• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama is fighting for something

Straw, I said "control", the fed does not control the stock markets, there is not a 1 to 1 relation to interest rates/money supply and the indices. There have been crashes without fed moves, again, not 1 to 1.

Weird, now you are back to using "control". No, the POTUS can influence the FED decisions, he can put his man or woman in charge, he can ask that they use their influence to effect credit/banking stabilization, interest and money supply.

Sorry, I missed the part where you showed it to be false.

Actually, they are up since the bottoming of the Bush Recession.

Good grief, here you are, Mr. Oil, asking me to educate you on the history of US oil corporations.
Hint: Look it up for yourself.

This is the typical denier response still not coming to term with the depths of the Bush Recession.

Now I see why you don't know about the early history of oil industry subsidization (and probably not the current amounts either), it is because you don't read what is in front of you. Here, let me repeat and see if you get it the second time:

Detroit saw massive declines in 2000 in manufacturing and along with it massive declines in population with some of the highest levels of unemployment. Manufacturing in the US has tumbled in the same time period, unions existed long before 2000. Find a better meme.


PS....I see you have abandoned the whole "Has anyone heard of, seen, read anything about the Earthquakes, the ground water pollution and the horrors of Fracking that Obamabots are are complaining about" meme.

Was not that the a main argument point along with the denial that oil deposits are not an act of "god"?



Everything you are saying is word games and proof that you don't seem to understand words.

I was only responding to what your delusional rants have touched on. Have you heard of any of the things highlighted in red cropping up in NoDak?
 
You folks who complain so loudly about the Federal Reserve's involvement in the marketplace, particularly the bond market, really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

First off, the Federal Reserve has long had control of the prime interest rate on Treasuries - government bonds whether savings bonds, treasury bills or treasury bonds. The reason the interest rate on bonds has remained low is because the money supply isn't tight right now. No, I'm not referring to the government printing press. I'm referring to flow of U.S. currency on the open market. Doubt me? Read this article from news.comau, "US shares soar to record high," dated August 2, 2013.

QE is necessary in order to keep the revenue stream going at the Treasury considering how the GOP won't raise taxes on those who could afford to pay more or remove tax loopholes as they promised one year ago in the run-up to the 2012 presidential election. I mean, it was such a good, acceptable plan when their guy, Mitt Romney, endorsed it as the GOP presidential candidate. But suddenly now that Pres. Obama was re-elected, they've hedged on the idea.

Folks are right to complain about joblessness. The GOP is also correct when they suggest that the best and possibly the fastest way to replenish revenue in the Treasury is for more people to be employed and, thus, pay federal income taxes. It's the multiplier effect in full taxation mode! But when these same people do everything they can not to spur job growth, it's kinda defeatist to talk about job growth on the one hand yet do everything possible not to approve those measures that would incentivize hiring and thus, spur job growth. But how about this as an alternative...

Don't want to pay higher taxes on the rich? Don't want the rich to lose tax loopholes! Don't want the government to raise the minimum wage rate? Then the rich should pay higher wages and let the people decide what to do with their earnings - spend it as consumption calls for, splurge and take on more debt also as consumption calls for but through the credit markets or invest it!! Now, there's an idea!!!



Higher or lower wages are the outcomes of tighter or looser job markets.

If there are fewer jobs for the job seekers to find, then the wages paid for those jobs will drop. In effect, many, many job seekers are reducing their bid and therefore increasing their value to make themselves available for the work to be done.

This is not different than "bidding" a job to have a project in your home completed. If 20 plumbers all want to install your toilet, you get to pick the one that is best and cheapest. This is what employers are doing right now; getting the best workers at the cheapest rate they can.

When the economy booms and the jobs outnumber the applicants, then the wages offered soar to attract the best applicants.

If the government would get out of the way and allow Fracking and the pipeline, the work available would be expanding and the number of workers needed would rise. To attract the best workers, the companions hiring would need to raise the wages.

In the Democrat strong holds across the country, the McDonalds workers are striking for $15.00 an hour. In North Dakota, the McDonald's workers are being paid $15.00 an hour and no strike is needed.

