In order to build the roads, govt taxed people. how did those people ran businesses before roads were built by govt?Originally Posted by Pedro Gonzales
In order to build the roads, govt taxed people. how did those people ran businesses before roads were built by govt?
Pedro
I follow politics toomuch, don't just give all the credit to Karl Rove
heard, Axelord refer to Rove's playbook every now and then
Absolute rot. The quote was meant to portray Obama as saying that business owners did not build their businesses. He never said any such thing. The fact that you, as an educated, intelligent person brings it up without the context (apologies if it wasn't you, the original quote has gone to the previous page) makes you a party to Romney's lie.
The context is that business owners didn't build the infrastructure. That remains true.
NSC (originally TSC, transferred to NSC on 02/13/13) |-| PD - 04/25/08 |-| MD - 01/19/12 |-| RD - 01/27/12 |-| ND - 01/31/12 |-| Check Encashed - 02/02/12 |-| NRD - 02/04/12 |-| FPND - 02/09/12 |-| FPNRD - 02/17/12 |-| FP Early Walk-In - 02/24/12 |-| EAD/AP Approval & card production notice - 03/07/12 |-| EAD/AP RD - 03/12/12 |-| EAD/AP renewal RD - 12/11/12 |-| EAD/AP renewal approval - 01/22/13 |-| 485 Approval notice - 09/04/13 |-| GC RD - 09/11/13|
didn't build infrastructure, hence?
Quite simple actually. Tar Sands produce 15 to 20% more CO2 per barrel of crude vs. middle eastern oil, (that’s well to wheels as they say.). This is because the bitumen is highly viscous and needs to be heated (using steam produced by burning natural gas) in order to release it and permit it to flow. The net calorific value turns out to be barely positive.
Climate change will affect a lot more than the purple assed crab. The current drought in the U.S. and India (two of the world’s top three food producers) is going to cause significant spike in food prices this year. People are going to go hungry. You may argue that this is one off and has nothing to do with global warming. Only time will tell.
People who care for the environment absolutely live a more energy efficient life than others. I can tell you that I a) have solar panels on my roof in Phoenix that produces more electricity than I use most months, b) I never use the heat or air conditioning in my apartment in New York, c) I use public transportation in New York, d) I drive a hybrid in Phoenix (with a plan to switch to plug in hybrid in the near future), e) always check the option to buy offsets for my flights (it’s required by my employer for my official flights, but I do so for my personal flights too), f) use a clothes hanger (both in New York and Phoenix), and most importantly of all, g) stuck to my habit from childhood of switching off lights and air-conditioning when I leave a room/home. I’m still not living a carbon neutral life which most famous spokespeople for the environment do (Gore, Ed Baglely Jr, Di Caprio, Larry Hangman etc). All Dems wouldn’t do what I do because all Dems don’t care about the environment as much as you think they do. They ought to, as ought the Republicans, but they don’t. Most environmentalists are Democrats, most Democrats aren’t environmentalists.
But most importantly, your whole argument is irrelevant. I could turn your logic around and ask that all conservatives not use medicare, public universities, libraries, postal service, or airports so that the government has to spend less on these thereby balancing the budget. There are a lot more conservatives in favor of small (read non existant) government than there are environmentalists. What I’m suggesting would make more of a dent in the US deficit that what you’re asking would do to sea levels.
Actually, CO2 is the largest GHG (after water vapor which is usually ignored given its generally temporary lifespan in the atmosphere). I think you’re referring to the fact that it’s not as potent as methane or NOx – but the reason we’re not as concerned about those two is because a) their volumes are lower (even after accounting for the higher potency) b) roughly half those are manmade and technology exists to control them and c) volumes have been decreasing steadily over the last 20 years in the West. Yes most CO2 generation is natural, as is practically all sequestration of CO2; but nature has been maintaining this delicate balance for millennia. It’s the manmade CO2 component that has exploded, increasing levels by 40% since the industrial revolution began. In other words, nature cleans up its own shit, we’re the ones that don’t clean up ours.
