Palin Slams Obama's Energy Plan

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

you people would swear that a solid fart was the solution if it waved a gop lapel pin in your face. Seriously, I HOPE you people put your faith in the quitter come '12. For realz.

Try this please.. Point out the fallacies in her op ed. Tell me what you disagree with in her position.

the entire third, fourth paragraph, sentences like "Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy." are pretty fucking stupid, paragraph 6, 7, 8 (the entire sentence), I laughed at the whole "god put right under our feet", are her laughable ending wrap up.


the FACT is that it's not cap and trade that killed America's economy. It was the dangled rotten fruit of free market capitalism that hemorrhaged standard of living opportunity to third world slave wage nations. If you don't ahve a job because it was shipped to Mexico then you can't afford a house or car. Basic stuff, really. Blaming Obama given how eviscerated the economy was before he even held office is just asinine. Pretending that trite rhetoric and laughable talking points means more than trying to rally a bid for the '12 election is, again, asinine. Her OP is the equivalent of playing Jock Jams at a concert of Mozart music. Yea, it may get the crowd pumped but there is no substance beyond the usual GOP bait.

happy?

So you are saying NAFTA along with our free trade policies are what led to this economic problem?

You say it was just free market capitalism.....are you not including things like non-reciprocal tariffs on imports?...ie china charges a 50% tariff on our goods while we charge no tariff on theirs giving them an unfair advantage in global trade.....or economic lending policies that Bush and Clinton both passed guaranteeing a higher and higher percentage of mortgages to high risk lendees?



Basically all I'm doing is calling you out....you seem quick to insult people but I just want you to pour out the substance of your insults so they have some meaning....without you explaining yourself a little more you just sound like a talking point nut bag .

I think you have the capacity to do this and am eagerly awaiting you to do so.

 

[Vel]

the entire third, fourth paragraph, sentences like "Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy." are pretty fucking stupid, paragraph 6, 7, 8 (the entire sentence), I laughed at the whole "god put right under our feet", are her laughable ending wrap up.


the FACT is that it's not cap and trade that killed America's economy. It was the dangled rotten fruit of free market capitalism that hemorrhaged standard of living opportunity to third world slave wage nations. If you don't ahve a job because it was shipped to Mexico then you can't afford a house or car. Basic stuff, really. Blaming Obama given how eviscerated the economy was before he even held office is just asinine. Pretending that trite rhetoric and laughable talking points means more than trying to rally a bid for the '12 election is, again, asinine. Her OP is the equivalent of playing Jock Jams at a concert of Mozart music. Yea, it may get the crowd pumped but there is no substance beyond the usual GOP bait.

happy?

Ok we'll overlook the fact that no one has said that cap and trade has killed America's economy ( the concern is that IF PASSED it will destroy whatever we have left of our economy. ) and we'll narrow the focus to the one thing you said that really addressed the OP. You disagree with "Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy." So is it your opinion that we must necessarily destory the American economy in order to meet our future energy needs?

I am deeply concerned about President Obama's cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy.

Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.


If the above blue text is the ONLY thing you took from my post then I guess it's understandable why you'd totally disregard the red text above. And, truly, it's completely asinine to ASSume that I think it's necessary to destroy the economy in order to meet energy needs. In fact, I'd say there is a pretty strong correlation between the level of stupid it takes to write Sarah's OP as it does to make a reply like that.


Energy dependence is not a catch all excuse. Maybe if we weren't coming fresh out of the SUV presidency which, SHOCKER, also saw the highest gas prices in decades you wouldn't have to act like the sky is falling if we don't maintain current consumption rates. Hell, we COULD try to use the gov stock in GM currently to push vehicles that use less energy AND stimulates the economy but I get the sneaking suspicion that you would cry like a bleeding martyr that the big bad gov is trying to keep you from buying a hummer (made in mexico). Just because you lost the last election doesn't mean you ahve to drag your feet until the next GOP brand turd pulls a string and echoes the same ole talking points like a greek chorus. And, be sure, gutting the fucking planet just because you think jesus is on his way won't invalidate science behind environmental concerns.

