Insights for the Thinking Voter

[PoliticalChic]

“ But the internal messages revealed for the first time the high level of White House interest in the startup and its faltering finances after the Energy Department backed it with $535 million in loans…. Obama: It went through the normal review process and people thought this was a good bet.”

It's easy to make bets with other peoples money when you're a Banker or the President isn't it?

1. "...people thought this was a good bet."
That was a lie, doc....

....not only the Bush administration, but his own supporters told him not to do it....

2. ...when you're a Banker...

Bankers who make bad bets lose their jobs.
Presidents?
Watch this space for further developments in November.

 

[PoliticalChic]

...

Insights from PoliChick?

And can spot neurosis, plus other illnesses without an exam. More of a super hero than an online poster.

Both?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Yes, good old boy Bush would never have cronyism(black water) in it's administration, or would Bush ever lose money(4 billion lost in Iraq) on a venture , be it private or public.

Why are you guys sooooooo afraid to center the debate on Obama.....

....I believe I know.


Deep down....you know what a mistake you've made....and the Bush stuff is your way of apologizing to the nation.

Am I right?

Confession is good for the soul.

 

[Moonglow]

try Reagan and the Star War program and all the billions given out for a technology that didn't work.

How about we 'try' Obama?

Still afraid to deal with the OP?

In the words of the famed Brown Bomber: you can run, but you can't hide.


But....in your case, hiding won't be a bad idea.

Obam has done nothing differnet than any other president, yet you make sure all you know about is how bad Obama is, well here's an insight, you should see things for what they really are and not just a democrats are wrong all the time versuus republlican sainthood.
both sides do it, if you ***** about Obama you should ***** about all that have done it. Try going aginst the act itself and not just a certain political party.

 

[Moonglow]

Yes, good old boy Bush would never have cronyism(black water) in it's administration, or would Bush ever lose money(4 billion lost in Iraq) on a venture , be it private or public.

Why are you guys sooooooo afraid to center the debate on Obama.....

....I believe I know.


Deep down....you know what a mistake you've made....and the Bush stuff is your way of apologizing to the nation.

Am I right?

Confession is good for the soul.

gfy

 

[PoliticalChic]

“...people thought this was a good bet.”

It's easy to make bets with other peoples money...

--and placing bets is always easier for someone with no money sense. Like, someone who's never run a business but rather has spent his years as a career 'community organizer'.

Gambling is for losers. The market place is for adults.

Now....hold on for one cotton-pickin' minute there, ape-boy!!!

Unless I miss my guess....you're callin' this President a LOSER???????


Why I never....not for the last two minutes at least.....

 

[PoliticalChic]

so in other words you dislike capitalism and believe all companies are to big to fail. Obama has not done much if anything different except getting national healthcare which has been debated since the 1940's

"... in other words ..."

Why any other words.....mine are pretty good.
Is there some reason you can't deal with the argument I've made, you need to
change the debate?
Don't be afraid to try to rebut the OP....

...unless you can't.


Wise up, little fella.....

Let’s see how much the Obama administration learned from the Solyndra debacle...

“Learning nothing from the Solyndra crackup and the many other green-energy failures, the White House, also last week, handed out an $852 million loan guarantee to the Genesis Solar Project in California. This 1,950-acre slice of federal land in Riverside County filled with parabolic solar panels is supposed to produce enough power — 250 megawatts — to light, heat and cool more than 48,000 homes.” Obama gives out new $850 Million Loan Guaranty to another Cali Solar Company

The $1-billion Genesis Solar Energy Project has been expedited by state and federal regulatory agencies … Instead, the project is providing a cautionary example of how the rush to harness solar power in the desert can go wrong — possibly costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars and dealing an embarrassing blow to the Obama administration's solar initiative.”
Problems cast shadows of doubt on solar project - Los Angeles Times

Good thing you were not at the head of NASA when astronauts were killed during launch, why you would shut them down for failure.

Maybe you missed this......

"President Barack Obama?s 2011 budget request has effectively shut down NASA?s five-year effort to return astronauts to the moon, leaving the U.S. space agency with lofty goals ? but no firm deadlines ? to once again send humans beyond Earth orbit.

