General Politics Thread

[Funeralfog]

well a world war always seems to get the ball rolling with economies, we will see maybe

[btbam]

well a world war always seems to get the ball rolling with economies, we will see maybe

It's not good economic boost though. It would boost the GDP ya, but we'd be living a life of austerity.

[Funeralfog]

well i really don't see anything working, and spending money we don't have sure doesn't help. best to go out and get gold

[Morganator]

Good movie, but I don't think it tells the whole story, and really seems to focus on one specific aspect. It does a good job on focusing on what was going on during the financial crisis, but it doesn't spend much time on the ENTIRE back story that leads up to it.

Honestly, I'm not sure that an hour and a half film is anywhere near long enough to tell that story, need a multipart documentary to get it out there.

This. I think, to truly understand everything regarding the economy and how it's been managed along with all the perceived consequences espoused by both the Austrians and Keynesians, you'd need a film that would run through about 72 hours long. A music video that does pretty well is this one.

[btbam]

This. I think, to truly understand everything regarding the economy and how it's been managed along with all the perceived consequences espoused by both the Austrians and Keynesians, you'd need a film that would run through about 72 hours long. A music video that does pretty well is this one.

Haha I posted this video like 2 months ago in another thread. Notice who the bartenders were? Ben and tim. Made me rofl.

[Morganator]

Haha I posted this video like 2 months ago in another thread. Notice who the bartenders were? Ben and tim. Made me rofl.

Yeah. Those guys are funny. I actually saw this video more than 2 years ago though.

[TwentyThree]

Not sure if the MSM reported on this, but I very much doubt it since its military personal marching to DC in support of Ron Paul. I hope the military man and woman continue to voice their opinions on these and future elections.

[btbam]

http://ivn.us/2012/02/27/republican-...elegate-count/

Good insight into the delegate process. Has a pretty clear affinity for Ron Paul, but make sufficent arguments.

[DayWalker]

So if Rick wins in Michigan today... ????

[btbam]

So if Rick wins in Michigan today... ????

Mittens is boned if santorum wins. So is gop in 2012. Nobody can win as the social issue candidate

[MATRIX 2]

Mittens is boned if santorum wins. So is gop in 2012. Nobody can win as the social issue candidate

Not necessarily. Most of the country isn't keen on a theocracy. Mark my words, if santorum wins the nomination he will burn even worse that McCain/Palin in 2008.

The only two candidates that stand any chance of winning against obama are paul and Romney (paul being the better of the two).


Also this is an interesting video:

[TwentyThree]

Not necessarily. Most of the country isn't keen on a theocracy. Mark my words, if santorum wins the nomination he will burn even worse that McCain/Palin in 2008.

The only two candidates that stand any chance of winning against obama are paul and Romney (paul being the better of the two).


Also this is an interesting video:

He predicted the future back in 02, why is this man still ignored... SMH. We need direct democracy to keep the rats out of government.

[btbam]

He predicted the future back in 02, why is this man still ignored... SMH. We need direct democracy to keep the rats out of government.

This is gonna sound eliteist, cus it is. There are some idiots I don't want voting

[TwentyThree]

Idiots will vote regardless, most of the republican base voters are voting based on who the media says has the better chance at beating Obama in these elections. At least in a direct democracy our rights or privileges are less threatened by our own government. The people hardly ever have a vote when it comes to important decisions such as the Patriot Act, NDAA, Sopa, ect.
We couldn't be worst off in a direct democracy IMO.

[btbam]

Idiots will vote regardless, most of the republican base voters are voting based on who the media says has the better chance at beating Obama in these elections. At least in a direct democracy our rights or privileges are less threatened by our own government. The people hardly ever have a vote when it comes to important decisions such as the Patriot Act, NDAA, Sopa, ect.
We couldn't be worst off in a direct democracy IMO.

Look at california. they have ballot initiatives for everything. A lot of things get passed through, but never get funded. Its called an unfunded mandate. Their direct demcracy is a clusterfuck. Republic is better than direct. just my opinion.

[Morganator]

We need to get away from democracy. What we need to do is return to the constitutional republic which was founded and given to us.

[TwentyThree]

Look at california. they have ballot initiatives for everything. A lot of things get passed through, but never get funded. Its called an unfunded mandate. Their direct demcracy is a clusterfuck. Republic is better than direct. just my opinion.

I'm sure we can find a much more efficient way of implementing direct democracy at the fed level, scrap ballot initiatives and have congress propose bills that the people can vote on. Instead of giving all the power to the politicians whom are already are highly influenced by lobbyist, and big business interest. Let us decide if we want to continue sending our troops to die for nothing, let us decide weather we want to bail out big business who have rigged the game by socializing losses and privatizing profits, I could keep going on but i think you get my point.

[btbam]

We need to get away from democracy. What we need to do is return to the constitutional republic which was founded and given to us.

Agreed 100%. I guess i should clarify what i was saying about idiots voting. In a republic, we elect people to represent us in government. Typically this is their full time job and are much more educated and well rounded on issues than the average person would be. They also have staffers, subject matter experts and committee hearings at their disposal meaning they have the resources to make the most infrmed decisions. Ya, we got idiots voting for people to represent them, but i don't want every tom dick and harry voting on issues they don't understand or don't know. It is elitist, but necessary. Combine that with every citizen generally wanting programs but not taxes, you get a number of unfunded mandates which puts a burden on an executive agency to fulfil some purpose with no resources in which to do so. Republics are the best form of governence.

I'm sure we can find a much more efficient way of implementing direct democracy at the fed level, scrap ballot initiatives and have congress propose bills that the people can vote on. Instead of giving all the power to the politicians whom are already are highly influenced by lobbyist, and big business interest. Let us decide if we want to continue sending our troops to die for nothing, let us decide weather we want to bail out big business who have rigged the game by socializing losses and privatizing profits, I could keep going on but i think you get my point.

I also want to address lobbying for a second. Lobbyists get a bad rap, that they shouldn't. Its a point of view they advocate and there is a lobbyist for every issue and every point of view. They are advocates, not these evil things that the media portrays them as. Find me an issue that doesn't have a lobbyist advocating it, and we can negotiate a very high pay check for you. Lobbysits help the process. Often times, they can present their point of view to a legislator and provide credible information on subjects. They also testify in hearings often to provide to the discourse.

[Funeralfog]

we need a charismatic leader who puts the country first...then we would need more living space. canada seems decent to "expand" it wouldnt be too difficult and it's not near as ugly as mexico

[TwentyThree]

I also want to address lobbying for a second. Lobbyists get a bad rap, that they shouldn't. Its a point of view they advocate and there is a lobbyist for every issue and every point of view. They are advocates, not these evil things that the media portrays them as. Find me an issue that doesn't have a lobbyist advocating it, and we can negotiate a very high pay check for you. Lobbysits help the process. Often times, they can present their point of view to a legislator and provide credible information on subjects. They also testify in hearings often to provide to the discourse.

Lobbying has its advantages and disadvantages. On one hand, it is designed to help special-interest groups (which may be a group of a certain religion, belief, industry, etc) get their voices heard by members of the law-making body. On the other hand, lobby groups with large amounts of money are able to support campaigns and sway opinions, and therefore limit the mobility of politicians by creating the sense they are owed.

Money contributions under any guise nullifies the original intent of lobbying . Instead
bribery is now the main effect of the efforts on the part of the lobbying organization. No one donates money or gifts funds without the promise of a return, swaying votes or in effect buying congress and thereby making the general electorate voiceless.


In general, Lobbying would be considered a bad thing by the middle class private sector due to their comparative lack of influence IMO. In this day and age, Lobbying has become a way for corporations, religions, and other private and special interest groups to submit their influence over the legislature and essentially circumvent the standard law-making procedure. While all political parties and groups involved with politics have lobbyists, many Americans feel lobbying has gotten out of hand and should be outlawed, but this comes at a double standard because you have to lobby the outlawing of lobbying for it to take any effect lol. However the practice of lobbying is currently protected by the model of government we have and since corporations and other special interests are legally considered a singular entity, they are represented as such in Congress.

[weskurtz81]

Lobbying is still very important on MANY levels. My company participates in lobbying which has helped result in positive changes for my industry as well as consumers in Texas. While there are some lobbying groups that may have too much power, us smaller companies (think middle class America) can use lobbying to form a single cohesive voice that is able to reach our law makers on both a state and federal level.

btbam has it right IMO, lobbying gets a rap overall though some of it IS deserved.

[TwentyThree]

This is interesting

[btbam]

Lobbying is still very important on MANY levels. My company participates in lobbying which has helped result in positive changes for my industry as well as consumers in Texas. While there are some lobbying groups that may have too much power, us smaller companies (think middle class America) can use lobbying to form a single cohesive voice that is able to reach our law makers on both a state and federal level.

btbam has it right IMO, lobbying gets a rap overall though some of it IS deserved.

Jack abramov lol. I read a book once (title to come when I remember it) that summed up lobbying very neatly. It said the purpose of lobbying is to educate, inform, and persuade legislators to your point of view.
In fact, I think it's a vital function on the state and local level. Federal govt. Usually has think tanks or dept. That can have huge research and analysis behind an issue, but states can't. Lobbyists provide that function to educate because the no nothing lobbyist has no influence.

[Morganator]

we need a charismatic leader who puts the country first...then we would need more living space. canada seems decent to "expand" it wouldnt be too difficult and it's not near as ugly as mexico

Being charismatic is the least of my concerns and I suspect, many others' too. Why do you think there are so many Ron Paul supporters? Sure, he's not as charismatic as say Flip Mitt, Fake Rick, Serial Hypocrite Newt but, being charismatic is really a secondary issue or even - dare I say it - a tertiary issue. Ron Paul has it where it counts the most; the voting record and clear stance on every issue.

[weskurtz81]

not gonna lie...

I'm pretty entertained by the new GOP talking point: "Gas is so expensive! Gah!"


Looks like the shoe is on the other foot... I'll have to go back and review what their gamplan was in the past under the same criticism...

I thought gas was expensive by design, hasn't the Secretary of Energy said on multiple occasions that they aren't interested in lower gas prices. Hell, he said a while back, a year or so ago, that they he wanted to figure out how to boost gas prices to the same level as it is in Europe.

So, they say they WANT higher prices, now we HAVE higher prices.... but there's no way the current administrations "energy policy" has NOTHING to do with it??