Quantcast

That's it.. I'm not voting for McCain...

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
44,794
10,446
Sleazattle

Went for a road ride over the weekend into some very rural parts of Virginia, very conservative area. I was shocked to see the majority of yards that had political signs had ones supporting the republican senate and congress candidates and Obama. Either some kids were having fun with signs on Saturday night or there are a lot of Reps for Obama in this area.
 

SDH

I'm normal
Oct 2, 2001
374
0
Northern Va.
so how have those tax cuts for the rich back in '01 and '02 turned out? I haven't checked, but based on the trickle-down rhetoric I heard at the time I'd assume a growing and more prosperous middle class, huge job creation, and a continuation of the great economic times of the 1990s...

edit - at the very least, the last 8 years had to have been as good as the 1990s, since Bill Clinton raised tax rates on the upper-income earners in 1993. Damn that trickle-up poverty of the 1990s really sucked, didn't it?
No way could we see the continued growth of the mid to late '90's in '01, '02, '03 no matter who the prez was or what he did. Why? Two factors
1) Sun setting of the .com's. Nothing new here the .com era mimicked classic product cycle theory. A rise, leveling off and b/c of competition a decline of the ones that could not compete. The .com's provided and over inflation in the market system which was ripe for collapse. ( Very similair to the housing market, which is a much worse situation b/c much our economy is based on the mortage back security)
2) 9/11 Very crippling to our system. Wether we like it or not.


So now onto the trickle down effect. What they have not told you is the tickle down effect takes anywhere from 7 to 10 years (roughly). Why? Here is a scenario.

Through tax incentives a company has extra cash. The compnay is in it to make more money than it did before, therefore it seeks ways to invest the influx cash to make more cash. This is not an over night process. Two things need to be determined, what is the amount of (new) cash and approxiameately how long will that influx last, this will determine what type and scope of investments the company will make. So now they decided on the type(s) of investments, new products, new business etc. Now we need to work the structured financing for the new initiative. This also takes some time. Next we need to make agreements and set infrastructure in place (this is a number of years) then we begin making money but we also have branding expenses and barriers of entry expenses. So really we will not see a true profit for 3-5 years. Now, is the growth period where we start hiring people and developing the product to increase market share. That too is not done over night, I would say minimum 2 years. So, trickle down can work, the point they never say is how long until it starts working. This also assumes in this time frame the company does not go through some other problem(s).

Example 2
Why give the rich a tax break over the middle class?
Well for one, the poster before me is correct they share most of the burden on a percentage basis but more importantly, the rich will statiscally have a greater chance to create more jobs and purchase more product.
I offer this example:
I think I read somewhere that 60-67% of the middle class is living on credit. What is credit? Getting goods and services before actually paying for them. So if the average middle class dude came into some $ what would he do with it? I submit he would pay down his credit for services and good that have "already" been rendered. Switch to the rich dude. Not that leveraged on credit, he gets some cash, what does he do with it? Buys more stuff and creates more jobs (I.e hires a maid, buys a new car etc)


PS
In case it matters, I have not made my mind up as to McCain or Obama. Both concern me.
 
Last edited:

kykona

Chimp
Oct 11, 2008
13
0
Dude, Savage used to sell books about healthy eating! The guy's a bottom feeder who moved on to the business of making millions by being extreme and feeding off of American ignorance.
Savage is a pretty smart guy. Most of what he says is true / to the point, but he often says it with an "edge." After all, he is an entertainer and that is what gets ratings. I dont listen to him for "insight" I listen to him for entertainment.

To the guy talknig about bush's tax cuts in 01 and 02. Like I said before, the republicans lost my vote when they kept him in office. He is in no way conservative, in no way a "republican" (I guess he is the start of the "new republicans" after seeing McCain's standpoint). Bush is NOT the worst president, but he is among them... although he has had some of the worst times to be a president (gotta play both sides). Also, the guy 2 posts above me made very good points that I wish I could have put in here. There were circumstances during both periods that have extreme effects on the economy.

