dayman

God bless you and God bless America. Country first! So long as country is "me and my view."

This "debate" has come to an end.

It really is just on and on and on in a circular discussion at this point. And it's good it's that time and eventually we can all go vote and be done with it. My hope is simply that whoever wins out this time, be it Obama or Romney...we all just go with their plan and encourage our representatives to at least not obstruct...they don't have to compromise themselves (and there is a place for the opposition party and minority views) but they will have to compromise issues in the end for the country and if they can't then don't vote for them. More than anything this endless jousting is what hurts us all the most. So we can all go vote for our guy as president but I would hope that there's an opportunity to vote for your guy in the congressional races that shares your views but also understands they owe a duty to work with other elected officials to govern. In any event this election will be decided on the basis of who is the better singer, and who does and doesn't hate gay people, and who has a dancing horse, and who is a black foreign socialist, and who is a rich fat cat who fired the neighbor and so on...but whoever wins that nonsense (and in doing so will likely carry their party to the Presidency and at least 1 chamber of congress) wins. And while there will be compromise it shouldn't be filibuster mania and broken congress round 2. It's easy to say this now while both sides think there's a chance they win...but I just hope as a nation we can move on after the election.

Every bit the pragmatist I've come to know you as. We're wasting each others time anyway, we don't even operate of the same set of facts. I get it, I'm not a pragmatist I'm just a socialist ideologue in disguise and the unemployment studies be damned none of the intervention kept us from prolonged contraction and we'd have a better recovery right now if we did nothing. I know...I'm bad. If only I believed in some personal accountability and contributed 2 dead condos to Miami personally I would be better off. (lol...cheap shot I know don't take it personally)

Ok then I'll chalk you up to one of the many conservatives on this board waiting for the self feeding spiral to naturally fix itself who also complains about recovery that isn't booming.

I've talked about how I see the situation go read. Everyone in the economy b/c it forestalls the recovery and prevents any positive action F&F can bring to the help the spiraling mortgage crisis. All homeowners b/c their home value is through the floor. And yes, since this is what I know you are getting at, it would help those on the verge of default some of whom were irresponsible and some of whom were actually reasonable in taking the mortgage they took before the collapse despite their current situation. The point is I get the "I don't want to help people who can't afford mortgages they took out" argument and nobody is saying that isn't the obvious and ordinary position of everybody. This is not the time to get hung up on that for reasons stated over and over and over in this thread.

Now it really is just repeating things already said to ask that. I've posted at length to this subject.

When you think debt relief will help the mortgage market and the recovery, and it isn't happening b/c it isn't good for F&F's short term profits...then you think there's a little shaft to all of us. I'm not starting an occupy DeMarco movement here btw...I'm just saying. I'd like to see some action here.

More people should get on board with providing debt relief to the people to spur recovery. Are these bailouts of the F&F and while the people get the shaft not one of the original tea party gripes? (haha, just snarky comment there btw don't blow a load). So there we have it.

He may save F&F some money today but in the long run until the underlying problem is addressed housing stock will continue to decrease. And in any event half of foreclosures are F&F and they have taken on a public persona w/ the bailout...it's a complex issue and I get that not everyone thinks it will help. A lot of people do...help both the recovery and the long term stability of housing stock.

It's well known DeMarco views his mission as interim director as conserving F&F's assets, not restoring the market or aiding the recovery. Never mind their quasi-public (or just plain public) nature of the two firms post collapse, he isn't concerned with macro-policy.

Haha, I should have kept a list of the Tebow people. Where are they now?

Hmm..I agree probably don't see it as being AS bad as you do but plain and simple I do agree. It's a little tough to really tell b/c it's been so long since a non-Clinton democrat was in there and well..lets face it Clinton had it coming. And even going back before Clinton the media was totally different. But I agree generally. That said, that's the media. Mitt can't just complain about it. He should have some sort of media initiative brainstorm in his campaign b/c really the majority favoring Obama (both slightly and those that are totally in love) talk a lot about how Obama is good and Mitt sucks. I watch ... not a lot of Fox but some ... and they don't really talk a whole lot about Romney at least maybe I just don't see it. (O'Reilly anyway doesn't seem to be in love w/ Romney not too many Mitt stories at all it's almost strange) I mean, at some point if it's going to be a close election...Romney should try and win someone over, get something going on his own, get someone talking him up. Politically that just makes sense and I'm sure they know that and really have yet to roll out whatever they have planned for post-Tampa. It's a tough one but they have to at least do something so I'll be interested to see what happens there.

A lot of it is, some is totally against him, and some try and be fairly neutral. On balance it's in the tank for him but that's not really any different than it has been in the past and Republicans have won anyway. Romney should find a way (I don't know what it is) to be more open to them in a good way if possible. Maybe it isn't, maybe politically he should keep his shell strategy going...but ultimately if it is close I'm not sure playing everything so close to the vest will pay off.

Oh well sorry didn't catch that thread. In any event I really don't use this thread (personally) for discussion of the validity of anything. Just saying this will probably be a messaging deal they sell and then of course jobs numbers Friday. Next wave of new crap to fill the political analysis on daily cable shows and talk radio.

What's really interesting is how the Bills use their running backs as receivers. At times, Fred Jackson or C.J. Spiller will be the No. 2 receiver. hmmmm

I don't hate Thig...but he's done nothing to separate himself from VY after being the offense and me having seen him play a little (only a little)...there is no way he wins the job. If Fitz goes down it'll be roll the dice on whatever the offense can do with VY whatever that may be and regardless of how different it looks from what we ordinarily try to do.

