America...the Thread

[rdh007]

I agree. It's sad that the governing body insists on lowering taxes, while at the same time cutting government programs for poor or under-educated children in an attempt to balance the checkbook. And then in a completely self-defeatist move, increase defense spending beyond all reasonable bounds.

I don't mind the cuts to match the tax cuts, but what I mind is that they didn't have the guts to cut enough. They could've said--we'll get rid of everything but the DOD and I'd have disagreed whole-heartedly but I could understand. I just wish they would've made more cuts or cut less taxes. As I said, Clinton was a great Republican.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Actually, the President has virtually no affect on the economy. Most of the economy hinges on the consumers who support it, not those that make the budgets and etc.

again.


Incorrect.

 

[XtromaniaK]

again.


Incorrect.

Haha. Again, you're wrong. Maybe you should take a basic Econ class. The economy hinges predominantly on the habits of the consumer and the resource markets to consumer markets, etc. The President has little affect on the economy, and this is basic ****.

If you want to prove me wrong, go ahead. But saying "incorrect" like some pompous d-bag isn't making anyone smarter.

 

[Bubonic]

Things can always get worse. Bad as america is, there's places where genocide and rape and murder are as common as Tex-Mex restaurants here. It's sad that we actually bemoan how "horrible" it is in the USA when there is real and vicious suffering going on in other parts of the world.

Politics will ALWAYS be @ucked up. No one will ever be completely happy with their government or the choices they make. You try and make changes you feel are important when you can. You do your best to make life better. That's all any of us can do. Most just prefer to sit around and complain but not act in any way.

We must realize though, that the reason why so many countries have awful things happening to them is a trickle down consequence of first, colonial occupation, and the way America often has endorsed tyrants, as it is often economically beneficial to them.

Plus your right about people not acting, we don't live in full fledge democracies, in a lot of ways there is definitely more freedom, yet we are not involved in hardly any of the decisions made.

 

[Kritish]

If America knew what's good for it we'd establish a non-interventionist foreign policy. I don't know about the rest of you but I'm tired of policing the globe.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Haha. Again, you're wrong. Maybe you should take a basic Econ class. The economy hinges predominantly on the habits of the consumer and the resource markets to consumer markets, etc. The President has little affect on the economy, and this is basic ****.

If you want to prove me wrong, go ahead. But saying "incorrect" like some pompous d-bag isn't making anyone smarter.

LOL, you know what basic **** is?
the spelling of "effect" see?
the President can "affect" the economy, therefore he has an "effect"

get it?

but that whole "try to sound smart" thing you did?
cute. adorable even.
re-read your own statement, then put your yellow thinking cap on and really strain those brain cells.
ask yourself.

"do policies and economic strategies put in place by a given President affect the habits of the American consumer?"

"do economic incentives for a higher strata of society affect how another strata of society would spend it's income? what if the lower strata has less "disposable" income due to said economic policies?"

"how do said policies enacted by said President affect consumer confidence and other key elements of a healthy economy?"

"why am I, XtromaniaK, such a gigantic *****e?"

see? but these are questions you should have been asking a long time ago, like when you took that awesome "econ" *snickers* class.
but you're right, I highly doubt this is going to make you any smarter.

 

[XtromaniaK]

LOL, you know what basic **** is?
the spelling of "effect" see?
the President can "affect" the economy, therefore he has an "effect"

You know affect means to influence. Effect means the result. I was using affect in the grammatically correct context. Nice try though, what with trying to teach someone who probably knows much more than you English.

but that whole "try to sound smart" thing you did?
cute. adorable even.
re-read your own statement, then put your yellow thinking cap on and really strain those brain cells.
ask yourself.

I don't have to try to sound smart, I don't even have to strain myself in the least to "sound smart". The big difference between you and I is that I am endowed with intelligence, whereas you are not.

"do policies and economic strategies put in place by a given President affect the habits of the American consumer?"

Most often than not, they do not. American consumers still "consume" gas like there's no tomorrow, regardless of the "president's" war. Consumers have certain habits that aren't broken or noticeably changed by change in policy. The economy depends on the consumer much more than the policies of the president. The fact that you can't discern this is mortifying.

