Rangerland Forum Information

[Hockey101]

No popular names in the debate in South Carolina, except for Ross Perot wannabe Ron Paul.

My reaction to that group (Pawlenty looked dead, Santorum uptight)....

[Hockey101]

Obama is pretty much a socialist, and universal healthcare is an act of remodeling part of the country's policies. I wouldn't go as far as saying he wants to completely change this country to his liking, also because he can't. It takes years and a lot of power within those years to do so, which is what Europe gives to its politicians. Too much time, too much power to influence, hence why you see long "regimes" there. Thankfully this country does not allow that.

The reason why the CBO made that statement is because they double counted in their report.

No argument was played out from the alternative energy discussions and we didn't necessarily touch on the cap and trade policy itself, but more like oil prices, and automobiles.

People at first liked the stimulus because Obama, and the leaders of the Dems, presented it as a plan to quickly solve issues. However, it actually DID fail as proven by the following facts:

The recovery lost momentum in the spring as growth slowed to a 2.4 percent pace, its most sluggish showing in nearly a year and too weak to drive down unemployment.

Consumers spent less, companies slowed their restocking of shelves and the nation’s trade deficit dragged more on the economy in the April-to-June quarter. In a separate report, the Commerce Department said the recession was deeper than previously estimated.

Together, the reports raise doubts about whether employers will hire enough and consumers will spend enough to invigorate the economy. As unemployment remains near double digits, Congress could feel pressure to pass more stimulus measures to speed the recovery. So far, Republicans and some Democrats have blocked additional spending because of their concerns about the size of the deficit.

Also this link will show you more facts and data as to how the stimulus did not work.

The problem with Factcheck.org is that it is basically an Obamabot because the very leftist Kathleen Jamieson runs it behind the Annenberg Public Policy Center (well connected with Obama), which controls Factcheck.org.

He extended the Bush Tax Cuts because he had to. He actually battled not to, but even his economic advisor, and a couple of them "resigned" afterwards, said it had to be done. He had to scale back on his universal healthcare plan because he did not have enough support from his own party in the first place.

You're giving the guy full credit as if he proposed these decisions trying to be bipartisan. Not even close.

[the old mole]

Obama is pretty much a socialist

Oh wait...you're serious. Why don't you ask real-life socialists what they think about Obama (or google it)?

He has been pretty goddamn pragmatic.

+1. Obama's whole MO is getting something for the democrats by giving something to the republicans. He is the very picture of bipartisan compromise. He gives an inch to get an inch, but when you give the republicans an inch they take a mile.

[Hockey101]

Oh wait...you're serious. Why don't you ask real-life socialists what they think about Obama (or google it)?
+1. Obama's whole MO is getting something for the democrats by giving something to the republicans. He is the very picture of bipartisan compromise. He gives an inch to get an inch, but when you give the republicans an inch they take a mile.

He was a member of the New Party, a socialist party. He believes in distribution of wealth, as he stated himself. Yeah...he is pretty much a socialist if you ask someone whose family decided to flee from a socialist government. (That'd be me).

Oh, and he had no choice but to give in also because his own party told him as well on certain bills passed. I don't get this sudden thought that Obama has worked down the middle. The guy has painted his administration with leftist czars that don't need to be approved. If it wasn't for a good number of smart democrats telling him that his universal healthcare plan was disastrous, he would have passed it. The only thing that he did prior to the November elections that Republicans wanted him to do was extend the Bush tax cuts, which he didn't want in the first place, but was well advised by his own economy think tank to go with it. Post November elections the budget slash deal was fair enough. His stimulus bill had minimal support from the Republican party, but he went with it anyway.

Please.... all the sudden the guy is painted as a centrist. That is the joke of the year.

This post has been edited by Hockey101: May 16 2011, 01:28 AM

[The Fast Choker]

He was a member of the New Party, a socialist party. He believes in distribution of wealth, as he stated himself. Yeah...he is pretty much a socialist if you ask someone whose family decided to flee from a socialist government. (That'd be me).

Believing in the distribution of wealth isn't a bad thing. I mean, the figure is something ridiculous like 1% of the population holding 90% of the wealth, so is wanting to break that up really so bad?

Also, you're drawing the conclusion that all socialism is bad based on how a corrupt government took advantage of it. As an ideal, it has a lot of good aspects, and even implementing parts of that here could be a huge benefit.

[Hockey101]

Believing in the distribution of wealth isn't a bad thing. I mean, the figure is something ridiculous like 1% of the population holding 90% of the wealth, so is wanting to break that up really so bad?

Also, you're drawing the conclusion that all socialism is bad based on how a corrupt government took advantage of it. As an ideal, it has a lot of good aspects, and even implementing parts of that here could be a huge benefit.

There already is a distribution of wealth as government use tax dollars to fun programs for the poor. We use billions of dollars every year on Charity Care. That is already distribution of wealth, and i am ok with that. It's the expansion of it that i am against.

As for socialism.... i think a lot of political ideologies have benefits. Even communism. The flaw with these political ideologies is that they are too easy to manipulate for human beings. Lula's administration from Brazil did a very good job (despite him almost being illiterate), but socialism was well used and well suited for that developing country. For a developed country, though, i don't think socialism works. It poorly affects citizens, i think it slows down growth, and it limits freedom. That's my point of view on it.