See how it works? You are now a graduate of Economics 1-101
 
Last edited:
And do you understand why that happened? The answer is simple: If you raise the interest rate on bonds while the money supply is still fluid, people will begin to migrate to those investment vehicles that stand to yield them the fastest rate of return. In short, they'll start shorting the markets - speculating - looking for a quick buck.

QE is the result of the work of the Federal Reserve. Are you saying that the president controls the Federal Reserve, another crime by the president?
As stated above, the Fed Resv controls the interest rate on Treasuries. So, you are correct where QE is concerned. But just for emphasis, the President has absolutely nothing to do with QE. The Fed Chairman may advise him on such matters where economic policy/conditions are concerned, but the decision whether or not to raise the interest rate on government bonds is the responsibility of the Fed Resv.


Oh, brother...can we stop with the hyper-partisan absurdity already?



Apparently, you glossed over the title of the chart, "Onshore Federal lands sought by oil and gas industry for leasing, 2006-2012". Clearly, the chart is in response to an earlier poster who questioned the Obama Administration's approval of domestic oil leases. Granted, the numbers are down compared to where they were in 2009 and especially since 2006, but as the chart clearly illustrates such leases have been on the up-swing since 2010.


And you blame President Obama for all that? Really? Oh, no...you don't blame him for creating the mess...just not cleaning it up fast enough. Ah...got it. Because acknowledging the truth of who caused most of these problems - much of which even pre-date GWB and WJClinton - most Right-Wing conservatives couldn't handle it because it would mean they'd have to acknowledge that their conservative hero's long-term economic policies were all wrong!



He already did! See the chart of oil leasing since 2006.



All I can say to that is if the shoe fits. Of course, history will tell just how affective or destructive GWB's economic and foreign policies were to the nation.


More hype...:roll:



Just a quick guide to reading comprehension: The chart was for things that were APPLIED for; not for those things approved, granted, accepted or real in any way in the real world.

Please just reply to the post in one body. The cut and paste is tedious. Write a little essay so your thoughts can flow.
 
Correct. Capitalism does care about the environment. And I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where there is evidence of any capitalism in the konservative* states.

(* - synonym for taxpayers picking up the tab for massive environmental damage)



There is no unregulated Capitalism in the USA.

There is a difference between unregulated Capitalism and Socialism.

Ford and Firstone and Edison and Carnegie were all in favor of unregulated Capitalism.

Obama is in favor of Socialism.

Under the industrialists of the the 1800's and early 1900's in the USA, the USA transformed from the agrarian culture of the 1700's into the biggest economy on the planet. There was a time in that period when Andrew Carnegie had more money than the Federal Government. The pendulum, as they say, had swung too far in the direction of allowing business to do whatever it wanted. Big business dominated in a society where the laws were written to regulate Ma & Pa operations.

Now the pendulum has swung the other way and government can do whatever it wants. There needs to be a balance and the balance has been destroyed.

Reagan famously described the Liberal approach to economics: "If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize it." We are where Reagan predicted we would be.

If we want to be more like NoDak or more like Detroit, we have a choice to make.
 
Last edited:
Define Libertarianism for us, in your own words .

Then tell us how much government there currently exists in Detroit.



I didn't introduce the word to the discussion. My definition does not impact your use of the word nor does it affect your meaning when you used it.

All I wanted to know was what you are trying to say. Examples and links might help.
 
A Townhall fan. God help him, please.


From his link:

The government is completely incompetent: Ever notice that the bigger government seems to get, the less it does anything well? Citizens of Detroit could tell you all about that.

The school system is horrible, which explains why a staggering 47% of the population is illiterate. In addition, 40% of the street lights don't work, only about 1/3 of the ambulances are running, and 2/3 of the parks have been closed since 2008.

Just to give you an idea of its priorities, an independent report in 2012 suggested the city fire 80% of the Water and Sewage Department including a horseshoer" that it has on staff even though it has NO HORSES.

How did the union respond to that report? "They don’t have enough people as it is right now. They are just dreaming to think they can operate that plant with less." Detroit may not have enough police, ambulances, or competent teachers, but if you ever need a horseshoe in the Motor City, they've got you covered.
 