Unless of course, you're saying that the Great Depression was a direct result of the White House's policies. Or that the stock market crash was caused by the government and not the panick of the public.

"do economic incentives for a higher strata of society affect how another strata of society would spend it's income? what if the lower strata has less "disposable" income due to said economic policies?"

Most often than not, no. You fail to see that people's spending habits tend to follow a particular pattern regardless of the White House's policy. If anything, the Congress has more control over the economy. But even then, that's nothing compared to the power the average commodified consumer ****e has en masse.

"how do said policies enacted by said President affect consumer confidence and other key elements of a healthy economy?"

They don't in any big way. Sure, we have a deficit. Has that really caused that great of damage to the U.S.'s economy in comparison to other economic factors? No.

"why am I, XtromaniaK, such a gigantic *****e?"

I tend to get that way when morons like you spout off about **** you have zero knowledge in.

see? but these are questions you should have been asking a long time ago, like when you took that awesome "econ" *snickers* class.
but you're right, I highly doubt this is going to make you any smarter.

Congratulations for proving absolutely nothing. Besides the extent of your stupidity.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

You know affect means to influence. Effect means the result. I was using affect in the grammatically correct context. Nice try though, what with trying to teach someone who probably knows much more than you English.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!t:

I don't have to try to sound smart, I don't even have to strain myself in the least to "sound smart". The big difference between you and I is that I am endowed with intelligence, whereas you are not.

yeah, that whole "much more than you English" totally backs up THAT statement.
boy is MY face red.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Most often than not, they do not. American consumers still "consume" gas like there's no tomorrow, regardless of the "president's" war. Consumers have certain habits that aren't broken or noticeably changed by change in policy. The economy depends on the consumer much more than the policies of the president. The fact that you can't discern this is mortifying.

LOL, again.
way to TRY and sound smart, but you didn't actually say anything did you?
you placed one example ( one bad example)then said something completely unrelated to said example and didn't back it up.
but yeah...I'm sure you're "mortified"(I'm also sure you think the meaning of "mortified" has something to do with Zombies, but you're not quite sure).
uh...yeah, way to say nothing except something comparable to "Nuh-uh"

Unless of course, you're saying that the Great Depression was a direct result of the White House's policies. Or that the stock market crash was caused by the government and not the panick of the public.

LOL, what's "panick" mean anyway? is it like "panic" but for the cool "internets" crowd? or maybe just the people that "know more than me English" who's to say?
but no, I'm not saying THAT.
why would I? when were talking about the effects of a President on consumer confidence.
I'm talking about the effects of economic policies on the spending habits of a populace.
I mean, you CAN trot out an unrelated example like the depression.
but.
at your own risk.
because see, there's a lot of different views on what exactly caused the Great Depression.
and guess what?

government deficit spending is ONE of those explanations.
so while I had not initially considered the Depression relevant to my argument you have gone and made it not only relevant, but you have unwittingly (as most of your life probably happens, due to lack of wit) made an argument in my favor.

so thanks for that!

Most often than not, no. You fail to see that people's spending habits tend to follow a particular pattern regardless of the White House's policy. If anything, the Congress has more control over the economy. But even then, that's nothing compared to the power the average commodified consumer ****e has en masse.

man, for an internet Genius, you use a lot of concepts you don't really seem to understand.
but, you failed again.
lack of disposable income has been cited, over and over again as a cause for a decrease in spending. It's actually mentioned at least once every Christmas shopping season.
just last Monday I was watching the Today show and they had a report of probable sales that the larger retailers might have due to fear of low turnout after black Friday.
one of the reasons cited?
"less disposable income" so, actually, less disposable income HAS an effect on the economy more often than not.
how ironic is THAT ****?
I mean, It was kind of logical, but I CAN see how you'd miss it.

They don't in any big way. Sure, we have a deficit. Has that really caused that great of damage to the U.S.'s economy in comparison to other economic factors? No.

I like how so far, you have failed to back up any statement you have made.
I'd also like a list of those other economic factors.
fact is, consumer confidence is KEY in the economy and in the modern economy the economic policies and the POLITICS that a given countries President engages in are a very important factor.
the continuing, and rather baffling delusion you live in notwithstanding.
I know you won't like to hear this.
but people smarter than me, and vastly smarter than you have argued about just how much influence any President has over the economy.
they range from people that blame EVERYTHING on the President to people that think that Presidents hold almost no effect.
now, do I think that a War abroad affects an economy?
yeah, I do.
maybe you don't, but really that's just you.