Well recent analysis of Romney's tax scheme will be the next wave http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/08/study-how-mitt-romneys-tax-plan-could-save-the-millionaires-87000-and-raise-taxes-on-the-middle-clas.html Romney campaign obviously takes issue with the findings. One spokesman said it doesn't take into account that cooperate cuts will obviously translate directly into higher earnings for employees. That's kind of a funny thing to say for me...and they say it doesn't factor in budget cuts but we don't know what those cuts are so that would be tough. In any event...this will probably be the next weeks topic + jobs report.

Well hey I think very highly of you and your worldly experiences too 3rd. So that's at least 2 of us. One day I will go beyond these walls of my crib. Then my soul will be crushed and I'll hate ideas. Then I'll be a big boy like you.

Well like I said I brought up job creation in the discussion as a by-product point. Solar and wind would be the norm now if it were a fix all and ready to take the reigns, I don't deny that nobody does. What I'm saying is the innovation curve is on the rise w/ world demand, and world demand is on the rise not for no reason at all...b/c this stuff is as of today great energy in some areas and looks increasingly promising in others. Here in America it could work great...we have a lot of wind and a lot of sun (obviously not all over the nation but in various places). It's not being "forced in" it's about looking to the future. I get the market mindset. I really do I'm not trying to say it's stupid or trivialize it. I'm actually a fan in many (actually almost all) circumstances. But investment and planning and positioning for the future makes business sense. Investment is apart of market forces. In some things it happens perfectly fine naturally...in others the competition and uncertainty in time frame and most of all status quo is something that causes the market to not jump on something until later. As a nation, collectively, we can and should position ourselves to excel in ALL areas of new energy....gas, wind, solar, anything else under the sun (pun intended). It's a philosophical divide and I respect that...but there are IMO some things that through incentives and programs should be encouraged publicly. This is one such area. Every tactical procedure we use to position ourselves? What programs? What incentives? That's where the debate is ripe. Is CO2 bad? Is solar and win a crock of ****? That's not a debate I see as credible.

Osama's plan carried out from beyond the grave (or beyond the ocean).

“Whoever brings the mujahidin information about the whereabouts of infidel Obama and the lady of Bill Clinton, the woman named Hillary Clinton, I will give a reward,” the man said. So can I collect if I tell them about the White House? http://www.runtanews.com/2012/08/01/somali-islamists-offer-10-camels-as-bounty-for-obama-2/

CO2 is the topic and that is THE factor I'm really concerned with in this thread but it goes along with all sorts of other considerations b/c we live in the real world. Someone started talking about coal and whatnot and then "other factors" came into the discussion that's why those stats came out. And the less energy...it's not true. It's energy with lower annual costs. And solar and wind are things other countries are going at aggressively and we are well equipped as a nation to do the same. Like I said earlier we consistently come out on top in studies about countries whose natural layouts are conducive to wind and solar. So it's not about making jobs the idea. Or CO2 the idea. Or annual costs the idea. Or energy independence the idea. It's about all of that, rolled into 1. And lest I leave it out of any post I make...it's also not about only solar and wind as far as my position it's just about solar and wind being good ideas for us that we should not be made to hate or trivialize.

Supposedly on the jobs end, yes the coal jobs go away. But on average every billion spend on new coal fire plans nets 870 jobs. The same amount in solar closer 1900 and for wind a whopping 3,300 on condition the turbine are actually built in the US (which is a significant condition). Retrofiting houses/buildings on the other hand produce 7-8 million jobs per billion spent. Despite certain example I know you love to point out and they are fair enough, a study from the Brookings institution found that from '03-'10 new clean energy jobs grew by 8.3%, way faster than in other fields, and on average they pay 20% more. And while nothing has performed the way we want, they've continued to grow through the recession. Now this stuff comes from the brooking institution and http://www.google.org/energyinnovation/The_Impact_of_Clean_Energy_Innovation.pdf ... so I know being the skeptic of all things left many coal supporters will nay say it all and call it BS and that's fair enough. All I'm saying is if you consider the coal folk, consider the other folk as well. The biggest challenge v. coal is that coal plants are easier to finance...solar and wind have very low annual costs but high upfront costs (despite solid rates in increasing technology which are lowering this cost). Anyway, I agree with you. It is a good discussion to have. I do support solar and wind I think we have a great layout in this nation to take advantage of it and a lot of other nations are doing so for good reason. But at the same time I'm just adding this to the discussion...I don't need coal plants gone tomorrow. But it's pretty clear to me our focus moving forward isn't there.

Haha first and foremost I use PPP to develop skills that will further my career. That's why I'm here. It's not about the market recovering prior to correction it's about policies that in some people's opinion can help spur that along while in your opinion only delay the correction. And I read btw too...so if there are some articles that talk about the views you all have that disqualify some of the solutions I've posted I'm all for clicking links and scanning them later tonight over dinner and thinking about it. I'm not sitting around and making stuff up I mean I don't pretend the position I have is some grand original thought I have b/c I'm a genius and know how to fix everything...this isn't remotely my field anyway. These are the views of various people writing articles I've read and doing interviews I heard...it's not "hiding behind experts." I'm not an expert. What am I to do ignore everything written? This is what people do, they read about stuff. The whole "circumventing the natural laws of the world" ... look I get it. And like I said I'm not some top down central planning guy. You insist I have some staunch controlling ideological agenda propelling me, it's not the case. I'm not an ideologue at all and as I said in normal circumstances I do agree, don't !@#$ with it. But in this circumstance it seems we should. My point is not hide behind experts, it's to point out that experts are the people framing the discussion and they differ. To just say "all experts who say anything will help at all are wrong" ... that's some pretty staunch ideology as I see it. But anyway like I said over and over, I'm not here to sway you or anybody else. I'm not going ton convince you. I'm not even trying to argue with you. It's discussion.