115
Elections have consequences : Swingers Discussion 2191161081
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsElections have consequences
TOPIC: Elections have consequences
GoTo Page: Less ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Start   81 to 90 of 105   End
User Details are only visible to members.
Va:

Unlike the tea party, the OWS crowd still had a coherent message that wasn't looking backward, and they didn't demand that the government do anything more than do what the companies wouldn't do.

If OWS wanted the government to provide for them, they would have protested in DC and other government facilities... They protested at the banks, the places of business, so to try and make it understood that they wanted business to step up first and if they would not, then the government.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(7576 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
In this way, it was very similar to the Tea Party protests. There were some legitimate gripes, and people had some real points. But it soon became overwhelmed by unions, Democrats, college students and everyone else who isn't happy that life isn't fair.

The Tea Party started with some legitimate gripes and began as an attempt to have a discussion about the role of government, but soon was co-opted by churches, Republicans, rednecks and everyone else who isn't happy about gettin' away from Gawd.

Chesapeake VA
Username hidden
(19802 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I can buy what you're selling VA. I do disagree a little bit in regards to what it means to reinvest into a company, but other than that, I think we're more or less on the same page.

I do get angry through when I think about how fucked up the whole Occupy Movement was. It really could have been productive but apparently was "organized" by some of the most counter-productive people out there.

T

Danville PA
Username hidden
(3203 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
VA:

“The uncertainty with respect to how the 2008 election was going to pan out played an enormous role which we rarely speak of. If I'm an investor, I have equations worked out to calculate risk/reward scenarios. There are lots of variables in those equations, and lots of constants (such as tax rates). When one candidate was promising to alter those constants, suddenly you don't know if your equations are going to be reliable. You don't know if they'll go up, or by how much, or when. Uncertainty = sit on my cash. That's what they did, and they were smart to do so. This uncertainty continued over the next couple of years as we fought and bickered over tax rates, "temporary" tax rates, and other factors. I promise you that uncertainty is even worse than pessimism - at least in a pessimistic scenario you can make some predictions. “

Then you need to get out of the game, because you aren’t ever going to get certainty. If the employees don’t have the certainty of employment, you don’t get the certainty of stability. If you can’t play this game with these facts, you can’t play the game to begin with.

“Now we're talking about why most of them were really there. You're rich (or I think you're rich), I'm not. I don't know how this happened, but I'm here to demand you give me your money. If not, I'll get the government to take it from you and give it to me.

All these signs about how "bankers need to be in jail" etc. For what? Certainly people who pulled shit like Bernie Madoff need to be (and are), but for the most part, people just made this as a blanket statement. Why isn't the head of (whatever) in jail? For the same reason Bill Buckner isn't in jail. Poor job performance isn't a crime. “

This wasn’t poor performance, it was intentional destruction. The banks knew they were making bad business moves by chopping up the loans, the banks knew that when you make bad loans to people who can’t pay back their loans… That you will be stiffed.

When you making profit endangers the national good, it becomes criminal. It becomes placing yourself over the nation and this is economic treason. Nations have collapsed for less.

“I think most of these people (and a lot of people in general) subscribe to a zero-sum economic theory. Since money was suddenly gone, it must have gone somewhere. Lacking anyone who seems to have gotten it all, they turned to Wall St. and the "1%" (who in reality lost far more than anyone else). The idea that most wealth is based on valuation of assets is not something many people understand, and when suddenly everything lost value and wealth evaporated, they were flummoxed.”

Cry me a river. The wealthy were never endanger of losing everything. The top people in the banks weren’t on the street with a foreclosure sign on their homes, the repo guy driving off with their cars or the loss of their medical insurance.

There for the rich, the wealthy, the top 1-2% were never hurt. Worst yet, they threatened further damage unless they were given free money. That is the equivalent of threatening to destroy this nation. Economic terrorism.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(7576 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"The Occupy Movement was a poorly executed attempt to get the richest 1% of Americans to reinvest some of that money into the rest of the company via job creation and wage increases that matched cost of living increases, along with Wall Street reform, health care and education costs, etc, etc. The intent behind the movement was a good one, imo."

Strongly disagree on *most* of that.

