UBinVA Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/arti...px?RsrcID=51162 If told my wife the same thing, she'd clocked me right upside my head. And she would be right. Who is going to be one one to clock these guys up side the head to stop this nonsense? And this is the party that called Dan Quayle an idiot? Dan Quayle had his flaws, but Biden has a gaffe every time he opens his stupid mouth. Does the Press care? Hell no. The emperor has no clothes but the press think he's best dressed man in town. This was my 5th Grade play in Buffalo and the premise is below. Sound familiar? The question is, who is going to be that child that tells the truth so everyone else will finally realize what is going on. An emperor of a prosperous city who cares more about clothes than military pursuits or entertainment hires two swindlers who promise him the finest suit of clothes from the most beautiful cloth. This cloth, they tell him, is invisible to anyone who was either stupid or unfit for his position. The Emperor cannot see the (non-existent) cloth, but pretends that he can for fear of appearing stupid; his ministers do the same. When the swindlers report that the suit is finished, they dress him in mime. The Emperor then goes on a procession through the capital showing off his new "clothes". During the course of the procession, a small child cries out, "But he has nothing on!" The crowd realizes the child is telling the truth. The Emperor, however, holds his head high and continues the procession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Well, they firmly believe that every stimulus dollar spent on green things returns a $10 reduction in healthcare costs and every dollar spent by the government returns $1.50. I believe the clowns are running the circus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Yes, but Joe Biden is intelligent so it doesn't matter how stupid he sounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyemike Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Yes, but Joe Biden is intelligent so it doesn't matter how stupid he sounds. (not at you, KD, but at the media's attitude) Joe Biden's just an idiot. I haven't truly criticized Obama, but I know who Joe Biden is, what he stands for, and I will make fun of him until the cows come home. In other news, have you ever noticed how much Joe Biden looks like Bob Uecker? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 (not at you, KD, but at the media's attitude) Joe Biden's just an idiot. I haven't truly criticized Obama, but I know who Joe Biden is, what he stands for, and I will make fun of him until the cows come home. In other news, have you ever noticed how much Joe Biden looks like Bob Uecker? It's just funny looking back at the Palin hysteria and the cries of "OMG, what if she had to be President! At least Obama has rock-solid Joe Biden behind him in case the worst ever happened!". Now of course Palin is an idiot and the thought of her as POTUS is pretty frightening, but right now I don't see how Joe Biden is any less scary. The guy doesn't think anything through before opening his mouth. And that means he doesn't think anything through. He's a !@#$ moron. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Actually, everyone thinks that if we don't change health care eventually the nation is going to be bankrupt. The way to do it is what is debatable. And there is zero question that if we don't spend money on it, we're going to go bankrupt. When we do it, the way to pay for it, who pays for it and when they pay for it, and if it eventually costs more or costs less, are the only things in question. There is no quote in that article from Biden that isn't absolutely true. Whoever wrote the article characterized that Biden said if we don't pass this particular bill we are going bankrupt. IF he said that, it would be a stupid thing to say. I don't know what else he said there. But the quote they used didnt say that at all. The quote from Biden was inarguably true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Actually, everyone thinks that if we don't change health care eventually the nation is going to be bankrupt. The way to do it is what is debatable. And there is zero question that if we don't spend money on it, we're going to go bankrupt. When we do it, the way to pay for it, who pays for it and when they pay for it, and if it eventually costs more or costs less, are the only things in question. There is no quote in that article from Biden that isn't absolutely true. Whoever wrote the article characterized that Biden said if we don't pass this particular bill we are going bankrupt. IF he said that, it would be a stupid thing to say. I don't know what else he said there. But the quote they used didnt say that at all. The quote from Biden was inarguably true. That is what is wrong with not just this administrations but previous one's and a number of economists thinking. The more we spend, the more we borrow, the more we grow. That is pretty much the philosophy. This line of thinking is destined to have a major meltdown, sure we have major issues now, but we will get through it, weaker, but we will get through it, but at some point it is all going to break down. There is genius in simplicity, and I want you to think about it for a second. We must spend and borrow in order to save ourselves. We must spend and borrow in order to have a healthy economy We must spend and borrow in order to grow With this approach Dog, at some point, the party