You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
could the economic situation be different if we voted differently
Quote from morganist:
i was just thinking would the economic situation be different now if we voted for the other party or whether it was inevitable due to the parties have one agenda.
in britain i think the conservatives would have put us in the same position. do you think it is the same in america? that no matter who you put in the situation would be the same.
there seems to be bipartisan corruption. what do you think is there anything we could have done?
No
The Right thinks it was fine to spend $600B blowing up shit in Iraq
The Left thinks its fine to spend $900B monkeying with healthcare
Both left and right thought it was necessary to spend $800B to bail out the banks
so.....
It doesn't really matter who you vote for. You can be certain that once they are past all the idealistic nonsense and political rhetoric, both sides will make equally bad governance decisions
Quote from morganist:
i was just thinking would the economic situation be different now if we voted for the other party or whether it was inevitable due to the parties have one agenda.
If one were to rely solely on the mainstream media to tell them about the state of the economy, it would be vastly different. At the market peak under Bush (when people still had jobs) the economy was frightful, but now it's pretty damn good according to CNBC.
In theory, yes, the economic situation would be different now, simply because shorter term cycles are spun-out from a vector impulse (election) but are still subject to long term cycles that have been in play for decades, if not centuries. The prime key is time, when these cycles start harmonizing.
But again, this is dealing in theory as observed in a vacuum, not a dynamic system with multiple nested cycles, operating within emotionally stimulated forces.
No one can accurately predict the future.
This is completely indecipherable
Can you say it in English?
But again, this is dealing in theory as observed in a vacuum, not a dynamic system with multiple nested cycles, operating within emotionally stimulated forces.
No one can accurately predict the future.
This is completely indecipherable
Can you say it in English?
Quote from PranKsterJack:
No
The Right thinks it was fine to spend $600B blowing up shit in Iraq
The Left thinks its fine to spend $900B monkeying with healthcare
Both left and right thought it was necessary to spend $800B to bail out the banks
so.....
It doesn't really matter who you vote for. You can be certain that once they are past all the idealistic nonsense and political rhetoric, both sides will make equally bad governance decisions
Well, the bill for healthcare is more like $2.5 Trillion, but what's a trillion or two between friends.
Public Choice theory explains why politicians will always make decisions that screw us. Whether the politician is a Republican or a Democrat his incentive is always to sell his power to the highest bidder and that screws us.
It totally matters who you vote for. We get the best outcomes when the two branches of government are split between the two parties. A pretty even split results in plenty of fingerpointing and political grandstanding and very little actual legislation and that's always better for us. This works best if congress is evenly split between radical lefties and radical righties. They can't agree on ANYTHING. It's great.
Quote from Angrycat:
Well, the bill for healthcare is more like $2.5 Trillion, but what's a trillion or two between friends.
Public Choice theory explains why politicians will always make decisions that screw us. Whether the politician is a Republican or a Democrat his incentive is always to sell his power to the highest bidder and that screws us.
It totally matters who you vote for. We get the best outcomes when the two branches of government are split between the two parties. A pretty even split results in plenty of fingerpointing and political grandstanding and very little actual legislation and that's always better for us. This works best if congress is evenly split between radical lefties and radical righties. They can't agree on ANYTHING. It's great.
Agreed
I'd like to think the economic situation would be different.
If for a moment we consider the media picks the issue rather than the candidate. I don't believe we would of spent a year on health care reform had we voted in McCain. Health care is not going to create jobs or improve the economy.
McCain is familiar with WS, the military and politics, I'm sure he's familiar with business issues via his marriage.
At some point in time we are going to have to face the financial crisis in this country, currently finance is a back burner issue till health care issue comes to some type of conclusion.
With sound footing on finance/credit there may be some hope for future rise in employment numbers.
If for a moment we consider the media picks the issue rather than the candidate. I don't believe we would of spent a year on health care reform had we voted in McCain. Health care is not going to create jobs or improve the economy.
McCain is familiar with WS, the military and politics, I'm sure he's familiar with business issues via his marriage.
At some point in time we are going to have to face the financial crisis in this country, currently finance is a back burner issue till health care issue comes to some type of conclusion.
With sound footing on finance/credit there may be some hope for future rise in employment numbers.