Ok.. You obviously lack the ability to focus on one point at a time. Had your first response contained anything substantive other than you thinking sentences like "Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy." are pretty fucking stupid then I might have had more to assess your opinion on. The rest of your post simply devolved off topic to " It's not fair to blame Obama for the current economy" crap that had nothing to do with the OP. My original question was asking you simply what part of the OP that you thought was wrong. To further clarify.. I wanted to know what part of her take on the ENERGY POLICY you disagreed with. But since you don't seem to be able to focus on the points of the op ed rather than the author.. nevermind.

 

[Shogun]

Ok we'll overlook the fact that no one has said that cap and trade has killed America's economy ( the concern is that IF PASSED it will destroy whatever we have left of our economy. ) and we'll narrow the focus to the one thing you said that really addressed the OP. You disagree with "Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy." So is it your opinion that we must necessarily destory the American economy in order to meet our future energy needs?

I am deeply concerned about President Obama's cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy.

Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.


If the above blue text is the ONLY thing you took from my post then I guess it's understandable why you'd totally disregard the red text above. And, truly, it's completely asinine to ASSume that I think it's necessary to destroy the economy in order to meet energy needs. In fact, I'd say there is a pretty strong correlation between the level of stupid it takes to write Sarah's OP as it does to make a reply like that.


Energy dependence is not a catch all excuse. Maybe if we weren't coming fresh out of the SUV presidency which, SHOCKER, also saw the highest gas prices in decades you wouldn't have to act like the sky is falling if we don't maintain current consumption rates. Hell, we COULD try to use the gov stock in GM currently to push vehicles that use less energy AND stimulates the economy but I get the sneaking suspicion that you would cry like a bleeding martyr that the big bad gov is trying to keep you from buying a hummer (made in mexico). Just because you lost the last election doesn't mean you ahve to drag your feet until the next GOP brand turd pulls a string and echoes the same ole talking points like a greek chorus. And, be sure, gutting the fucking planet just because you think jesus is on his way won't invalidate science behind environmental concerns.

Ok.. You obviously lack the ability to focus on one point at a time. Had your first response contained anything substantive other than you thinking sentences like "Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy." are pretty fucking stupid then I might have had more to assess your opinion on. The rest of your post simply devolved off topic to " It's not fair to blame Obama for the current economy" crap that had nothing to do with the OP. My original question was asking you simply what part of the OP that you thought was wrong. To further clarify.. I wanted to know what part of her take on the ENERGY POLICY you disagreed with. But since you don't seem to be able to focus on the points of the op ed rather than the author.. nevermind.

Did you need more than a highlighted, color coded response? I literally went paragraph by paragraph. I dunno, man.. if you need big lines in your coloring book then so be it; you'll have to fogive me for not taking your criticism seriously.

 

[WhiteLion]

Palin's op ed addresses Obama's cap and tax plan as an enormous threat to America....

The Cap and Tax Dead End
By Sarah Palin
The Washinton Post
Tuesday, July 14, 2009

There is no shortage of threats to our economy. America's unemployment rate recently hit its highest mark in more than 25 years and is expected to continue climbing. Worries are widespread that even when the economy finally rebounds, the recovery won't bring jobs. Our nation's debt is unsustainable, and the federal government's reach into the private sector is unprecedented.

Unfortunately, many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges. So, at risk of disappointing the chattering class, let me make clear what is foremost on my mind and where my focus will be:

I am deeply concerned about President Obama's cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

American prosperity has always been driven by the steady supply of abundant, affordable energy. Particularly in Alaska, we understand the inherent link between energy and prosperity, energy and opportunity, and energy and security. Consequently, many of us in this huge, energy-rich state recognize that the president's cap-and-trade energy tax would adversely affect every aspect of the U.S. economy.

There is no denying that as the world becomes more industrialized, we need to reform our energy policy and become less dependent on foreign energy sources. But the answer doesn't lie in making energy scarcer and more expensive! Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy.

Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.

In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan. For example, the cost of farming will certainly increase, driving down farm incomes while driving up grocery prices. The costs of manufacturing, warehousing and transportation will also increase.

The ironic beauty in this plan? Soon, even the most ardent liberal will understand supply-side economics.

The Americans hit hardest will be those already struggling to make ends meet. As the president eloquently puts it, their electricity bills will "necessarily skyrocket." So much for not raising taxes on anyone making less than $250,000 a year.