will end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 There is genius in simplicity, and I want you to think about it for a second. We must spend and borrow in order to save ourselves. We must spend and borrow in order to have a healthy economy We must spend and borrow in order to grow With this approach, at some point Dog, the party will end. Pyramid scemes are always invisible or ignored by the participants. But there will be congressional recriminations and indignation afterwards, rest assured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 That is what is wrong with not just this administrations but previous one's and a number of economists thinking. The more we spend, the more we borrow, the more we grow. That is pretty much the philosophy. This line of thinking is destined to have a major meltdown, sure we have major issues now, but we will get through it, weaker, but we will get through it, but at some point it is all going to break down. There is genius in simplicity, and I want you to think about it for a second. We must spend and borrow in order to save ourselves. We must spend and borrow in order to have a healthy economy We must spend and borrow in order to grow With this approach Dog, at some point, the party will end. Myself, and Biden in that speech, were only talking about Health Care. All of the rest is arguable both ways as to how much we need to spend and borrow, and when we do it, and you may be right. But there are certain situations where there is no question you need to borrow and spend to make money and survive. If you're a small printing company, and you're losing money, and your printer breaks, your accountant may say "we can't afford a new printer right now". But if you don't spend money to either fix it or buy a new one, you're going to go bankrupt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Myself, and Biden in that speech, were only talking about Health Care. All of the rest is arguable both ways as to how much we need to spend and borrow, and when we do it, and you may be right. But there are certain situations where there is no question you need to borrow and spend to make money and survive. If you're a small printing company, and you're losing money, and your printer breaks, your accountant may say "we can't afford a new printer right now". But if you don't spend money to either fix it or buy a new one, you're going to go bankrupt. There is always going to be instances where it could make sense to do so. My issue is with the fundamental philosophy of reliance of borrowing and spending in order to have sustainable growth. My fear is that some time ago, we set a dangerous precedence, and now we have gone too far down the rabbit hole to be able to get out of ourselves out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 There is always going to be instances where it could make sense to do so. My issue is with the fundamental philosophy of reliance of borrowing and spending in order to have sustainable growth. My fear is that some time ago, we set a dangerous precedence, and now we have gone too far down the rabbit hole to be able to get out of ourselves out of it. The same arguments were made about Roosevelt's New Deal. But now most economists agree that the reason the recovery took longer back then was that the government didn't spend enough to restart economic growth. And that is what many are saying now, that the 2nd stimulus package (Bush had the 1st last year) wasn't big enough. Like trying to prime an engine, but only giving it 2 squirts of gas when it needs 3 to turn over. Of course only about 10% of the 2nd stimulus has been spent so far, so I think it's too early to tell. Like your doctor saying you need 10 treatments to get relief from your ailment, and you saying it's a failure after only the 1st treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 There is always going to be instances where it could make sense to do so. My issue is with the fundamental philosophy of reliance of borrowing and spending in order to have sustainable growth. My fear is that some time ago, we set a dangerous precedence, and now we have gone too far down the rabbit hole to be able to get out of ourselves out of it. I'm no economist, but it seems to me that America exploded and became the biggest economy in the world because people borrowed enormous amounts of money they didn't have and couldn't pay back for a long time to start and run and expand their businesses. Surely there are limits and surely we can't keep doing it endlessly, but I have a lot of faith in American ingenuity and entrepreneurship. I think it's a long term overhaul and in 10-20 years it's going to be a completely different world. Think of what people thought the world was going to be like in 10 year projections in the last, say, 50 years. Think of how different the US's economy was, both way better and way worse, from 1960-1969, from 70-79, from 80-89, from 90-99, and from 00-09. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 The same arguments were made about Roosevelt's New Deal. But now most economists agree that the reason the recovery took longer back then was that the government didn't spend enough to restart economic growth. And that is what many are saying now, that the 2nd stimulus package (Bush had the 1st last year) wasn't big enough. Like trying to prime an engine, but only giving it 2 squirts of gas when it needs 3 to turn over. Of course only about 10% of the 2nd stimulus has been spent so far, so I think it's too early to tell. Like your doctor saying you need 10 treatments to get relief from your ailment, and you saying it's a failure after only the 1st treatment. Odd, I always thought that the reason the Dpression was so severe was the monetary policy contraction by the Federal Reserve and the protectionism epitomized by such misguided laws as Smoot Hawley. As for fiscal policy, they did the best the could with what tools were available. I would argue that they also violated the Constitution repeatedly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 It's just funny looking back at the Palin hysteria and the cries of "OMG, what if she had to be President! At least Obama has rock-solid Joe Biden behind him in case the worst ever happened!". Now of course Palin is an idiot and the thought of her as POTUS is pretty frightening, but right now I don't see how Joe Biden is any less scary. The guy doesn't think anything through before opening his mouth. And that means he doesn't think anything through. He's a !@#$ moron. End of story. That's the difference between idiocy and "rhetorical flourish." Did you hear the justice formerly known as Sotomayor explain away her past comments using the same phrase? I was stunned. They use it on Biden. They use it for Sotomayor. It's like the new administration has found the golden key to justifying stupid comments, and yet virtually no one calls them on it. It would have been great if just one person responded to Sotomayor with "So, you tend to suffer from rhetorical flourish like Joe Biden? Are you a gaffe machine as well? Do you embarrass people whenever you open your mouth, or are you simply Peyton Manning throwing off your back foot under pressure every hundred times you drop back?" That would have at least made the hearings interesting. Rhetorical flourish. Jesus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 The same arguments were made about Roosevelt's New Deal. But now most economists agree that the reason the recovery took longer back then was that the government didn't spend enough to restart economic growth. And that is what many are saying now, that the 2nd stimulus package (Bush had the 1st last year) wasn't big enough. Like trying to prime an engine, but only giving it 2 squirts of gas when it needs 3 to turn over. Of course only about 10% of the 2nd stimulus has been spent so far, so I think it's too early to tell. Like your doctor saying you need 10 treatments to get relief from your ailment, and you saying it's a failure after only the 1st treatment. The only problem with that argument is that back in the days of FDR, we use to manufacture and build a lot of things, and over the years we have gotten away from that. We have been sizing down over the past 30 years, and this economic crisis has forced us to sell off lots of assets that use to be something. Guess who's buying up these companies? BRIC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Biden is the Messiah's insurance against some KKK nut assassinating him. Biden is so stupid that not even the KKK would want him as president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlaskaDarin_Has_AIDS Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 That's the difference between idiocy and "rhetorical flourish." Did you hear the justice formerly known as Sotomayor explain away her past comments using the same phrase? I was stunned. They use it on Biden. They use it for Sotomayor. It's like the new administration has found the golden key to justifying stupid comments, and yet virtually no one calls them on it. It would have been great if just one person responded to Sotomayor with "So, you tend to suffer from rhetorical flourish like Joe Biden? Are you a gaffe machine as well? Do you embarrass people whenever you open your mouth, or are you simply Peyton Manning throwing off your back foot under pressure every hundred times you drop back?" That would have at least made the hearings interesting. Rhetorical flourish. Jesus. CHECK IT Bingo. But Sarah Palin is the moron. Yeah right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 I'm no economist, but it seems to me that America exploded and became the biggest economy in the world because people borrowed enormous amounts of money they didn't have and couldn't pay back for a long time to start and run and expand their businesses. So we fix that mess by borrowing money. Niiiiiiice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 So we fix that mess by borrowing money. Niiiiiiice. What I was describing wasn't a mess, it was a success. It built the country into the biggest, greatest, most powerful and successful country in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 What I was describing wasn't a mess, it was a success. It built the country into the biggest, greatest, most powerful and successful country in the world. And the world is going to be a much different place in 10 to 20 years is what you said. I agree. And the change is that people are not going to be able to live beyond their means anymore. Then need to save as much money as they can and what this will create is a huge reduction in the stress being put on SS. But here's the thing. The government needs to set the example. But they are and have been spending beyond their means worse than the American people. What good is it if Americans finally get it and start saving but the whole country goes blewie because the government didn't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts