the United States, are YOU happy with or regret the choice that you have made? Why? Why not?
I trust the man's instincts. I do not regret the choice I made. There is no way that I could have lived with a milk-toast like Romney
"Milk toast," apparently we have different notions of what this means. I thought it meant, Milquetoast - a weakling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milquetoast.
Surely Obama's relationship with Putin....Never mind, you must be right, Romney would have been so much weaker. He often appears as boneless as a jellyfish.
<personal attack snipped> You need to move to Nigeria where he would be popular. You are clueless on what's happening to America!
Why Nigeria? He could very well be popular in Amsterdam for all we know.
I have no regrets. I trust his moral and ethical center, his instincts and his heart. If he has any flaw it's that he believes too strongly that people will make rational ethical decisions for the common good, when it's been proven to him that too many times people don't. A president can only do so much when people aligned against him are determined to destroy him, even if it means destroying the country in the process. That's on them, not him.
I'm not really sure what you mean by the United States current state of affairs. If you mean a growing economy, a slow down on the national debt, record profits on Wall Street, increased housing prices, low interest rates, the implementation of Obamacare, the death of bin Laden, the withdrawal of troops from Iraq and a philosophy of slow and steady wins the race...then yes, I am glad I voted for Mr. Obama.
What I am not happy about is a do nothing Congress that is only in session 126 days per year, while reaping huge benefits on the backs of U.S. taxpayers and yet telling the rest of us that our "entitlements" need to be slashed.
Congress has passed 41 Bills that loser Harry Reid has dumped. If you don't know who HR is, look it up and don't wait on the News Media to not tell you about these 41 Bills. If they don't line his pockets or they help America's Middle Class in any way they go in the trash can with Lois Lerner's emails!
You should talk to John Boehner and see what he has killed. You see if you point at one of the scumbags in a 16% approval rated congress it is like a doing forensics of a shotgun shooting in a Swiss cheese factory, you only have a victim with no suspects.
Happy is subjective. Could I have hoped for more progress, absolutely. I am never satisfied with the choices we are given to vote for as the two party system has a stranglehold on the ideology that is disconnected from the reality of the issues. I always joke that when I go into the voting booth I hold my nose and vote for the one that stinks less. Romney was too duplicitous on every issue and just said what people wanted to hear. I did not sense any direction other than a corporate sellout to spark the economy. He did not specifically outline anything and "promised" that if elected he would "fix" the economy. Rule number one is never to trust a politician who asks you to trust him. His campaign reminded me of the Kerry/Edwards debacle that when asked on "60 Minutes" what their message to the people was Edwards said "We just want to tell people what they want the hear". I voted Bush after that. Obama has made many missteps and trust has eroded further for me what with the scandals and lack of transparency. I took my lead about Romney from so many Republicans who hated him until he became the candidate and they switched overnight from their other desired candidate. It told me then it was more about the party than the issues.
Hope and Change. Obama is hoping he gets all your change and sinks America.
....Hope and Change. Obama is hoping he gets all your change and sinks America.
I understand the first part as it reflects taxing America to death which is not party specific but I get it. But the second part is kind of familiar among conservatives and I have to ask what could possibly be the motive for him to "sink America"? I have heard this over and over and it seems as if there is a hidden agenda to destroy the country. How is this the motive and what could possibly be the rewards?
Of course this question could have been phrased better, by not asking for an either/or answer or boiling it down to "happy" or "unhappy."
It's obvious now, even Mitt Romney recently admitted that he had his doubts about himself, and that he has no regrets about not being POTUS.
That is not to say that I've been delighted with Obama's decisions because he has indeed disappointed me often by his moderate and Bush-Lite decisions.
Nevertheless "the choice" was a no-brainer because this country has become "Pottersville" under the Republicans. What little Obama has done has at least kept some of the greedy oligarchs somewhat at bay.
And what can be more foolhardy than not wanting any government? There are plenty of countries today with no government, and I suggest those folks move to Africa or the Middle East—Syria for instance!
Btw, here's my proof, and a perfect example of what Americans have lost . . .
George Bailey's Speech to Potter & the Loan Board:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p … 4ne13Zft9Q
Your right. It took very little thought and no brains to elect a Dictator as Obama thinks he is needing no Government to keep him in line and make him actually do something! He is non committal to anything except demoralizing America and lying.
Great bravado in your assessment but do you have a few for instances to argue your point or is it just a bad case of acid indigestion that threw itself up all over the place?
Now you just have to stop this. You are infringing on the Curmudgeon's territory - a transgression that is not taken lightly! It is my job to call out the chuckleheads!
GA
I have absolutely no regret whatsoever, given the choices we did have. I also believe that the state we are in isn't a direct result of his actions alone. We tend to forget who was before him and the trillions of dollars spent on a war(s) that should have never been waged. Yes, he's made mistakes, but so has every other president in American history -:Nixon and Wilson just to name a couple.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0933935.html
The Cost of OIF, OEF have been intentionally inflated for the consumption of the poorly informed.
Forget the money, the arrogance and fear-mongering that destroyed so many lives is incalculable. The neo-con lies and the profiteering, all in the name of freedom, is even more despicable! Obama has nothing to be ashamed of!
Obama gets his share of blood and blood money. Given the current state of world affairs both of those totals will likely rise over the next two years. Obama has been a disaster and, to quote the Most Loved President Ever, Blessed Be His Name - Barrack Hussein Obama's favorite spiritual leader, those "chickens have come home to roost."
(add in the current twin embarrassments - an erased southern border[we still keep those dirty ignorant Canadians out] and the diminutive Vladimir Putin swinging his giant manhood at the world while Obama can't get his Viagra prescription refilled because his pharmacy doesn't take Obamacare)
http://www.examiner.com/article/war-pro … -on-terror
http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/ … 10196.html
http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/03/ … obama.html
http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/the … awlessness
Perhaps you are right. Obama may have nothing to be ashamed of, but America does. On the international stage this man is more hapless and incompetent than the clueless Jimmy Carter.
On the domestic stage it isn't shame Americans should feel, it is terror. This is the least restrained and most capricious President, ever, including FDR. He has the instincts of a communist strong man. You would think he and Putin would get along, being cut from the same cloth and all. His inferiority to Putin is obvious, even to his self absorbed mind, hence the irritation and snottiness.
There is no point in recounting the lies of Obama, they are too many and too varied to bother with.
The cost of Obama's duplicity in human life rises each day along the border, in Iraq, across the Middle East and now in Ukraine. The cost of Obama's incompetence rises exponentially as the economy is still hobbled by his cupidity.
The total cost of his dictatorial and narcissistic "excellence" is likely to keep the world in turmoil for decades. He has ended Pax American single-handedly in just 5 years and the brigands of the world know it as they satisfy their hegemonic ambitions.
http://danfromsquirrelhill.wordpress.co … barrassed/
You really must learn some degree of objectivity as your vitriol to collapse all of The Obama Boogeymans domains is quite clearly a subjective rant of exasperation to gain some validation.
Let the attacks begin.
Not so subjective and not necessary for validation.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/theoval/2 … /11985837/
Support for Obama is rooted in blind emotion. An objective examination of his words and actions demonstrate that he is at best an incompetent and liar, at worst a tyrant. As his final term draws to a close his cupidity will become obvious even to his most dedicated lovers.
Two things that ring out to counter your claims. One is that The Obama Boogeyman averted a sure depression when he came into office. Your boy Georgie made a hell of a mess and we are still cleaning up after this. We are looking at a ten year recovery as was predicted and the plus side of that is we are not standing in bread lines. When was the last time you ate dinner at a Salvation Army soup kitchen?
The other is that he has kept us out of wars and has actually ended one and is working on the other one even as we write. I know you think it cowardice to not send in the troops to defend our pride but I am glad he is hesitant because my sons are not fighting for some corporation to keep the mineral and oil rights in somebody else's country. As far as the other things like the ACA and such, there were other parties involved in blocking everything that he wanted to do. But I know you think he is acting as a Monarch autonomously setting policy and subverting the constitution but in reality he is acting for the good of the people with whatever tools he can..