Even Warren Buffett, an ardent Obama supporter, admitted that under the cap-and-tax scheme, "poor people are going to pay a lot more for electricity."

We must move in a new direction. We are ripe for economic growth and energy independence if we responsibly tap the resources that God created right underfoot on American soil. Just as important, we have more desire and ability to protect the environment than any foreign nation from which we purchase energy today.

In Alaska, we are progressing on the largest private-sector energy project in history. Our 3,000-mile natural gas pipeline will transport hundreds of trillions of cubic feet of our clean natural gas to hungry markets across America. We can safely drill for U.S. oil offshore and in a tiny, 2,000-acre corner of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge if ever given the go-ahead by Washington bureaucrats.

Of course, Alaska is not the sole source of American energy. Many states have abundant coal, whose technology is continuously making it into a cleaner energy source. Westerners literally sit on mountains of oil and gas, and every state can consider the possibility of nuclear energy.

We have an important choice to make. Do we want to control our energy supply and its environmental impact? Or, do we want to outsource it to China, Russia and Saudi Arabia? Make no mistake: President Obama's plan will result in the latter.

For so many reasons, we can't afford to kill responsible domestic energy production or clobber every American consumer with higher prices.

Can America produce more of its own energy through strategic investments that protect the environment, revive our economy and secure our nation?

Yes, we can. Just not with Barack Obama's energy cap-and-tax plan.

washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines

Why the hell not? i beleive Palins got this one pegged for dam sure. i mean wtf's the point of continuing to debunk good policy making suggestions unless your dumber than a fuckin box of rocks??? or you just hate her for what she stands for or what others have told you? Im sure the current white house admins will still be blaming Bush for the current economic probs a year later, will it work???, or will people start scratching theirs heads and say hola bejesus wtf have we done??? i beleive the latter is truth...

What you tolerate today, You will entertain tomorrow -whitelion

 

[RodISHI]

You and shogun are in the GoP?

..does it take GOP membership to post in threads these days? I must have deleted that memo.

Don't tell you also lost your sense of humor, there are so many clinched buttholes here lately it's as if a bus full of evangelicals broke down in Frisco.

Is that the Frank Lombard effect?

 

[Shogun]

Try this please.. Point out the fallacies in her op ed. Tell me what you disagree with in her position.

the entire third, fourth paragraph, sentences like "Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy." are pretty fucking stupid, paragraph 6, 7, 8 (the entire sentence), I laughed at the whole "god put right under our feet", are her laughable ending wrap up.


the FACT is that it's not cap and trade that killed America's economy. It was the dangled rotten fruit of free market capitalism that hemorrhaged standard of living opportunity to third world slave wage nations. If you don't ahve a job because it was shipped to Mexico then you can't afford a house or car. Basic stuff, really. Blaming Obama given how eviscerated the economy was before he even held office is just asinine. Pretending that trite rhetoric and laughable talking points means more than trying to rally a bid for the '12 election is, again, asinine. Her OP is the equivalent of playing Jock Jams at a concert of Mozart music. Yea, it may get the crowd pumped but there is no substance beyond the usual GOP bait.

happy?

So you are saying NAFTA along with our free trade policies are what led to this economic problem?

You say it was just free market capitalism.....are you not including things like non-reciprocal tariffs on imports?...ie china charges a 50% tariff on our goods while we charge no tariff on theirs giving them an unfair advantage in global trade.....or economic lending policies that Bush and Clinton both passed guaranteeing a higher and higher percentage of mortgages to high risk lendees?



Basically all I'm doing is calling you out....you seem quick to insult people but I just want you to pour out the substance of your insults so they have some meaning....without you explaining yourself a little more you just sound like a talking point nut bag .

I think you have the capacity to do this and am eagerly awaiting you to do so.

