lol
Last edited:
Half Of America Makes Less Than $27,520 A Year And 15 Other Signs The Middle Class Is Dying
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by nationaltruckerdave,
- Start date
- Sep 10, 2005
- 9,253
- 3,007
No he's not an average President. He has plain bad. An average President maintains the status quo, nothing transformative or progressive. Things have gotten worse on his watch, thus making him a bad President.
"Don't blame him because people believed"
What??? Does that even make sense in your head? That's what an election is all about.
"Don't blame him because people believed"
What??? Does that even make sense in your head? That's what an election is all about.
- Aug 23, 2003
- 7,122
- 1,149
i bet whoever donated generous sums to his campaign is not complaining
- Sep 10, 2005
- 9,253
- 3,007
They are pissed too. Individuals who donate heavily to campaigns do so for access. Most Presidents host these people at the White House, give them special seating for events, and call them back. The President does none of these things. He's stated countless times that he does not like the glad handing part of politics. He rather read his briefings and craft policy, he doesn't have the stomach for the political pleasantries and coalition building that is essential to making it in Washington, and to be a successful President. He has no "friends" here.
Last edited:
- Mar 2, 2013
- 2,303
- 2,538
Things were on a downward spiral when he got into office... Things are on a downward spiral now. If you ask me he definitely maintained the status quo. If he was president in the 80s or 90s no one would even have these issues with him. The president doesn't have real power. The power is in congress. The banks and corporations run congress with lobbying and campaign money. He takes the blame because that's what he's paid to do, Take blame. But if you think he really didn't believe he could help people in 08, you're wrong. He wanted to play Robin Hood, which is why he was labeled a socialist by the right wing. Congress had him gridlocked for the longest. By the time 2012 came around he was already tired of dealing with the bs, but what's the alternative? Romney? He wouldn't have been better. The banks own him too. America never had a choice in the first place.
createdestroy
Banned
- Apr 18, 2010
- 4,310
- 2,017
lol@blaming the condition of the entire US economy on a single person
what schools are giving you guys diplomas?
what schools are giving you guys diplomas?
- Sep 10, 2005
- 9,253
- 3,007
Stop drinking the conventional Kool aid bro. Presidents wield a tremendous amount of power, if they know how to wield it. To be successful a President has to appeal to the masses(Obama had that) AND Congress. He failed miserably on the latter.
Lobbyist only have power if what they're offering is better than what the current White House is offering. Money is only necessary in Congress to rum campaigns. Excessive money is needed in campaigns when the election will be difficult. Difficult elections come when the electorate is pissed. People get pissed when the nation's agenda isn't swinging in their favor. And the agenda is set by the President. It's cyclical. So because Obama is such a **** up, the lobbyist have more influence. Obama is terrible at balancing the individual needs of Congressmen and their constituencies and his personal goals. A good President knows how to do this.
Romney may or may not have been better. Nobody knows. But i can honestly say he has far more business experience and acumen than Obama did. An it would breath of fresh air, even just for 6 months to have someone new in the White House, whether he failed miserably or not. America needs that.
Lobbyist only have power if what they're offering is better than what the current White House is offering. Money is only necessary in Congress to rum campaigns. Excessive money is needed in campaigns when the election will be difficult. Difficult elections come when the electorate is pissed. People get pissed when the nation's agenda isn't swinging in their favor. And the agenda is set by the President. It's cyclical. So because Obama is such a **** up, the lobbyist have more influence. Obama is terrible at balancing the individual needs of Congressmen and their constituencies and his personal goals. A good President knows how to do this.
Romney may or may not have been better. Nobody knows. But i can honestly say he has far more business experience and acumen than Obama did. An it would breath of fresh air, even just for 6 months to have someone new in the White House, whether he failed miserably or not. America needs that.
