quote:

Originally posted by darcnight quite the opposite. the depression lasted long because the government did NOTHING. stopped spending when it should have,etc,etc... where do you guys come up with this stuff? the REASON the credit crisis and everything else is happening is because of a LACK OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION. That's exactly why the Canadian banks and housing arent imploding the way the US is. because we stayed regulated...even when our banks were whining about how over regulated we are...its what saved us. Regulation controls greed. One of the proposed fixes for all that's going wrong stateside is MORE REGULATION.

wow, Your version of the history is even more biased than the myth. The Myth says the government did little or not enough. The person who told you the government did nothing didn't have a slightest clue. In fact hoover tried many things which all failed, and when Roosevelt came he did a lot more under the new deal and spent a lot of money compare to the size of the economy at the time, those were all big failures too. But you think the depression would have been much longer if the government didn't do anything? Maybe 20 years? Nobody likes to answer this question because the recession that was due in the 1929 was much smaller than what we are going through now and yet with all the government spending it lasted 10 years. So by that standards the current recession should really take over 20 or most likely 30 years if the government were to do nothing!?

As for the regulation, the world isn't black & white, let me explain why you are so misinformed. You simply think all the regulations are "GOOD" so more regulation is better. But unfortunately things don't work like that in the real world. There are good regulations and bad regulations, so arguing we need more regulation is premature and it's a thing of media to exaggerate. If you had a friend in the wallstreet he would tell you that there are tons of regulations or some say they are even over regulated. It's not the regulation that solves our problems, the free market will regulate itself when needed, the bad regulation is what got us into this mess NOT the LACK of REGULATION. You cannot regulate greed. Greed is part of the free market which exists and it always will. You cannot regulate greed unless you go fully after it which in that case you will only do more harm than good. Wallstreet is not to be blamed for the current financial crisis. I know average person like myself doesn't like bankers and wallstreet in general but they really aren't to be blamed, I'll explain why. Think about everybody who bought an overpriced house in the past years speculating that the prices will always go up. Think about people who bought houses which they knew they couldn't afford but they thought the house will appreciate so much that at the end it would still be worth it. The prices of houses cannot possibly go up at that rate forever, so when you pay for an overpriced house you are speculating just like when a stock market investor buys a stock %20 up of its recent lows speculating it will go up another %20 in the coming months or years. We are all responsible for our own financial actions, so yes we are held responsible when we ignore the risks we take. The risk home buyers took by buying overpriced houses thinking the prices will always go up is no different than the bad loans wallstreet made, but these are the consequences of the problem not the the problem itself, lets play a little analogy game.

Imagine there is a birthday party of a teen boy and all his friends from his school and an adult relative bring a bottle of Absolute Vodka for the boys and leaves. Although one of the mothers is present at the party to have an oversight she spends most of her time reading books and doesn't pay much attention to the kids thinking the boys are just having normal fun. At some point during the party the kids will drink the alcohol knowing what it is and the day after all the parents are extremely angry at what happened so who do you blame? The kids who knew it was alcohol but drank it anyway? The mother who was supposed to look after the kids but spent most of her time reading? or the idiot who brought the Vodka to the party in the first place?

It was the government of the united states that kept the interest rates so low for so long to fight the dot com and 9/11 recessions. It was the government who created Fanny and Freddi and promoted their business model and sent the wrong signal to the market. It was the government distorting the market all along and caused this giant mess not the free market, so government cannot possibly solve our problem by doing more of the same. I know some people think of bankers running wild when they hear the term free market, but that's wrong. Free market is me you and everybody else including the bankers which can regulate itself when needed. You cannot control greed for the same reason as why Santa Clause doesn't exist.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.