Yes, as a matter of fact it is exactly nafta-like free trade bullshit that is currently affecting our economy. It's why your kind try so hard to ignore trade deficits and the repercussions of hemorrhaging jobs to third world nations where wages don't support the kind of living standard we used to enjoy here in the US. You can see the difference illustrated in Greenspan's early 90s testimony and his "oops, I might have been flawed" testimony after the start5 of our financial crash. America was once THE PLACE to go and find opportunity. Since then, free market capitalistas have been jettisoning any and all opportunity to India, China and Mexico for the sake of cheaper labor; economic impact be damned. You people would rather blame Unions than retarded "hey, lets sell more SUVS" ceos. When, in fact, it is the UNIONS that make sure our middle class has more consuming ability than a 9 dollar an hour auto worker at a Nissan plant in Georgia. You can't name a single nation that benefits from free trade policies that doesn't have a giant trade deficit. I don't care if blaming clinton acts as a salve for your economic opinion the fact on the ground is that it's free trade economics, and the rotten promises dangled, that have caused more people in the middle class to not be able to buy houses and cars and pay off credit. UAW workers in the 80s COULD pay for all three. easily. Even if some dirt slave from Mexico costs less for labor. We can't maintain our american standard of living by normalizing economics with Indian beggars.

 

[Toro]

NAFTA did not cause this problem. Trade did not cause this problem.

The problem was created by excess speculation in asset markets.

 

[Jennifer.Bush]

She makes some excellent points, but I expect the people that dislike her won't address the op ed, they will attack her instead.

duh and they will claim she didn't write it, typical hate she gets from the loons

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

the entire third, fourth paragraph, sentences like "Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy." are pretty fucking stupid, paragraph 6, 7, 8 (the entire sentence), I laughed at the whole "god put right under our feet", are her laughable ending wrap up.


the FACT is that it's not cap and trade that killed America's economy. It was the dangled rotten fruit of free market capitalism that hemorrhaged standard of living opportunity to third world slave wage nations. If you don't ahve a job because it was shipped to Mexico then you can't afford a house or car. Basic stuff, really. Blaming Obama given how eviscerated the economy was before he even held office is just asinine. Pretending that trite rhetoric and laughable talking points means more than trying to rally a bid for the '12 election is, again, asinine. Her OP is the equivalent of playing Jock Jams at a concert of Mozart music. Yea, it may get the crowd pumped but there is no substance beyond the usual GOP bait.

happy?

So you are saying NAFTA along with our free trade policies are what led to this economic problem?

You say it was just free market capitalism.....are you not including things like non-reciprocal tariffs on imports?...ie china charges a 50% tariff on our goods while we charge no tariff on theirs giving them an unfair advantage in global trade.....or economic lending policies that Bush and Clinton both passed guaranteeing a higher and higher percentage of mortgages to high risk lendees?



Basically all I'm doing is calling you out....you seem quick to insult people but I just want you to pour out the substance of your insults so they have some meaning....without you explaining yourself a little more you just sound like a talking point nut bag .

I think you have the capacity to do this and am eagerly awaiting you to do so.

Yes, as a matter of fact it is exactly nafta-like free trade bullshit that is currently affecting our economy. It's why your kind try so hard to ignore trade deficits and the repercussions of hemorrhaging jobs to third world nations where wages don't support the kind of living standard we used to enjoy here in the US. You can see the difference illustrated in Greenspan's early 90s testimony and his "oops, I might have been flawed" testimony after the start5 of our financial crash. America was once THE PLACE to go and find opportunity. Since then, free market capitalistas have been jettisoning any and all opportunity to India, China and Mexico for the sake of cheaper labor; economic impact be damned. You people would rather blame Unions than retarded "hey, lets sell more SUVS" ceos. When, in fact, it is the UNIONS that make sure our middle class has more consuming ability than a 9 dollar an hour auto worker at a Nissan plant in Georgia. You can't name a single nation that benefits from free trade policies that doesn't have a giant trade deficit. I don't care if blaming clinton acts as a salve for your economic opinion the fact on the ground is that it's free trade economics, and the rotten promises dangled, that have caused more people in the middle class to not be able to buy houses and cars and pay off credit. UAW workers in the 80s COULD pay for all three. easily. Even if some dirt slave from Mexico costs less for labor. We can't maintain our american standard of living by normalizing economics with Indian beggars.

Before I tell you any more of my actual opinions....just what is "my kind"? I just want to see how spot on or far off base you are.


