edwardtheclean
Well-Known Member
so this all must be fake right? all made up? anyone?
It's all about knowing who your friends are...
- Thread starter CrackerJax
- Start date
edwardtheclean
Well-Known Member
let me guess, someone will have something to say about this not being true? for gods sake watch more than one news channel!!!!!!!!!
tip top toker
Well-Known Member
you mean the healthcare system that has never failed me in my life or cost me anything other than my taxes? yeah, that's the one, and i have no gripe with it whatsoever. (although when it comes to transplants and much more major things i know of the waiting lists, but hell, if it's that big of an issue pay the money for private and live?)
and i think that the whole US and UK allies thing is starting to fade out. i don't think i'd like to call the USA an ally of mine, not any more. it is little more than the labour govt that is this present day ally. the war is one issue, but other things such as crap extradition policies etc etc.
it is a friendship between the USA (maybe just president and party) and tony blair, gordon and labour etc. not one from the people.
not really sure of your attitude t the war these days, in the UK the majority are wondering what the fuck we're doing, yet the government sprouts crap anfter crap about how essential the work we're doing over there is while we sink into debt and continue to get our soldiers killed. stop doing what the americans would like and look at the UK peoples needs for once!
proud brit (every day a little bit less proud though)
C
chitownsmoking
Guest
its official.. none likes obama anymore... and has of late not even our long time friends the jews!! his approvle rating is 4% in isreal........... and low has hell in europe, and over here to........
i can see the people getting sick of this dictatorship of a government....... prolly not that far away from people rioting to show there dissapprovle, and them bitches sicking the national guard, and army into major us cities...... call me crazy but similer shit like this has happend before in a period know has the 60's
i can see the people getting sick of this dictatorship of a government....... prolly not that far away from people rioting to show there dissapprovle, and them bitches sicking the national guard, and army into major us cities...... call me crazy but similer shit like this has happend before in a period know has the 60's
tip top toker
Well-Known Member
i certainly aprove of him. don't know what the fuck he does right or wrong, but he's not bush
bush is where the friendship took some funny turns. oh, and clinton gaffing her face off in disaproval any time we do something she doesn't like. our more senior members of govt rarely give news statements saying how dissapointed we are that she has been kept in employment or whatnot yada yada
C
chitownsmoking
Guest
what your failing to understand is obama is just bush with a darker face... the chicago version of bush. he does lil shit to seperate himself from bush like politics but in the end there all the same. one before him, him, and the one after him... this shit is getting crazzzzy. the gov. is like the mob int hat they now got there pockets into almost everything. and its legal.i certainly aprove of him. don't know what the fuck he does right or wrong, but he's not bush
bush is where the friendship took some funny turns. oh, and clinton gaffing her face off in disaproval any time we do something she doesn't like. our more senior members of govt rarely give news statements saying how dissapointed we are that she has been kept in employment or whatnot yada yada
tip top toker
Well-Known Member
until he goes to war with someone he's better than bush that's the limit of my concern 
that's the limit of my concern 
IAm5toned
Well-Known Member
how about the wall street journal... that credible enough for you? i take its word over cnn or fox news....
By MICHAEL J. BOSKIN
It's hard not to see the continued sell-off on Wall Street and the growing fear on Main Street as a product, at least in part, of the realization that our new president's policies are designed to radically re-engineer the market-based U.S. economy, not just mitigate the recession and financial crisis.
-Martin Kozlowski
The illusion that Barack Obama will lead from the economic center has quickly come to an end. Instead of combining the best policies of past Democratic presidents -- John Kennedy on taxes, Bill Clinton on welfare reform and a balanced budget, for instance -- President Obama is returning to Jimmy Carter's higher taxes and Mr. Clinton's draconian defense drawdown.
Mr. Obama's $3.6 trillion budget blueprint, by his own admission, redefines the role of government in our economy and society. The budget more than doubles the national debt held by the public, adding more to the debt than all previous presidents -- from George Washington to George W. Bush -- combined. It reduces defense spending to a level not sustained since the dangerous days before World War II, while increasing nondefense spending (relative to GDP) to the highest level in U.S. history. And it would raise taxes to historically high levels (again, relative to GDP). And all of this before addressing the impending explosion in Social Security and Medicare costs.
To be fair, specific parts of the president's budget are admirable and deserve support: increased means-testing in agriculture and medical payments; permanent indexing of the alternative minimum tax and other tax reductions; recognizing the need for further financial rescue and likely losses thereon; and bringing spending into the budget that was previously in supplemental appropriations, such as funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The specific problems, however, far outweigh the positives. First are the quite optimistic forecasts, despite the higher taxes and government micromanagement that will harm the economy. The budget projects a much shallower recession and stronger recovery than private forecasters or the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office are projecting. It implies a vast amount of additional spending and higher taxes, above and beyond even these record levels. For example, it calls for a down payment on universal health care, with the additional "resources" needed "TBD" (to be determined).
Mr. Obama has bravely said he will deal with the projected deficits in Medicare and Social Security. While reform of these programs is vital, the president has shown little interest in reining in the growth of real spending per beneficiary, and he has rejected increasing the retirement age. Instead, he's proposed additional taxes on earnings above the current payroll tax cap of $106,800 -- a bad policy that would raise marginal tax rates still further and barely dent the long-run deficit.
Increasing the top tax rates on earnings to 39.6% and on capital gains and dividends to 20% will reduce incentives for our most productive citizens and small businesses to work, save and invest -- with effective rates higher still because of restrictions on itemized deductions and raising the Social Security cap. As every economics student learns, high marginal rates distort economic decisions, the damage from which rises with the square of the rates (doubling the rates quadruples the harm). The president claims he is only hitting 2% of the population, but many more will at some point be in these brackets.