"get the richest 1% of Americans to reinvest some of that money into the rest of the company via job creation and wage increases that matched cost of living increases"

If investors are not investing, it's for a reason. They don't invest because it's fun. The invest because they see potential. If they choose to sit on their cash rather than invest, it's because they have made the determination that the potential for reward is too low, or the risk is too high, or both. The same goes with investing in an employee. You increase their wages in order to keep from losing them. It is not in your interest to have unhappy employees, unless, of course, they would be just as unhappy anywhere else, or you WANT them to leave.

The uncertainty with respect to how the 2008 election was going to pan out played an enormous role which we rarely speak of. If I'm an investor, I have equations worked out to calculate risk/reward scenarios. There are lots of variables in those equations, and lots of constants (such as tax rates). When one candidate was promising to alter those constants, suddenly you don't know if your equations are going to be reliable. You don't know if they'll go up, or by how much, or when. Uncertainty = sit on my cash. That's what they did, and they were smart to do so. This uncertainty continued over the next couple of years as we fought and bickered over tax rates, "temporary" tax rates, and other factors. I promise you that uncertainty is even worse than pessimism - at least in a pessimistic scenario you can make some predictions.

"along with Wall Street reform"

In some instances, they were right, although most of them didn't understand why. A huge lack of understanding of economics and "what really happened" contributed to this. They were convinced that the country was broke because Wall St. took all the money, and then the Feds gave Wall St. money to fill the hole. Or something. Whatever. Give me some money. Which gets me to the next one....

" health care and education costs, etc, etc"

Now we're talking about why most of them were really there. You're rich (or I think you're rich), I'm not. I don't know how this happened, but I'm here to demand you give me your money. If not, I'll get the government to take it from you and give it to me.

All these signs about how "bankers need to be in jail" etc. For what? Certainly people who pulled shit like Bernie Madoff need to be (and are), but for the most part, people just made this as a blanket statement. Why isn't the head of (whatever) in jail? For the same reason Bill Buckner isn't in jail. Poor job performance isn't a crime.

I think most of these people (and a lot of people in general) subscribe to a zero-sum economic theory. Since money was suddenly gone, it must have gone somewhere. Lacking anyone who seems to have gotten it all, they turned to Wall St. and the "1%" (who in reality lost far more than anyone else). The idea that most wealth is based on valuation of assets is not something many people understand, and when suddenly everything lost value and wealth evaporated, they were flummoxed.

"was a poorly executed attempt"

Strongly agree :)

Chesapeake VA
Username hidden
(19802 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"But it was easily the most horribly executed protest I've ever seen because they absolutely presented themselves as lazy, dirty, leeches. "

For the most part that's EXACTLY what they are. Those who are not, are out making their way in life. They don't have time to protest, and are smart enough to know it was all bullshit.

Pittsburgh PA
Username hidden
(17109 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Actually, we often think very poorly of pioneers while they are actually pioneering. They are often very controversial figures in their time.

Chesapeake VA
Username hidden
(19802 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"pioneers are so very few today.."

Agree with this. Same as it ever was. In their time, pioneers and prophets are not generally seen as such. Only after they're entered into history does their significance come into focus.

Flat Rock NC
Username hidden
(2984 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"pioneers are so very few today..........BS"

Disagree with this too. It's practically impossible to have more than a few pioneers at any given time. That's what makes them pioneers in the first place.

T

Danville PA
Username hidden
(3203 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"some will learn to take care of them selfs.some will lead.a lot will look to the goverment to take care of them.they will be expolited by such people that want power and will use them."

Strongly disagree. The Occupy Movement was a poorly executed attempt to get the richest 1% of Americans to reinvest some of that money into the rest of the company via job creation and wage increases that matched cost of living increases, along with Wall Street reform, health care and education costs, etc, etc. The intent behind the movement was a good one, imo. But it was easily the most horribly executed protest I've ever seen because they absolutely presented themselves as lazy, dirty, leeches. I liked the idea behind it, but damn if I didn't want to napalm them every time I drop by one of their shanty towns.

T

T

Danville PA
Username hidden
(3203 posts)
GoTo Page: Less ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Start   81 to 90 of 105   End
TOPIC: Elections have consequences