EDIT: TORO go get some education in economics and come back with something that isn't so simplistic....as if that was the one thing :doh: or just make me look foolish and actually show you understand the problems that led to the current situation better than that.

 

[Toro]

EDIT: TORO go get some education in economics and come back with something that isn't so simplistic....as if that was the one thing :doh: or just make me look foolish and actually show you understand the problems that led to the current situation better than that.

If you want to get into a tet-a-tet on economics, bring it on. I'm more than happy to play.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/79488-hyperinflation-not-in-america.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/79386-the-fed-has-not-spent-9-trillion.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...administration-was-a-myth-10.html#post1296638

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

EDIT: TORO go get some education in economics and come back with something that isn't so simplistic....as if that was the one thing :doh: or just make me look foolish and actually show you understand the problems that led to the current situation better than that.

If you want to get into a tet-a-tet on economics, bring it on. I'm more than happy to play.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/79488-hyperinflation-not-in-america.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/79386-the-fed-has-not-spent-9-trillion.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...administration-was-a-myth-10.html#post1296638

i love economics

If you want some intelligent exchange of ideas i'm down for it. As long as you dont try to make economics into politics. As we all know politicians SUCK at economics.

What caused this current economic crisis (not in order of importance)

1) Trade Policies
2) Innacurate Market Speculation
3) Lending policies revolving around fannie/freddy.....such as equal opportunity lending and the govt's required percentage of loans to high risk individuals
4) Debt Expenses
5) Unsustainable Govt Defecit spending
6) Sharp increases in energy prices (this one is actually is in the top 2 or 3 of my reasons for the recession)


Add some to the list? or do you think some of those dont belong?

 

[Sinatra]

Palin is spot on with that opinion - an opinion far more cogent and intellectually honest than that coming from the mouth of just about any other politician today...

 

[Maple]

Sarah Palin Calls Obama Cap-and-Trade Plan a Threat

Tuesday, July 14, 2009 1:10 AM

Article Font Size



Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who says she'll leave office at the end of the month, is already taking on one national issue, calling the Obama administration's plan to reduce greenhouse gases a threat to the U.S. economy.


In an op-ed piece in Tuesday's Washington Post, Palin attacks the administration's so-called cap-and-trade plan that would allow industrial sources to buy and sell pollution permits.


The plan, Palin writes, is "an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage."


She adds: "In addition to immediately increasing unemployment in the energy sector, even more American jobs will be threatened by the rising cost of doing business under the cap-and-tax plan."


Instead, the former Republican vice presidential nominee says: "We are ripe for economic growth and energy independence if we responsibly tap the resources that God created right underfoot on American soil. Just as important, we have more desire and ability to protect the environment than any foreign nation from which we purchase energy today."


The climate bill passed by the House last month requires power plants, factories, refineries and electricity and natural gas distributors to reduce the emissions linked to global warming. It also calls for more power production from renewable sources such wind and solar energy, and raises energy-efficiency standards.


Palin surprised political observers when she announced July 3 that she would leave the governor's office while in the middle of her first term. The governor chose not to seek re-election and suggested it was unfair to hold onto the office as a lame duck.


She did take a shot at her critics in her Post essay.


"Unfortunately," Palin wrote, "many in the national media would rather focus on the personality-driven political gossip of the day than on the gravity of these challenges."





© 2009 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


Print Page | Forward Page | E-mail Us




Related Links:

Doctor Says Obesity Caused by Common Food Additives.
Thyroid Imbalance Linked to Heart Disease
Winston Churchill's

 

[Maple]

she is the energy expert in this country. She knows more about energy than Obama would learn in a lifetime. She also is dead on right about what Cap and Trade would do to our economy, it would kill the coal industry, tax our corporations so more would go overseas and cost millions of more jobs. Then all the industrial nations, china, India, Russia would sit back and do nothing but welcome our American companies to put their people back to work.

Don't be fooled by this write your senators, the democratic congress has already passed it, we can'[t afford to put any more of a strangle hold on our businesss or the American people.

 

[Maple]

you must be a communist to write a post like that. In case you did not know, communism has been tried and it has failed miserably, the former Soviet Union is a classic example.