Year after year the economy has shown minimal growth. It is likely to be 10 years because the government is a greater drag on the economy, thanks to Obama. Much like FDR's Depression, this one has been extended because government constructed economies are miserable economies. Look at the Chinese economy. As the Chinese government loosens its grip on the economy, that economy blossoms.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27631286
http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/30/news/ec … index.html
http://investmentwatchblog.com/bernanke … e-to-rise/
We aren't working, either. We are dropping out of the work force. We are opting for disability, transfer payments, draining retirement funds and EBT cards.
http://ycharts.com/indicators/labor_for … ation_rate
http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/
http://www.themainewire.com/2014/04/wel … r-workers/
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati … r/2832289/
Obama has specifically waged a war for oil and against increasing the oil supply from stable regions in favor of OPEC oil.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/162908/ob … -oil-libya
http://www.gaypatriot.net/2011/03/28/ob … r-for-oil/
Obama has expanded the war on Terror into Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Uganda and many more. Sometime waging war with troops, sometimes encouraging more war in the future through cyber and drone attacks. Keeping a list of people to murder.
http://obamas-wars.com/
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130 … tack.shtml
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world … ed%253Dall
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world … ed%253Dall
How about a list from Obama's Peace Prize application.
2010–11 – War in Iraq: Operation New Dawn, On February 17, 2010, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced that as of September 1, 2010, the name "Operation Iraqi Freedom" would be replaced by "Operation New Dawn". This coincides with the reduction of American troops to 50,000.
2011 – Libya: Operation Odyssey Dawn, Coalition forces enforcing U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 with bombings of Libyan forces.
2011 – Osama Bin Laden is killed by U.S. military forces in Pakistan as part of Operation Neptune Spear.
2011 – Drone strikes on al-Shabab militants begin in Somalia. This marks the 6th nation in which such strikes have been carried out, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen and Libya.
2011 – Uganda: U.S. Combat troops sent in as advisers to Uganda.
2012 – Jordan: 150 U.S. troops deployed to Jordan to help it contain the Syrian Civil War within Syria's borders.
2012 – Turkey: 400 troops and two batteries of Patriot missiles sent to Turkey to prevent any missile strikes from Syria.
2012 – Chad: 50 U.S. troops have deployed to the African country of Chad to help evacuate U.S. citizens and embassy personnel from the neighboring Central African Republic's capital of Bangui in the face of rebel advances toward the city.
2013 – Mali: U.S. forces assisted the French in Operation Serval with air refueling and transport aircraft.
2013 – Somalia: U.S. Air Force planes supported the French in the Bulo Marer hostage rescue attempt. However, they did not use any weapons.
2013 – 2013 Korean crisis
2013 – Navy SEALs conducted a raid in Somalia and possibly killed a senior Al-Shabaab official, simultaneously another raid took place in Tripoli, Libya, where Special Operations Forces captured Abu Anas al Libi (also known as Anas al-Libi)
2014 – Uganda: V-22 Ospreys, MC-130s, KC-135s and additional U.S. soldiers are sent to Uganda to continue to help African forces search for Joseph Kony.
2014 - Iraq: 2014 Northern Iraq offensive 500 U.S. troops, AH-64s, and unmanned drones deployed to protect the American Embassy in Baghdad and advise Iraqi forces.
Obama has specifically waged a war for oil and against increasing the oil supply from stable regions in favor of OPEC oil and, again, setting the stage for future wars.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/162908/ob … -oil-libya
http://www.gaypatriot.net/2011/03/28/ob … r-for-oil/
http://www.cfact.org/2014/01/21/obamas- … -s-energy/
Obama has a voice, a phone and a pen. He has NEVER worked with Congress, except when it was all Democrats. Obamacare passed into law without a single Republican Vote - PASSED INTO LAW. Every effort by the House dies in the Senate - that is the road block.[/color}
http://www.capitalisminstitute.org/obam … ol-orders/
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc … ss/244420/
http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/terence-p … ech-vowing
http://www.npr.org/2014/01/20/263766043 … s-it-alone
[color=blue] Monarchs typically have a vested interest in the strength of their country, if for no other reason than ego. Obama shows no such proclivity. Instead, his every decision is aimed at diminishing America. Few monarchies have been so poorly run without resulting difficulty.
http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/10/austr … te-agenda/
http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/18/anoth … anada-appr
http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/glo … s-faulted/
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com … tied-down/
Love is not just blind, it is apparently really stupid.
.....Year after year the economy has shown minimal growth.
Why is that? Could it have something to do with the fact that corporations are holding trillions in assets and refuse to hire or raise workers wages. Remember you have to have an income to have money to spend.
....It is likely to be 10 years because the government is a greater drag on the economy, thanks to Obama.
The government is trying to make up for the greatest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the rich in the history of the country. No president has had to deal with this type of greed perpetrated by your congress.
http://robertreich.org/post/72265646495
....Much like FDR's Depression, this one has been extended because government constructed economies are miserable economies.
Bought government economies is what you should say. With NAFTA and the TPP we have effectively been thrown out of our jobs and security in favor of foreign economies where labor is much cheaper.
....Look at the Chinese economy. As the Chinese government loosens its grip on the economy, that economy blossoms.
The Chinese haven't loosened any grip on their economy. They are just reacting to the global downturn perpetrated by the corporations. You are correct on one thing however. We are becoming more and more reliant on competing with a sub standard of living, in essence traded ours for theirs.
....http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27631286
.....Besides, the economy wasn't performing well in any case. The first estimate of GDP was stagnant due to bad weather. YOUR LINK
....Freezing conditions closed factories and construction sites as well as affected stores. YOUR LINK
I guess The Obama Boogeyman is in charge of the weather now?
....http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/30/news/ec … index.html
Bad link
....http://investmentwatchblog.com/bernanke … e-to-rise/
Bad link
....We aren't working, either.
No jobs might have something to do with that. Remember all those jobs going overseas to make us stuff we now can't afford?
....We are dropping out of the work force.
Being pushed out is a better term.
....We are opting for disability, transfer payments, draining retirement funds and EBT cards.
To make up for the lack of gainful employment
....http://ycharts.com/indicators/labor_for … ation_rate
Bad link
....http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/
Did these people get the Obama Boogeyman invitation to go on these programs. How has this happened? Maybe because many have been pushed to do jobs they cannot physically stand to handle as more and more jobs are becoming physical in nature as opposed to the office and professional work they used to do. The work force is getting older and many can't bare the two or three jobs it takes to make a decent wage. Being on disability must be a cake walk compared to what they used to do?
....http://www.themainewire.com/2014/04/wel … r-workers/
Bad link
....http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati … r/2832289/
Bad link
....Obama has specifically waged a war for oil and against increasing the oil supply from stable regions in favor of OPEC oil.
Oh yeah that one again. Read this.
http://www.nrdc.org/energy/keystone-pipeline/
We are on course to surpass Russia with the shale oil industry. That would be domestic. How much more stable can you get?
....http://www.thenation.com/blog/162908/ob … -oil-Libya
Bad link
....http://www.gaypatriot.net/2011/03/28/ob … r-for-oil/
Bad link
....Obama has expanded the war on Terror into Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Uganda and many more. Sometime waging war with troops, sometimes encouraging more war in the future through cyber and drone attacks. Keeping a list of people to murder.
How many troops are there currently in these countries? What better way is there to fight terror than with terror?
....http://obamas-wars.com/
I guess beating the deadline would qualify more?
....https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130 … tack.shtml
Bad link
....http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world … ed%253Dall
Bad link
....http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world … ed%253Dall
Bad link
....How about a list from Obama's Peace Prize application.