I'm in no way supporting bush, but I refuse to support obama. The simple fact is McCain isnt going to win, so lets get ready for obama. I just refuse to vote for him.


oh yeah, I'm not vibiker or his brother... why would you think that?? and I love my konas :P
 
Last edited:

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,645
6
SF, CA
So now onto the trickle down effect. What they have not told you is the tickle down effect takes anywhere from 7 to 10 years (roughly). Why? Here is a scenario.
Yes, you're right, eventually some of that money does trickle down. And you're right, it takes a long time. And you're also right that everyone in that chain of events you laid out takes a cut. And in the end, we've waited 5-10 years to get a very measly return on a major investment.

Now if that money is spent in the marketplace, rather than invested, it generates about 3X it's nominal amount in market value, and that's a conservative average estimate. Google currently trades at 18X revenues. That valuation is something that can be traded and invested just like the cash you want to pump directly into the financial markets.

So I can put a dollar straight into the financial market, or I can put a dollar into the consumer market and have it create 3 dollars of value in the financial market. Which would you do?

It's not that trickle down doesn't exist, it's that it is an extremely slow and inefficient and there are (much) better ways to encourage economic growth.
 

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
33,231
6,148
Portland, OR
It's not that trickle down doesn't exist, it's that it is an extremely slow and inefficient and there are (much) better ways to encourage economic growth.
So the singles I tip at the strip club will eventually wind up as $3 in my pocket. Awesome.
 

sanjuro

Tube Smuggler
Sep 13, 2004
17,373
0
SF
Savage is a pretty smart guy. Most of what he says is true / to the point, but he often says it with an "edge." After all, he is an entertainer and that is what gets ratings. I dont listen to him for "insight" I listen to him for entertainment.

To the guy talknig about bush's tax cuts in 01 and 02. Like I said before, the republicans lost my vote when they kept him in office. He is in no way conservative, in no way a "republican" (I guess he is the start of the "new republicans" after seeing McCain's standpoint). Bush is NOT the worst president, but he is among them... although he has had some of the worst times to be a president (gotta play both sides). Also, the guy 2 posts above me made very good points that I wish I could have put in here. There were circumstances during both periods that have extreme effects on the economy.

I'm in no way supporting bush, but I refuse to support obama. The simple fact is McCain isnt going to win, so lets get ready for obama. I just refuse to vote for him.

oh yeah, I'm not vibiker or his brother... why would you think that?? and I love my konas :P
Well, at least you like bikes.

Michael Savage is a dumbass who gets points by yelling a lot.


I heard Rachel Maddow point out there has been 4 major disasters under Bush:

9/11
Iraq Invasion
Katrina
Financial Crash

She pointed out any one typically signifies a horrible President. All four really means the guy is the worst.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,645
6
SF, CA
No way could we see the continued growth of the mid to late '90's in '01, '02, '03 no matter who the prez was or what he did. Why? Two factors
1) Sun setting of the .com's. Nothing new here the .com era mimicked classic product cycle theory. A rise, leveling off and b/c of competition a decline of the ones that could not compete. The .com's provided and over inflation in the market system which was ripe for collapse. ( Very similair to the housing market, which is a much worse situation b/c much our economy is based on the mortage back security)
2) 9/11 Very crippling to our system. Wether we like it or not.
And now for this portion. Absolutely not true on either point.
1) A temporary slowdown at best IF we had identified a new opportunity for investment. The dot com bubble actually generated significant persistent value, even after it burst, and though we definitely would have had maybe a year of down time for that money and value to be reinvested, that's all we would have had. In fact, that's the way it worked out, except all that money and value was dumped into sub-prime mortgage investment since that was offering the highest returns for awhile. However, with the right stimulus that *could* have been green energy, pharmaceuticals, space flight/travel, telecom investment instead. All of which would have given us persistent and exportable value. But we chose to put our eggs in the low-interest rate basket instead.