The budget request, released today, would scrap NASA?s Constellation program to build the Orion spacecraft and Ares rockets for new manned moon missions ? a $9 billion investment to date. The request calls for $19 billion in funding for NASA in 2011, a slight increase from the $18.3 billion it spent in 2010."
Obama Budget Scraps NASA Moon Plan for '21st Century Space Program' | Space.com


And, in a related story:

NASA's Muslim Outreach
By Mona Charen
It's not really surprising that President Obama told NASA administrator Charles Bolden that his highest priority should be "to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering." It fits with so much that we already knew about the president.
RealClearPolitics - NASA's Muslim Outreach


Jeezz....after November, I don't know what we're gonna do for comic relief without this President.....

....promise me you'll still be here!

 

[PoliticalChic]

try Reagan and the Star War program and all the billions given out for a technology that didn't work.

Try Obama.....

....btw....did you hear that Obama has this solar power fetish that he stokes with taxpayer money...
....and uses it to pay off supporters, as well.

True story.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It's easy to make bets with other peoples money...

--and placing bets is always easier for someone with no money sense. Like, someone who's never run a business but rather has spent his years as a career 'community organizer'.

Gambling is for losers. The market place is for adults.

Now....hold on for one cotton-pickin' minute there, ape-boy!!!

Unless I miss my guess....you're callin' this President a LOSER???????


Why I never....not for the last two minutes at least.....

Yawn...burp...Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Arrogant, self righteous and boooooring.

 

[PoliticalChic]

try Reagan and the Star War program and all the billions given out for a technology that didn't work.

How about we 'try' Obama?

Still afraid to deal with the OP?

In the words of the famed Brown Bomber: you can run, but you can't hide.


But....in your case, hiding won't be a bad idea.

Obam has done nothing differnet than any other president, yet you make sure all you know about is how bad Obama is, well here's an insight, you should see things for what they really are and not just a democrats are wrong all the time versuus republlican sainthood.
both sides do it, if you ***** about Obama you should ***** about all that have done it. Try going aginst the act itself and not just a certain political party.

"....you should see things for what they really are...."


Attention shoppers! Blue light special!

We have a winner in the category of "Unintentional Humor"

And the winning entry is ......


"...you should see things for what they really are..."



You can pick anything from the second shelf....I'd say the top shelf, but you couldn't reach that one.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Yes, good old boy Bush would never have cronyism(black water) in it's administration, or would Bush ever lose money(4 billion lost in Iraq) on a venture , be it private or public.

Why are you guys sooooooo afraid to center the debate on Obama.....

....I believe I know.


Deep down....you know what a mistake you've made....and the Bush stuff is your way of apologizing to the nation.

Am I right?

Confession is good for the soul.

gfy

I knew the real you would surface.

You have real class.
The class is kindergarten.

 

[PoliticalChic]

oooh, I feel so enlightened now.

Fibber.

 

[edthecynic]

More long distance diagnoses? I think Frist has a copyright in that area.

So...do you find him to be an ideologue?

i·de·o·logue/ˈīdēəˌlôg/
Noun:
An adherent of an ideology, esp. one who is uncompromising and dogmatic

Fits pretty well, huh?


neu·ro·sis/n(y)o͝oˈrōsis/
Noun:
A relatively mild mental illness that is not caused by organic disease, involving symptoms of stress (depression, anxiety) but not a...
(in nontechnical use) Excessive and irrational anxiety or obsession.


Seems I hit the nail on the head.

Got one more for YOU

Psychological projection
A psychological defense mechanism where a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other people.

 

[Widdekind]

Since 1980, Public-sector government price-levels have soared above private-sector business (investment) price-levels. Dollars go twice as far in the latter, as the former. Discussing services, too, Newt Gingrich contrasted the "world that works" with the "world that fails", citing improved quality of services offered by the private-sector. Savings (S) and Investment (I) would more plausibly improve the US economy, than Taxes (T) and Government expenditures (G):

 

[PoliticalChic]

Since 1980, Public-sector government price-levels have soared above private-sector business (investment) price-levels. Dollars go twice as far in the latter, as the former. Discussing services, too, Newt Gingrich contrasted the "world that works" with the "world that fails", citing improved quality of services offered by the private-sector. Savings (S) and Investment (I) would more plausibly improve the US economy, than Taxes (T) and Government expenditures (G):

John Lott has an interesting article on austerity....I may put it up later if I have time...

