Debates

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Vol_Bengal' timestamp='1349811845' post='1168345']
This could definitely be interesting as long as the discussion stayed focused around the book and what it is trying to convey... without turning into some folks posting 50,000+ (yes, I'm being hyperbolic!) articles supporting political positions. Would like to read the give and take strictly about the books content...

Homer - I'm not referring to you in this regard... just that it could be a really good give and take provided it is used for its intended purpose. Does that make sense?
[/quote]

Are there going to be any books with pictures?

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengalrick' timestamp='1349790621' post='1168249']
It goes completely against what I believe in. I believe that competition is the key to the 'free' market. I say 'free' because a true free market would never work. It needs to be well regulated and transparent but I would never buy into a national bank, no matter how much I read...
[/quote]

Then I dont think you understand the role of a National Bank.

Let me ask you this, are you comfortable with a Private Fed?

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='mullichicken25' timestamp='1349791403' post='1168255']
For all the talk about deficit spending and the push to reduce the deficit, does anyone care to take a few minutes and tell me why its such a bad idea to marginally increase our already tremendous nation debt to get people back to work?

Cant those things be addressed when the economy and jobs situation has stablized?

It just seems to me that the priority, above all else for the next few years, should be to get people working. I feel like it shouldnt matter if it private vs public sector...what am i missing?
[/quote]

Yes. This is my desire as well. You worry about the debit when people are working again, not before.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1349804123' post='1168313']
I'm not sure if I can agree with you on this. The founding fathers of this country believed in a small representative government where states held more power than the national government. Today we have a strong national government who's laws trump that of the states, controls the military, and controls the economy. That's just the start of things. If the federal government created one centralized bank, do you know how big of an outcry that would create? There would be riots everywhere. Just look at the occupy Wall Street, and Tea Party movements and multiply that by 1,000.
[/quote]

Then I would suggest you dont know much about Hamilton and the Federalists.

[Jamie_B]

I also want to go back a bit to the notion Lew made about the government selling the Nextel towers at discounted rates. I would say to this end. So? Do you realize the amount of people at the time that were using Nextel and the amount of jobs that created thus bringing revenue back to the government in the way of taxes? I have little doubt they made up for the "loss"

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1349812530' post='1168350']
Yes. This is my desire as well. You worry about the debit when people are working again, not before.
[/quote]

Usually there are 3 important items that are focused on in a presidential campaign, balancing the budget, unemployment, and foreign affairs. You can't set your priorities. A President can't afford to piss off his backers by creating a list of items to work on. He has to find a middle ground where he can do tings that helps all of his promises. Obama didn't accomplish much during his term as President, except showing his family publicly in hopes that the average American relate to them, and not focus as much on his own failures.

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1349812835' post='1168351']
Then I would suggest you dont know much about Hamilton and the Federalists.
[/quote]

Sure there is always an exception to the rule so to speak, and it would have been MUCH easier if he did it back in his day before more and more states joined the union. It's one of the points I was making earlier. It would seem to be a whole different ball game if Hamilton had to deal with all the financial things we deal with today.

Could you imagine how many jobs would be lost if the government took over banks? I live in a small town and there are 5 banks here. If you close all 5 of those down and opened one bank, or even opened one bank in only large cities, that's a lot of people added to unemployment.

As far as the Nextel towers go, that was just one example of how the government will spend millions and billions of dollars, to eventually trash something or sell it dirt cheap to the private sector. It dumb and irrational.

[Vol_Bengal]

[quote name='mullichicken25' timestamp='1349791403' post='1168255']
For all the talk about deficit spending and the push to reduce the deficit, does anyone care to take a few minutes and tell me why its such a bad idea to marginally increase our already tremendous nation debt to get people back to work?

Cant those things be addressed when the economy and jobs situation has stablized?

[b]It just seems to me that the priority, above all else for the next few years, should be to get people working.[/b] I feel like it shouldnt matter if it private vs public sector...what am i missing?
[/quote]

I thought that was the priority for the last 3 1/2 years... why we poured money into green jobs, job creation where government was funding the first 6 months, etc. and have zip to show for it. Our unemployment is as bad now as it was in January of 2009, and only the magical creation of 130,00+ government jobs created in the last 30 days has it down to that number. So, do you stay with the status quo and continue with the same tactics, same people, etc. when in 3 1/2 years you've seen no progress?

Honest question.

I'm not opposed necessarily to the theory that in down times you get people working, and in prosperous times you pay down debt... but the method by which we're going about creating jobs (at least during Obama's tenure) has garnered us nothing for the additional debt we're saddled with... ZIP. In other words... our ROI is shit. How long do we continue banging our heads against that rock?

Kinda stuck in a damned if you do, damned if you don't. Do changes get made for changes sake? That isn't necessarily always the best route either.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1349813618' post='1168355']
Sure there is always an exception to the rule so to speak, and it would have been MUCH easier if he did it back in his day before more and more states joined the union. It's one of the points I was making earlier. It would seem to be a whole different ball game if Hamilton had to deal with all the financial things we deal with today.