Good sarcasm but he was awarded the prize before any of this took place. He even stated how incredulous it was for him to get the prize after just getting into office.
....2010–11 – War in Iraq: Operation New Dawn, On February 17, 2010, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced that as of September 1, 2010, the name "Operation Iraqi Freedom" would be replaced by "Operation New Dawn". This coincides with the reduction of American troops to 50,000.
2011 – Libya: Operation Odyssey Dawn, Coalition forces enforcing U.N. Security Council Resolution 1973 with bombings of Libyan forces.
2011 – Osama Bin Laden is killed by U.S. military forces in Pakistan as part of Operation Neptune Spear.
2011 – Drone strikes on al-Shabab militants begin in Somalia. This marks the 6th nation in which such strikes have been carried out, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen and Libya.
2011 – Uganda: U.S. Combat troops sent in as advisers to Uganda.
2012 – Jordan: 150 U.S. troops deployed to Jordan to help it contain the Syrian Civil War within Syria's borders.
2012 – Turkey: 400 troops and two batteries of Patriot missiles sent to Turkey to prevent any missile strikes from Syria.
2012 – Chad: 50 U.S. troops have deployed to the African country of Chad to help evacuate U.S. citizens and embassy personnel from the neighboring Central African Republic's capital of Bangui in the face of rebel advances toward the city.
2013 – Mali: U.S. forces assisted the French in Operation Serval with air refueling and transport aircraft.
2013 – Somalia: U.S. Air Force planes supported the French in the Bulo Marer hostage rescue attempt. However, they did not use any weapons.
2013 – 2013 Korean crisis
2013 – Navy SEALs conducted a raid in Somalia and possibly killed a senior Al-Shabaab official, simultaneously another raid took place in Tripoli, Libya, where Special Operations Forces captured Abu Anas al Libi (also known as Anas al-Libi)
2014 – Uganda: V-22 Ospreys, MC-130s, KC-135s and additional U.S. soldiers are sent to Uganda to continue to help African forces search for Joseph Kony.
2014 - Iraq: 2014 Northern Iraq offensive 500 U.S. troops, AH-64s, and unmanned drones deployed to protect the American Embassy in Baghdad and advise Iraqi forces.
Once again. How do you fight terrorism? With terrorism. It has worked well so far AND we have been able to cut the budget in the process. A good bang for your buck solution don't you think?
....Monarchs typically have a vested interest in the strength of their country, if for no other reason than ego. Obama shows no such proclivity. Instead, his every decision is aimed at diminishing America. Few monarchies have been so poorly run without resulting difficulty.
That is the biggest bunch of crap you have offered so far.
....http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/10/austr … te-agenda/
Bad link
....http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/18/anoth … anada-appr
Bad link
....http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/glo … s-faulted/
Bad link
....http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com … tied-down/
Bad link
This is the last time I will faithfully run through your scripted links as they are a big waste of time and besides so many being old or bad links they only proffered opinion.
Every link worked for me. Every source is from Obama's term, so relevant to the discussion. Multiple sources and types of source were included to demonstrate the tapestry of Obama's miserable performance. The 2.9% drop in GDP may or may not have been caused by a difficult winter. How does a difficult winter cause so much economic havoc?
http://www.statista.com/statistics/1881 … ince-1990/
Who controlled Congress, where spending is authorized?
Were there any major world events?
2008 and 2009 were a wonderful cooperative effort by the current president while he was in the Senate and as a candidate, the Democrat controlled Congress and the dumbest man to ever be President - whose response to the banking crisis was supported by Obama- the smartest man to ever be president.
http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profil … iews/TARP/
Its okay, America is finished. The world is descending into the same kind of bloody chaos that accompanied the previous Dark Ages. I am just sad that my grandsons will have to live in a world without a strong America and in an America led by leftist weaklings and fascists government officials.
....Every link worked for me.
I must have the Obama Boogeyman anti computer then.
....Every source is from Obama's term, so relevant to the discussion. Multiple sources and types of source were included to demonstrate the tapestry of Obama's miserable performance.
We shall never know as not being able to verify you may be right. But I will bet none of the links demonstrate the blockade the GOP house has put on any progress in a congress with a 7% approval rating. You must remember this when the independents vote as all are not party stooges.
....The 2.9% drop in GDP may or may not have been caused by a difficult winter. How does a difficult winter cause so much economic havoc?
Your link not mine buddy! You mean there is room in there for doubt. What else do you doubt about your posts? The difficulty of the winter is explained in your link. Maybe you should read it again.
....http://www.statista.com/statistics/1881 … ince-1990/
Bad link
....Who controlled Congress, where spending is authorized?
When and .....what?
....Were there any major world events?
Once again Who, when?
....2008 and 2009 were a wonderful cooperative effort by the current president while he was in the Senate and as a candidate, the Democrat controlled Congress and the dumbest man to ever be President - whose response to the banking crisis was supported by Obama- the smartest man to ever be president.
So The Obama Boogeyman was supposed to do something different? Besides he had a democratic house to get it through. Unlike your discussion I don't collapse all their domains when something is either initiated or finished by someone I don't like.
....http://www.thepoliticalguide.com/Profil … iews/TARP/
Bad link
....Its okay, America is finished. The world is descending into the same kind of bloody chaos that accompanied the previous Dark Ages. I am just sad that my grandsons will have to live in a world without a strong America and in an America led by leftist weaklings and fascists government officials.
I believe very much we are in trouble but I don't happen to believe it is one source. The money that violates good sensible governing is what is at the core of the problem. Bought votes to further an individuals desires over the masses is corrupt and ishurting us everyday. Unless we take the money out of the decision making there is no chance of a strong America.
As I have read your past responses, it appears you think corporations are only in it for the buck, and I agree the buck is the purpose of a corporation, but this point of yours doesn't seem to make sense to me...
'Why is that? Could it have something to do with the fact that corporations are holding trillions in assets and refuse to hire or raise workers wages. Remember you have to have an income to have money to spend.
What does that have to do with your point? Why would a corporation hire if they did not have a need to fill that would make them more money? Do you advocate that they create jobs just for the sake of creating jobs? If they are in it for the money, why would they withhold trillions - if there was a productive use for those trillions that could make them more trillions?
You speak frequently against NAFTA and TPP, I don't see their affects as severly damaging as you do - maybe you could offer a little here's why clarification?
"Bought government economies is what you should say. With NAFTA and the TPP we have effectively been thrown out of our jobs and security in favor of foreign economies where labor is much cheaper."
But I do heartily agree with your "bought government economies" perspective.
"...The Chinese haven't loosened any grip on their economy...."
Really? My readings are quite contrary to this claim. Chinese government investments in business and its turning a blind eye to expanded entrepreneurship of it citizens and business entities seems to indicate the opposite. I followed your link, but it was about the U.S. economy, so maybe you have other data that proves your point?
"I guess The Obama Boogeyman is in charge of the weather now?"
Now that is a good one. I am anxious to see how that is responded to.
GA
....What does that have to do with your point? Why would a corporation hire if they did not have a need to fill that would make them more money?
Why indeed. The corporations ran an end game around the economic structure of the US by cutting out the increasing labor costs. They went overseas to labor pools that paid less than a quarter of the wages a US worker would have made here. Effectively raising their profit margins 3 fold they made the quick margins and sold out to larger corporations. A bonanza of profit in the short term. Now they are left with sagging sales as those that lost their jobs cannot support the economy as it was before. There for they won't hire anybody. My point was that they initially refused to hire and keep up with the natural progression of wage costs to make short term gains. Had they been satisfied with their market presence before they would have still been hiring as the business model made steady progress supplying people jobs that continued the economic cycle. Now the corporations are not hiring and holding on to the trillions I spoke of and will not spark any economic recovery because they have essentially run their hand out.
....Do you advocate that they create jobs just for the sake of creating jobs?
