OT: Election/Politics thread, Part 6

[Jackdog]

I vote you "Arithmetic Man" in this forum. You add trouble, subtract pleasure, divide attention, and multiply ignorance.

Has JRod been starting any personal attacks in this thread? I understand that you disagree with his posts, and sometimes the tone of his posts. Well, the tone of a lot of these posts haven't been perfect, and I really don't care about that. That is, someone can show frustration, be upset, be sarcastic, etc. HOWEVER, there's no need for the personal cheap shots. Consider this the thread-wide warning: none of this kind of stuff (personal cheap shots), or I will ban and/or close the thread at my discretion.

I disagree with the tone. Believe it or not I respect his opinions. I respect everyones opinions. I just threw back a little of what he throws out in every thread he's involved with in this forum. My response too him has nothing to do with politics. Next time I'll PM him.

[JackB1]

Was surprised at how quickly I was able to vote this morning. In and out in 15 mins. Hope that's not a sign of poor turnout.

[matthewk]

My duty is done. I got to my polling location 10 minutes before it opened, and there was a line of over 100 people already there. After a short wait of about 25 minutes I was voter #117.

I have a feeling the election will be a lot closer than most of the polls have been indicating. I don't think the high turnout will benefit either side exclusively, as there seems to be a lot of quiet republicans that don't care for polls, and will simply show up and vote. At least in my neck of woods that's the impression I'm getting.

[Jackdog]

My friends...

I woke up to an unusually warm November morning here at the end of the earth. Warm enough that I walked to my polling place, enjoying a few tunes on my iPod while I prepared to do my little part for democracy. I got in line, filled in my bubbles, and submitted my ballot. I walked back home, stopping to pick up some coffee, and marveled at how easy it is for us to perform something that others die for. No gunmen, no strongmen, no obstacles to me walking a few blocks to elect my representatives.

So no more arguing from me. Let the chips fall where they may. Get out and vote for the candidates of your choice: Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Green, Constitution, Natural Law, Silly. The point is to exercise this privilege we should be proud to have, even if politics is a dirty business.

Amen,Hallelujah and God bless us all Tiny Tim!! Well said my friend.

[JackB1]

In other words, you want McCain to have been a damned democrat, a liberal, or something of the sort. Predictable, but still quite unbelievable. Anything other than a republican. Well, that's what he is. He is most certainly not Bush, no matter what the blue kool aid crowd wants to chant and repeat ad nauseum. But it would not have mattered. Had McCain gone further left, you and others would've painted him a 'me too' candidate, and repudiated him anyway.

He's clearly not the same "Maverick" he was 10 years ago when I respected him. Just the way he chose his VP said volumes to me.
His economic policies are not providing any decernable difference from what the Rep party & Bush has done the past 8 years and that is the reason he will lose this election. Plain and simple.

[JackB1]

I have a feeling the election will be a lot closer than most of the polls have been indicating. I don't think the high turnout will benefit either side exclusively, as there seems to be a lot of quiet republicans that don't care for polls, and will simply show up and vote. At least in my neck of woods that's the impression I'm getting.

I have a feeling it won't be close at all.

We shall see.

[wco81]

Lastly, I have an outlandish request for the future. Next time we allocate blame/credit on a president for economic conditions, could we actually require that the advocate point to a specific policy/action of the president and point to a direct effect that it caused. Giving the president all blame/credit by proximity is a fool's errand.

Sounds like you're saying that you're skeptical that Bush bears blame for the current economy but that you fear Obama's policies will cause even more economic problems.

Your claim that Obama will create problems for "capital formation," what is that based on other than the general belief that higher taxes automatically discourages investment?

Whatever did we do before dividend and capital gains taxes were cut? Did people not bother to save for retirement or buy stocks?

Did investment banks stop financing mergers or other business investment? Taxes were lower in this decade yet we've lost several investment banks and several other large financial institutions. If anything, the investor class was too sanguine about financing questionable ventures, like sub-prime, MBS and CDS.

Outside of the financial services sector, companies aren't in that bad shape, at least their current balance sheets. Sure they're going to cut jobs, in anticipation of lower revenues from a sinking economy. But the problem isn't that they can't get money to finance ventures. The LIBOR has come down a lot since the bailout, so lending will start growing again.

It's funny to see concern about job creation now. The 2002-2007 recovery has been one of the weakest period in a long time for job creation. Why didn't the Republicans, after a big presidential victory in 2004, propose these tax changes or at least making the Bush tax cuts permanent, in order to spur job creation? Why didn't McCain, who at that time didn't support the Bush tax cuts, make those proposals?

Instead, the president, boasting of all the political capital that he had, pushed for social security "reform," while bogging down deeper in Iraq and getting preoccupied with Iran. The only other item on the domestic agenda was what, touting the "ownership society?"

[XXXIV]

He's clearly not the same "Maverick" he was 10 years ago when I respected him.

He is truly a man to be disrespected.

[Naples39]

Sounds like you're saying that you're skeptical that Bush bears blame for the current economy but that you fear Obama's policies will cause even more economic problems.