Could you imagine how many jobs would be lost if the government took over banks? I live in a small town and there are 5 banks here. If you close all 5 of those down and opened one bank, or even opened one bank in only large cities, that's a lot of people added to unemployment.

As far as the Nextel towers go, that was just one example of how the government will spend millions and billions of dollars, to eventually trash something or sell it dirt cheap to the private sector. It dumb and irrational.
[/quote]

I would suggest that Hamilton knew more than any other founder they type of society we would be and how we would be dealing with our neighbors.

I dont think you understand the role of a National bank either.

And you also miss the point that the government got its money back from the nextel towers when nextel employed people and they paid their taxes.

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1349814394' post='1168359']
I dont think you understand the role of a National bank either.

And you also miss the point that the government got its money back from the nextel towers when nextel employed people and they paid their taxes.
[/quote]

Haha you are missing the point. How is the government getting it's money back from Nextel employee taxes? Yeah those employees are paying taxes, but is it right for the government to 'get their money back' by taxing the poor employees instead of the company? That type of thinking is exactly the kind of thing we were talking about earlier. Nextel get a favorable deal, while Nextel's employees get the shaft.

If I am wrong about a National Bank let me know. There is already a Federal Reserve, who sets the interest rates.

I think the only solution is for the government starts getting smarter, and more hands off, OR start creating there own "for" profit businesses.

[Jamie_B]

I also want to ask Rick, you say you would never support a national bank because it doesnt fit your ideological beliefs, do you not see a problem with this? Putting yourself so rigidly in one corner doesnt allow you to take in ideas that dont come from your ideals, so if any good idea wasnt presented by a conservative you are essentially telling me, if I am reading this right, that you would dismiss it.

Do you not see how this puts you in a corner to be manipulated by those who might call themselves conservative I would suggest thats exactly how we have moved the center so far to the right, that Obama is basically a 90s Republican. The more extreme elements take over, call anything that isnt on their agenda not conservative, then folks freak out and say they want their country back. I mean just look at Obamacare, it was a bill written by the heritage foundation for crap sake.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1349814876' post='1168361']
Haha you are missing the point. How is the government getting it's money back from Nextel employee taxes? Yeah those employees are paying taxes, but is it right for the government to 'get their money back' by taxing the poor employees instead of the company? That type of thinking is exactly the kind of thing we were talking about earlier. Nextel get a favorable deal, while Nextel's employees get the shaft.

If I am wrong about a National Bank let me know. There is already a Federal Reserve, who sets the interest rates.

I think the only solution is for the government starts getting smarter, and more hands off, OR start creating there own "for" profit businesses.
[/quote]

That's what we call investment. I'm not against it be it from the company or citizen side, what I am against is folks who are against the citizen side screaming about socialism while ignoring the corporation side. Also are you suggesting that Nextell didnt pay taxes?

Ill ask you the same thing I asked Rick, are you comfortable with a private federal reserve?

I think the only solution is for the government to stop the fraud going on in the system, and collect revenue from it, then use that revenue to invest back into creating jobs.

[bengalrick]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1349814883' post='1168362']
I also want to ask Rick, you say you would never support a national bank because it doesnt fit your ideological beliefs, do you not see a problem with this? Putting yourself so rigidly in one corner doesnt allow you to take in ideas that dont come from your ideals, so if any good idea wasnt presented by a conservative you are essentially telling me, if I am reading this right, that you would dismiss it.

Do you not see how this puts you in a corner to be manipulated by those who might call themselves conservative I would suggest thats exactly how we have moved the center so far to the right, that Obama is basically a 90s Republican. The more extreme elements take over, call anything that isnt on their agenda not conservative, then folks freak out and say they want their country back. I mean just look at Obamacare, it was a bill written by the heritage foundation for crap sake.
[/quote]

might want to read my retort back to Homer on that topic. I understand there are a lot of comments here but I said I would try to be open minded, after it was explained in better detail. I still am extremely weary of doing that though. It would take a shit load of convincing and I am only one person. There are still 40%+ of the country that would also need convincing.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='bengalrick' timestamp='1349815577' post='1168369']
might want to read my retort back to Homer on that topic. I understand there are a lot of comments here but I said I would try to be open minded, after it was explained in better detail. I still am extremely weary of doing that though. It would take a shit load of convincing and I am only one person. There are still 40%+ of the country that would also need convincing.
[/quote]

Ok I'll start here. Does the US as a nation have a need to extend credit to other nations for the purposes of doing business with them? If you answer yes, who do you believe should do that? If you answer no, how do we do business with other nations?