Not for the sake of creating jobs but for stimulating the economy. You may ask how they could maintain the loss of revenue by hiring US workers with no demand for their product? Hiring someone to have the money to buy your product is a start. As more corporations did so their sales would increase. What about their profit margin you may ask? It would suffer for awhile but a profit margin they would eventually make as the cost of the product is much less than the profit of selling it.
....If they are in it for the money, why would they withhold trillions - if there was a productive use for those trillions that could make them more trillions?
Greed comes to mind and a temporary loss of marginal gains is very unsavory to stock holders
....You speak frequently against NAFTA and TPP, I don't see their affects as severly damaging as you do - maybe you could offer a little here's why clarification?
NAFTA and the TPP effectively put the labor force of America out of work leaving us with low paying service oriented jobs. It reduced our capacity to earn enough to spend enough in our consumer based economic model. The recovery is slow as the housing market usually generated by a robust economy is nowhere near where it should be and other related industries are slow to growth.
....Really? My readings are quite contrary to this claim. Chinese government investments in business and its turning a blind eye to expanded entrepreneurship of it citizens and business entities seems to indicate the opposite. I followed your link, but it was about the U.S. economy, so maybe you have other data that proves your point?
I could not find the link that expressed my point as I wished in the last post but here is another one.
http://www.chinatoday.com.cn/english/ec … 434936.htm
My understanding is that the state run banking is the real indicator of where the freedom of lending and profit lies for the communists. There is a loosening being seen in the oil and gas industries as you say but the banking is still reticent to envelop debt as we have here in the west. Maybe they're onto something.....
Thank you for your thoughtful and productive questions.
An understanding of what world we are talking about is the first order of business. If we were dealing in the Utopian world where everyone is their brothers keeper, and all actions are first evaluated for their benefit to the whole - before their benefit to the few, then your perspective on corporate actions might be reasonable, but in the real world we live in, the lead-in below is wrong in so many ways...
"Why indeed. The corporations ran an end game around the economic structure of the US by cutting out the increasing labor costs. They went overseas to labor pools that paid less than a quarter of the wages a US worker would have made here...."
A corporation is a business. A business has the purpose of making money. (ps. making money is not unpatriotic). To the whole of your corporations condemnation I would ask... If it were your business, would you pay more for anything, labor, materials, rent, etc., than you had to? Would you be willing to lose your business in exchange for the satisfaction of feeling you were doing the 'right thing?'
As an additional ps., any business that is satisfied with the status quo is a business that is not progressing. Treading water in the business world is not an option.
"...Not for the sake of creating jobs but for stimulating the economy. You may ask how they could maintain the loss of revenue by hiring US workers with no demand for their product?..."
Those type of business concepts are called non-profits. I think you would be hard put to find any board of directors that make business decisions based on stimulating the economy rather than decisions made to boost profits and corporate stability - which is also not a bad thing.
How many people does GE employ - tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands? What if GE made corporate decisions based on Utopian ideals instead of real world circumstances and went out of business because of those decisions? Tens of thousands of jobs lost - is that a better choice than striving for profit?
"NAFTA and the TPP effectively put the labor force of America out of work leaving us with low paying service oriented jobs...."
You need to go back to the drawing board on this one. That is a bunch of party-line hoopla. A more researched and informed opinion would stand you in good stead in future NAFTA discussions. America was headed for a government employment and service industry employment economy long before NAFTA. NAFTA merely formally recognized the future that was coming whether we liked it or not.
Regarding your 'China' response; "...but the banking is still reticent to envelop debt as we have here in the west. Maybe they're onto something....." I stand by my original point, but you do make a good one here about aversion to debt. Maybe our banking system should take a peek under the hood and reevaluate their risk level tolerances.
GA
....A corporation is a business. A business has the purpose of making money. (ps. making money is not unpatriotic). To the whole of your corporations condemnation I would ask... If it were your business, would you pay more for anything, labor, materials, rent, etc., than you had to? Would you be willing to lose your business in exchange for the satisfaction of feeling you were doing the 'right thing?'
I am sorry if my explanations are short but at the risk of running into Hub length explanations I guess I have not been very thorough. My beef with the corporations has been the influence they have pedaled through political avenues. Large donations demanding results have played a significant part in passing legislation to create trade status through NAFTA and the TPP. The result has robbed the US of the mainstay jobs of the lower and middle class that are the largest chief consumers in this economy.
....As an additional ps., any business that is satisfied with the status quo is a business that is not progressing. Treading water in the business world is not an option.
I agree whole heartedly but to survive they must have a consumer to prosper. Their competition should be in the viability of their product and not result in the elimination of the consumer. Even Walmart is starting to feel the pinch with declining sales. Although some of it is explained by a harsh weather pattern the decrease of the food stamp program is hurting their sales. There is even feelers being presented to build smaller retail stores with much less inventory. Kind of a bigger 7-11 model.
http://www.9news.com/story/money/busine … 6/1880216/
....Those type of business concepts are called non-profits. I think you would be hard put to find any board of directors that make business decisions based on stimulating the economy rather than decisions made to boost profits and corporate stability - which is also not a bad thing.
To do this they must reduce their costs even more as the race to the bottom has to cater to those with less income and on some type of government compensation. The jobs to support the old models are disappearing in this race to the bottom.
....How many people does GE employ - tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands? What if GE made corporate decisions based on Utopian ideals instead of real world circumstances and went out of business because of those decisions? Tens of thousands of jobs lost - is that a better choice than striving for profit?
There is no Utopian ideal here as the consumer is what supports their companies. The consumer is going away slowly but surely as shelter and food become the basics to survive. The loss of the jobs has predicated the loss of sales and the employees of GE are consumers as well. It is spinning out of control until in the quest for wholesale globalization we will instead plummet into equalizing our standard of living with third world economies such as Viet Nam, India and the like. So how do you prop it up to not happen? Robert Reich is in favor of raising the minimum wage as a means to stimulate the economy because congress will never repeal the trade treaties to reverse this trend. I don't know if it will drive more manufacturing overseas laying off more workers as the corporations strive to squeeze that last ounce of profit out of their products or go under because no one will be able to support their business in sales. I think Walmart sees the writing on the wall and will downsize accordingly. I have heard that Target is considering similar movement.
....You need to go back to the drawing board on this one. That is a bunch of party-line hoopla. A more researched and informed opinion would stand you in good stead in future NAFTA discussions. America was headed for a government employment and service industry employment economy long before NAFTA. NAFTA merely formally recognized the future that was coming whether we liked it or not.
Sorry but for some odd reason you think the government did this because it was predestined? The corporations wanted this for a long time. They began their march to the massive amounts of slave labor way before Clinton and continue with Obama today. Why not when you can get an eight year old in Indonesia to stitch a soccer ball together for $0.15 and retail it for $85 to $115 in the US. America has always loved slave labor. It began in Jamestown, VA and continues in our third world labor pools.
....Regarding your 'China' response; "...but the banking is still reticent to envelop debt as we have here in the west. Maybe they're onto something....." I stand by my original point, but you do make a good one here about aversion to debt. Maybe our banking system should take a peek under the hood and reevaluate their risk level tolerances.
I respect your take on it as it does have some controversy. As far as China banking averting debt I think the eventuality is that it will succumb to the US system as soon all we will have to sell is weapons and debt.
A thorough explanation. Most of which I agree with, except your inclination to describe overseas labor as slave labor... a description I disagree with.
I think that would be a point which might make for a good discussion, so I will start a new thread on that question.
GA
I saw your posting the "slave labor" post and am anxious to see what the others think.
I refer to it as slave labor because to try and live on the wages paid in these overseas labor pools here in the US would be considered by many sub standard. But as I mentioned before the race to the bottom is a scary one as soon we may be looking at the consequences of eventually being equal to the other globalized economies. The average annual household income in China, converted to dollars, was $10,220, compared with $84,300 in the United States (the median US income is $47,300.). Are we headed there soon?