Last edited:
- Jun 1, 2013
- 509
- 913
What we need right now from our political leaders is innovative thinking that will bring our economy back to its roots that made us so great in the late 1800s during the industrial revolution. We need to focus on building internal infrastructure within our own country and force multi-million and billion dollar companies in this country to shift focus from outsourcing to the cheapest overseas bidder to investing in technology and industry within the United States. We are one of the only industrialized countries in the world without a high speed train to connect cities and industry together. A cross-country system of trains would connect cities and bring commerce to smaller/ struggling cites and towns like never before in our history. The building of this system would put millions of Americans to work and could be funded by our wealthiest companies to stimulate the growth of internal factories that would further propel a return to home philosophy.
Obama should not be blamed for this loss of a generation and further dissolution of the middle class. At his core he is like almost every other politician in Washington, a lawyer skilled at oratory and promises that are neither forward thinking or innovative. I really wish the smartest minds in our country would run for office, particularly those in business and medicine, as we need a return to what made America so great which has always been our willingness to explore the unknown and takes risks like our forefathers who pushed west in search of a better life in the 1800s.
A return to local industrialization and expansion of more affordable transportation such as trains and rail transport would connect cities and the lost middle class to industry and wealth expansion that would further stimulate our internal economy.
Obama should not be blamed for this loss of a generation and further dissolution of the middle class. At his core he is like almost every other politician in Washington, a lawyer skilled at oratory and promises that are neither forward thinking or innovative. I really wish the smartest minds in our country would run for office, particularly those in business and medicine, as we need a return to what made America so great which has always been our willingness to explore the unknown and takes risks like our forefathers who pushed west in search of a better life in the 1800s.
A return to local industrialization and expansion of more affordable transportation such as trains and rail transport would connect cities and the lost middle class to industry and wealth expansion that would further stimulate our internal economy.
- Sep 10, 2005
- 9,253
- 3,007
Umm if you run a campaign talking about how you can get the U.S. economy back on track and then a re-election campaign on how you're policies are getting the U.S. economy back on track, then you better be ready to take the blame when the U.S. economy doesn't get back on track.
Last edited:
- Sep 10, 2005
- 9,253
- 3,007
Force companies? Take that kind of thinking to Russia or North Korea.
You talking out of both sides of your mouth right now. Talking about going back to the age of the industrial revolution and westward expansion but then championing government control of business and commerce. There was no damn regulation in those days. People were free to spend their money doing what they wanted, how they wanted. What happened back then was natural economics. Now you wanna replicate that with government intervention. It doesn't work.
Last edited:
- Jun 1, 2013
- 509
- 913
Yes I would force these multimillion/ billion dollar companies to reinvest in their own country that made them all that money. I would tax the heck out of Apple and Microsoft. You want to outsource your microprocessor plant to China where the average worker makes pennies a day while you increase your profit margin without benefitting the United States? Ok fine, then you have to pay the government a tax for every device manufactured outside of our shores. Our national debt would dissolve before our eyes and then these big companies will be affected by the bottom line which will always be there profit margin and they will bring these plants and factories back to where they belong which is the United States. This isn't communism, its capitalism with a twist designed to re-stimulate a dying segment of our population that doesn't have the skills or knowledge to compete for jobs in medicine or business. If we continue down our current path we will be left with a huge gap between the upper and lower classes leading to the verge of revolution like the once great powers of the world Greece and Spain.
- Sep 10, 2005
- 9,253
- 3,007
Your "Capitalism with a twist" = socialism with a twist. If that's what you want, then cool. Just don't invoke the industrial revolution because everything you're speaking on is the exact opposite of what went on back then.
Last edited:
- Aug 23, 2003
- 7,122
- 1,149
i don't think we can solve our problems with the tools offered by the current system.
- Jun 1, 2013
- 509
- 913
You seem to have a jaded view of our history. You seem to dislike my example of the industrial revolution of the 1800s which essentially shaped what we know of America today, ok then how about the stimulation of our economy and the period following WWII in the 1950s which many in economics and politics point to as the pinnacle of our prosperity. The stimulation of our economy made by industry (most of it driven by the wives of men sent to war in the 1940s) led us into an age where the middle class essentially was formed.
