Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.
All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..
As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.
Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!
*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."
Vestlusringide loetelu
Sa ei tohi sellesse vestlusringi kirjutada. Madalaim lubatud liikmelisustase sellesse vestlusringi kirjutamiseks on Ajuettur.
Czuch: My point is that giving money to the big oil companies doesn't help the poor or the economy in general, it hurts it. It's a smoke screen. It's sheer robbery by those who don't NEED it.
Yes, stopping ALL handouts (Ron Paul's answer) would be far better than the system in place now, because it would even the playing field. A lot of these big boys would go under. A lot of folks who are poor now would rise. You say you believe in competition. Be consistent then!
But with the system we have now, it would be more effective, not to mention more ethical, to give the money to the people who NEED it, and thereby stimulate the economy from below.
The Usurper: Okay, im with you then, for the most part.... but you even said yourself, either we give them money for 2 dollar gas or we dont give them money for 8 dollar gas, either way they make the same money?
But it really does help the poor, by keeping gas prices lower..... and lower gas prices helps the whole economy as well, cheaper to ship goods results in lower prices for everything, more spending power, economy humming along?
As far a stimulating the economy from below... well i am as skeptical of that as you are of trickle down... the good news is we will find out soon enough, as the big experiment of change is already in motion....
also with this increased spending to the low income at record levels, how do we decrease the deficit too?
Czuch: I'm pretty skeptical of Obama's program myself, or of his "good will." A lot of that money "looks" like its going to the poor, but is actually more handouts to the rich....more trickle down. But some of it may help the poor, which is good in itself. I think his real aim is encouraging austerity, the tight belt-buckle, for the American people in general, all for the "greater good." He calls it sacrifice. But the defense budget won't be cut, so the imperial mission is still front-and-center. Will his modifications of the economy work? I don't think so.
The Usurper: From what I remember seeing, a lot of the stimulus package goes straight to welfare and food stamps and programs like that?
I was personally happy when it first got proposed, huge spending on infrastucture I could support, high speed cable and a new road out front and the jobs it would create to make it happen... it surprised me a bit because that really is more of a trickle down formula than trickle up, but it seems like instead, i can fly to LA and take a really fast train to vegas... no high speed internet for me i guess?
Czuch: Yes, a lot of it is trickle down. But as you say, the infrastructure is what is actually needed, and would create jobs. The food stamps, etc., are also needed. But the most important single factor that's needed, and won't be addressed, is the giant defense budget that robs us all blind while havoc in the rest of the world.
The Usurper: Im pretty sure the defense budget is due to be cut as well, although we are pretty much trading Iraq for Afghanistan and people dont realize, that even without either of those, it still costs a lot of money to keep a military in ready... doing military training in alabama or having troops in Iraq, its not as much a difference in cost as most people realize. Its still soldiers and feeding them and arming them....
i wrote this before reading you most recent post before this one
(peida) Kui Sa tahad kedagi tema emakeeles tervitada, vaata meie Mängija Sõnastikku "veel keeltest" lingil lippude all. (pauloaguia) (näita kõiki vihjeid)