What I learned on Nov. 6th 2012

[Mark@Sea]

How about some charts on real unemployment, deficit, national debt, household income? Then explain how cutting the number of oil and gas leases has no effect on the price of gasoline, again, because I missed that part. Then we can talk about inflation, and why the price of a pound of chicken has nearly doubled in the last 4 years.

Now I know why the word 'unexpectedly' comes up so often when talking about the economy.

[Will H]

I know that I am in a minority here, but I think W was a fine president... During his first term. Just like a lot of war time presidents I think 9/11 took something out of him. I think it was too much for him, and probably would have been too much for anyone else too. His mistake was running for a second term. He was used up and should have known it. I think he did know it. There was a change to his attitude and he went from being plain spoken to "I don't really care." If he had stuck to one term I think he would have been remembered in a totally different way, and might not have run off to live his life out as the hermit he is now.

[Smith]

Lester i make no assumption about political party. However, the values of our current parties are clear. As has happened in the past that could very well flip flop and change. I'm not tied to defending a party but there is no denying their is a sharp contrast between the current two.
The Bible is also very clear on what type of "government" God intended and there is no denying that it was a prophet lead society. Kings came about because of mans stubbornness. Samuel warned them that a king would take their freedom and yet they demanded a king like the other nations. Like a father with stubborn children, God allowed them what they demanded and they got what we have gotten. So no, you can't make the scripture read what you want it to be anymore than the liberals can make the constitution a "living" document and maintain original intent.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Yeah, King Obama has fooled the sheeple with free stuff that will only lead to their demise. King Obama is their savior. Hail Obama..Hail Obama...Hail Obama.

[JAB]

I think some folks are missing an important part of the puzzle. Yes, I believe that a certain percentage of Americans have gotten lazy, have lost their work ethic or simply don't care. However, it is hard to imagine a very large percentage of that sector getting out and voting.

Then we have the so-called 'progressives' - pissed off ex-hippies who never, really grew out of it or current hippy-wannabes who haven't the sense to see the fact that way of life failed several decades ago. But still they probably don't make up a large enough of a percentage to re-elect Obama, given how many people see the truth that he has been a poor President. So, what is the answer? Why did so many vote for him?

Simple. Greed. But not the greed you are thinking of.

See, many lament the fact that so many Americans are angry at the 'rich' or are angry at successful companies. To some, this makes little sense as those very companies are the ones that provide jobs, support the economy and so on. So why all the animosity? Well, mostly because those companies have done so much to kill the American dream.

It used to be that if a man went to work for a company and was a good, hard worker then he could make a decent living. Maybe get promoted. Maybe end up in a position to work his way up and become one of the 'wealthy', himself. If a man was loyal to the company then the company would often be loyal to him. I would argue that, for the most part, those days are gone.

Instead, now, a company will work a man to death for as little as they can get by with paying him. They will work him until they burn him out then, six months or a year before he'd be able to retire, they'll lay him off or fire him. I've seen it happen. Then the company will hire an illegal immigrant in his place at a much reduced salary. Or, even better, they'll send his job to Mexico or China because they can get cheap labor there and increase their profit margin (and the CEO's bonus) even more.

These companies will take millions or even billions in 'bail out' money (given by both GW Bush and Obama) - money that came from taxes contributed by those aforementioned hard working Americans - so that their VPs and CEOs can keep their private jets and get their million dollar bonuses. Meanwhile, the little guy that is working for them has also gotten in a financial bind because of the economy but no one is bailing him out. He will be lucky to get a ham from the company at Christmas, much less a bonus.

Pretty soon, it becomes easy to see why many, otherwise hard working Americans - not just the ones on welfare or other government assistance - would be fed up. They see some big wig sit on his arse in an office and make more money in a week than they will make in a life time of work - and then see that big wig get his million dollar bonus from taxpayer funded bail outs. Then that same big wig decides to lay them off because (in order to keep receiving his million dollar bonus) they have to trim expenditures somewhere in the company. The company no longer gives a crap about them, the working people - they just want to use them up then throw them away.

So, yeah, it comes back to greed. Corporate greed and the willingness to treat working people like so much chattel. And then they have the audacity to stand around with their, "Let them eat cake," attitudes and wonder, "Why, oh, why do they hate us so much?"

