Eturnalshift wrote:
In the typical progressive/liberal fashion, blame is being put elsewhere as if the Lord Obamessiah is incapable of doing anything because of those evil and dastardly Republicans cock-blocking all his moves.
Oh, and the GOP cock-blocking argument is only good for so long. Remember, Obama was able to enjoy a Democrat majority in the House and Senate for two years and, even then, he didn't get much done.
Pretty much, yeah. They did the same thing during the Clinton era. Remember Newt shutting down the government on - how many occasions was it? three? Or turning the citadel of government into a circus and wasting time and money because someone had sex with an intern, rather than dealing with festering issues?
Obama didn't screw any interns. But the efforts to stymie government continue. How is that his fault?
Eturnalshift wrote:
From the National Priorities Project, the total cost of the Iraq/Afghanistan wars is 1.34T. If that data is accurate, the 2012 Federal Deficit, 1.32T, is about the same as the cost of a decade of two wars. You can search for their methodology in getting that number. The 1.34T was spread across a decade and doesn't wholy justify the massive deficits we've been experiencing.
The NPP is a political lobby, so what they claim is biased and irrelevant.
The CBO, which is generally non-partisan, cites direct appropriation at $1.4T.
Direct appropriation does NOT include:
-Opportunity cost of war employment
-Attrition of support infrastructure and war materiel
-Inflation due to supply-side economics (i.e., prices for civilian consumption and industry go up when supply is being consumed by a war; also see: how WW2 destroyed the British Empire)
-Interest on said spending
-Black budgeting
Eturnalshift wrote:
The annual interest paid on the national debt during the last decade varies year to year. In the last decade it's been somewhere between $320B and $450B. The problem is Obama doesn't realize this is a problem. Instead, if we were to tighten our straps and actually do something about our debt, then we'd have an additional $300-400B each year to cover social programs and/or whatever else, so long as its covered in a solvent budget. "How is any of that his fault?"
What your basis for claiming Obama does not see this as a problem?
"Our straps"? Who is "our", and what "straps" are we tightening?
Does that mean you personally are willing to pay higher taxes, or sustain a decrease in your standard of living? What programs do you think should be cut?
Eturnalshift wrote:
The one thing I hated most about Bush was his inability to keep spending under control. Yes, Bush added to our National Debt at record paces, but that record was short-lived and easily outpaced by Obama. As such, Obama is simply adding to the problem you're saying he's not responsible for (the debt) and because of Obama's portion, we're going to have to pay even more interest in the coming years.
.
You can keep saying "but deficits went up under Obama" all you like.
Until you can draw a causal relationship the argument is moot. Eturnalshift wrote:
"What do you think Obama should have done?" Focus on our economy rather than passing health care legislation would've been a good start.
How?
Eturnalshift wrote:
For some reason, I feel like people spend money when they have money, and when people spend money, that creates jobs.
And how would you propose people get money?
There are not enough jobs, remember? And without enough people with jobs...with money...then what incentive do corporations have to hire people...to produce products for which there is currently no market...because no one has jobs or money?
What is the incentive, Eturnal?
Eturnalshift wrote:
The problem is people aren't working and Obama did little to address that fact. Instead, we get to buy ObamaCare. Hooray!
So you say, people should get money, so they can spend, and businesses can hire.
Obamacare will result in the hiring of doctors and medical personnel, to give people boob and nose jobs-I mean, to provide primary medical care.
Where do you think the money the medical personnel earn is going to go? The Cayman Islands? Obama's savings account? Or buying things they want and need?
Or would you prefer they not be hired at all? If your complaint is that the money comes out of taxpayers' wallets, how is that different than the money coming out of consumers' wallets? It's the same wallet, no?
Or would you prefer economic stasis? No money changing hands - no medical personnel being hired, we all just sit around and wait for...what?
What do you think a preferable alternative to Obamacare would be, and what is your
empirical evidence that it would work?
Eturnalshift wrote:
Quote:
an economy in terminal decline made even worse by the loss of human capital to the wars.
Don't kid yourself. The
fraction of a fraction of a single percentage point of US citizens that were once able-bodied US military weren't going to be the driving force behind economic recovery. The fact that you even considered that rather than blowing them off as "welfare state human filler" or whatever other insult you could muster, is shocking.
You're contradicting yourself here.
Are they "welfare state human filler" or useful economic material? Either they would be on the street if they were not in the military, or they would have jobs in the economy. Which is it?
Military people, like everyone else on welfare, are wasted human capital. I know full well that the military has some of the smartest and most able-bodied human resources in the country. Which is why it's a tragedy those people are on welfare, rather than being economically productive. But until that happens, yeah, they're filler, just like everyone else on welfare who isn't being used to build this country.
Eturnalshift wrote:
I think there is a real concern about our fiscal situation and I hope people are starting to realize that we can't continue the path we've been walking. You said Obama didn't have enough bold ideas. You know, if those bold ideas were actually going to help us in some way then I'd be less critical of the President and, if they were going to promote job growth, then I'd support him. John Edwards had some ideas that I supported and he's an OMFG DEMOCRAT RLY NOWAI. Unfortunately, as you pointed out, Obama hasn't done anything to really help. I don't not like him because he's black. I don't not like him because of his name. I don't like him because he was able to tell the world, "I'm your guy. I'll shit rainbows, piss unicorns and fuck leprechauns to make the world better." Sadly, the world believed him and now we're all stuck paying for it. That's why I don't like him. He's a well-spoken liar who hasn't ever been good for this job and I hate it knowing I was right all along.
You being someone who gets lied to all the time and makes a point of striving to believe lies that have been thoroughly debunked, I know that you don't like Obama because he is a reminder of the contradictions in your life and the bigotry (not exclusively towards black people) that underscore your world view.
You identify with the GOP ideology because it flatters you to think of yourself as a self-made hero and that everyone and anyone who isn't you is a bad person, who didn't have the guts to serve in the National Guard, who came from parents who weren't as supportive and didn't take it upon themselves to scam the government into paying for their kid's education.
You identify with the GOP ideology because you find it deeply threatening to think that the world might just not be fair and that in a more perfect America, you might not be so high on the totem pole. That's not to say that you deserve to be poor and someone else should live in your house...rather, that you consider it a personal affront, that people who aren't you might be just as deserving of what you have.
You identify with the GOP ideology because you are uneducated, not in the sense you don't have embossed toilet paper on your walls, but in the sense that you have a total ignorance of how the world, this country, other countries, life in general, actually works. And rather than doing the difficult and necessarily traumatic (for anyone and everyone, including me) task of educating yourself and expanding yourself, you identify with an ideology that enshrines your ignorance and tells you that it is a virtue.
That is why you support the GOP.