From same:
"Austerity" may be a bad word to some politicians, but the countries that followed Keynesian policy have a trifecta of problems: poor GDP and job growth, plus they've left their citizens with massive debts to pay off. Government spending doesn't increase wealth, and it needs to be stopped before Europeans dig themselves an even deeper hole.

 

[Wiseacre]

Here you go, PC, a link to the John Lott piece I think you referenced:

RealClearMarkets - Austerity Works: It's Time to Give It a Try


another snippet:

Using the latest Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) data for all 32 countries that it is available for, there's a strikingly clear relationship. The countries with the largest stimulus programs suffered the most during the recessions. The more they increased spending or the more they increased their deficits, the worst they did.

Countries such as Ireland, Iceland, Estonia, Spain, and the UK dramatically increased per capita government spending, boosting it by 14.5 to 48 percent. Those nations also suffered the biggest drops in GDP, contracting on average by a total of 4.4 percent between 2007 and 2010. The share of their working age population that was employed fell by an average of 6.6 percent.

The most frugal countries, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Israel, Poland, Sweden, and Switzerland, let per capita government spending either shrink or grow much more slowly, ranging from -1.5 to 7 percent. The result? Per capita GDP actually grew by an average of 7 percent over the three-year period. These countries also saw the share of their working age populations with jobs grow. The results are not dependent on Ireland and Iceland being included, and also regressions show that increased government spending reduces the next year's GDP growth and employment.

 

[expat_panama]

...placing bets is always easier for someone with no money sense. Like, someone who's never run a business but rather has spent his years as a career 'community organizer'. Gambling is for losers. The market place is for adults.

...you're callin' this President a LOSER?...

OK, he's only a loser and I apologize for calling him a "community organizer". I have to admit that was way over the top.

 

[PoliticalChic]

...placing bets is always easier for someone with no money sense. Like, someone who's never run a business but rather has spent his years as a career 'community organizer'. Gambling is for losers. The market place is for adults.

...you're callin' this President a LOSER?...

OK, he's only a loser and I apologize for calling him a "community organizer". I have to admit that was way over the top.

Hear that sound?

That's Alinsky spinning.....

 

[Widdekind]

According to online data from the World Bank & Penn World Tables, from 2001-2009, Fiscal Stimulus (net government spending, G-T) was weakly, and negatively, correlated to job growth. Increasing spending, and decreasing taxing, tended to occur with falling employment rates, in Britain, Ireland, and Germany. For example, in Britain & Ireland, increasing net spending from 2008-2009 coincided with spiking unemployment:

Perhaps more recent data, from the aftermath of 2008, would support Fiscal Stimulus, in different economic circumstances? FS is only alleged to be appropriate, in very particular circumstances (recession (no spending) with low interest rates (no private borrowing, to restart spending)).

 

[Widdekind]

Inexpertly, Fiscal Stimulus is net government spending, i.e. government spending (G) less taxes (T). Rising government spending, alone, is not FS, if accompanied by rising taxes. So, showing that rising government spending, alone, did not generate jobs in Europe from 2007-2010, is not (directly) relevant, to the issue of FS.

EDIT: On further inspection of cited data, year-to-year changes in UE (%) are uncorrelated with changes in G (% GDP); and are weakly correlated to changes in T (% GDP). For, when UE decreases, more workers are earning more money, and paying more taxes, in a booming economy, paying yet more taxes. Thus, rising employment tends to occur with rising tax revenues. Thus, in comparing UE vs. G-T, UE is oblivious to G, and rises when T falls (which makes net government spending, G-T, rise). So, UE winds up being correlated to Fiscal Stimulus (G-T); or, E is anti-correlated to FS. So, the data seems to show that FS does not boost E, and does not reduce UE, but in fact the reverse. That particular impression may not imply, that FS is always bad, even in recessions. Keynes did not suggest FS as a general yearly spending strategy.