2) Total bull****. It unfortunately coincided with the .com bubble burst, which added a hard dip to an already downward curve, but in terms of the value destroyed or the production capability removed from the economy it's insignificant. It's emotionally tragic, but the economy has a short memory when there's money to be made. Again, this is demonstrated by the quick followup of the .com bubble with the housing bubble.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,645
6
SF, CA
So the singles I tip at the strip club will eventually wind up as $3 in my pocket. Awesome.
You joke, but it's somewhat true. Follow the dollar:

You get back $1 in your tax return.
You go to the titty bar and stuck your $1 in a G-string
Stripper gets smacked up by her boyfriend, goes to gun store and buys gun, spends $1 on a bullet
Gun store owner realizes he's a gay pacifist and decides to sell shop. New owner sees balance sheet that says $100,001/yr in revenue at 30% margin, and offers owner $300,003 for the business. Boom, we just made $3.
In addition, the gay pacifist didn't give that $1 to the new owner. He either pocketed it himself or used it to pay an employee, so it's still in circulation just waiting to work more magic.
 

SDH

I'm normal
Oct 2, 2001
374
0
Northern Va.
Now if that money is spent in the marketplace, rather than invested, it generates about 3X it's nominal amount in market value, and that's a conservative average estimate. Google currently trades at 18X revenues. That valuation is something that can be traded and invested just like the cash you want to pump directly into the financial markets.

So I can put a dollar straight into the financial market, or I can put a dollar into the consumer market and have it create 3 dollars of value in the financial market. Which would you do?


Maybe I missed something. Define consumer market? A market that produces good or services for consumers here and abroad? If that is what you meant, there is still a tredmendous ramp up time and expense to expand or break into a new market financial or consumer.
 

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
33,231
6,148
Portland, OR
Maybe I missed something. Define consumer market? A market that produces good or services for consumers here and abroad? If that is what you meant, there is still a tredmendous ramp up time and expense to expand or break into a new market financial or consumer.
He meant strip club. But in Fresno, they are topless only where as in Oregon, they are all nude.

Does that help?

<edit> In Guam, a single goes a hell of a lot further than in the continental US as well. Keep that in mind when traveling abroad (and visiting strip clubs).
 

SDH

I'm normal
Oct 2, 2001
374
0
Northern Va.
And now for this portion. Absolutely not true on either point.
1) A temporary slowdown at best IF we had identified a new opportunity for investment. The dot com bubble actually generated significant persistent value, even after it burst, and though we definitely would have had maybe a year of down time for that money and value to be reinvested, that's all we would have had. In fact, that's the way it worked out, except all that money and value was dumped into sub-prime mortgage investment since that was offering the highest returns for awhile. However, with the right stimulus that *could* have been green energy, pharmaceuticals, space flight/travel, telecom investment instead. All of which would have given us persistent and exportable value. But we chose to put our eggs in the low-interest rate basket instead.

Agreed to a point. Like any failed marriage it is never one thing that happens it is series of stuff. No way was the boom of the '90's sustainable no matter what we did and second, "things" (9/11, stock crash etc) kept happening that just made things worst. I agree there was a down time, but if we use that down time for significant investment for our future as you gave good examples of the down time and hurt would have lasted longer b/c of the out lay required for such significant intiatives (see my other post as the time requirement as well). And that is not the American way (sarcasm) Instead, like a fickle highschool chick after getting broken up with by the high school quaterback, we jumped into the next easy and sexy thing (sub-primes). Now we are screwed!
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,645
6
SF, CA
Maybe I missed something. Define consumer market? A market that produces good or services for consumers here and abroad? If that is what you meant, there is still a tredmendous ramp up time and expense to expand or break into a new market financial or consumer.
Consumer market is in the space where a dollar is consumed (transferred), rather than saved (held/invested), by goods or services. For the poor and for some of the middle class, an additional dollar in their pockets is an additional dollar consumed. For the upper-middle and upper classes an additional dollar in their pocket is almost certainly held in some kind of investment.

