******* sheep

Posted by genghisxcon on 4/14/2012 8:22:00 PM (view original):
Helps? Helps how? Helps me realize that you think the world is a clean slate when a head of state takes office? Helps me realize you have terribly simplistic views of economics, politics, and even cause and effect? I guess, except I already knew all that.

If you think a major economic downturn can just be fixed overnight, maybe you should turn off TVLand. This isn't I Dream of Jeannie. Problems aren't instantly made all better by twitching your nose.

However, you did say one thing of great value. Obviously not here, but in the HBD forum. It's what micki hinted at earlier. You said you shouldn't complain without offering a solution. So tell me what specifically should Obama have done differently to address an issue of your choosing? Go ahead agent Starling, enthrall me with your acumen.

I'm not the President.   It's not really my job to have solutions.    However, if you want just one, I'd say a large part of our problem is unemployment.  Part of that problem is companies taking jobs overseas.   So, rather than tax businesses further and have them scraping for another dollar, how about focusing on what it takes to keep those jobs in the US?   It's a company's job to profit.  If, after labor/taxes and all other associated costs, it's $40 to have a job done in the US and $20 to have a job done in India, what's the logical thing to do?    Tax the business more on anything the government can?

As for "clean slates", Presidential terms are 4 years.  That's how long the President is given to make it all better.   Or at least give the illusion that he's making it better.  I don't set the rules. 

And I believe it's Bewitched where the nose twitch solves problems.

So, cutting spending is the solution ? hmmm I agree.  Do the readers of this forum think we would be in a better place today, April 15, 2012, if John McCain had won the election ?

Lets take a poll

I vote - NO. We would be in the same place we are in today. Presidents don't have that much power.

If the President can't make a difference, why do we bother electing one?

Today's Facebook post from a work colleague of mine, who happens to be a HUGE Obama apologist:

"Tax Day: while economists are a diverse lot, one area of broad agreement is that it takes 3 - 6 years for the impact of one president to work through the economy, and a like time for the next president's policies to begin having an impact. Keep that in mind as you write your check."


Translation: it's still Bush's fault.

so answer my poll question honestly

Do the readers of this forum think we would be in a better place today, April 15, 2012, if John McCain had won the election ?

We wouldn't have the albatross of a health care bill hanging around our necks.  So for that reason alone, yes.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/15/2012 7:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by genghisxcon on 4/14/2012 8:22:00 PM (view original):
Helps? Helps how? Helps me realize that you think the world is a clean slate when a head of state takes office? Helps me realize you have terribly simplistic views of economics, politics, and even cause and effect? I guess, except I already knew all that.

If you think a major economic downturn can just be fixed overnight, maybe you should turn off TVLand. This isn't I Dream of Jeannie. Problems aren't instantly made all better by twitching your nose.

However, you did say one thing of great value. Obviously not here, but in the HBD forum. It's what micki hinted at earlier. You said you shouldn't complain without offering a solution. So tell me what specifically should Obama have done differently to address an issue of your choosing? Go ahead agent Starling, enthrall me with your acumen.

I'm not the President.   It's not really my job to have solutions.    However, if you want just one, I'd say a large part of our problem is unemployment.  Part of that problem is companies taking jobs overseas.   So, rather than tax businesses further and have them scraping for another dollar, how about focusing on what it takes to keep those jobs in the US?   It's a company's job to profit.  If, after labor/taxes and all other associated costs, it's $40 to have a job done in the US and $20 to have a job done in India, what's the logical thing to do?    Tax the business more on anything the government can?

As for "clean slates", Presidential terms are 4 years.  That's how long the President is given to make it all better.   Or at least give the illusion that he's making it better.  I don't set the rules. 

And I believe it's Bewitched where the nose twitch solves problems.

What will be funny is when our corporate tax rate is finally slashed to 20 percent, tax loopholes are closed, and subsididies are ended and the corporations start crying because they are actually paying a higher tax rate than they ever have.