From his link:

The government is completely incompetent: Ever notice that the bigger government seems to get, the less it does anything well?

How big is Detroit's govt. right now?
 
Oh so BP didn't spend any money cleaning up its mess in the gulf, nope, nota dime!

BP has so far paid out next to nothing, only a measley $1.4 billion. . .

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The fund established to compensate Gulf Coast residents in the aftermath of last year's massive BP oil spill said Monday it has paid out $3.8 billion so far.

BP Gulf oil spill claims fund pays $3.8 billion, so far - Apr. 18, 2011

the five Big Oil companies receive an estimated $2.4 billion in subsidized tax breaks annually.

BP Earned $2.7 Billion In Q2 Profits But Still Thinks It

FYI, basic subtraction for you. . .

$3.8 billion - $2.4 billion = $1.4 billion

When you leave Limbaugh Land (konservatism) and learn more about true capitalism, you will learn these math skills :)
 
BP has so far paid out next to nothing, only a measley $1.4 billion. . .





FYI, basic subtraction for you. . .

$3.8 billion - $2.4 billion = $1.4 billion

When you leave Limbaugh Land (konservatism) and learn more about true capitalism, you will learn these math skills :)

Using your logic (math?) the US taxpayer has received about $17 trillon in subsidies.
 
Prove it. Show us the math.

The national debt is simply defered taxation, money borrowed and spent in excess of actual taxation. While I agree with your sentiments about goofy special tax treatment for any industry that can successfully lobby our congress critters for favorable tax treatment - that is not the same as a "subsidy". Keeping your own money is not the same thing as a subsidy or we would have to count the national debt as a subsidy.
 
The national debt is simply defered taxation, money borrowed and spent in excess of actual taxation. While I agree with your sentiments about goofy special tax treatment for any industry that can successfully lobby our congress critters for favorable tax treatment - that is not the same as a "subsidy". Keeping your own money is not the same thing as a subsidy or we would have to count the national debt as a subsidy.

Typical wage earners make a net payment to the govt. in taxes. Oil cos, OTOH, minus subsidies and tax breaks, result in govt. making a net payment to them.
 
BP has so far paid out next to nothing, only a measley $1.4 billion. . .





FYI, basic subtraction for you. . .

$3.8 billion - $2.4 billion = $1.4 billion

When you leave Limbaugh Land (konservatism) and learn more about true capitalism, you will learn these math skills :)


The payments to the people are being made by a government agency.

BP gave them 20 billion to make the payments. the 20 billion dollar fund is fully funded.

Compensating the people and communities affected | BP Global
 
Typical wage earners make a net payment to the govt. in taxes. Oil cos, OTOH, minus subsidies and tax breaks, result in govt. making a net payment to them.



Can you link to the proof that the government is making payments to subsidize the oil industry that are not the usual and normal deductions due to any business?
 
Typical wage earners make a net payment to the govt. in taxes. Oil cos, OTOH, minus subsidies and tax breaks, result in govt. making a net payment to them.

Care to provide a link showing any net federal payments to oil companies?

45% of US households paid no federal tax- MSN Money

ExxonMobil Makes $41 Billion, But Pays Estimated 17.6% Tax Rate, Lower Than Most Taxpayers (But Not Romney) | ThinkProgress

http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/sr194.pdf
 
Last edited:
Jobs are like water. They flow to where the work is.

If you want jobs to appear in a place, then create the conditions that attract jobs.

The conditions that you desire repel jobs.

Nonsense.

Close the borders to foreign cars. That will create American jobs.

Problem solved.
 
A Townhall fan. God help him, please.
Oh, I get loads of help from God. He could help you too, if you'd just climb out of the cesspool.
 
Oh, I get loads of help from God. He could help you too, if you'd just climb out of the cesspool.
Pray for him to send me more bourbon. I'm running low. That's a good Christian.
 
Nonsense.

Close the borders to foreign cars. That will create American jobs.

Problem solved.



And when we stop accepting imports, where do you propose we will make our exports?
 
Back
Top Bottom