I understand your explanation, but you refuted your own point with this...
"I refer to it as slave labor because to try and live on the wages paid in these overseas labor pools here in the US would be considered by many sub standard."
Of course U.S. workers would consider that substandard - but that is an apples and oranges comparison. The real comparison would be to the regional standards - not a third world vs. first world comparison.
GA
....Of course U.S. workers would consider that substandard - but that is an apples and oranges comparison. The real comparison would be to the regional standards - not a third world vs. first world comparison.
Globalization has blown that out of the water. In an effort to maximize profit corporations want it both ways. Take from one economy and trade in the other while pocketing the difference. It is great on a personal basis if you can make it happen. But in globalization the difference needs to be made up somewhere. Loss of jobs erodes the US economy and the money and jobs going out of the country makes it a drain on trade within the country. For the foreign labor pool it is a Ponzi scheme as they must race to build up their consumer based economy to support what they are losing overseas (in this case the US). Right now on average in China workers make about a quarter of what their counterparts make in the US. In the Chinese economy that is enough to make them a middle class as you have surmised. The thing that changes the equation is that if we were on an equal trading plain then the Chinese worker would make the same as an American worker if this is truly fair trade. The lack of safe and healthy working conditions and numerous environmental catastrophes cleansed by the international borders make the Chinese worker a short lived commodity. As with our slavers in the 17th and 18th century the wages and conditions can be sub human as they were easily replaced when they became incapacitated by the conditions. They have no voice and their labor only is their ticket to survive.
Damn! Well said!
I disagree with a couple points, first the Chinese worker is making less than a tenth of a U.S. worker, and no, relative to the discussion of manufacturing factory workers, it does not make them middle class in their Chinese economy - but that is quibbling over details.
But your Ponzi Scheme analogy seems very apt.... live for today and to hell with tomorrow. Good one. I think it an apt description of the corporate mentality that sees only profit in overseas manufacturing.
Of course I will steal it - but maybe I will give you author's credits if circumstances warrant.
GA
....I disagree with a couple points, first the Chinese worker is making less than a tenth of a U.S. worker
I stated it was about on average a quarter of the rate of an American worker.
....it does not make them middle class in their Chinese economy - but that is quibbling over details.
No quibbling here. Maybe you are right but the study I can't find now may include rural statistics in their figures to average out the amount as compared to class status.
....Of course I will steal it - but maybe I will give you author's credits if circumstances warrant.
Plagiarize if you must but don't blame me when the flaming begins.
No Bid Obama.
http://www.algemeiner.com/2011/05/31/ob … -contract/
Lies? Some were the truth, but don't let reality dissuade you.
http://www.inquisitr.com/928699/scud-mi … from-iraq/
Since the 2010 Midterm Elections the US House of Reps have refused to fund Domestic Spending ( Unemployment, Food Stamps, Job Creation, Healthcare, and any and everything The President wants. The House embraced The Sequester and Austerity to balance the Budget, but has been willing to engage in war again in the Middle East and spend billions or trillions again to arm or support by any means people who feel America is the reason for their troubles. A balance budget and austerity has to take a back set when it comes to the promotion of The Military Industrial Complex and The Oil Industry. The President has been denied tax revenue and or a credit card to do what is good for the American people. To claim The Presidency a failure without actknowledging The Obstruction is where the lies are told.
Enjoy the end of America, I hope the popcorn is good, but, since it will be lefty government popcorn it will likely be bland, scarce and cold.
Ironic LOL! "The end of America" started with Reagan the snake-oil barker for the reactionary right!
Cool picture. Do you also feel drawing mustaches on the pictures of people you disagree with is the epitome of righteous statements?
ps. were you one of those kids that used your hands to make faces at people you did not like?
GA
Well GA, in all candor, presenting facts doesn't seem to work around here, while the lies and the propaganda from the Party of Resentment & Hatred just flows like Niagara in a rainstorm. Therefore, taking Mark Twain to heart (that " Against the assault of laughter, nothing can stand."), I try to channel my outrage in a healthy way with visual satire. Moreover it isn't a question of dislike or righteousness—which are your presumptions—it's a question of sharing opinions in a succinct and effective manner that jujitsus the blatant bile into humor.
That was a good answer. One which I would counter with two observations;
1) Yes, there are chuckleheads in this forum that are never concerned with facts. To them facts are secondary to rhetoric - but they are a minority, (even if a very vocal one). I have found that a little tenacious prodding to stay on topic has resulted in some excellent exchanges.
2) Your images leave a lot to be desired contextually, and as such are subject to easy rebuttal - leaving you looking less than informed on your opinions.
For instance; your 'Five Years' image. Do you really believe that those illustrated 'facts' could stand up to an honest scrutiny? With no context to explain the statement - it is too easy to refute almost all of those "'facts.'
And yes, whether it is your intention or not - posting those images does make you appear to be too self-righteous to honestly address the point you are ridiculing. So it was more of an interpretation than a presumption - is that the impression you wanted to convey?
Just sayin'
GA
Obama and Lefties will not and cannot cause The Fall of America. The insane greed and wealth of a few Americans can cause the Fall of America.
An unhappy person always seeks to blame others for their unhappiness, so my question is - why are you so unhappy? Six years ago the state of this country was no better off than it is now. If it was, then Bush would not have deemed it necessary to give everyone stimulus checks before he left office. So, I'm curious. Are you really unhappy with the state of this country? Or, are you unhappy with the face you see?
I appreciate that you are full of opinions.
I'm so glad that you can find it in yourself to appreciate something.
It doesn't matter (1a-1d) since they both, if not all, relate to recognition. We all have opinions, including you, and we all certainly should be adult enough to share them, ie appreciate them.
I believe you believe what you said and that's sad!
Sounds like you watch too much Fox News. You know that Politifact did a recent study on Fox News and determined that only 8% of what was said on Fox News could be considered true?
I'm sad for you that you're so negative toward the greatest President of the 21st century. Dow at 17,000. Month-over-month job growth for 5 years. 6.1% unemployment. Yearly deficit cut in half.
I'm pretty sure that there's literally nothing that Obama could do that the GOP would consider right. I mean, for God's sake, he took the GOP's own health care law and got it passed and now they hate that.
As if Politifact doesn't drip with political bias.
I believe that a very small percentage of super rich Americans control over 90% of America's wealth. Those few Americans holds the the future of the American economy in their hands, the rise or fall is their call. America has more kings and queens now then England had when the American people fought for life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Is it better to have a job to pay taxes or have no money to pay taxes or buy food or shelter. It is sad that some can't see whats has happened.
Impossible challenge:
Write an argument in favour of Barack Obama without referring to Mitt Romney, Republicans or the Tea Party.
Well just think, if it wasn't for the Tea Party, the GOP might actually be willing to work with Obama to get things done.
Obamacare predates the TEA party and was passed without a single Republican vote for the final bill. If it is the TEA party that is the sole reason for an impasse between Republicans and Obama, how is that possible. By the way, Obamacare is not the only example of that impasse.
Nice to see you again, Innersmiff.
Did you say, “Impossible challenge?” It is not an impossible challenge for the well informed. Folks opposed to the current administration need to realize that their negative views about the President are not shared by all, and to a much larger measure, not even by most.
The CBS News exit poll following the President’s re-election in 2012 revealed…
- “Sixty percent of voters who cast ballots on Election Day or earlier said the economy was the most important issue in their vote.” {1}
- Eighty-eight percent of Obama voters saw the economy was getting better.
- 27% of all voters said their family finances were better on Election Day than four years earlier.
- 42% of voters said Mr. Obama's response to Superstorm Sandy was a factor in their vote.
- 74% of Obama voters said the U.S. economic system favors the wealthy.
- 44% of all voters wanted to expand the Affordable Care Act or keep it as is.
- Only 9% polled thought that President Obama favors the rich.