Dude, now that’s just insulting. To suggest that we who care for the environment are doing it for personal gain is deeply offensive. It’s easy to invert cause and effect. These folks see the problems and are looking for solutions. They invest billions looking for a solution, knowing that the investment is highly risky. As an investment strategy, it would be incredibly stupid to make a risky investment with a plan of altering national opinion and effecting public policy so that that investment can then make you great returns. As an example, my solar panels are giving me a negative return on investment (in Phoenix, our utility does not net-meter). I’m a finance guy, I understood it when I made the investment but I made the investment despite that, not with the hope that it would somehow turn into an incredible investment sometime in the future. To attack with baseless allegations, an individual whose arguments you disagree with (Gore here, not me) instead of attacking their argument is typical of what I have seen on Fox and elsewhere. I think some of that might just be rubbing off on you.
NSC (originally TSC, transferred to NSC on 02/13/13) |-| PD - 04/25/08 |-| MD - 01/19/12 |-| RD - 01/27/12 |-| ND - 01/31/12 |-| Check Encashed - 02/02/12 |-| NRD - 02/04/12 |-| FPND - 02/09/12 |-| FPNRD - 02/17/12 |-| FP Early Walk-In - 02/24/12 |-| EAD/AP Approval & card production notice - 03/07/12 |-| EAD/AP RD - 03/12/12 |-| EAD/AP renewal RD - 12/11/12 |-| EAD/AP renewal approval - 01/22/13 |-| 485 Approval notice - 09/04/13 |-| GC RD - 09/11/13|
Pedro
If president chose his words carefully, nobody needs to defend him asking whether other side is educated/intelligent or not.
hence you are making use of common public goods that was built using taxes. Hence, taxes, are sometimes essential.
NSC (originally TSC, transferred to NSC on 02/13/13) |-| PD - 04/25/08 |-| MD - 01/19/12 |-| RD - 01/27/12 |-| ND - 01/31/12 |-| Check Encashed - 02/02/12 |-| NRD - 02/04/12 |-| FPND - 02/09/12 |-| FPNRD - 02/17/12 |-| FP Early Walk-In - 02/24/12 |-| EAD/AP Approval & card production notice - 03/07/12 |-| EAD/AP RD - 03/12/12 |-| EAD/AP renewal RD - 12/11/12 |-| EAD/AP renewal approval - 01/22/13 |-| 485 Approval notice - 09/04/13 |-| GC RD - 09/11/13|
That is unfortunately true in today's politics. Everything ought to be scripted. Otherwise a Presidential candidate will quote you out of context.
NSC (originally TSC, transferred to NSC on 02/13/13) |-| PD - 04/25/08 |-| MD - 01/19/12 |-| RD - 01/27/12 |-| ND - 01/31/12 |-| Check Encashed - 02/02/12 |-| NRD - 02/04/12 |-| FPND - 02/09/12 |-| FPNRD - 02/17/12 |-| FP Early Walk-In - 02/24/12 |-| EAD/AP Approval & card production notice - 03/07/12 |-| EAD/AP RD - 03/12/12 |-| EAD/AP renewal RD - 12/11/12 |-| EAD/AP renewal approval - 01/22/13 |-| 485 Approval notice - 09/04/13 |-| GC RD - 09/11/13|
Over and out. I need a drink.
NSC (originally TSC, transferred to NSC on 02/13/13) |-| PD - 04/25/08 |-| MD - 01/19/12 |-| RD - 01/27/12 |-| ND - 01/31/12 |-| Check Encashed - 02/02/12 |-| NRD - 02/04/12 |-| FPND - 02/09/12 |-| FPNRD - 02/17/12 |-| FP Early Walk-In - 02/24/12 |-| EAD/AP Approval & card production notice - 03/07/12 |-| EAD/AP RD - 03/12/12 |-| EAD/AP renewal RD - 12/11/12 |-| EAD/AP renewal approval - 01/22/13 |-| 485 Approval notice - 09/04/13 |-| GC RD - 09/11/13|
Its even more messy if you take the whole context, thats the reason the Mr O is still quiet inspite of Romney repeated reference to "you didnt build that", its the same reason many business folks are still angry.Please see the entire video.