And then some politicians come along and promise to help those much maligned workers get a little back - to make the big corporations start doing what is right and help ease the burden on the little guy. Sure, it sounds attractive. Of course, everyone must forget the fact that those same politicians have, themselves, been issuing bailouts and supporting corporate welfare - and some people forget so easily and willingly, especially when they like what they are hearing.

Yes, laziness and a weakening of the work ethic are partially to blame. However, the greedy corporations and 'he who dies with the most toys wins' attitude of the rich has also contributed. The greed of those who have attained their own portion of the American dream and who intend to hold onto it by making sure that dream is dead for most everyone else are as much to blame as the laziness of those who won't lift a hand to attain it. Of course, the Republicans continue to act mostly in support of the former while the Democrats appeal to the latter. Meanwhile, the true middle class - good, honest Americans who would be wiling to work hard if they actually saw some return on their work - remain caught in the middle, watching their tax dollars go to supporting the CEO's bonus as well as the ghetto rat's weed/booze/meth habit as they, the middle class, continue to get more and more fed up.

So is it any wonder that they like what they hear when some silver-tongued devil starts whispering in their ear that he is on their side? Is it surprising that they want to believe him when he says he will help make sure they get what their hard work and dedication so richly deserve by forcing those weathy corporations and individuals to help ease their burden? Sure, he's lying but, given the circumstances, can you really blame folks for wanting to believe him - and voting for him, just in case, with the belief (right or wrong) that at least he can't screw them any worse than they are already being screwed? Edited November 8, 2012 by JAB

[Smith]

JAB, have you been reading Das Kapital?

[JAB]

[quote name='AK Guy' timestamp='1352394915' post='841849']
JAB, have you been reading Das Kapital?
[/quote]

Nope. Never read a single page of it. Just looking around and seeing reality.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that socialism is any kind of solution. I'm not saying that being 'rich' is a bad thing or that no one should be 'wealthy', 'middle class' and so on. When the 'wealthy' class are willing to see others succeed - even if it means their yearly bonus might not be quite as huge - then Capitalism is definitely the best system, even with its possible flaws. I'm simply saying that working people should see a little more profit from their own work and the VPs and CEOs can survive just fine without that third vacation home.

And, no, I am not a Unionist, either. I do believe the Unions served a purpose, once - partially the very purpose I am talking about - but now they have become just another racket to dupe people out of their money and allow yet another group (the Union big wigs, etc.) to live off of the backs of the working people.

Honestly, I just see it as a recurring theme throughout history. One group of people profits by the work, labor or exploitation of another group of people. Sooner or later, the latter gets fed up and revolts against the former. It isn't necessarily a Communist theme, a Marxist theme or so on. If you really think about it, at its most basic, while simplified, that comprises the main reason our Founding Fathers fought the American Revolution and established this country in the first place - they were tired of having their work exploited by a greedy English throne (taxation without representation and so on.) So what if the person/group of people in the 'elite' or 'exploiter' role is a King, Parliament or a Board of Directors? The idea remains the same. Edited November 8, 2012 by JAB

[Guest HvyMtl]

[quote name='Will H' timestamp='1352380662' post='841720']
I know that I am in a minority here, but I think W was a fine president... During his first term. Just like a lot of war time presidents I think 9/11 took something out of him. I think it was too much for him, and probably would have been too much for anyone else too. His mistake was running for a second term. He was used up and should have known it. I think he did know it. There was a change to his attitude and he went from being plain spoken to "I don't really care." If he had stuck to one term I think he would have been remembered in a totally different way, and might not have run off to live his life out as the hermit he is now.
[/quote]

Interesting. I have never thought about it this way. I think you may have a very valid point.

[Glenn]

A friend of mine posted this on facebook. It really sums up the way I am feeling right now. And I quote:


[b] [/b]


[color=#333333][size=3]"I am over this forever. I will begin making changes in my financial situation now, while I still have the opportunity. Buy American? Only if it is produced in a right to work red state. But I will no longer invest in America, it no longer exists. My next call is to my accountant to find out how I can minimize taxes on my liquidation, and I'm sending it to another country. Fortunately I have relatives out of country who can guide me.

My biggest concern is my kids. They don't deserve what is heading towards them like a speeding train. It brings tears to my wife's eyes to think what this country is [/size][/color]
[color=#333333][size=3]setting them up for. I don't cry, but I could for them.

There is a term that accurately describes the selling of ones virtues for free stuff. It is called whoring and that is what half this country is. And their pimp is the media.

I am reminded of the words of Reagan: I didn't leave the democrat party, it left me. In my eyes, I am not leaving America, it has left me. I am contacting my reps, most good men, and demanding they get our troops home. There is nothing left for them to defend so they shouldn't be asked to sacrifice for something that won't sacrifice for them.

I have no pride in what this country is now, only memories of what we once were. My kids don't even have that.

I am a reflective person, and I might regret these words. But I cannot imagine a scenario where that will happen.

PS - Read my signature. We are there.

“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.”

― Alexis de Tocqueville[/size][/color]


My ps: I know that quote is incorrectly attributed to Tocqueville

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That guy knows where we are heading, Glenn.

[Guest ThePunisher]

All heck guys, the sky is not falling. We have Hope and Change in our lives. We've also got a savior as POTUS. We might not have bread and butter for long, but most of us here at TGO have our guns and ammo.

[strickj]

[quote name='AK Guy' timestamp='1352350656' post='841670']
First, I never said we were founded on a specific religion. Judeo-Christian values is a very broad concept that includes all if the founding fathers root ideology even encompassing much of Islam. Deist included.
Secondly, I guess all the scriptures chiseled into all if our federal buildings and monuments, the ten commandments watching over most of the highest federal court, the fact that every president, senator, judge, and congressman is sworn in on the Bible, and"In God We Trust" marked all over our currency (just to name a few) are definite marks of a secular humanist society.
[/quote]

Supreme Court has the Bill of Rights, not the ten commandments. Moses is not depicted as a religious figure. He is present with several other lawgivers.
No one is forced to be sworn in on a bible. That is the choice of the one being sworn in. They can also choose to affirm.
"In God we trust" was added in 1957 as part of war propaganda.

Hard to argue against what our Founders actually wrote about religion and government.
It's a real shame to piss on those men who fought to give us religious freedom from government.


All that said, why is it against God's will to have O in office?

Edited November 8, 2012 by strickj

[Oh Shoot]

[quote name='JAB' timestamp='1352394573' post='841840']
....
Simple. Greed. But not the greed you are thinking of.

See, many lament the fact that so many Americans are angry at the 'rich' or are angry at successful companies. To some, this makes little sense as those very companies are the ones that provide jobs, support the economy and so on. So why all the animosity? Well, mostly because those companies have done so much to kill the American dream....[/quote]

Much validity in that little essay, methinks.

The whole idea of the American business model is that profits must increase by x amount or it's failure. The concept of companies just kicking along in a stable fashion year after year, with a bottom line that only increases enough to keep up with inflation is a thing of the past. And of course this is driven by most big companies being publicly traded rather than being privately owned.

And of course this classic concept of Big Capitalism works fine until there's a crunch with the consumers. Then, instead of just kicking along with less profit, desperate measures are taken to keep bettering the bottom line, and of course labor is the first thing to go. It's more the "greed" of the investors driving the business than anything else.

Much different than the traditional concept of a true "small business", like your classic family business endeavor, that can do fine as long as it makes the nut it did the previous year plus enough to cover any inflation of product supply and living and operating expenses. During boom times, everybody makes more money, during hard times, they make just a little more money. But of course the mega corps undercut many small biz's pricing, so they fail too: the family store vs Wal-Mart or Amazon thing.

But there's another major force in evidence here, and it's one that folks don't consider much. It's the fact that every year, it simply takes fewer humans to provide the goods for [i]all[/i] the humans. Technology. The computer changed everything, essentially. And then the power of computer connectivity: the Net. So eventually you get to a point where the worker bees can't afford the products, because they aren't needed in the employment pool to make them. But of course the number of humans keep increasing, and the value of most all professions decrease either because of over saturation of people with a given training and skill set, or because the consumer base doesn't have the money to support ever increasing expansion, and hence value. Translates into surprising areas too: think medical doctors. Still plenty of demand for the profession, but less income per doctor hour of effort.

Of course, except for the[i] federal[/i] government these days, other government/public agencies are affected too. I myself was beneficiary of that in '97. After 21 years at UT, had settled into the "gonna stay until I retire mode", having turned down various other higher paying opportunities over the years, staying with the traditional ideas of job security and benefits. Right. Caught in combination of budget and internal political crunch, hasta la vista. Made the last 12 years or so of my working life very "interesting" indeed. Unheard of circumstances just a decade before, and of course I wasn't the only one.

Hmm..okay, turning into a bit of a ramble, but safe to posit that both US and world economy have turned into quite the vicious circle.