As an aside, I'm not encouraging spending beyond your means or spending on credit, nor am I even encouraging spending ahead of saving. I'm just saying by definition the lower and middle classes spend a larger proportion of their income (and any tax relief they receive), while the upper classes save more. Trickle down says saving is better for economic growth therefore give to the rich, I'm saying spending is better for economic growth therefore give to the poor. All within some reasonable bounds, of course.
 

1000-Oaks

Monkey
May 8, 2003
778
0
Simi Valley, CA
Bill Clinton raised tax rates on the upper-income earners in 1993. Damn that trickle-up poverty of the 1990s really sucked, didn't it?
Please, Clinton's tax policies had nothing to do with the stunning economic advances due to the creation and implementation of the World Wide Web.

Nice try.
 

1000-Oaks

Monkey
May 8, 2003
778
0
Simi Valley, CA
I heard Rachel Maddow point out there has been 4 major disasters under Bush:

9/11
Iraq Invasion
Katrina
Financial Crash

She pointed out any one typically signifies a horrible President. All four really means the guy is the worst.
9/11 - Clinton was told the attack was coming but did nothing, so Bush got hit with it. Duh.

Iraq Invasion - Bush was wise enough to take the ensuing war to foreign soil, instead of it happening here.

Katrina - Is she saying Bush can control the weather??? Come on. Blame for the aftermath is clearly on the shoulders of the N.O. mayor and governor of LA, who used Federal funding for improving the levies for their own pet projects (sweetheart deals for their buddies). They also failed to act prior to the storm - not only did thousands of school buses sit idle, they even rejected Amtrak's offer to transport thousands of residents out of the area via rail. FEMA is designed to come in after distasters, and can't unseat elected officials - even if they fail to perform.

Financial Crash - Eight years of Bush is hardly a match for decades of flawed congressional policy initiated by democrats. How many times did the republicans warn congress about Fannie and Freddie? The dems refused to admit they created a time bomb, and conveniently made Bush the biggest scapegoat of all time. Freaking amazing, my hat is off to their genius.


Obama deserves to win and bring socialism to the US; they've played a tremendous political game and Americans who have fallen for the scheme hook-line-and-sinker deserve what we're all about to get.

So keep blaming Bush, Fox news, and anyone who isn't blindly following our latest American Idol star. If Obama really was about "change", he would have fought the pork-filled $700B bailout plan. But he went along with it, and proved he's just as corrupt as the rest of congress.

Maybe I'll just vote like Obama - "present" and leave it at that.
 

dante

Unabomber
Feb 13, 2004
8,808
9
looking for classic NE singletrack
Please, Clinton's tax policies had nothing to do with the stunning economic advances due to the creation and implementation of the World Wide Web.

Nice try.
last I checked non-internet companies did pretty good during that time period as well.

beginning of 1993 (Clinton's first year) - DJIA 3250
beginning of 1996 (before the WWW had any effect) - DJIA 5271
beginning of 1998 - DJIA 7580

so are you saying that non-technical companies on the DJIA increased 2.5 times between 1993 to 1998 purely because of an internet that had progressed as far as netscape by that time?

Also, the DJIA and the Nasdaq moved together until the end of 1998 when the 'daq took off to stratospheric levels and can be said was the beginning of the "internet boom". if you mean to tell me that the ENTIRE 1990s, including the part where the "internet" consisted of 14.4 modems is due to the dot-com boom, you have a very, very simplistic view of history...
 

JohnE

filthy rascist
May 13, 2005
12,889
950
Front Range, dude...
We were in serious danger of a major sea and airborne invasion that could have been mounted by Hussein at any moment before we took the war to him, after clearing it with his old buddy Dick Cheney.

Havent you people been listening? The man was a threat...
 

H8R

Cranky Pants
Nov 10, 2004
13,964
36
Havent you people been listening? The man was a threat...
Luckily Palin could see his mighty war ships coming over the Bering Strait after the Ruskies had helped fuel em up. She saved us all!
 

Defenestrated

Turbo Monkey
Mar 28, 2007
1,657
0
Earth
9/11 - Clinton was told the attack was coming but did nothing, so Bush got hit with it. Duh.

Iraq Invasion - Bush was wise enough to take the ensuing war to foreign soil, instead of it happening here.

Katrina - Is she saying Bush can control the weather??? Come on. Blame for the aftermath is clearly on the shoulders of the N.O. mayor and governor of LA, who used Federal funding for improving the levies for their own pet projects (sweetheart deals for their buddies). They also failed to act prior to the storm - not only did thousands of school buses sit idle, they even rejected Amtrak's offer to transport thousands of residents out of the area via rail. FEMA is designed to come in after distasters, and can't unseat elected officials - even if they fail to perform.

Financial Crash - Eight years of Bush is hardly a match for decades of flawed congressional policy initiated by democrats. How many times did the republicans warn congress about Fannie and Freddie? The dems refused to admit they created a time bomb, and conveniently made Bush the biggest scapegoat of all time. Freaking amazing, my hat is off to their genius.


Obama deserves to win and bring socialism to the US; they've played a tremendous political game and Americans who have fallen for the scheme hook-line-and-sinker deserve what we're all about to get.

So keep blaming Bush, Fox news, and anyone who isn't blindly following our latest American Idol star. If Obama really was about "change", he would have fought the pork-filled $700B bailout plan. But he went along with it, and proved he's just as corrupt as the rest of congress.

Maybe I'll just vote like Obama - "present" and leave it at that.
quoting failure
 

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
33,231
6,148
Portland, OR
Iraq Invasion - Bush was wise enough to take the ensuing war to foreign soil, instead of it happening here.
Wow, you are functionally retarded.

What the hell was Iraq going to hit us with? Empty aluminum tubes sent via UPS? I'm so glad we averted that onslaught!

4 more years!
 

RenegadeRick

98th percentile on my SAT & all I got was this tin
quoting failure
Yeah, but...

If Obama really was about "change", he would have fought the pork-filled $700B bailout plan. But he went along with it, and proved he's just as corrupt as the rest of congress.
This is a really good point. Obama is as sold out to the corporations and Israel as the rest of them.

The bailout rewarded failure. Funking brilliant.

Neither McCain, or Obama, or Biden voted for or against the bailout. Nice. And even with all of McCain's grandstanding about needing to get back to fix the economy, he doesn't cast a vote?

Locally, my Rep Mark Kirk voted FOR the bailout, as I see it he owes my family about $8,000. Iliinois other Senator, Dick Durbin, voted FOR the bailout too.

As usual, I will be voting against Kirk (since he has supported Bush and his stupid Iraq war wholeheartedly), and as much as I have liked Durbin in the past, I will vote against him this time. Anyone who rewards corporate failure at the expense of the American™ people is no representative of the people's interests. Those who do nothing to oppose it are equally responsible.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,645
6
SF, CA
Wow, you spent a long time proving your ignorance right there. But way to mix in some big words and concepts from what appears to be a decent education that only you half-paid attention to.

Welcome to the forum.
 

BurlyShirley

Rex Grossman Will Rise Again
Jul 4, 2002
19,181
17
TN
Thanks for the warm welcome! And thanks for illustrating another commonly used form of fallacious reasoning: Ad hominine statements.

Instead of actually addressing a single point I made, you simply bypass the whole discussion by trying to discredit me with name calling. I'm ignorant? Really, show me how. I only half paid attention to my education? Give me an example of what I said that was inaccurate.

Hey, I&#8217;m certainly not above being wrong, and I actually appreciate being corrected so that I do have the facts strait, but you haven&#8217;t made any effort beyond name calling to do this.

It's amazing to me how many people resort to simple name calling instead of actually making a valid point.
fag..

"hominine" :rofl: pretty close.