The Pew Research Center adds even more knowledge…
- Since 1980, more than 56% of the Hispanic vote had been cast for the Democratic candidate. In 2012, the advantage was 71%, four points higher than in 2008, and almost matching President Clinton’s 72% in 1996.
- Among all voters, 65-percent said illegal immigrants should be offered a chance to apply for legal status.
- About 60-percent of all young voters supported President Obama. {2}
Some reasons, Innersmiff and Mr. Fiorito, why American voters favor Barack Obama without referring to Mitt Romney, Republicans or the Tea Party. In the final analysis, Obama bashers feel better when they ignore that governments are neither all good nor all bad but, rather, they are always some of both. To demand perfection is ludicrous. To only see the bad and to ignore the good is to choose to live half blind and in partial darkness.
{1} http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-575 … top-issue/
{2} http://www.pewhispanic.org/2012/11/07/l … -election/
I've noticed that even the left has found it extremely difficult to support the claims that "the economy is getting better", that the ACA will actually work, so have to shape their argument around how the Republicans would be worse. It's easy to tick a box in a poll, but can you actually present a compelling argument, with evidence? That's what I'm asking for.
I don't demand perfection, I demand no government at all. But I don't see how, from anybody's perspective, Obama could be seen than anything more than another Bush. He's a crony capitalist, imperialist and is ushering in a police state in the US. That's enough to be an 'Obama basher' for me. If it's not for you, you have extremely low standards.
Hello, Innersmiff. When you do not get the results you hoped for, change the rules!
The original “Impossible challenge”:
”Write an argument in favour of Barack Obama without referring to Mitt Romney, Republicans or the Tea Party”
I did that by showing you why American voters preferred Barrack Obama in 2012 but you choose to reject the public’s opinion as “not compelling” enough for you. How convenient!
So now you revised the challenge. “The left has found it extremely difficult to support the claims that "the economy is getting better…Can you actually present a compelling argument, with evidence? That's what I'm asking for.”
Here are “compelling arguments, with evidence,” without arguing “around how the Republicans would be worse,” that “the economy is getting better"…
… Dow and S&P 500 achieve new historical peaks on Aug. 1, 2013. The Dow rose from 6627 in Mar. 2009 to 15247 in Aug 2013. {1}
… US Unemployment rate has declined steadily from 10.0% in Oct 2009, from 9.0 % in Feb. 2011, from 8.1 % Apr. 2012, to 7.4% in Jul. 2013! July’s 7.4% is the lowest since Jan. 2009! {2}
… US Total YTD Domestic Car Sales (excluding imports) increased 10.1% over the same 7 months in 2012. {3}
GM, Ford, Chrysler Group, and Toyota, the nation's four largest automakers, had their best July since before the 2007 recession.
… New Privately Owned Housing Units Started in the United States during the first quarter of 2013 was greater than the same quarters in 2010, 2011, 2012 by 19% or more. {4}
… New Home Sales surged 8.3 percent in June 2013, the highest in five years, bringing the year to date percentage change to 28.4 % over 2012! {5}
… Retail Trade and Food Services: U.S. Total - Seasonally Adjusted - Sales reported in May 2013 exceeded every month going back to Jan. 2009! {6}
{1} http://www.djaverages.com/
{2} http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
{3} http://wap.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_30 … autosalesE
{4} http://www.census.gov/construction/nrc/ … etions.pdf
{5} http://www.census.gov/construction/nrs/ … ssales.pdf
{6} http://www.census.gov/econ/currentdata/ … t=GET+DATA
Presenting a list of results from polls did not satisfy the original rules. The challenge was to "write an argument" not "tick a box". Writing an argument and expressing an opinion are entirely different things.
But thank you for proving me wrong and presenting an argument without referring to any Republican. When I have time I shall attempt to refute it.
Greetings, My how Obama's numbers have changed in the very brief months since the 2012 elections and I will make a prediction, they will change even more drastically over the next months running up to January, 2016.
I deeply regret my choice. But did we really have a choice? It is our democracy where the choice lies between the hands of the two houses that perpetually fight to seize the power : the house of Republicans and the house of Democrats. At the end, lobbies win.
Very well said, AMFredenburg. I feel you, that was outstanding.
What a sad state of mind you must in, Quill, to search for such twists statistics to justify this Oval Office train-wreck. There is nothing about this fabrication of a president or his administration and policies that represents anything which approaches the description of " good for America".
Howdy Mr. Brown. So nice to hear from you once again.
I am not in a sad state of mind, Mr. Brown. Your unsupported criticisms in the face of documented facts speak to your state of mind and not mine.
What you call “twisted” statistics are merely uncomfortable facts that can not be ignored. When uncomfortable facts are ignored, misperceptions become a distorted reality. If the data I furnished is wrong, correcting the errors is more constructive then denying the truth.
I have noticed how “trainwreck” has become the favorite term of most critics without facts. Most Americans realize the “trainwreck” was the Great Recession of 2007-2008 and the country has recovered in most sectors under the guidance of the present administration. Those who refuse to acknowledge this recovery have only themselves to blame for their negativity.
I do not view the Obama administration with rose colored glasses. All is not perfect and many things could use some improvement. Still, I can see enough to know that it is not as bad as its worst critics claim that it is.
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday August 9 shows 48% of likely U.S. Voters approve of President Obama's job performance. {1} This fact must put a burr under the saddles of most Obama critics. If nothing else, it should cause some to question their perception of reality.
In addition, with all of the energy some spend bashing the current administration, these same folks seem to ignore a NBC/Wall Street Journal poll that found 83 percent of Americans disapprove of the job Congress is doing in Washington, an all-time high in the poll. Just 12 percent approve of Congress' job, while 57 percent said they would replace every member of Congress if they could. {2}
It appears that President Obama’s approval rating is significantly better than the GOP majority in the House of Representatives! I think about these facts every time I hear someone blame President Obama for all of the ills in this country.
Thank you, Mr. Brown, for sharing your opinions with us.
{1} http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ … cking_poll
{2} http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/2 … 42480.html
I don't have any regrets, I think things would still be worse if Romney was in office. @ Wayne Brown, it just may be a train wreck, but can you tell me how its any different from the Bush Administration "train wreck"? I agree with Maxoxam41, with both parties fighting for power, nothing will ever get resolved
I was pro Obama in his first election, but had an ideological shift before the second election. After giving things careful thought, I'm not sure a president is to blame for the situations we've been having. Every election we are forced into the "lesser of two evils" pushed out by two titanic conglomerates known as the democrats and the republicans. Ever since the advent of mass media, things have looked more and more like this: politician gives favors for PACs and bundlers, who give money and votes, politician gives money to commercials and media, who convert money into more money for themselves and more votes for the politicians. This means that favor will always go to large interest groups that are flush with cash.
Rarely, if ever, will the population at large receive favor from the political class. Why? Because giving the common person favor won't get you reelected. Getting a large interest group the policy you need will.
It's not about Obama, or Bush, or Romney, or whoever the next panderer is. This Obamacare bill is poorly written. Every small law has unintended consequences (heck, look at stand your ground). The amount introduced by a 10,000 page bureaucratic tome will be insane. But, that bill was going to win votes, so it was pushed through congress.
We need more diversity of perspective in the election process and just way less pay-for-policy all the way around.
Quilligrapher is lighting the anti-Obama folks up with facts.
I voted for the man and am happy I did so. In fact, I would think any woman would be happy about that since he supports women's rights. I think his stance on gay marriage will go down in history as one of those giant steps in equal rights even if it did come a little late.
Also, I'm happy with the improving economy, housing market, and stock market. All three of those things were very bad when he took over and it takes some time to turn around a ship as big as the United States.
I don't expect to admire or respect my politicians any more. Under any given set of circumstances they will all disappoint you. I just want the people I put in office to do what I want them to do. Obama has: revised health care and gotten us out of a decade of two wars. And getting Bin Laden was icing on the cake.
