General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLaurian
(2,593 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)That is the only stat that people can see.
It's all about jobs.
Loge23
(3,922 posts)The poor job numbers should give John & Jane Doe all the information they need to support the President.
You think jobs hurt the President? Try Romney - he is the freakin' poster boy for bad corporate behavior!
Obama continues to respond to the worst economic situation of our lifetime.
This is an issue of supply-side economics versus Keynesian economics. Just point out one - one - scenario where supply-side has been successful long-term. You won't find any.
I lost my job over greed. There is no current incentive for businesses to hire if they have a conditioned workforce that will work for lower wages, less benefits, and virtually no rights in this economy. This is American business in 2012.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Say screw it.
It is possible but some don't want to go there. Lower tax rates for repatriation of funds that go towards new plant and equipment or jobs in the US should be a no brainer. Bill Clinton would have done it.
But these types of things don't make sense to populist tax the 1% types so Obama won't go there because they are blinded by their need for the rich to pay more. We cut off our nose to spite our face.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)How many offshore accounts do you have?
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)dionysus
(26,467 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)I want a country that works and that makes sense and if Democrats need to be refocused on reality I'll go there.
Politics in general is becoming increasingly disgusting. Winning no longer involves moving the country forward but just in getting ones way preferably as ideologically focused as possible.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)right? I found your post a bit curious, pitting Obama against Clinton. You're so transparent.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)forested areas?
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Some people keep saying that Obama/Congress has increased the deficit lots and lots (trillions?), but others say the opposite, like this graphic. Which is right?
JaneQPublic
(7,113 posts)Last edited Sat Aug 18, 2012, 04:13 AM - Edit history (2)
The two are often confused, but the first chart shows that the deficit (Orange Line) has improved after the spike at the end of Dubya's time. The second chart shows that most of the deficit was the result of Bush-era spending: the wars and the two rounds of tax cuts.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)During the FDR years, we were still acquiring national park land, and had more natural resources, metals, timber, water and food. There were vast open spaces to exploit and a richer ecosytem.
The population was the opposite of what we have now, much bigger urban areas dependent on other areas for necessities. There were a few 'frontiers' at that time, room to make mistakes and grow.
In numbers alone, what we now face and most plan for requires the hings that the GOP is resisting, smart growth and sustainable development. For example, when FDR was in office, our population was over 120 million. Now, it is over 320 million and projected to be a billion at the end of the century at this website. although I've heard this predicted before:
http://www.mnforsustain.org/united_states_population_growth_graph.htm
We have a older population, which is not the problem. Nothing is going to return to the open spaces of the past and the many resources of the past, there is no turning back, we must 'move forward.'
There was also a long standing belief in public education, a desire to build the nation up and not tear it down. We have an entrrenched class who wants to own everything in this nation and guarantee their prosperity, and deny the rest of us. That was not the case in FDR's day.
The media was diverse and people knew what propaganda such as the 3rd Rsich used to incite, that we have been flooded with for over twenty years. FDR put the measures in place to prevent media consolidation and only one view being expressed, but our current variety of Reichwingers has turned those back and the populace has accepted it. They've also used religion to dumb down the public and spread hatred and disrespect for the democratic processes that were put in place ot give an equal playing field. True, we had our own version of domestic demagoguery in some areas, little different than now, but without the national power of FNN and hate radio.
Obama came into office with 2 wars ongoing, a 911 mentality, a media spreading lies when started programs like FDR did. He tried giving them different names but was savaged by media and congress relentlessly. He worked to rebuild our manufacturing and to provide stimulus to keep Americans going to work and into alternatives.
Obama has had a hell of a time, and it was not because he didn't have ideas or wasn't smart or was bought off. The conquest of America by our domestic fascists was almost complete when he entered office. I'm hoping that with a second term in office, he will be able with a more receptive Congress to exercise more flexibliity as he said.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)to republican control and they have been actively opposing the majority of his proposals.