That would not be a wholly inaccurate representation. Bush definitely bears some blame, but it irresponsible to blame everything on Bush without some actual cause-and-effect analysis. If anyone can provide links to such analysis, I'd be very interested to read it.

Your claim that Obama will create problems for "capital formation," what is that based on other than the general belief that higher taxes automatically discourages investment?

I didn't realize that assumption was up for dispute! Any other conclusion flies in the face of basic economics and common sense. Is there any other tenets of basic economics you would like to dispute before we discuss things any further? Sure, higher taxes won't kill all investment, but it will undoubtedly reduce domestic capital investment.

Are you trying to suggest capital investment is wholly impervious to taxation? Certainly sounds like it.

Damn. There goes my goal. I fail.

[RobVarak]

Jrod,you've read more than we know??
After months of reading your antagonizing comments I know exactly what's on your nightstand.



I vote you "Arithmetic Man" in this forum. You add trouble, subtract pleasure, divide attention, and multiply ignorance.

LMAO

That explains why his extensive outside reading didn't include the defintion of the word "plan."

I haven't voted yet, but my wife infoms me that my polling place does not have "I Voted" stickers this year.

What exactly are my tax dollars being used for around here, schools? Screw it, I'm staying home!!

[webdanzer]

I haven't voted yet, but my wife infoms me that my polling place does not have "I Voted" stickers this year.

What exactly are my tax dollars being used for around here, schools? Screw it, I'm staying home!!

None at my polling place either. I hear ACORN has commandeered all of the rolls to assemble patchwork sticky (Easy on, easy off!) winter coats for the homeless they are bringing in.

[Brando70]

One interesting note: Michigan had a medical marijuana proposition that I was completely unaware of. There's a stem-cell research initiative that has had a lot of TV commercials directed toward it, but I didn't hear a peep about this prop item. I was really surprised by that.

[RobVarak]

One interesting note: Michigan had a medical marijuana proposition that I was completely unaware of. There's a stem-cell research initiative that has had a lot of TV commercials directed toward it, but I didn't hear a peep about this prop item. I was really surprised by that.

Homer Simpson was supposed to work on that campaign, but he and Otto were too busy getting high and watching the Stooges in his basement.

[RobVarak]

Shall we keep a scorecard of today's mayhem?

I'll start;
Republican campaign workers thrown out of Philly polling sites in violation of PA law

Nudist vote being suppressed?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122576113489495571.html

Exerpt:

Last week Mike Sandvick, head of the Milwaukee Police Department's five-man Special Investigative Unit, was told by superiors not to send anyone to polling places on Election Day. He was also told his unit -- which wrote the book on how fraud could subvert the vote in his hometown -- would be disbanded.

"We know what to look for," he told me, "and that scares some people." In disgust, Mr. Sandvick plans to retire. (A police spokeswoman claims the unit isn't being disbanded and that any changes to the unit "aren't significant.")

In February, Mr. Sandvick's unit released a 67-page report on what it called an "illegal organized attempt to influence the outcome of (the 2004) election in the state of Wisconsin" -- a swing state whose last two presidential races were decided by less than 12,000 votes

[Brando70]

One interesting note: Michigan had a medical marijuana proposition that I was completely unaware of. There's a stem-cell research initiative that has had a lot of TV commercials directed toward it, but I didn't hear a peep about this prop item. I was really surprised by that.

Homer Simpson was supposed to work on that campaign, but he and Otto were too busy getting high and watching the Stooges in his basement.

I voted yes. Never know when that glaucoma will flare up.

[matthewk]

Bush definitely bears some blame, but it irresponsible to blame everything on Bush without some actual cause-and-effect analysis. If anyone can provide links to such analysis, I'd be very interested to read it.

Cause: Bush was elect....*ahem* stole the elections.
Effect: He single-handedly brought the Earth to near total destruction.

That pretty much sums it up.

[matthewk]

Shall we keep a scorecard of today's mayhem?

I'll start;
Republican campaign workers thrown out of Philly polling sites in violation of PA law

Nudist vote being suppressed?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122576113489495571.html

Exerpt:

Last week Mike Sandvick, head of the Milwaukee Police Department's five-man Special Investigative Unit, was told by superiors not to send anyone to polling places on Election Day. He was also told his unit -- which wrote the book on how fraud could subvert the vote in his hometown -- would be disbanded.

"We know what to look for," he told me, "and that scares some people." In disgust, Mr. Sandvick plans to retire. (A police spokeswoman claims the unit isn't being disbanded and that any changes to the unit "aren't significant.")

In February, Mr. Sandvick's unit released a 67-page report on what it called an "illegal organized attempt to influence the outcome of (the 2004) election in the state of Wisconsin" -- a swing state whose last two presidential races were decided by less than 12,000 votes

You beat me to it. I heard about the WSJ article on the radio this morning. So voter fraud does not exist, huh?

[wco81]

I didn't realize that assumption was up for dispute! Any other conclusion flies in the face of basic economics and common sense. Is there any other tenets of basic economics you would like to dispute before we discuss things any further? Sure, higher taxes won't kill all investment, but it will undoubtedly reduce domestic capital investment.