So u are saying Obama shd get credit for Apple and not Steve Jobs, govt did not do on its own as well, it just spent the money that the people gave to the govt.
On a lighter note:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4A1v4AkqYJE
have a good weekend
Bieber, what is "path to Europe"? Generally the critics of fiscal policy mean 2 things - 1) It means Europe's problems are result of big govt. 2) It also means Europe's inability to defuse the crisis steps from European governments' unwillingness to embrace austerity. Seen from both angles - neither of these two things are universally true in Europe.
The root of european crisis is "monetary base expansion without underlying real growth" which leads to bubbles and investments in non productive assets. When bubbles burst they jeopardize our ability to honor our liabilities. Same is true with Govts. However one must understand that root cause of the problem is 'more than necessary monetary expansion leading to bubbles'.
Mind you the problem becomes acute where capital can't be efficiently deployed. How do you solve bubbles? There are two ways. Let them correct themselves. Which means let them implode leading to huge losses to the rich who were asymmetrically benefitted from the bubbles. The second way is to increase inflation to the extent that the debt stays. The problem with second approach is that it creates other bubbles rather than solving problems. It is like giving more drugs to an addict. We already saw 2 cycles where stimulus resulted in further bubbles - first there was internet bubble which when followed by furthre stimulus resulted in housing bubble which when was followed by further monetary stimulus gave rise to recent commodities bubble. If monetary steroids are kept injecting the system, only world war III will stop this madness. Which is why monetary policy should be checked and let the debt destroy itself. Those who run bogey of path-to-euope are the creditors who want more monetary stimulus and don't want debt destroyed. Better yet they want govt to buy that debt which the govt actually did.
So again I repeat don't fall for the words path to Europe. That's a clever scare tactic and deflection from real problems.
Now you can also see why the trillions in stimulus didn't create more growth. Because the stimulus was monetary rather than fiscal. Get it? I don't read krugman and don't care what he says. But I am sure he is advocating fiscal as opposed to monetary stimulus.
Champu u r fine. No need to be sorry. As long as this is an objective logical discussion I will be happy to learn and share.
I don't dispute your right to advocate for republicans based on your personal interest. No problem.
To say 40% don't pay taxes is wrong. If nothing else they pay sales and property taxes.
Ayn rand was a phenomenal lady w fierce intellect. I admire her objective morality. I completely agree with stark speech. And by same standard debt must be allowed to destroy itself. Makes sense? Equal opportunity is what stark would have advocated. Right?
Today America is moving away from equal opportunity by creating too big to fail. This is socialization of debt and crony capitalism. Debt that is perpetual and unsustainable is antithetical to free societies. Ayn Rands views are more libertarian and even democratic than republican.
That certainly is NOT what I said. Please reread my post.
they ran them with less profits. With all the infra in place today's businesses make far more money than any other businesses in history.
Yes bieber but that is true universally. And hence not quite relevant to our discussion.
Last edited by qesehmk; 08-18-2012 at 06:47 PM.
With two days to take a deep breath, I am able to look back at this discussion with an avuncular, almost non partisan eye. One thing, that I think is increasingly evident is that politics today is devoid of information and analysis and is replete with falsehoods.
Taking a leaf out of this forums' original motive (that of providing some clarity to the immigration process), perhaps we could use this thread to provide some clarity to policy issues. That could perhaps help us better understand the differences between the right and the left.
I'll take the first step and post what I think is a good analytical read. Krugman clearly is a leftist, but that shouldn't take anything away from his arguments in this article. If any of you see a good counterpoint from the right (that actually answers the issues he raises, rather than vilifying Krugman, Obama or others), please let me know. I look forward (genuinely) to reading more about how people justify Ryan's plans.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/20/op...-man.html?_r=1
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote