Almost a year since the election---Do you regret voting for Obama?

[smoke ya later]

I'm a veteran and I don't have any problem with him except people are still dying, not in Iraq anymore but Afghanistan again. I was expecting some kindof closure with the war really quick hopefully before my son is a teenager it will be over?

 

[ravagebx]

All I know is that if just a fraction of the discontent shown for Obama in this first year was shown after Bush's first term we might not be in thepredicament we're in now.

I do not regret my vote.

 

[kal ripped ken]

Originally Posted by WarMachine

Originally Posted by Stay Lurkin

I have a question. I really don't know much about politics but I was wondering..Obama or not, what is expected or a president 10 months into his campaign?

Peace in Palestine, all troops out of the middle east, Universal Health Care, closure of torture camps, economy back to 1950s levels.

now you wouldn't like that, would you Warmachine?

 

[blaxoid]

The above conspiracy theory is crazy. There's no conspiracy, it's just about the people in power wanting to stay in power.

Everyone is out for themselves - People who sponsor the candidates and parties are protecting their interests and wealth. You think they want you to vote for acandidate that could end their relationships with people of power and potentially the advantages they get from said relationships?

Voting is just a popularity contest in the end anyway.

Don't cry about it; it's just a byproduct of society.

 

[friendliest ghost]

Change. What a joke.

Gotta' love how Cindy Sheehan was swept under the rug when her agenda ran contrary to Obama.

 

[chris boshs neck]

How is he suppose to fix all the %!$* in 10 month though, I don't think you realized how badly bush #%+!%% up the country

 

[rexanglorum]

Originally Posted by KanyeWestJayZ4life

• or "He's spending money like crazy" - further proving they have no grasp on the complexities on a bailout and the situation we are in. I in fact believe we needed much more stimulus money. As I've often said, yeah itll add to the deficit but but the 80 billion spent will be insignificant compared to the end goal of closing our output gap of nearly 1.2 trillion in two years. Especially when the only other option is to, in a weak economy, allow that much money to be spent naturally and wait the decades it will take to naturally close the output gap. While every year wasting trillions is potential GDP growth and revenue for the sake of frugal "government spending". The bailout issue is far more complicated than your Fox News anchor will ever say....My biggest beef about the bailouts is not enough regulation to these companies we've invested a ton of money to. But then again repubs would cry Socialism or something ridiculous.

I am not implying that you are parroting some else's opinions nor am I claiming that you are pulling these numbers out of thin air, I askingfor the place or places you have read that out of my own curiosity.

I have doubts about anyone's macro predictions, all we know for certain is what we see from empirical evidence and that has not been kind to big economicstimulus projects. Japan undertook an even more ambitious path of fiscal stimulus in the 1990's and they have little to show for it, let alone afundamental change in the trajectory of its economy. A big reason for that was that the qualitative aspects of "G" matter a great deal and whenpolitician spend money it usually going to be malinvested because they have almost no incentive to spend for the public good and every incentive to spend toenhance their own political clout. I doubt that American politicians are any different from Japanese politicians in that regard.


BTW, I do share your disdain for those who oppose deficits on account of who is incurring them. If this stimulus bill would change the whole course of oureconomic future, I would favor it it but I have major doubts and would rather see more monetary stimulus, tax cuts on capital and labor and a plan that focuseson troubled assets and not on troubled banks.

 

[dsk aka illoquent13]

Originally Posted by Nike Star Jay

op knows what's up, independent party ftw

Oh so we independent now?

Kid was riding that Republicanelephant pretty hard in the weeks before the election. Probably learned something new at school and decided to be a rebel..."screw what my rich daddy andNT says!"

Originally Posted by franchise3

No regrets.

Considering if it was the other way around, Palin would be a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

No thanks.

...and at the end of the day, this is something that must be considered. I'm good over here with that.

By the way, the position is a 4 year job. Not 100 days, not 6 months, not a year. Never have I seen a President get "judged" and "graded"so much this early in a term...

 

[warmachine]

Why do dudes on NT feel the need to have these large drawn out arguments?

why not take your arguments to a board with other people who are moreintellectually equipped?

 

[coolnificent]

Originally Posted by jawnyquest

not voting cause it dont matter ftw

 

[38690]

a

 

[teamjordankidd532]

I didn't vote in the primaries. I'm not sure who I would have voted for out of the Democrats if I had. But in the final election, I wasn't about tovote for McCain, so I voted for Obama. I definitely do not regret it.

 

[kanyewestjayz4life]

Originally Posted by Rexanglorum

Originally Posted by KanyeWestJayZ4life

• or "He's spending money like crazy" - further proving they have no grasp on the complexities on a bailout and the situation we are in. I in fact believe we needed much more stimulus money. As I've often said, yeah itll add to the deficit but but the 80 billion spent will be insignificant compared to the end goal of closing our output gap of nearly 1.2 trillion in two years. Especially when the only other option is to, in a weak economy, allow that much money to be spent naturally and wait the decades it will take to naturally close the output gap. While every year wasting trillions is potential GDP growth and revenue for the sake of frugal "government spending". The bailout issue is far more complicated than your Fox News anchor will ever say....My biggest beef about the bailouts is not enough regulation to these companies we've invested a ton of money to. But then again repubs would cry Socialism or something ridiculous.

I am not implying that you are parroting some else's opinions nor am I claiming that you are pulling these numbers out of thin air, I asking for the place or places you have read that out of my own curiosity.

I have doubts about anyone's macro predictions, all we know for certain is what we see from empirical evidence and that has not been kind to big economic stimulus projects. Japan undertook an even more ambitious path of fiscal stimulus in the 1990's and they have little to show for it, let alone a fundamental change in the trajectory of its economy. A big reason for that was that the qualitative aspects of "G" matter a great deal and when politician spend money it usually going to be malinvested because they have almost no incentive to spend for the public good and every incentive to spend to enhance their own political clout. I doubt that American politicians are any different from Japanese politicians in that regard.


BTW, I do share your disdain for those who oppose deficits on account of who is incurring them. If this stimulus bill would change the whole course of our economic future, I would favor it it but I have major doubts and would rather see more monetary stimulus, tax cuts on capital and labor and a plan that focuses on troubled assets and not on troubled banks.

No problem, as I have mentioned every other I've stated that from Krugman. I just get tired of referring to him everytime, I sound like abroken record.

Let me please state this though, I'm not arguing for or against any particular rate of success in any form of stimulus, whether it be through workforce,capital, banks, I feel we can get a team on non-partisan economists to hammer out the how.

I think we're both in agreement of that a proper working stimulus is a good idea. What do have in mind by more monetary stimulus as opposed to the stimuluswe have now? And how would you impliment tax cuts on labor and captial? I agree with you on focusing on troubled assets but that term could be very vaguedepending on who's pockets are looking at it. What did you have in mind?

 

[josephskc]

 

[neptunebeats187]

Obama ftw

How about we wait until his actual term is up to evaluate him? We will see if his long term plan for change actually did change the Country for the better. Or,wait... I get it, ya'll wanna put him down and complain before anything has been done. It's only fair. As far as what I've seen for his first yearthough... I've seen an outstanding individual able to walk tall with a world of doubters and naysayers on his shoulders. I've never been able to relateto a president before, or have been so interested in politics before. This man has the hardest job in the world, and due to who he is, it's probablytwo-fold. People that lurk for any minor misstep, or poor decision that they can choose to exploit before seeing the greater good come of it. I think anyone inhis shoes who has not had a meltdown, even when being blatantly disrespected by his peers, is definitely something special. At the end of the day, I just hopehe proves any and every doubter wrong some way or another.

 

[nicedudewithnicedreams]

Originally Posted by swizzc

Originally Posted by Friendliest Ghost

When are the "Look what Bush left him with" arguments going to fall to the wayside?

He's had enough time to win a nobel peace prize but not fix what bush left him. Fall back bro.

Do you know when they voted for the winner? Not much time after he became President. So no need to compare to the time to fix what Bush left him.

 

[nightruans]

Originally Posted by COOLnificent

jawnyquest wrote:

---

not voting cause it dont matter ftw

 

[rexanglorum]

Originally Posted by KanyeWestJayZ4life

Originally Posted by Rexanglorum

Originally Posted by KanyeWestJayZ4life

• or "He's spending money like crazy" - further proving they have no grasp on the complexities on a bailout and the situation we are in. I in fact believe we needed much more stimulus money. As I've often said, yeah itll add to the deficit but but the 80 billion spent will be insignificant compared to the end goal of closing our output gap of nearly 1.2 trillion in two years. Especially when the only other option is to, in a weak economy, allow that much money to be spent naturally and wait the decades it will take to naturally close the output gap. While every year wasting trillions is potential GDP growth and revenue for the sake of frugal "government spending". The bailout issue is far more complicated than your Fox News anchor will ever say....My biggest beef about the bailouts is not enough regulation to these companies we've invested a ton of money to. But then again repubs would cry Socialism or something ridiculous.

I am not implying that you are parroting some else's opinions nor am I claiming that you are pulling these numbers out of thin air, I asking for the place or places you have read that out of my own curiosity.

I have doubts about anyone's macro predictions, all we know for certain is what we see from empirical evidence and that has not been kind to big economic stimulus projects. Japan undertook an even more ambitious path of fiscal stimulus in the 1990's and they have little to show for it, let alone a fundamental change in the trajectory of its economy. A big reason for that was that the qualitative aspects of "G" matter a great deal and when politician spend money it usually going to be malinvested because they have almost no incentive to spend for the public good and every incentive to spend to enhance their own political clout. I doubt that American politicians are any different from Japanese politicians in that regard.


BTW, I do share your disdain for those who oppose deficits on account of who is incurring them. If this stimulus bill would change the whole course of our economic future, I would favor it it but I have major doubts and would rather see more monetary stimulus, tax cuts on capital and labor and a plan that focuses on troubled assets and not on troubled banks.

No problem, as I have mentioned every other I've stated that from Krugman. I just get tired of referring to him everytime, I sound like a broken record.

Let me please state this though, I'm not arguing for or against any particular rate of success in any form of stimulus, whether it be through workforce, capital, banks, I feel we can get a team on non-partisan economists to hammer out the how.

I think we're both in agreement of that a proper working stimulus is a good idea. What do have in mind by more monetary stimulus as opposed to the stimulus we have now? And how would you impliment tax cuts on labor and captial? I agree with you on focusing on troubled assets but that term could be very vague depending on who's pockets are looking at it. What did you have in mind?

The reason I favor monetary stimulus is because it relatively less political in how it is done compared to fiscal stimulus. The monetary effectsare diffused instead of allocated in the way fiscal stimulus is. The costs are also diffused because the main cost of monetary stimulus is inflation while thecost of fiscal stimulus is taxation and debt, future taxation, which are heaped on the backs of politically powerless groups. Not only is fiscal stimulus badeconomics, but it is also bad morally and ethically for the same reason, the costs and benefits are allocated entirely by politics.

When it comes to reducing taxes on capital and labor, I would use capital gain cuts and payroll taxes, respectively.

For backing assets, I would expand the scope of FDIC coverage to include securitized assets. It is much more cost effective compared to giving banks a directline of access to the treasury. Furthermore, the fact that TARP funds can be recycled by this president and future presidents is terrible. Fiscal stimulus ispolitical but at least it must flow through the legislative process, a perpetual TARP program gives even more arbitrary power to the President.

 

[mosthated770]

voting doesnt matter anyways, hope all of you are proud of the time you wasted voting

 

[ph3n0m3n0n]

I'm liking my decision so far. Sarah Palin as vice president is ridiculous.

 

[solezonfroze]

I voted for Obama and I dont regret it. Not to be confused with me saying he's doing an excellent job. Bottomline is, whether it be Obama, McCain, Nader,or Darth Vader. The country is struggling. And sacrifices would have had to be made. And I'm more willing to believe that the government isn't gonnalet large corporations struggle b4 ur average US citizens. We were doomed b4 anybody wuz elected anyway.

 

[kix4kix]

Voting in this oligarchical system? why? Anyway, I didn't vote for him, but he is doing fine.

 

[ag 47]

I'm satisfied with where we are...beyond satisfied, thrilled even. Wasn't there a report of businesses saving 30% more of their profits recently?

 

[dirtylicious]

no
then again i didnt expect much either

 

[solewoman]

Originally Posted by Dirtylicious

no
then again i didnt expect much immediately

I believe time will truly tell