I tend to get that way when morons like you spout off about **** you have zero knowledge in.

yeah, you have provided SOOOO much to back up your argument.
wait, you kind of didn't.
so.

uh...

that must be awkward for you.

Congratulations for proving absolutely nothing. Besides the extent of your stupidity.

uh...yeah.
sorry.

I bow to both your little knowledge of basic economics.
and your mad, mad skills ( by which I mean "complete incompetence") at sentence construction.

uh, Kudos on that.

sure showed me.

 

[LexCorp]

If America knew what's good for it we'd establish a non-interventionist foreign policy. I don't know about the rest of you but I'm tired of policing the globe.

Police the globe....that's a stretch. We all look after each other and given the strength of the £ you may not have to bother with it much longer

 

[Memphis Slim]

If America knew what's good for it we'd establish a non-interventionist foreign policy. I don't know about the rest of you but I'm tired of policing the globe.

So what you're saying is , if the U.S. sees trouble brewing for itself or its allies, don't do anything? Just let it happen?

 

[LexCorp]

So what you're saying is , if the U.S. sees trouble brewing for itself or its allies, don't do anything? Just let it happen?

The EU will soon be able to take care of itself....

t:

 

[Memphis Slim]

Like Peter Parker let the thief get away, because it wasn't his problem, he soon saw how it did effect him, just a short time later. I know that's a comic book reference. But there's some truth in that.

 

[Memphis Slim]

Things can always get worse. Bad as america is, there's places where genocide and rape and murder are as common as Tex-Mex restaurants here. It's sad that we actually bemoan how "horrible" it is in the USA when there is real and vicious suffering going on in other parts of the world.

We're spoiled.


Politics will ALWAYS be @ucked up. No one will ever be completely happy with their government or the choices they make. You try and make changes you feel are important when you can. You do your best to make life better. That's all any of us can do. Most just prefer to sit around and complain but not act in any way.

Bush is a terrible president but we haven't had a decent one, IMO, for as long as I've been alive. Seeing how the next elections are gearing up I may not see one for the rest of my life either. It's not so much a tragedy, few times generations we get to have a truely great leader, most people never get to experience that. I'll just have to settle with not relying on a magical leader to fix things and do what I can in my own small way.

You have a very common sense view on this.

 

[LexCorp]

Like Peter Parker let the thief get away, because it wasn't his problem, he soon saw how it did effect him, just a short time later. I know that's a comic book reference. But there's some truth in that.

Great power comes great responsibility t:

 

[Memphis Slim]

Great power comes great responsibility t:

Aye Aye Captain!!! t:

 

[shapeshifter]

America really depends on what side of the fence you are on.
those people that can make it work its a great place to exploit your surroundings for your own benefit
for those outside looking in it seems like a society on the brink, obsessed with its own excess. Violent, petulant and obese. Like a spoiled fat little rich kid that has not had to work for a living, and just sponges off past generations.

 

[LexCorp]

America really depends on what side of the fence you are on.
those people that can make it work its a great place to exploit your surroundings for your own benefit
for those outside looking in it seems like a society on the brink, obsessed with its own excess. Violent, petulant and obese. Like a spoiled fat little rich kid that has not had to work for a living, and just sponges off past generations.

Well that statement depends as you say on where you are in this world at any given moment.

I see the USA as a place to exploit for my own benefit. As the UK currently does not offer me what I need to accomplish my goals.

I have seen many places in the world and the USA is just ahead at present.

 

[moraldeficiency]

We must realize though, that the reason why so many countries have awful things happening to them is a trickle down consequence of first, colonial occupation, and the way America often has endorsed tyrants, as it is often economically beneficial to them.

Plus your right about people not acting, we don't live in full fledge democracies, in a lot of ways there is definitely more freedom, yet we are not involved in hardly any of the decisions made.