Besides, after the fiasco of the last one, he could hardly do worse.
And yet he has. He must be a man of genuine talent.
The healthcare reform alone makes it worthwhile. Getting rid of DADT is icing. Massive deportations and Guantanamo still there though.
There has been no healthcare reform. There has been medical insurance changes. How has the destruction of the existing system been an improvement when there are millions of people who had insurance who no longer have it. There are millions who were able to get medical care through a provider who can no longer treat them. When a reform results in more problems not fewer, how it was all worth it eludes the thinking person.
This is because it was never meant to succeed. The medical insurance providers wanted to remain in control so this is the solution. This is all headed to a single payer system as it is with many other countries. Obama had to take this step so the next one will be taken down the road when this no longer becomes feasible.
Howdy Retief. I hope you are enjoying your summer. Any vacation plans? I will be staying close to ye ole homestead this year.
I thought I might just jump in here to clarify a few of the omissions in your post above. Clearly, your posts are not in favor of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). To be honest, I really have no desire to change people’s opinions about the act but I care very much about the facts and the truth.
The healthcare delivery system in this country has not been destroyed and there is no reason to proclaim that it has. Some hospitals are reporting rising revenues due to a decline in self-paying admissions especially in blue states that opted to expand Medicaid.{1}
The negativity directed at the ACA often ignores all of the positive data coming from researchers, the insurance industry and the bipartisan Congressional Budget Office. They are, after all, in the best position to actually know how the ACA is really performing. Sadly, most complainers (not all) do not give any indication that they reference any of these resources.
For example, take this statement:
“there are millions of people who had insurance who no longer have it.”
Well, data gathered by the Rand Corp indicates this claim is not even true.
The Rand Corp. researched the overall net improvement in the number of uninsured persons after the close of the initial enrollment period on March 28, 2014. Regarding the “millions” that “had insurance who no longer have it,” the study found the number was actually less than one million and truly very small.
“Less than 1 million people who previously had individual-market insurance became uninsured during the period in question. While the survey cannot tell if this latter group lost their insurance due to cancellation or because they simply felt the cost was too high, the overall number is very small." {2}
Perhaps you know of another study that had other results.
As for the bigger picture, this study also documented the success of the ACA up to that point: “overall, the authors estimate that 9.3 million more people have health care coverage in March 2014, lowering the uninsured rate [nationwide] from 20.5 percent to 15.8 percent.” {3}
The negative statements continue but they are rarely accompanied by facts to support them. We have all heard the anecdotes about cancelled policies but as Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” Please tell us where you found data that says “millions who were able to get medical care through a provider who can no longer treat them.” Do tell us, please, how many “millions” were actually counted.
The final claim is the most difficult to logically justify.
“When a reform results in more problems not fewer, how it was all worth it eludes the thinking person.”
With all due respect, Retief, I must admit that the “thinking person” reference smacks of pure elitism. Surely, you can not believe that every “thinking person” who has considered the pros and cons of the ACA must agree with you. Who, exactly, determined that the ACA results in more problems and not fewer?
While I surely see problems, I see fewer problems then before, not more. Further, the fewer problems that I see have been tallied by the Rand Corporation. I see 9.3 million and ultimately 38 million fewer Americans starting in 2014 who are unable to have a primary care physician because they are uninsured. I see 9.3 million and ultimately 38 million fewer Americans starting in 2014 who will not receive regular wellness visits, tests, and screenings because they are uninsured. I see more than 5700 hospitals in the US {4} receiving benefit payments from insurers instead of having to write-off uncollectable bills from uninsured patients. Those who see more problems than before the ACA may just not be considering all of the problems that existed before. Just maybe.
Finally, your ultimate uncertainty is “how it was all worth it eludes the thinking person.” I submit for your consideration one answer from the bipartisan CBO net revenue statement for the ACA covering the decade 2015 - 2024: “The current projection is for a reduction in the [federal] deficit of $152 billion.”{5}
Always a pleasure to exchange facts with you, Retief. Stay well and never have to use your healthcare insurance.
{1} www.bizjournals.com/nashville/blog/2014 … l?page=all
{2} http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR656.html
{3} Ibid
{4} http://www.aha.org/research/rc/stat-stu … acts.shtml
{5} http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/ … Column.pdf p.22
Quilligrapher,
Love your responses, but aren't you fighting a losing battle?
After all, there are plenty of facts about evolution and climate change, yet that doesn't seem to sway those on the far right side of the political spectrum. It seems that no matter how many facts you put out there, they just say your facts are wrong, even when they're irrefutable ones.
When a Republican rolls around that treats women fairly, helps the middle class, wants individual rights for all groups including gay people, and believes in the separation of Church and State and keeps his religious views and his political views mostly separate, then I will seriously consider voting for him or her.
Is our costing hard working people jobs, emptying cities, and spending billions on Electricity and solar overpriced energy in a recession so folks like Al Gore can make millions (400 to be exact) more like a depression time going to change China, Spain, Greece, India, or the other countries that are much worse off than us????? If so how?
We need to protect ourselves, our borders, and our allies. That's what important now, right now! Russia is giving tanks and Jets to ISIL and that way more important than "Global Warming"!
The silence from our right-winged friends is palpabe. But I don't want to confound them with yet more facts because Quill is obviously the most eloquent regarding the verities of our recent history.
Nevertheless, I do want to share a point of view that I think might persuade any ideological zealot (on either side of the issues) to be more reasonable and less resentful of our President—and from a fellow Texan, no less! [ Mr. Brown ;-) ].
The reason I don't come around here any longer is that I have come to realize that America is a dysfunctional family that has overreacted to a devastating trauma—namely 9/11 and the unnecessary wars that followed it.
Americans have overcompensated in countless ways and the denials have kept our once united American family quarreling for the last decade with a them vs. us childish mentality. I simply don't want to be part of the problem any longer.
So I will now defer to that Texan, Brene Brown, a social researcher and educator in Houston. She comes from German-American stock and, as she states: "Texas programmed me to Lock & Load!" when it comes to family and socio-political matters. Her Ted Talk went viral with almost 16 million hits.
Her basic premise is that our vulnerabilities are the keys to self-understanding and living a joyful and creative life. If we still wear the mental armor that we assume will protect us from yet more trauma, that causes us to be unyielding and resentful, then we will destroy any chance of a life well lived in love and sharing.
If you have 15 minutes and an open mind, you'll find this amusing and insightful . . .
http://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_on_vulnerability
You're very welcome, Quil. An the word above was meant to be: palpable, not "palpabe."
I wonder what she thinks of the promised attacks of the newest threat from the Muslim group Isis. Most reports say the Taliban and Isis will be in competition for destruction before long.
I'm not sure what you are trying to imply with your question, Sed-me. Can you be more specific?. Did you view her Ted-Talk talk? What are your thoughts and opinions about the issues she brings up? Do they apply or do you think they don't and why?
Actually I'm not sure there were any implications with my question.
You had talked about 911, you seemed to think America overreacted in response? I'm not sure what reaction you expected. Then you talked about Brown and how she gave a talk on sociopolitical matters... how the premise was that vulnerability is the key to a happy life. Did you not intend for the reader to connect 911, America's overreaction, and Brown's talk on vulnerability? I connected them, b/c they were concurrent... so I wondered allowed what she would think of the new threat, that being Isis. Would she prefer us to be vulnerable? Or maybe you meant something else entirely.
Thanks for responding, Sed-me and I do mean something else. In all candor, I still can't tell if you were (and still are) implying that vulnerability equals "defenselessness, "powerlessness," and "helplessness." Personally, I think there is an important distinction, and it has to do with the experience of fear and trauma.
I think America lived (and still lives, to some degree) in a bubble of ignorance (as in to ignore) and self-preoccupation; and to some degree accounts for our overreaction to 9/11 and terrorism.