Don't be scared or intimidated by our past. If you don't understand these periods in our history I suggest you go back and learn about them. They reveal subtle clues to stimulating a stagnant modern economy that relies too much on government hand outs and less on hard work and industrial expansion. I see this lack of foresight in my own city Las Vegas. We have so much land and environmental resources to build industry and expand our local economy, but so many are blinded by the appeal of the gambling industry and quick wealth. We need more companies like Zappos which not only has forward nationalistic and international goals but also seeks to revitalize the local infrastructure and economy at the city and county levels as well.
- Jul 19, 2012
- 23,064
- 33,927
The current system, or the people who control it, are the problem.
We need to start over. Which seems next to impossible. So the next best thing is to figure out how to get them all out.
They're supposed to be working for us, and answering to us. Not the other way around.
Millions of us yet we can't regain even a slight grasp of control.
Keep voting I guess. The red liar or the blue liar, whoever sounds better.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 6,150
- 508
I pretty much fit every damn statistic (barring the unemployed ones since I've been working since 16)
mr marcus
Banned
- May 3, 2010
- 26,572
- 5,415
Change my ***. I tried to warn people in 2012 that he wasn't working out. But people just had to give him another chance.
Not an Obama fan but he was a better choice than Romney
- Aug 23, 2003
- 7,122
- 1,149
Trust can be decentralized with new disruptive tech like the blockchain. The potential solutions are out there if you look beyond the given political structure... just don't expect a president to "change" the system that made him president.
- Aug 1, 2013
- 1,944
- 1,343
Obama is an employee, he's an easy target and definitely can be implicated but he's not the cause of all this. You have to go higher and ask yourself what powers he serves.
- Dec 1, 2011
- 4,323
- 4,705
@ this threadI want more, but I'm happy for where I am at 22. PS, those stats are not accurate at all. Like someone said, look up the work force participation numbers. A lot of you may be considered as nonparticipants in the workforce and not even know it.
fontaine
Banned
- Jul 5, 2013
- 8,053
- 6,535
- Aug 7, 2012
- 2,731
- 2,257
Agree with 95% of this.
al audi
Banned
- Jun 18, 2009
- 29,810
- 4,562
Metsn13 for President
- Sep 10, 2005
- 9,253
- 3,007
You definitely blocked out my whole point, and straw manned me. No one is denying the impact of the industrial revolution. I'm simply pointing out how that was a time of no government intervention and so much was accomplished. An you clearly stated that you would FORCE companies to use their money on projects you deemed necessary. Like I stated before, that is just the exact opposite of the time period your championing.
- Oct 27, 2013
- 576
- 450
i think the problem is with the people of america
the american people have let conditions get to this point with their blind acceptance of things
ron paul came around and tried to change things. i believe that ron paul was the best presidential canadite in a long time
everyone was sweet talked by a pretty voice and a ***** in some makeup to make them look good.
the american people have control it's just that so many of us are borderline ******ed that none of us see great options put right in front of us
i think if ron paul were elected things would be moving in a completely different direction.
never was a sell out to corporations and had a track record that showed he had the american people's interest at mind at all time
but no, yall idiots let the media think ron paul was crazy and now were stuck in the same cycle again.
if we as a country want to get anywhere we need citizens that are aware of whats going on and who particapate with logic and not off of emotion
the american people have let conditions get to this point with their blind acceptance of things
ron paul came around and tried to change things. i believe that ron paul was the best presidential canadite in a long time
everyone was sweet talked by a pretty voice and a ***** in some makeup to make them look good.
the american people have control it's just that so many of us are borderline ******ed that none of us see great options put right in front of us
i think if ron paul were elected things would be moving in a completely different direction.
never was a sell out to corporations and had a track record that showed he had the american people's interest at mind at all time
but no, yall idiots let the media think ron paul was crazy and now were stuck in the same cycle again.
if we as a country want to get anywhere we need citizens that are aware of whats going on and who particapate with logic and not off of emotion