War and any other conflict thoughout history is always started by the same thing: greed. Someone wants what someone else has so they try and take it. It's actually much more simple than you make it out to be. Countries have awful things happening in them because others don't act or allow their neighbors to do whatever. (I'm not endorsing the US attacking a bunch of other countries here, but maybe when someone tries to commit genocide we shouldn't be so eager to look the other way concerned with how good a mother Brittney Spears is. This goes for any country with the power to help, not just the US)

Nothing is ever perfect. I love how people will try for some lofty cause, march against some great injustice they have little effect on, but have no problem ignoring their neighbors and communities entirely. If we worry and help with what we can have an impact on and others do the same, then most of the big problems won't be able to start.

 

[LexCorp]

War and any other conflict thoughout history is always started by the same thing: greed. Someone wants what someone else has so they try and take it. It's actually much more simple than you make it out to be. Countries have awful things happening in them because others don't act or allow their neighbors to do whatever. (I'm not endorsing the US attacking a bunch of other countries here, but maybe when someone tries to commit genocide we shouldn't be so eager to look the other way concerned with how good a mother Brittney Spears is. This goes for any country with the power to help, not just the US)

Nothing is ever perfect. I love how people will try for some lofty cause, march against some great injustice they have little effect on, but have no problem ignoring their neighbors and communities entirely. If we worry and help with what we can have an impact on and others do the same, then most of the big problems won't be able to start.

I great idea and I would love to help, but I feel like taking care of myself first. Does this make me a bad person? Ask not what your country can do you for, ask what you can do for your country.....meh

For me that should be the other way around.

 

[moraldeficiency]

I great idea and I would love to help, but I feel like taking care of myself first. Does this make me a bad person? Ask not what your country can do you for, ask what you can do for your country.....meh

For me that should be the other way around.

Taking care of your immediate surrondings is taking care of yourself. If you take an interest in your neighborhood and don't hide from problems you'll be in a safer place. People just don't care about that until they're mugged, raped or have a kid molested by Barry that quiet guy two houses down.

 

[LexCorp]

Taking care of your immediate surrondings is taking care of yourself. If you take an interest in your neighborhood and don't hide from problems you'll be in a safer place. People just don't care about that until they're mugged, raped or have a kid molested by Barry that quiet guy two houses down.

I see what you mean yes I would want to take care of my immediate surrondings first and work from there.

 

[moraldeficiency]

That's all I'm saying, if each person gives a @hit about the people they deal with in their daily lives and try to help where they can bigger problems don't really arise so much. This is far more effective than just giving money or marching on Washington, plus no sharing buses with smelly hippies.

 

[shapeshifter]

Well that statement depends as you say on where you are in this world at any given moment.

I see the USA as a place to exploit for my own benefit. As the UK currently does not offer me what I need to accomplish my goals.

I have seen many places in the world and the USA is just ahead at present.

i agree, but the problem is this
there are to many corrupt people in the US of A that treat it like a bottomless pit of resources. It has given them an over inflated sense of worth and a deflated sense of conservation.
Aside from that, the odd need that the US citizens seem to have, of butting in to every other countries problems and impose their democratic system has caused strife and disillusionment in myself and many others.

 

[Darthphere]

Like Peter Parker let the thief get away, because it wasn't his problem, he soon saw how it did effect him, just a short time later. I know that's a comic book reference. But there's some truth in that.

Yeah, it's like how the US gets involved in other people's problems instead of letting them get away and then thousands of our soldiers die while they go on vacation and we continue to find idiotic ways to justify being there in the first place. Yeah, it's kind of like that.

 

[LexCorp]

That's all I'm saying, if each person gives a @hit about the people they deal with in their daily lives and try to help where they can bigger problems don't really arise so much. This is far more effective than just giving money or marching on Washington, plus no sharing buses with smelly hippies.

As long as it helps in the long run it's cool...

i agree, but the problem is this
there are to many corrupt people in the US of A that treat it like a bottomless pit of resources. It has given them an over inflated sense of worth and a deflated sense of conservation.
Aside from that, the odd need that the US citizens seem to have, of butting in to every other countries problems and impose their democratic system has caused strife and disillusionment in myself and many others.

I would not say I am corrupt it's just that the UK can not provide what I need in business terms. Which is why I need the USA.