Are you trying to suggest capital investment is wholly impervious to taxation? Certainly sounds like it.

Damn. There goes my goal. I fail.

No I'm not saying that. But we've had one of the highest corporate tax rates (at least on the books) in the world. Have American companies trailed companies in other countries in investment?

You can talk about tenets or you can talk about actual experience.

Most big companies are multinational. They derive about half their revenues and profits overseas. And often, they pay nowhere near the formal tax rates.

Where is the evidence that there's been a shortage in capital investment? There's certainly been a lack of investment in creating new jobs, certainly.

There were more jobs created in the '90s, when the income, dividend and capital gains rates were higher. You may attribute that to the dot com bubble but few dot coms built up a substantial workforce and most of them lasted months. Plus, the housing bubble was much greater.

So why did lower tax rates create less than 1/5 the jobs?

[wco81]

You beat me to it. I heard about the WSJ article on the radio this morning. So voter fraud does not exist, huh?

It's an opinion piece by columnist John Fund, who appears as a RW pundit on cable TV.

It's not a news piece.

[RobVarak]

I didn't realize that assumption was up for dispute! Any other conclusion flies in the face of basic economics and common sense. Is there any other tenets of basic economics you would like to dispute before we discuss things any further? Sure, higher taxes won't kill all investment, but it will undoubtedly reduce domestic capital investment.

Are you trying to suggest capital investment is wholly impervious to taxation? Certainly sounds like it.

Damn. There goes my goal. I fail.

No I'm not saying that. But we've had one of the highest corporate tax rates (at least on the books) in the world. Have American companies trailed companies in other countries in investment?

You can talk about tenets or you can talk about actual experience.

Most big companies are multinational. They derive about half their revenues and profits overseas. And often, they pay nowhere near the formal tax rates.

Where is the evidence that there's been a shortage in capital investment? There's certainly been a lack of investment in creating new jobs, certainly.

There were more jobs created in the '90s, when the income, dividend and capital gains rates were higher. You may attribute that to the dot com bubble but few dot coms built up a substantial workforce and most of them lasted months. Plus, the housing bubble was much greater.

So why did lower tax rates create less than 1/5 the jobs?

Taxes are only one part of the equation that a multi-national will look at when deciding where to invest. The higher tax rates of the '90's were in an environment where, for instance, real investment in the BRIC nations was risky due to political unrest, instability and even more corruption than there is now. Companies were willing to pay the extra cost for the security of investments in the US.

With the rise of viable and stable alternatives, the financial considerations are more important than ever.

[RobVarak]

You beat me to it. I heard about the WSJ article on the radio this morning. So voter fraud does not exist, huh?

It's an opinion piece by columnist John Fund, who appears as a RW pundit on cable TV.

It's not a news piece.

I didn't even realize he was a hockey player!

[Naples39]

My point is that there is a a thousand factors that dictate levels of capital investment. Government only directly controls one of those factors, and that is taxes.

You can argue the magnitude of the effect of taxes on capital investment, but the effect of higher taxes, ceteris paribus, driving down capital investment is beyond reproach.

Where is the evidence that there's been a shortage in capital investment? There's certainly been a lack of investment in creating new jobs, certainly.

I think we'd all agree that unlike the 90s, or any other time in recent memory, we are in a uniquely bad time for capital formation. The credit crisis, the stock market crashing. Investors aren't exactly lining up at the doorstep of businesses. IMO, it is indefensible for government to compound this problem at this time by raising these taxes to historical levels which are even higher than those 'socialist' nations.

Most big companies are multinational. They derive about half their revenues and profits overseas.

Absolutely true, which is why it is increasingly futile to practice protectionism these days as Obama espouses. You can practically guarantee with these higher tax rates that capital investment that once would go into the United States will now be put into foreign investments in countries like Ireland, where the corporate tax rate is less than a third of the United States'.

[matthewk]

You beat me to it. I heard about the WSJ article on the radio this morning. So voter fraud does not exist, huh?

It's an opinion piece by columnist John Fund, who appears as a RW pundit on cable TV.

It's not a news piece.

So f-ing what? I don't care if the guy appears as a cross-dressing gay rights activist on cable tv.

The 67-page report was full of facts and evidence of fraud. Voter fraud does exist, and it's more than 1-2 votes.

[RobVarak]

Contrast:

Obama's Hyde Park polling place with Farrakahn and Ayers rubbing shoulders on one hand and Palin's polling place in Wasila with crusty parka-clad old Alaskans and what looks like every single extra from "Fargo."

It's a big country in more ways than one.

[Brando70]

Contrast:

Obama's Hyde Park polling place with Farrakahn and Ayers rubbing shoulders on one hand and Palin's polling place in Wasila with crusty parka-clad old Alaskans and what looks like every single extra from "Fargo."

It's a big country in more ways than one.

Our Congressional Rep, Bart Stupak, had this for his lawn sign:

BART
You Betcha!

Considering, just 10 short years ago, I worked in the heart of Manhattan, it made me think of this:
"What's a dazzling urbanite like you doing in a rustic setting like this?"