The reason that our American companies go overseas and take their jobs with them is that they now have the largest corporate tax in the world. More taxes means they do not have the money to hire and provide benefits to American employees and still make those EVIL profits. If they did not make a profit they would be bankrupt and have to go out of business laying off all of their American employees.

I can't beleive that something so basic like the reduction of taxes across the board with small business, large business and average Americans is so hard to get through to you libs.

When business and people like you have more of your own money to spend, save and invest, you create a demand for products, someone has to produce that product, which creates a job. The more you have to pay in taxes the less money you have to spend, invest and save which means that you can not afford to buy those products which means that business will have to lay someone off.

It's nothing more than common sense, it's econ 101 and somehow you libs who will only vote for an elitist, Harvard graduate don't get it. BTW, he doesn't get it either, that's why the stimulus package is a total failure and will do nothing but create a bigger fatter government and do nothing to create jobs in the private sector.

Sarah has it dead on right, Cap and Trade will cause another 4-5 million in job losses. Energy independence can be done with renewables, drill here drill now, new refineries, wind, solar etc, But to put a punishment tax on American business and every family in America is ludicrist. But then again look what we have for a President the most liberal tax and spend President that this country has ever seen, he is going to overtake Jimmy Carter for 1st place in the worst President ever contest.

 

[Toro]

EDIT: TORO go get some education in economics and come back with something that isn't so simplistic....as if that was the one thing :doh: or just make me look foolish and actually show you understand the problems that led to the current situation better than that.

If you want to get into a tet-a-tet on economics, bring it on. I'm more than happy to play.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/79488-hyperinflation-not-in-america.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/79386-the-fed-has-not-spent-9-trillion.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...administration-was-a-myth-10.html#post1296638

i love economics

If you want some intelligent exchange of ideas i'm down for it. As long as you dont try to make economics into politics. As we all know politicians SUCK at economics.

What caused this current economic crisis (not in order of importance)

1) Trade Policies
2) Innacurate Market Speculation
3) Lending policies revolving around fannie/freddy.....such as equal opportunity lending and the govt's required percentage of loans to high risk individuals
4) Debt Expenses
5) Unsustainable Govt Defecit spending
6) Sharp increases in energy prices (this one is actually is in the top 2 or 3 of my reasons for the recession)


Add some to the list? or do you think some of those dont belong?

Trade does not belong on that list.

The biggest culprit of the financial crisis is the Fed. Next is Wall Street. Next is everyone who thought speculating in home prices was a good idea. Next was deregulation. It's all a rounding error after that.

 

[Zoom-boing]

you must be a communist to write a post like that. In case you did not know, communism has been tried and it has failed miserably, the former Soviet Union is a classic example.

The reason that our American companies go overseas and take their jobs with them is that they now have the largest corporate tax in the world. More taxes means they do not have the money to hire and provide benefits to American employees and still make those EVIL profits. If they did not make a profit they would be bankrupt and have to go out of business laying off all of their American employees.

I can't beleive that something so basic like the reduction of taxes across the board with small business, large business and average Americans is so hard to get through to you libs.

When business and people like you have more of your own money to spend, save and invest, you create a demand for products, someone has to produce that product, which creates a job. The more you have to pay in taxes the less money you have to spend, invest and save which means that you can not afford to buy those products which means that business will have to lay someone off.

It's nothing more than common sense, it's econ 101 and somehow you libs who will only vote for an elitist, Harvard graduate don't get it. BTW, he doesn't get it either, that's why the stimulus package is a total failure and will do nothing but create a bigger fatter government and do nothing to create jobs in the private sector.

Sarah has it dead on right, Cap and Trade will cause another 4-5 million in job losses. Energy independence can be done with renewables, drill here drill now, new refineries, wind, solar etc, But to put a punishment tax on American business and every family in America is ludicrist. But then again look what we have for a President the most liberal tax and spend President that this country has ever seen, he is going to overtake Jimmy Carter for 1st place in the worst President ever contest.

 

[Vel]

I am deeply concerned about President Obama's cap-and-trade energy plan, and I believe it is an enormous threat to our economy. It would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.

Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy.

Job losses are so certain under this new cap-and-tax plan that it includes a provision accommodating newly unemployed workers from the resulting dried-up energy sector, to the tune of $4.2 billion over eight years. So much for creating jobs.


