I for one am voting for Barack Hussein Obama

[discojoe]

100 years of war + mortgaging our children's future by selling bonds to China + no one can afford health care and women can't kill babies anymore get real america.

let's nationalize oil

[discojoe]

Norway has nationalized oil:
- is amongst the wealthiest countries in the world.
- the world's third largest oil exporter
- has a Scandinavian welfare system
- has the largest capital reserve per capita of any nation.
- was ranked highest of all countries in human development from 2001 to 2006
- rated the most peaceful country in the world in a 2007 survey by Global Peace Index

Too bad for you you haven't....

i know and who cares that it's ranked 28th in economic freedom or that it has a population of only 4,623,300 (smaller than Wisconsin) or that it has the 3rd highest taxes in the world. it's a model we should all strive to emulate.

[redbaron]

DJ, your avatar is cracking me up....

[discojoe]

no im agreeing with you. the fact that norway also has a tiny population that would be much, much easier to manage than one the size of the US or india is irrelevant.

(i was wrong about the taxes -- i shouldn't do math in the morning. However, Norway's tiny population does matter.)

I find it interesting that when you talk about how communism don't work, you talk about how the Soviet model didn't work, but when some system does work, it's somehow not relevant...

does norway have a centrally planned economy?

[Wittmont]

It is funny, in the early nineties when Norway, Sweden and Finland had similar banking problems as the US has now, these supposedly socialist countries let banks in trouble fail and the investers lost all their money.

In contrast look at the US today. Socialism for the rich is the agenda with hundreds of billions of inflationary Fed created money pumped into the system to support bankrupt Wall Street banks and bankrupt entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae. The latter two were nationalized this weekend, leaving US taxpayers on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars.

Mimosa makes a very interesting point in that most Americans seem oblivious to the economy crashing all around them. At least if you look at McCain and Obama they live in some kind of economic la la land. The US governemnt is on the brink of bankruptcy, every single system is deep in the red.

The only way for the US to recover is to get real money, not funny inflationary electronic money created by the Fed, back into the system. And that can only happen through higher interest rates, to attract real savings, and raised taxes. Until these two things happen the crash will continue and get worse as it goes.

[discojoe]

1. Find statistics that are from TODAY and not 10-15 years old.
2. Find statistics that include the whole population. My numbers are correct.
3. The European Countries have a large population, so please look at that instead of looking at one country alone. Political systems are similar.
4. It's strange how the American dream seems to be more real in Europe than in the States. Here it's actually possible to live a good life even though your parents lived in poverty. In the US that's mostly a nice story......

And by the way, Europeans probably wouldn't care so much about how you seem to want to kill your own economics lately had it not been that your economy is so big it affects us as well. We just would like you to get back in business. And for some reason Europeans see only Obama as a solution. And we don't get how you can be so blind when things fall apart around you... I guess it's like Socionics- it's hard to evaluate yourself?

And I'm no communist. Far from it. I'm all about personal freedom. I'm Delta, you know.

Wait a minute, you're the one who used Norway as an example, so complain to yourself if you've got a problem.

The fact is that Norway is a tiny country with massive natural resources and a mixed economy. You can't use it as a model of socialistic success.

[discojoe]

It is funny, in the early nineties when Norway, Sweden and Finland had similar banking problems as the US has now, these supposedly socialist countries let banks in trouble fail and the investers lost all their money.

In contrast look at the US today. Socialism for the rich is the agenda with hundreds of billions of taxpayer money pumped into the system to support bankrupt Wall Street banks and bankrupt entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae. The latter two were nationalized this weekend, leaving US taxpayers on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars.

Mimosa makes a very interesting point in that most Americans seem oblivious to the economy crashing all around them. At least if you look at McCain and Obama they live in some kind of economic la la land. The US governemnt is on the brink of bankruptcy, every single system is deep in the red.

The only way for the US to recover is to get real money, not funny inflationary electronic money created by the Fed, back into the system. And that can only happen through higher interest rates, to attract real savings, and raised taxes. Until these two things happen the crash will continue and get worse as it goes.

Look at US debt compared to the US GDP.

[Wittmont]

US GDP is inaccurate. If US debt goes up so does the US GDP. What does that tell you? You do not grow richer as your debt grows do you?

[discojoe]

US GDP is inaccurate. If US debt goes up so does the US GDP. What does that tell you? You do not grow richer as your debt grows do you?

I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with how the Federal Reserve prints out inflation money at its convenience, but as long as the debt can be turned over as the bonds mature, it isn't something to panic over.

Having problems finding arguments now, have we?

No, we haven't having problems. We just having trouble seeing what argument you've made other than citing three facts about Norway, plus rhetoric about the European standard of living (speaking of which, check out this link)

[Wittmont]

I'm not saying there's nothing wrong with how the Federal Reserve prints out inflation money at its convenience, but as long as the debt can be turned over as the bonds mature, it isn't something to panic over.