Which leads right into what I consider the overall main thing going on worldwide, what I call Environmental Economics. Not going into depth regarding that Gorilla in the Room again here, but suffice it to say that the upside down pyramid of the now [i]7 billion[/i] of us versus the finite resources is untenable. And like all things in modern civilization, the imbalance is translated into economic impact first. Mother Earth will eventually shake off billions of her fleas, and she has already set that in motion -- as an accountant.

- OS

[RobertNashville]

Regardless of the purpose of the engravings on our buildings and phrases on our currency, to ignore the religious, mostly Christian, underpinnings of our Nation is to simply refrain from rational thought.

I've read biographies of many of our founders...I've read many of their own writings....I didn't know them personally and do not know what they professed to their closest friends, but when I read their writings and biographies and see how they conducted themselves I reach the inescapable conclusion that these were men and women of faith. They may not all have had faith in exactly the same God or even a single god but they clearly seemed to believe in something eternal and greater than themselves.

I would suggest both their belief in personal freedom/liberty/justice as well as their abiding faith and its importance is expressed most clearly in the the very wording of the first amendment.

I have been, at times, a man of faith and a man who has strongly questioned the validity of a belief in any god - I've lived far less than a "Christian" life at times. However, as I look at my life as a whole, I find myself much prouder of my life and my actions during the periods when my faith was strongest and a major part of my life. Whether any God/god is "real" or not, I can't help but conclude that as a group, people who try to live a life as encouraged by the Bible are better people and better citizens than those who profess no faith in God at all. Edited November 8, 2012 by RobertNashville

[Commando68]

We are no longer the land of the "free"" and the brave. We live in the land of the sheep and the home of the slaves.

[Guest ThePunisher]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352403858' post='841959']
.
All that said, why is it against God's will to have O in office?
[/quote]

God gave man and woman free will of choice. If man and woman make bad choices, they suffer the consequences of such choice. Just like liberty is the right to choose, freedom is the result of the right choice.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

What happened right after Washington was inaugurated, strickj? Was he not one of our Founders?
What does Moses represent?
Judaeo-Christian principles isn't saying that everyone is subject to governing by a state church. It never did.

The government isn't allowing or requiring anyone to preach or be preached at or to. The government never
was allowed that by "we the people". The government is just that, the government. It doesn't represent God,
but it does recognize God as a higher authority, and so do I.

Your assertion about "In God We Trust" is wrong. Look at coinage from way before 1957. Whether or not there
was some kind of law passed doesn't matter. The fact that people trust in God is evidently something you disagree.

And don't jawbone that some of them were deists. That's really tiring.

Whether you believe in God or not, and trust me, that's up to you, Judaeo-Christian principles are all over
our founding, the fathers and the ideas that separate this country from the rest of the world, other than
Israel.
You used to see the Ten Commandments almost everywhere until secularists and others wished to deface
this country for all the wrong reasons.

Principles can never be eradicated until they are destroyed or the people who hold those principles are destroyed.
You will never destroy me because of my principles. So quit trying.

[JAB]

[quote name='6.8 AR' timestamp='1352407643' post='842001']
Your assertion about "In God We Trust" is wrong. Look at coinage from way before 1957.
[/quote]

'In God We Trust' was put on the penny, I believe, during the Lincoln administration, nearly a century after the 'founding' of the nation. It was later - in the 1950s - added to other coinage. That was done partly as cold war propaganda, in an attempt to separate us from those 'godless' Russians.

The founders chose a motto with no religious overtones, whatsoever - 'E Pluribus Unum' - one from many.

Oh, and many of the Founders [b]were[/b] Deists. Franklin is even quoted as saying that, while studying Deists in an attempt to refute them, he ended up becoming one (although in later life he does appear to have reverted to Christianity.) Sorry if that makes you tired. Edited November 8, 2012 by JAB

[strickj]

[quote name='ThePunisher' timestamp='1352407630' post='842000']
God gave man and woman free will of choice. If man and woman make bad choices, they suffer the consequences of such choice. Just like liberty is the right to choose, freedom is the result of the right choice.
[/quote]
But why is it against God's will to have O in the White House?

That was the purposeof this thread. God is on Romney's side.
I'm asking why y'all believe that.

[quote name='6.8 AR' timestamp='1352407643' post='842001']
It doesn't represent God,
but it does recognize God as a higher authority, and so do I.

Your assertion about "In God We Trust" is wrong. Look at coinage from way before 1957. Whether or not there
was some kind of law passed doesn't matter. The fact that people trust in God is evidently something you disagree.


[/quote]
Did you not read the thread?
The assertion is taking God out of government is destroying us. An example used to prove that we have always been a Christian nation is "in God we trust". That wasn't added until 1957. The term's origination is irrelevant.



[quote]And don't jawbone that some of them were deists. That's really tiring.

Whether you believe in God or not, and trust me, that's up to you, Judaeo-Christian principles are all over
our founding, the fathers and the ideas that separate this country from the rest of the world, other than
Israel.
[/quote]

It really doesn't matter what out Founders were. What matters is what they fought for, said in their own words put in writing.

[quote]You used to see the Ten Commandments almost everywhere until secularists and others wished to deface
this country for all the wrong reasons.

Principles can never be eradicated until they are destroyed or the people who hold those principles are destroyed.
You will never destroy me because of my principles. So quit trying.[/quote]

How is removing your God from government destroying your principles. Rhetorical question.
The only answer to this is that you need the government to tell you what your principles are. And if the government can no longer tell you what your principles are, then your principles are destroyed.

[Smith]

This was never about Obama or Romney or democrat our republican. It was and is about the electorate.

[RobertNashville]

Give it up guys; arguing with strickj is only slightly less a waste of time than arguing with me.

[strickj]

[quote]
[b] What I learned on Nov. 6th 2012[/b]

2. The secular-humanist now outnumber the conservatives.[/quote]

Pardon me for my confusion.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

No, they are just loud on the internet, like Democrats.
Government doesn't tell you what your principles are, strickj. First of all, who is the government? Not rhetorical.
It is supposed to be the other way than what you say. "We, the people, in order to..." set up a government to
protect those principles, not to tell us what our principles are.

Yeh, JAB, the problem with it being tiring is that it is virtually meaningless, except to those who wish to argue a
point into oblivion with no direction. Deism concerning the Founders means very little to me. It must have some
hidden handshake, to you. not me.

[Guest ThePunisher]

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352411087' post='842035']

But why is it against God's will to have O in the White House?

That was the purposeof this thread. God is on Romney's side.
I'm asking why y'all believe that.
[/quote]

God is not stupid.
He knew Romney would have been better for the country, but he let the people choose their King. God let's the people have their Kings, but if the people choose Kings that are not God fearing and don't obey God's laws then there are consequences. I'm afraid that we cannot even envision what the consequences of 8 years of Obama will be for our country. We will reap what we sow.

[Dennis1209]

All this is fine and dandy until it's time to pay the piper. I believe our lavish life style as a nation will soon end.

The government does not produce anything. They obtain their funds only by taxing it, borrowing it, or printing it. Look at our 16 trillion dollar debt, laying a fiat dollar bill end to end, I wonder how far 16 trillion of them would go, maybe out to where Voyager is today? The printing presses are 24/7 and it takes more money to produce coinage than its face value, does that tell you something? Ah, taxes! If you add up every bit of taxes you pay for everything, in my case, it comes up to slightly over 50% at my prior residence in Illinois. I'm talking everything, sales tax, income tax, personal property tax, license plates, food, property, state/county/city taxes, taxes on services like auto repair, garbage pick up, cell phone, utilities, fishing / hunting taxes, gasoline, boat annual taxes, etc. etc.

Elected politicians represent "we the people", pass the laws that governs us, and finance things the government has no business sticking its nose into. Ultimately they are not responsible for their actions, we the people are left holding the bag. The politicians or elected numb nuts will walk free tossing off his/her responsibility in creating, legislating, financing and embracing this mess.

Our three branches of government have become too intertwined.

The SCOTUS had tried time and again to legislate law from the bench.

Our executive branch has gone out of control and passes more laws in the form of Executive Orders, CFR'S etc. than Congress.

Our federal Representatives shirk their responsibilities by not being responsible for coining the money. Under our Constitution, the House of Representatives funds 100% of the Federal government, not anymore, as somehow a presidential executive order or whim gets funded without prior approval from Congress.

Look at the number of "lawyers" that are members of Congress. IMHO, a lawyer has no business in Congress and it's a conflict of interest.

There is what, 538 members of Congress, and 5 lobbyists for each Congressman getting their way?

And the Senate, who knows what the hell they're doing?

Would someone please get me off my soapbox

Edited November 8, 2012 by Dennis1209