OK, OK, i know you guys hate it when i get fired up on politics on k dice. but, settle that with thrax, no really!

obama has 67% approval rating because everybody is thinking

"OMG a black president, this guy must be able to walk on water, when as we all know (i know most of you are bush basher's and will dissagree) that the stock market has also crashed in the past 44 days witch is crap. as with bush the stock market was double as it is now! meaning every single person in america has lost half of their stock money witch is going to throw us into another depression, as so, this billions of dollar's he "gonna pull out of his ass". tell me though, for all the liberal. were is this money coming from? who's going to pay off our debt? hows this in anyway going to help out economy as life is getting sucked down a sewage pipe?

i main point is were is this money coming from? who's going to pay it off? i know your not. but i will, and my kids will and so on and so fourth. how's this going to help our economy? were is this all going too as the mayors for each city got called in for extra "tax payer" money.

this is just crap and i see he Mr. Obama not taking us a "change" for the future, but a "change" for the past with all of Clinton cabinets back in office.

one last thing before i shut up =]

there are guys in office who didn't pay their taxes. and guys who got money from the government to pay taxes with! but yet, their rich and top notch politians and they don't go to jail, but my dad owns part of a fortune 500 company that has thousand of hundreds of natural gas oil pipelines. if he didn't pay his taxes. he would go to jail!!!

so please somebody that has an obvious better understanding than i do tell me how this is flying? because it pisses me off people are soo stupid to fall into him. tell me if I'm wrong

Damn it skrum, don't tease me. Teach me more!!!

Is the U.S. federal government doing the right thing by throwing money at the problem?

Is the "redistribution" of wealth beneficial to U.S. society as a whole? (that's not a shot at Obama, it's an honest question)




thrax, the answer to that is no (as most have probably found out in the past few months of me fighting politics i am a strong conservative)

money will just make more federal debt which will just crash the economy more than ever

redistribution is crap. (don't call me cruel), i think that if people didn't get a good education in school. they can always go back. if their not willing to go back and work hard, then screw them and leave them behind because i know in 10 years when I'm paying taxes i wont feal comfortable paying for other people living on the side of the road doing nothing but begging for money they can easily earn. so I'm not willing to spend money on a fat old lazy guy who can't do anything but walk up and and down a car lane holding a piece of cardboard that quotes "anything will help, please. GOD BLESS"

and before you go bush bashing on me... just remember, he risked his fame (and lost it) keeping this country safe for 7 more years of office terms. just something to think about.

Sup Thrax,

from what I've been reading (I'm also not an economist) it's not true that Obama is spreading debt "so recklessly that the possibility of having a balanced budget anytime within his term is utterly impossible". Here's a link to an Economist's piece, which is far from being left-leaning: the plan is to have a major cut in debt until 2013, from current 12% down to 3% of GDP. The article also states that "Mr Obama seems more fiscally honest than George Bush, whose accounting gimmicks vied with Enron’s."

http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13185415&fsrc=rss

I won't develop much on this, but it really seems that Obama achieves the main expectation that I, personally, had towards him: a more pragmatic and less ideology-driven way of looking at issues. Actually I had this same expectation from McCain, but I dropped it when he announced Palin as his running mate.

@ wardog: "he risked his fame (and lost it) keeping this country safe for 7 more years of office terms"

As far as I can see, the only war in which Bush "risked his fame" (eh...) was the Iraqi one. I don't see how the US is safer now than it would be were Saddam still governing (dictating) Iraq.

"just remember, he risked his fame (and lost it) keeping this country safe for 7 more years of office terms. just something to think about."


this is bullshit.

you guys realize wardog is 12 right?

I agree that the hypocrisy here is astounding, from each and every politician. Having looked at the article http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/29/news/economy/stimulus_analysis/index.htm I have to say I'm still not convinced. The article starts off very weak, saying "Moody's study suggests extending unemployment benefits, increasing food stamps fastest ways to stimulate economy." Don't use suggest please, not to mention the article never mentioned unemployment benefits. I would prefer the money to be branched out. A person uses food stamps and then what? The money (at least the way I see it) stays in the grocery store. The grocery store doesn't invest the money, all they can do is hire more workers, which is good, but in two weeks that same person will come back with food stamps and will still be jobless.

When I say branched out I don't mean the pork that was in the economic stimulus bill, I mean trying ideas that actually have a chance of stimulating the economy. I had an idea of just giving every homeowner a credit card that will expire in a year or 6 months with $10,000 dollars on it saying "Here, go spend it before it expires." Not only would people be able to pay off bills, but they would buy a big screen tv that they wanted and still have money left over. It would help keep people in their homes and would encourage people to buy goods and services which helps businesses. I realize it's only a temporary solution, but at least it's bipartisan and actually stimulates the economy.

I figure there are at most 100 million homes in the U.S. so it would basically take all of Obama's stimulus money.

"just remember, he risked his fame (and lost it) keeping this country safe for 7 more years of office terms. just something to think about."

I think he's referring to 9/11 and the Patriot Act. In which case I agree. There were no terrorist attacks after 9/11 in the United States, but many other major cities around the world were attacked.

also, the bailouts (the socialist part) happened while bush was still president

anyways, in times like this when the free market puts its invisible hands in its pockets, its necessary for the government to come in and give the economy a jump start, be it with economic stimulus, job creation, whatever... its worked before (see New Deal) and it could work again, but one things for sure, if we just let the market be right now, it will only get worse

Ummm.... the new deal didn't do anything. The wartime economy of World War 2 is what shocked the economy back to life. It reduced unemployment, both working in factories and as soldiers overseas, and got the country moving in the right direction.