So I just sense that the fear and trauma has morphed into our dysfunction, the way a family can become dysfunctional when the various family members stop communicating and squabble amongst themselves because each member is filled with a kind of PTSD that destroys relationships.
America is still dysfunctional after thirteen years, while the blame and fear-mongering continues to keep us all in a spiritual malaise and a bubble of anger, mistrust and in denial of the truth. This is hastening America's decline, IMHO.
The Republican junkyard-dogs always hear their master's whistle . . .
http://billmoyers.com/2014/02/27/ronald … -speeches/
If the Republicans would just get back to being the party of small government, they would wipe the floor with the Democrats.
But no, they're the party of social control and religious extremism and theocracy.
OMG! More cute images instead of dialog? But you aren't going to trick me into defending Perry, even if your image is a silly composite.
I bet you are a texter instead of a vocalizer too - aren't you?
GA
"Brevity is the soul of wit." - Polonius, Hamlet Act 2 Scene 2
Gee, GA, did my Karma run over your Dogma again?
Nope, My Dogma was flattened a long time ago - about the same time I realized there are few instances where cute was an appropriate substitute for substance.
GA
In this type (forums) political dialog cute often provokes more thought politically than the dialog.
GA, as much as you seem convinced that "The Truth" is whatever you happen to be thinking at the moment, I'm still not quite sure why you've made it your mission to insult my postings—unless, of course, they get under your skin because they subvert your own propaganda and self-important opinions—to which you are of course entitled.
So thank you for your criticism and I will try not to be so "cute" in the future.
Oh my! You are so far off-base that the left fielder is able to tag you out at first base..
I never claim to know the truth, (unless I am positive of my opinion), I only claim that my opinions are based on as much information as I can find.
I hope I am not frequently wrong, (because it means I was too lazy to learn more), and I don't like to be wrong, but I usually appreciate when I have been shown that I was wrong - because it means I learned something and will not be the same wrong again.
So you can take your "The Truth" perspective and... reevaluate it.
My comments about your images were not intended to be insulting - they were intended to be snarky criticisms - for reasons already explained. I guess in this case it's a little bit like superb sarcasm - sometimes it gets missed.
I truly hope you are wrong about your evaluation that I espouse propaganda and believe in my self-importance. Those are two of my favorite targets, so I can only hope I am not the kettle calling the pot black.
But on a serious note, about your images... yes I criticized them and your repeated usage of them. If you want to convey such extreme opinions as the types of images you use portray - why would you have a problem discussing them? Why would you feel insulted when someone says they think they are silly?
Instead of posting and discussing an opinion, your use of such images reminds me of a guy that makes what he thinks is a great come-back line, and then looks to the choir, (his like-minded buddies), to give him high-fives and woot-woots for his cool wit.
Are you afraid to discuss the context or truth of the sentiments your images express? Is feeling insulted a safer outlet than defending them?
But the bottom line is my intentions were not to insult you. One of is wrong on that issue.
GA
Thank you for your snark, and for your smug challenge, GA, but I have no interest in wasting my time mincing words with yet another self-satisfied ideologue who likes to boast about how well informed he is. However, if you'd care to learn Photoshop and challenge me with your own original attempts at political cartooning, I'd certainly welcome the encounter.
It might even help with the obvious problem of verbosity in your writing.
Hmm... Smug, self-satisfied, ideologue, boastful, self-determined to be well-informed... Damn, I must be one hellava guy.
I do do a little photoshopping, (although I use Corel), but not for the purposes of political cartooning. I also wouldn't think of challenging you in that area - your technical expertise is obviously well above mine. However, it is your "photoshop" thinking that I was challenging, not your pixel manipulation abilities.
ps. you added about 20 extra years too much - gimme a break, I don't look that bad. I haven't even graduated to cane yet - much less walker or wheelchair.
pss. but you did nail me on the " verbosity" charge, it is a habit I can't seem to break - always trying to explain what I am saying so as to preclude any misunderstandings or false assumptions.
GA
Be nice Relief2000, ideology is seldom realistic.
GA
As a my philosophy professor, a Catholic Priest, once said, "there are no points for nice."
Thanks for the recognition of skill, GA, but satire is satire and if you appreciated my "thinking," I wouldn't be doing my job.
The fact that you, as you claim, "challenge" my views (or "thinking" as you put it) speaks to the cartoons' efficacy to subvert your own (which you obviously feel are sacrosanct), and it seems, get under your skin, somehow. I don't expect you to admit to this, of course.
Nevertheless, and unlike you, I don't criticize you for holding or expressing your own views and opinions—as I mentioned above, it's your right and I respect that. You don't accord me the same deference.
ummm. Sure, that's the ticket.
It appears you misunderstood my point, so you can be right - it's OK with me.
GA
I have no idea what that sentence means!
I agree, Politifact has a bias. They seem to dislike lying.
Let's see...a better economy, more people working (he created more new jobs in 2010 than G. W. Bush did in 8 years), the stock market is booming, we are out of Iraq, Osama Ben Laden is dead, Republican-created deficit cut in half, more Americans have healthcare, more illegals deported than any president in history, foreign countries have a more favorable view of U.S., Executive Branch more physically responsible, his policies have stabilized the housing market, saved more than one million auto industry jobs, he provided tax credits to first time home buyers, pushed through more wall street reforms than any other president since the Depression, and on, and on.
Thank God Obama was elected.
Like someone said, "Voters elect Democrats to clean-up the Republican messes".
by Grace Marguerite Williams 9 years ago
Has the United States become better or worse since President Obama and why?
by David 12 years ago
Why did Mitt Romney lose the election?Why do you think he lost? Was it his policies, VP, Sandy or???Let's please keep this political and not get into name calling or other non-productive things.
by taburkett 10 years ago
What is your opinion of President Obama stating that the current Administration scandals are Phony?Does this statement present a distraction to the public? Does it show that the President has little concern for the truth? Does it echo the same illogical rhetoric as that used to hide...
by Sychophantastic 8 years ago
Apparently a lot of Republicans think so. Here are the results of an NBC News poll:A recent NBC News Survey Monkey poll found that a whopping 72 percent of Republicans have doubts about Obama's citizenship and 41 percent are emphatic that he was foreign born. Meanwhile, 31 percent are unsure if he...
by Beth Perry 5 months ago
How did President Obama get the scar on his skull?A few times over the last months when the President is on television I've noticed a scar on his skull. A friend suggested he may have had an accident in his youth but I haven't heard about any accident he experienced so am still curious. Does anyone...
by Jack Lee 7 years ago
It has been almost a year since he left office. Though he seems to stick around DC and make his comments occasionally about policies...The question I have for all is this - what is your opinion of this President in his 8 years in office...?Overall, has he been good or bad for America?Please use...
Copyright © 2025 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2025 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.
For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy
Show DetailsNecessary | |
---|---|
HubPages Device ID | This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons. |
Login | This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service. |
Google Recaptcha | This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy) |
Akismet | This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy) |
HubPages Google Analytics | This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy) |
HubPages Traffic Pixel | This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized. |
Amazon Web Services | This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy) |
Cloudflare | This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Hosted Libraries | Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy) |
Features | |
---|---|
Google Custom Search | This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Maps | Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Google Charts | This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy) |
Google AdSense Host API | This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Google YouTube | Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Vimeo | Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy) |
Paypal | This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Facebook Login | You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy) |
Maven | This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy) |
Marketing | |
---|---|
Google AdSense | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Google DoubleClick | Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Index Exchange | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Sovrn | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Facebook Ads | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
AppNexus | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Openx | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Rubicon Project | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
TripleLift | This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy) |
Say Media | We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy) |
Remarketing Pixels | We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites. |
Conversion Tracking Pixels | We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service. |
Statistics | |
---|---|
Author Google Analytics | This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy) |
Comscore | ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy) |
Amazon Tracking Pixel | Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy) |
Clicksco | This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy) |