Can Someone Shed More Light Here?

[thepotato232]

Bottom line. The deficit under Obama has been increased MORE than during all of the other presidents terms COMBINED. You just can't teach stupid.

I know I'm going to come across as an irredeemable liberal pinko for saying this, but there isn't a [citation needed] tag on the internet big enough for this statement.

 

[NEDude]

More data-

From 1948 to 2009-

GDP growth under Democrats - 4.01%
GDP growth under Republicans - 2.75%

 

[PCL_128]

Not only did you miss the sarcasm, but you actually missed the part where I SAID it was sarcasm.

Sorry.

I was using sarcasm to point out that what you said is the same thing--equating everyone who votes for a specific party to the most extreme end of that particular political spectrum. It's just as stupid a comparision to make for either the left or the right.

Understood, but that's not what I said. What I said was "not that I've seen." And that's a true statement. Being a pilot at a southern airline, I spend almost every trip flying with a Republican. There is the occasional fellow liberal, but it really is pretty rare. And I can't even remember the last time I flew with a Republican who didn't fit the "radical" label. They all think that things like privatizing social security and medicare, eliminating the EPA and DOE, implementing a flat tax, etc. are the right policies. Sorry, but that's far-right. There's no "moderation" in those proposals.

Sure, but changing to more and more socialist policies isn't the answer (here you may notice that I didn't say that President Obama is a socialist, but rather that he's implementing socialist economic policies).

That's a distinction without a difference. And frankly, it's just false. The President has yet to implement (or even propose) a single socialist policy. As someone who actually is a socialist (democratic socialist), I wish he would. But that's not his style. The right paints him as a socialist, but he's the furthest thing from.

You guys keep harping on the evils of capitalism and CEOs taking too much money. Okay, what has the administration done about it? Three-and-a-half years of the Obama adminstration, and so far all we've got is: MORE taxes, MORE unemployment, MORE crushing debt, and MORE government control.

First, I don't think it's the government's place to regulate CEO compensation. So I don't expect the President to do anything about it. I don't really know any liberals who think that the government should regulate such a thing, in fact.

But as for your claims, the "more taxes" one is especially crazy. Our tax burden is lower today than it was under President Reagan. You're repeating Fox Noise claims with no data to back it up. Never repeat something on Fox without fact checking it first.

More unemployment? This recession started under the previous president, need I remind you? Virtually every economist agrees that President Obama's efforts have helped to prevent the recession from getting worse. Yes, unemployment is still quite high by our historical standards, but compared to what other western nations are dealing with through this economic crisis, we're doing relatively well. If anything, the stimulus wasn't big enough, which is what most economists were insisting at the time.

More debt? Yep, you're right on that one. But that's an inevitability when trying to stave off a depression. And let's not forget that a huge portion of that debt is a result of two unnecessary wars that weren't started by this President. He deserves some criticism for refusing to pull out of Afghanistan, but at least he went halfway and got us the hell out of Iraq.

And finally, more government control? In what way? I would love to see some more government involvement in many things, but this President certainly hasn't done it.

I hate to break it to you, but President Obama is a moderate. Those of us on the left are just as unhappy with him as those of you on the right, just for different reasons.

Until the government actually nationalizes these companies (uh, THAT would be pure socialism)

Oh, so you do know what socialism really is! Excellent. Maybe you'll stop using it to refer to this President's policies, then.

If I don't vote for who you want me to, I'm a radical?

No, as I said, there used to be reasonable Republicans. I'm sure some still exist, but it's hard to find them. Since you insist on referring to President Obama's policies as "socialist," then it doesn't appear that you're one of them, either.

 

[BoilerUP]

Only on Flightinfo does this thread remain on the Majors board, while others FAR less politically-tilted get moved to other forums...

 

[BoilerUP]

More data-

From 1948 to 2009-

GDP growth under Democrats - 4.01%
GDP growth under Republicans - 2.75%

You live in Europe now, you care about American politics why again?

 

[scoreboardII]

bubba,
Is swa a better place to work bc Herb's a democrat?

I love when swa pilots enjoy a company that espouses caring about people, sharing profits, and creating a hard working living company instead of paycuts and disproportionate bonuses take those ethics for granted.
There are a lot of republicans you could have chosen to work for.
Why did you choose Herb's 'socialist' agenda to dedicate your career to?

Way off base, SWA is as capitalistic as they come, ZERO entitlement beyond what is contractually specified. The LUV and goodwill is a nice touch, but doesn't run the business, greed does.

 

[scoreboardII]

Well said PCL

I suppose you want my gun next?

 

[scoreboardII]

You're still gonna vote for a guy - that's been shown in a US court to have engaged in illegal union busting activities. Firing pilots in order to sell a company.

You're still gonna vote for him aren't you ? Bubba.

Yes I will, because the alternative is the distruction of this country.

 

[jonjuan]

Yes I will, because the alternative is the distruction of this country.

Yep-the lesser of two evils. The in incumbent will truly F up this country for a long long time if he's left in charge. Think unemployment is high now? Wait 4 years. And yes, it will have a dramatic effect of who can buy plane tickets.

 

[waveflyer]

Way off base, SWA is as capitalistic as they come, ZERO entitlement beyond what is contractually specified. The LUV and goodwill is a nice touch, but doesn't run the business, greed does.

The problem then is that you equate democrat with socialist. (Fox stuck on repeat)
I'm as capitalist as they come- but R's don't represent capitalism- they represent oligopoly, good ole boy, & generational wealth entitlement-

If you read Adam smith beyond the free hand you'll find that a requisite of capitalism is some wealth redistribution- but I'm sure you knew that.

Which, to you, represents more of the American dream Barack Obama and bill Clinton or W Bush and Mitt Romney? I'm curious.