It amazes me that the United States was once the world leader in manufacturing with tax rates that were north of 60 percent.

One thing though Mike, I know why you are feeling the pain, according to the CBO, our tax structure is very industry specific with Trucking companies getting nailed at almost 31 percent. Petroleum and natural gas Structured companies pay Usually from 11 to -2.2 percent. Truckers feel the tax burden more than any other business in the US.

Posted by tecwrg on 4/15/2012 11:10:00 AM (view original):
We wouldn't have the albatross of a health care bill hanging around our necks.  So for that reason alone, yes.

Ha! What makes you think that? Every president Going back to FDR has a health care plan that until Obama, has always died before becoming a reality. Obamacare is in essence the same plan that the GOP and Heritage Foundation wanted to implement in the early 1990's. Newt and Mitt were on board back then.

Posted by The Taint on 4/15/2012 11:24:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 4/15/2012 11:10:00 AM (view original):
We wouldn't have the albatross of a health care bill hanging around our necks.  So for that reason alone, yes.

Ha! What makes you think that? Every president Going back to FDR has a health care plan that until Obama, has always died before becoming a reality. Obamacare is in essence the same plan that the GOP and Heritage Foundation wanted to implement in the early 1990's. Newt and Mitt were on board back then.

Obama had the benefit of a majority in the House and a super-majority in the Senate which helped railroad this atrocity into law.

If you don't think that we wouldn't have had this under a McCain administration, then you're living in an alternate reality.

Posted by The Taint on 4/15/2012 11:13:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/15/2012 7:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by genghisxcon on 4/14/2012 8:22:00 PM (view original):
Helps? Helps how? Helps me realize that you think the world is a clean slate when a head of state takes office? Helps me realize you have terribly simplistic views of economics, politics, and even cause and effect? I guess, except I already knew all that.

If you think a major economic downturn can just be fixed overnight, maybe you should turn off TVLand. This isn't I Dream of Jeannie. Problems aren't instantly made all better by twitching your nose.

However, you did say one thing of great value. Obviously not here, but in the HBD forum. It's what micki hinted at earlier. You said you shouldn't complain without offering a solution. So tell me what specifically should Obama have done differently to address an issue of your choosing? Go ahead agent Starling, enthrall me with your acumen.

I'm not the President.   It's not really my job to have solutions.    However, if you want just one, I'd say a large part of our problem is unemployment.  Part of that problem is companies taking jobs overseas.   So, rather than tax businesses further and have them scraping for another dollar, how about focusing on what it takes to keep those jobs in the US?   It's a company's job to profit.  If, after labor/taxes and all other associated costs, it's $40 to have a job done in the US and $20 to have a job done in India, what's the logical thing to do?    Tax the business more on anything the government can?

As for "clean slates", Presidential terms are 4 years.  That's how long the President is given to make it all better.   Or at least give the illusion that he's making it better.  I don't set the rules. 

And I believe it's Bewitched where the nose twitch solves problems.

What will be funny is when our corporate tax rate is finally slashed to 20 percent, tax loopholes are closed, and subsididies are ended and the corporations start crying because they are actually paying a higher tax rate than they ever have.

It amazes me that the United States was once the world leader in manufacturing with tax rates that were north of 60 percent.

One thing though Mike, I know why you are feeling the pain, according to the CBO, our tax structure is very industry specific with Trucking companies getting nailed at almost 31 percent. Petroleum and natural gas Structured companies pay Usually from 11 to -2.2 percent. Truckers feel the tax burden more than any other business in the US.

Would you like to know why that wouldn't be funny, MrShortsightedviewpoint?

Because, as always, loss of profit is passed on to the consumer with price increases.   As long as the objective is to STOP businesses from turning a profit, our economy will not recover.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2012 8:10:00 PM (view original):
As usual "What has Obama done?" is countered with "Well, look at those guys!!!"

Sad.

It is funny that people keep blaming Bush 4 years after the fact....at what point is the Obama administration and it's supporters going to own their situation and broken promises?