As for energy policy, the president's cap-and-trade plan for CO2 would ensnare a vast network of covered sources, opening up countless opportunities for political manipulation, bureaucracy, or worse. It would likely exacerbate volatility in energy prices, as permit prices soar in booms and collapse in busts. The European emissions trading system has been a dismal failure. A direct, transparent carbon tax would be far better.
Moreover, the president's energy proposals radically underestimate the time frame for bringing alternatives plausibly to scale. His own Energy Department estimates we will need a lot more oil and gas in the meantime, necessitating $11 trillion in capital investment to avoid permanently higher prices.
The president proposes a large defense drawdown to pay for exploding nondefense outlays -- similar to those of Presidents Carter and Clinton -- which were widely perceived by both Republicans and Democrats as having gone too far, leaving large holes in our military. We paid a high price for those mistakes and should not repeat them.
The president's proposed limitations on the value of itemized deductions for those in the top tax brackets would clobber itemized charitable contributions, half of which are by those at the top. This change effectively increases the cost to the donor by roughly 20% (to just over 72 cents from 60 cents per dollar donated). Estimates of the responsiveness of giving to after-tax prices range from a bit above to a little below proportionate, so reductions in giving will be large and permanent, even after the recession ends and the financial markets rebound.
A similar effect will exacerbate tax flight from states like California and New York, which rely on steeply progressive income taxes collecting a large fraction of revenue from a small fraction of their residents. This attack on decentralization permeates the budget -- e.g., killing the private fee-for-service Medicare option -- and will curtail the experimentation, innovation and competition that provide a road map to greater effectiveness.
The pervasive government subsidies and mandates -- in health, pharmaceuticals, energy and the like -- will do a poor job of picking winners and losers (ask the Japanese or Europeans) and will be difficult to unwind as recipients lobby for continuation and expansion. Expanding the scale and scope of government largess means that more and more of our best entrepreneurs, managers and workers will spend their time and talent chasing handouts subject to bureaucratic diktats, not the marketplace needs and wants of consumers.
Our competitors have lower corporate tax rates and tax only domestic earnings, yet the budget seeks to restrict deferral of taxes on overseas earnings, arguing it drives jobs overseas. But the academic research (most notably by Mihir Desai, C. Fritz Foley and James Hines Jr.) reveals the opposite: American firms' overseas investments strengthen their domestic operations and employee compensation.
New and expanded refundable tax credits would raise the fraction of taxpayers paying no income taxes to almost 50% from 38%. This is potentially the most pernicious feature of the president's budget, because it would cement a permanent voting majority with no stake in controlling the cost of general government.
From the poorly designed stimulus bill and vague new financial rescue plan, to the enormous expansion of government spending, taxes and debt somehow permanently strengthening economic growth, the assumptions underlying the president's economic program seem bereft of rigorous analysis and a careful reading of history.
Unfortunately, our history suggests new government programs, however noble the intent, more often wind up delivering less, more slowly, at far higher cost than projected, with potentially damaging unintended consequences. The most recent case, of course, was the government's meddling in the housing market to bring home ownership to low-income families, which became a prime cause of the current economic and financial disaster.
On the growth effects of a large expansion of government, the European social welfare states present a window on our potential future: standards of living permanently 30% lower than ours. Rounding off perceived rough edges of our economic system may well be called for, but a major, perhaps irreversible, step toward a European-style social welfare state with its concomitant long-run economic stagnation is not.
Mr. Boskin is a professor of economics at Stanford University and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. He chaired the Council of Economic Advisers under President George H.W. Bush.
and heres some facts from the us dept of treasury:
The national debt on Sept 1981 (Carter-D) 997,855,000,000.00
The national debt on Sept 1988 (Regan-R) 2,857,430,960,187.32
The national debt on Sept 1992 (H. Bush-R) 4,064,620,655,521.66
The national debt on Sept 2000 (Clinton-D) 5,674,178,209,886.86
The national debt on Sept 2008 (W. Bush-R) 10,024,724,896,912.49
The national debt on Sept 2009 (Obama-D) 11,909,829,003,511.75
do you doubt the credibility of the treasury dept??? there the ones that own the damn money!!!!!
CrackerJax
New Member
Too many facts in there!!
That's why lib's don't read the WSJ...
That's why lib's don't read the WSJ...
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
When did Obama decriminalize? I must have missed that.
I can only assume you are referring to the MEMO the Administration sent to the DEA advising them to use discretion in MMJ states.
I applauded the President at the time for taking that step.
But, in some isolated cases, the raids continue.
ViRedd
New Member
Hey Med O'Mao ...
I think you've set a record here in the forum for going the longest period of time before making an intelligent post. Congradulations, you've finally made sense.
And by the way, it looks like you've finally realized that Obama is an empty suit.
CrackerJax
New Member
As a side note............................. (over here)
With all of the gargantuan proportions and provisions in the health care bill.... no room for MMJ officially? Really?
Almiost as if it was a ruse to get elected, like all of the campaign promises. I'm shocked...
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I agree with you foreign intervention is often a bad policy and should be used with extreme care. Not to mention it is costly in both human life and money.until he goes to war with someone he's better than bush
Bush was a little trigger happy.
But, to state Obama hasn't gone to war wouldn't be fair either. He hasn't ended the wars in the middle east or on marijuana. He HAS declared war on your wallet though. That will have unintended consequences.
Inflation is a hidden tax, wait and see. We are also a debtor nation, that is unsustainable.
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Rob, you should check out an article in one of my favorite magazines: Backwoods Home Magazine.
The article is entitled, 'A Quick Tour of Hyperinflation and the Possible Consequences for America.'
http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/silveira122.html
The editorial for this issue is pretty good, too.
http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles2/duffy122.html