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1349815830' post='1168370']
Ok I'll start here. Does the US as a nation have a need to extend credit to other nations for the purposes of doing business with them? If you answer yes, who do you believe should do that? If you answer no, how do we do business with other nations?
[/quote]

In actuality, the U.S. shouldn't be loaning money to any one. Almost 50% of the U.S. is owned by Russia and China. How can the United States ever get out of these loans, if they are receiving loans at a higher rate than what the offer to others? Just this past year the U.S. almost missed a payment, and for the first time their credit record was lowered.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1349816151' post='1168371']
In actuality, the U.S. shouldn't be loaning money to any one. Almost 50% of the U.S. is owned by Russia and China. How can the United States ever get out of these loans, if they are receiving loans at a higher rate than what the offer to others? Just this past year the U.S. almost missed a payment, and for the first time their credit record was lowered.
[/quote]

Then how prey-tel do you suggest we do business with other nations?

They didnt lower the credit rating because we "missed a payment" Did you even read the report?

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1349816380' post='1168374']
Then how prey-tel do you suggest we do business with other nations?

They didnt lower the credit rating because we "missed a payment" Did you even read the report?
[/quote]

Well it seems whenever there is an earthquake, tsunami, etc. it's the United States the first to jump to help them with money, food, or anything else they essentially need. Next time let China or Russia step up and help. It's almost like an old saying about rich people, "They didn't get rich spending their money."

They actually didn't 'miss' the payment. They waited until the very last day to pay it. The report can be a little confusing but they base a countries credit score on quite a few reasons. First is a countries debt, then a countries trade, and a countries projection are some of things on the list.

[mullichicken25]

edit: didnt really ask what i wanted too...ill get back to this later

nothing to see here

[Lewdog]

Obama made several speeches about the government helping to create Green Jobs, especially in Ohio at the DHL hub. He hasn't done any of it.

[Jamie_B]

You know I dont mind people being contrarian for the purpose of fostering debate, but Lew you should at least read the report before you do so.

Here - [url="http://www.standardandpoors.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobheadername3=MDT-Type&blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename%3DUS_Downgraded_AA%2B.pdf&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobheadername1=content-type&blobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8"]http://www.standardandpoors.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobheadername3=MDT-Type&blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename%3DUS_Downgraded_AA%2B.pdf&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobheadername1=content-type&blobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8[/url]


Of course we could then talk about how serious should we take S&P when they were rating everything AAA during the financial crisis

[sois]

can yall type less words please, i can't read that much

[Lewdog]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1349823072' post='1168412']
You know I dont mind people being contrarian for the purpose of fostering debate, but Lew you should at least read the report before you do so.

Here - [url="http://www.standardandpoors.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobheadername3=MDT-Type&blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename%3DUS_Downgraded_AA%2B.pdf&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobheadername1=content-type&blobwhere=1243942957443&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8"]http://www.standarda...dervalue3=UTF-8[/url]


Of course we could then talk about how serious should we take S&P when they were rating everything AAA during the financial crisis
[/quote]

You easily brushed off the my first comment as me being contrary and not actually knowing what was in the report. In all actuality the report is very general and basically points to U.S. officials as the reason the rating was lowered. S&P believes the government is not competent enough to continue to receive the highest rating, and that at this time, they do not know if they have the eye for putting together a plan to resolve it's debts.

So if the S&P know so much why aren't they being paid by the U.S. to resolve these problems?

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Lewdog' timestamp='1349833144' post='1168511']
You easily brushed off the my first comment as me being contrary and not actually knowing what was in the report. In all actuality the report is very general and basically points to U.S. officials as the reason the rating was lowered. S&P believes the government is not competent enough to continue to receive the highest rating, and that at this time, they do not know if they have the eye for putting together a plan to resolve it's debts.

So if the S&P know so much why aren't they being paid by the U.S. to resolve these problems?
[/quote]

Now that is the case, the other stuff you were saying, not so much, which is why I brushed it off.

Personally I think S&P is full of shit, they failed to correctly rate the mortgage backed securities correctly.

Though personally I believe they had to have known not everything was AAA.

[sois]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1349833655' post='1168515']
Now that is the case, the other stuff you were saying, not so much, which is why I brushed it off.

[b]Personally I think S&P is full of shit, they failed to correctly rate the mortgage backed securities correctly.[/b]

Though personally I believe they had to have known not everything was AAA.
[/quote]

x10000000000000000000000

S&P should have as much cred as the dudes who said to draft Jamarcus #1 overall AKA zero

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='Vol_Bengal' timestamp='1349811845' post='1168345']
This could definitely be interesting as long as the discussion stayed focused around the book and what it is trying to convey... without turning into some folks posting 50,000+ (yes, I'm being hyperbolic!) articles supporting political positions. Would like to read the give and take strictly about the books content...

Homer - I'm not referring to you in this regard... just that it could be a really good give and take provided it is used for its intended purpose. Does that make sense?
[/quote]

I agree wholeheartedly. The focus ought to be on the details of the book and the history therein. Folks should be able to agree or disagree with the author, or each other, but those conversations ought to be anchored within the book itself. Any linking would be supplemental and subordinate to those goals, imo. For example, links that deepen our exploration on an issue raised by the book. But that would be peripheral to the goal of simply gathering and assessing the empirical presentation by Agar, or in examining his theses regarding various aspects of the history.

I hope you are considering trying this out; the more the merrier.