Protecting the bond markets was one of the main reasons the US government had to step in and nationalize Fannie and Freddie Mae. If the Chinese and other creditors were burnt there the damage would certainly spread over to the Treasury bonds.

Ultimately the problem with the current system is that it is unsustainable. Even the US has limits to it's credit and we are on the verge of finding out exactly where those limits are.

[discojoe]

tl;dr

[discojoe]

http://www.learningrx.com/reading-skills.htm

HURHURRHURRR NOW I FEEL LIKE MY READING SKILLS ARE INADEQUATE SINCE I DIDN'T FEEL LIKE READING YOUR LONG, BORING POST

[Ezra]

100 years of war + mortgaging our children's future by selling bonds to China + no one can afford health care and women can't kill babies anymore get real america.

let's nationalize oil

Barack will take America in a new and better direction. One McCain could only have nightmares about.

Yay for Barack. He'll probably get assassinated or something; imagine if JFK had stayed president. America would be different. But no, along comes LBJ and a bucket of napalm.

[Wittmont]

Barack will take America in a new and better direction. One McCain could only have nightmares about.

Yay for Barack. He'll probably get assassinated or something; imagine if JFK had stayed president. America would be different. But no, along comes LBJ and a bucket of napalm.

Unfortunately Obama will not fix a thing. If you remove debt from the US GDP the US has been contracting for about a decade. The basic problem the US (and Europe) has is that it cannot really finance it's vast debt apart from printing new money in various forms.

The US will turn to that old foreign policy tool for empires that feel the ground shift beneath it's feet. War. Both McCain and Obama will bring more war, and more war brings more debts that cannot be financed. And so it goes. Eventually the system will break, it is already very very close to breaking point if it hasn't already broken down with the Fannie & Freddie Mae takeover being the largest and latest sign.

50 % of the housing bond market is gone now compared to a year ago. At that rate there won't be much left soon. And we are only in the beginning stages of the recession still.

[Not A Communist Shill]

FWIW I don't think Obama has any possible way he could win, so you can just relax.

The bookies say that Obama has a 57% chance of winning, compared to a 40% chance for McCain. They're British based though, so they might not know what they are talking about.

[Logos]

It is funny, in the early nineties when Norway, Sweden and Finland had similar banking problems as the US has now, these supposedly socialist countries let banks in trouble fail and the investers lost all their money.

In contrast look at the US today. Socialism for the rich is the agenda with hundreds of billions of inflationary Fed created money pumped into the system to support bankrupt Wall Street banks and bankrupt entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae. The latter two were nationalized this weekend, leaving US taxpayers on the hook for hundreds of billions of dollars.

Mimosa makes a very interesting point in that most Americans seem oblivious to the economy crashing all around them. At least if you look at McCain and Obama they live in some kind of economic la la land. The US governemnt is on the brink of bankruptcy, every single system is deep in the red.

The only way for the US to recover is to get real money, not funny inflationary electronic money created by the Fed, back into the system. And that can only happen through higher interest rates, to attract real savings, and raised taxes. Until these two things happen the crash will continue and get worse as it goes.

Pardon my economic ignorance, but that is something that has always had me troubled: if free markets are ideal with the least amount of government interference, then wouldn't the market benefit in the long-run without the short-term government bailouts?

If a person with no job has a decent life (like he/she has in Europe) it doesn't threaten others. In the US that can be very different. My political opinion is you have to provide a minimum standard to even the poorest (or laziest) people in your society or the whole society will suffer (criminality, violence, murder, mental problems, poverty and everything following that for generations to come, etc.). I don't care what you do with the rest of your money, so you can still pretty much live like you do now. But a little more bread and maybe a little less circus wouldn't hurt. If you find the good balance it's pretty effective, that was proven centuries ago. I don't see any reason the US shouldn't be top 3 on the ranking of the best countries to live in.

This is a rather Rawlsian view. John Rawls advocated a modified version of utilitarianism that did not argue for the greatest amount of utility, due to the Utilitarian Monster (see Robert Nozick), but that government has an obligation to its weakest members.

The bookies say that Obama has a 57% chance of winning, compared to a 40% chance for McCain. They're British based though, so they might not know what they are talking about.

The current public opinion polls has McCain slightly ahead, but the US market is predicting Obama.

[discojoe]

Pardon my economic ignorance, but that is something that has always had me troubled: if free markets are ideal with the least amount of government interference, then wouldn't the market benefit in the long-run without the short-term government bailouts?

By taking Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into "conservatorship," the Federal Government is basically stealing half of the mortgaged houses in the country and making the taxpayers pay for them, at anywhere from 800 billion to 10 trillion dollars via inflation tax.

[Not A Communist Shill]

Is there any reason for the similarity in the names Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, or is this purely coincidence?

[discojoe]

Is there any reason for the similarity in the names Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, or is this purely coincidence?

They're both government-sponsored companies, created by the government to sustain the mortgage market.

I think Fannie Mae was created first, as part of the New Deal, so sometime during the 30s, and Freddie Mac was created during the 70s to compete with Fannie Mae, who I guess had monopoly at the time.

Also, they are both privately owned and operated.

[Logos]

By taking Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into "conservatorship," the Federal Government is basically stealing half of the mortgaged houses in the country and making the taxpayers pay for them, at anywhere from 800 billion to 10 trillion dollars via inflation tax.

That's what I thought. I would be in favor of just letting them fall to give rise to businesses who would be better suited to perform the same role. Oh well.

[discojoe]

That's what I thought. I would be in favor of just letting them fall to give rise to businesses who would be better suited to perform the same role.

Exactly.

[Logos]

Exactly.

I'm sure you've heard of the $739 Billion bailout the Bank of America asked Congress for in February, which is just crazy. Such arrangements say to me, "Hey, US government! We suck at business and at finding workable solutions for our publics. Would you mind giving us the public's money so we can continue to suck some more?"

[discojoe]

I'm sure you've heard of the $739 Billion bailout the Bank of America asked Congress for in February, which is just crazy. Such arrangements say to me, "Hey, US government! We suck at business and at finding workable solutions for our publics. Would you mind giving us the public's money so we can continue to suck some more?"

Yeah, and they get away with it by blackmailing the politicians into looking at the situation from a "what group of people [constituents] will this positively affect first?" POV, instead of being responsible and looking at the longer-term consequences it will have on the economy as a whole, probably years later, after they've left office.

Hence, the reason congress shouldn't be allowed to arbitrarily allocate taxpayer money, imo.

[Logos]

Hence, the reason congress shouldn't be allowed to arbitrarily allocate taxpayer money, imo.

I do not think it would be as bad if there were greater checks as to how Congress could spend money.

That said, I am now kind of curious as to what sort of reforms individuals would make to their governments if they were in control and had the power to make drastic changes with the assumption that they would be successfully passed.

[Christian Bale]

I always like to feel a close affinity with my fans, but to be honest, the credit crunch has had no noticable impact on my lifestyle.

[tcaudilllg]

I do not think it would be as bad if there were greater checks as to how Congress could spend money.

That said, I am now kind of curious as to what sort of reforms individuals would make to their governments if they were in control and had the power to make drastic changes with the assumption that they would be successfully passed.

And who checks the checkers? The buck has to stop somewhere.

Who are these "individuals" you speak of? If I pray to them, will they give me a Tonka truck?

[discojoe]

And who checks the checkers? The buck has to stop somewhere.

And that buck, of course, should stop with Barack Hussein Obama.

[tcaudilllg]

Unfortunately Obama will not fix a thing. If you remove debt from the US GDP the US has been contracting for about a decade. The basic problem the US (and Europe) has is that it cannot really finance it's vast debt apart from printing new money in various forms.

The US will turn to that old foreign policy tool for empires that feel the ground shift beneath it's feet. War. Both McCain and Obama will bring more war, and more war brings more debts that cannot be financed. And so it goes. Eventually the system will break, it is already very very close to breaking point if it hasn't already broken down with the Fannie & Freddie Mae takeover being the largest and latest sign.

My my you know I heard another INFp talk about that exact same thing a few years ago. You might want to ask him about it because it seems the two of you would really hit it off. Good luck finding him though, because he's been missing now for like... 7 years? The last time anyone saw him, that I recall, was at Tora Bora....

Close in Enron loophole, and the economy will rebound.

[Logos]

And who checks the checkers? The buck has to stop somewhere.

The checkers are the People.

Who are these "individuals" you speak of? If I pray to them, will they give me a Tonka truck?

It is a hypothetical question. The "individuals" would be people individuals on this forum who answer.

[Mariano Rajoy]

[Drommel]

Norway has nationalized oil:
- is amongst the wealthiest countries in the world.
- the world's third largest oil exporter
- has a Scandinavian welfare system
- has the largest capital reserve per capita of any nation.
- was ranked highest of all countries in human development from 2001 to 2006
- rated the most peaceful country in the world in a 2007 survey by Global Peace Index

Too bad for you you haven't....

So you think because Norway has nationalized oil, it is the largest oil exporter, is one of the richest countries, and is the most peaceful? If not, what is your argument?

[discojoe]

I for one am voting for Barack Hussein Obama

[tcaudilllg]

Yes, let's all vote for Barack Hussein Obama!

[Not A Communist Shill]

I for one am voting for Barack Hussein Obama

If you'd said 'Barack Obama' or 'Obama', I'm sure people would have understood what you meant.

[Elro]

I for one am voting for Ron Satan Paul

[tereg]

And who checks the checkers? The buck has to stop somewhere.

This man might be able to

[implied]

If you'd said 'Barack Obama' or 'Obama', I'm sure people would have understood what you meant.

are you kidding? i know like 20 barack obamas.