The Presidential Divider

[Penn]

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/06/19/i...pid.print.html

Originally Posted by Penn

http://www.newsweek.com/2011/06/19/i...pid.print.html

I'd take 8 more years of Clinton over 6 more years of Obama. SHIT, I can't beleive I just said that. When in a vacuum, Clinton performs well compared to Barry. But we live in a world where we do not have that luxury. The Clinton's also had set the stage for the continual spiral down, I will admit, however, the Republicans have done their share of the spiral as well.

I never voted for Clinton, sort of, kind of, hated him while he was in Office. Given the current state of affairs, I'm missing the guy.

[Radar Rider]

Originally Posted by Richard

Do you vote?

If so, why?

Richard

I vote, because I want to guide our country in the right direction.

Now, that being said, we often have to deal with the concept of term limits. Those that argue against term limits always say that "if you don't like them, the voters will vote them out."

Uuumm, yeah. I can't vote against Patsy Schroeder, Tip O'Neil, Ted Kennedy, or Bawney Fwank. If that isn't enough to support term limits, then, I am out of arguments.

[scooter]

I've never understood why people understand and endorse term limits for POTUS but not for members of Congress.

It always seems freshman Lawmakers enter the scene with fresh ideas and enthusiasm for fixing problems. Its the jaded multi-termed veterans who become self-licking lollipops. My 2 cents.

[Penn]

we'll see soon enough

[Radar Rider]

Originally Posted by Penn

we'll see soon enough

I don't get it.

[alright4u]

Originally Posted by nmap

Yes...but I'm not sure it's an easy lesson. In fact, it may be quite a painful lesson.

On the one hand, our present spending pattern is less one of borrowing than of printing. The Federal Reserve (I call them the Fed) is purchasing U.S. debt, and in a sense, bailing out the U.S. Congress. The term used is "Quantitative Easing". So...the dollar declines compared to other currencies and also commodities. Everyone gets hurt, at least a little.

But there is another side. What is GDP? It can be written as:

GDP = G + I + C + (E - Im)

With G as Government spending
I as private Investment
C as private Consumption
E as Exports
Im as Imports

So, if we cut G - Government spending - then GDP goes down. Growth in the other terms could offset it, but to really control the deficit we need big numbers. Bigger than Ryan's actually.

Could we raise taxes? Sure. But that must surely reduce private Consumption and Investment, so GDP goes down again.

This implies that cutting our excess spending will result in a lot of economic pain, including greater unemployment. Probably much greater unemployment.

If we put spending cuts off, then the pain, eventually, will be even worse.

What to do? I suppose we should endure a lot of pain today in exchange for a better future a decade or more in the future. I cannot see the voters going along with that. I'm not sure I want to go along with it, since there are ways to make money from the current pattern. Bottom line, I see no solution until we hit a crisis.

Do I vote? Absolutely. I enjoy voting against politicians I don't like. It's a cheap thrill....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product

Years ago GDP was macro econ

[Dusty]

The economy ain't even bad-yet-relatively speaking. Wait 'til the first fiscal quarter for 2012.