If the above blue text is the ONLY thing you took from my post then I guess it's understandable why you'd totally disregard the red text above. And, truly, it's completely asinine to ASSume that I think it's necessary to destroy the economy in order to meet energy needs. In fact, I'd say there is a pretty strong correlation between the level of stupid it takes to write Sarah's OP as it does to make a reply like that.


Energy dependence is not a catch all excuse. Maybe if we weren't coming fresh out of the SUV presidency which, SHOCKER, also saw the highest gas prices in decades you wouldn't have to act like the sky is falling if we don't maintain current consumption rates. Hell, we COULD try to use the gov stock in GM currently to push vehicles that use less energy AND stimulates the economy but I get the sneaking suspicion that you would cry like a bleeding martyr that the big bad gov is trying to keep you from buying a hummer (made in mexico). Just because you lost the last election doesn't mean you ahve to drag your feet until the next GOP brand turd pulls a string and echoes the same ole talking points like a greek chorus. And, be sure, gutting the fucking planet just because you think jesus is on his way won't invalidate science behind environmental concerns.

Ok.. You obviously lack the ability to focus on one point at a time. Had your first response contained anything substantive other than you thinking sentences like "Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy." are pretty fucking stupid then I might have had more to assess your opinion on. The rest of your post simply devolved off topic to " It's not fair to blame Obama for the current economy" crap that had nothing to do with the OP. My original question was asking you simply what part of the OP that you thought was wrong. To further clarify.. I wanted to know what part of her take on the ENERGY POLICY you disagreed with. But since you don't seem to be able to focus on the points of the op ed rather than the author.. nevermind.

Did you need more than a highlighted, color coded response? I literally went paragraph by paragraph. I dunno, man.. if you need big lines in your coloring book then so be it; you'll have to fogive me for not taking your criticism seriously.

While your color coded response was quite pretty, it did absolutely NOTHING to answer the original question. You say you disagree with the statement.

"Those who understand the issue know we can meet our energy needs and environmental challenges without destroying America's economy."

and then say,

" And, truly, it's completely asinine to ASSume that I think it's necessary to destroy the economy in order to meet energy needs."

so I can only assume that, while you can copy and paste in pretty colors, even you don't know what you believe.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

If you want to get into a tet-a-tet on economics, bring it on. I'm more than happy to play.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/79488-hyperinflation-not-in-america.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/79386-the-fed-has-not-spent-9-trillion.html
http://www.usmessageboard.com/econo...administration-was-a-myth-10.html#post1296638

i love economics

If you want some intelligent exchange of ideas i'm down for it. As long as you dont try to make economics into politics. As we all know politicians SUCK at economics.

What caused this current economic crisis (not in order of importance)

1) Trade Policies
2) Innacurate Market Speculation
3) Lending policies revolving around fannie/freddy.....such as equal opportunity lending and the govt's required percentage of loans to high risk individuals
4) Debt Expenses
5) Unsustainable Govt Defecit spending
6) Sharp increases in energy prices (this one is actually is in the top 2 or 3 of my reasons for the recession)


Add some to the list? or do you think some of those dont belong?

Trade does not belong on that list.

The biggest culprit of the financial crisis is the Fed. Next is Wall Street. Next is everyone who thought speculating in home prices was a good idea. Next was deregulation. It's all a rounding error after that.

I think trade fits in there too.....i pretty much agree with your order of things but I'd throw increased energy prices right after speculating in housing.

Trade fits because of trade policies such as nafta that gave high wage paying companies incentives to take those high wage jobs out of the USA and move them to other countries with much cheaper labor rates.....movement of jobs out of country=inability to pay bills such as mortgages which is whay I say trade belongs on the list (i know its very simplistic way of explaining it but still, i think from reading your threads you linked that you do understand what i mean)

EDIT: Still awaiting shogun's answer to what exactly "my kind" are

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The 08 Energy run up was perfectly timed to push the real estate market over the cliff. It was already bad in Miami and Boston and other big cities, but the spike in utilities swamped Fannie, Freddie and the insurers and threw the capital markets into panic

Soros and his ME Obamabacker buddies played it perfectly. Gotta give credit where credit is due