(08-09-2014 04:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 04:17 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(08-05-2014 10:38 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(08-05-2014 10:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Because the economy and health care reform was more important.
Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

And he f**ked up both. Next.

Healthcare Reform would have worked if the Conservatives hadn't pushed hard against it.
Single Payer would be great. Republicans said no.
A Single Payer Option would have been great. Republicans said no.
So what we got for the ACA was a watered down, ****** bill that Republicans try to (laughably) pin completely on Obama.
But truthfully, it is Obama's fault in great deal. He couldn't lead a girl scout troop out of a wet paper bag and the Democratic Party is filled with ******* *******.

No.

DEMOCRATS said no to Single-Payer. Socialist/communist Obama couldn't even pull his own party that far left.
DEMOCRATS said no to Public Option. Socialist/communist Obama couldn't even pull his own party that far left.
Republicans said no to the "watered down, ****** bill" that is correctly attributed to Obama and the democrats because ZERO republicans voted for it.
Those are facts. This is opinion. Neither Single-Payer nor Public Option would have been worth a damn. Just like Obamacare.

(08-09-2014 04:39 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 04:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 04:17 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(08-05-2014 10:38 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(08-05-2014 10:36 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Because the economy and health care reform was more important.
Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

And he f**ked up both. Next.

Healthcare Reform would have worked if the Conservatives hadn't pushed hard against it.
Single Payer would be great. Republicans said no.
A Single Payer Option would have been great. Republicans said no.
So what we got for the ACA was a watered down, ****** bill that Republicans try to (laughably) pin completely on Obama.
But truthfully, it is Obama's fault in great deal. He couldn't lead a girl scout troop out of a wet paper bag and the Democratic Party is filled with ******* *******.

No.

DEMOCRATS said no to Single-Payer. Socialist/communist Obama couldn't even pull his own party that far left.
DEMOCRATS said no to Public Option. Socialist/communist Obama couldn't even pull his own party that far left.
Republicans said no to the "watered down, ****** bill" that is correctly attributed to Obama and the democrats because ZERO republicans voted for it.
Those are facts. This is opinion. Neither Single-Payer nor Public Option would have been worth a damn. Just like Obamacare.

Instead of posting a selfie, why don't you refute anything he's said? Cause between this and educating our local history "teacher", Owl is spot on. On Fiiir I tell ya, Fiiir.

(08-09-2014 04:49 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 04:39 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 04:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 04:17 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(08-05-2014 10:38 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  And he f**ked up both. Next.

Healthcare Reform would have worked if the Conservatives hadn't pushed hard against it.
Single Payer would be great. Republicans said no.
A Single Payer Option would have been great. Republicans said no.
So what we got for the ACA was a watered down, ****** bill that Republicans try to (laughably) pin completely on Obama.
But truthfully, it is Obama's fault in great deal. He couldn't lead a girl scout troop out of a wet paper bag and the Democratic Party is filled with ******* *******.

No.

DEMOCRATS said no to Single-Payer. Socialist/communist Obama couldn't even pull his own party that far left.
DEMOCRATS said no to Public Option. Socialist/communist Obama couldn't even pull his own party that far left.
Republicans said no to the "watered down, ****** bill" that is correctly attributed to Obama and the democrats because ZERO republicans voted for it.
Those are facts. This is opinion. Neither Single-Payer nor Public Option would have been worth a damn. Just like Obamacare.

Instead of posting a selfie, why don't you refute anything he's said? Cause between this and educating our local history "teacher", Owl is spot on. On Fiiir I tell ya, Fiiir.

Because when presented with information, you guys stick your fingers in your ears and yell loud enough that the person can't be heard.

You're so against socialism? I won't give my superior knowledge to those who intellectually mooch off others.

Thank you, but who would want it?

(08-09-2014 05:31 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 04:49 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 04:39 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 04:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 04:17 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  Healthcare Reform would have worked if the Conservatives hadn't pushed hard against it.
Single Payer would be great. Republicans said no.
A Single Payer Option would have been great. Republicans said no.
So what we got for the ACA was a watered down, ****** bill that Republicans try to (laughably) pin completely on Obama.
But truthfully, it is Obama's fault in great deal. He couldn't lead a girl scout troop out of a wet paper bag and the Democratic Party is filled with ******* *******.

No.

DEMOCRATS said no to Single-Payer. Socialist/communist Obama couldn't even pull his own party that far left.
DEMOCRATS said no to Public Option. Socialist/communist Obama couldn't even pull his own party that far left.
Republicans said no to the "watered down, ****** bill" that is correctly attributed to Obama and the democrats because ZERO republicans voted for it.
Those are facts. This is opinion. Neither Single-Payer nor Public Option would have been worth a damn. Just like Obamacare.

Instead of posting a selfie, why don't you refute anything he's said? Cause between this and educating our local history "teacher", Owl is spot on. On Fiiir I tell ya, Fiiir.

Because when presented with information, you guys stick your fingers in your ears and yell loud enough that the person can't be heard.

You're so against socialism? I won't give my superior "knowledge" to those who intellectually mooch off others.

I put it in quotes, because you've proven to the rest of the board, to be a mental midget.

(08-09-2014 05:31 PM)mathenis89 Wrote:  Because when presented with information, you guys stick your fingers in your ears and yell loud enough that the person can't be heard.
You're so against socialism? I won't give my superior knowledge to those who intellectually mooch off others.

But you've presented no information. You've presented nothing but unsupported (and factually incorrect) talking points.

Something doesn't become true because you posted it.

(08-09-2014 03:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 03:27 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Whether it happened naturally or because of what someone did, it's still getting better.
If we are no longer in a recession, it means the economy is no longer shrinking.

No, it's not getting better, it's just going through a cycle. It's like the moon doesn't get bigger going from new to full, or smaller going back from full to new. It's still the same moon, just going through cycles.

And I would argue that on balance it is getting worse. We're getting deeper and deeper into debt--both public and private sectors. We're importing way more than we export. And businesses and jobs are continuing to relocate overseas to get lower costs, lower taxes, and less intrusive regulation. Those are not signs of economic improvement.

You would have to compare what you think is economic growth with what everyone else thinks is economic growth because every standard that I have seen frequently used to determine economic growth clearly that we have been in recovery.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(08-10-2014 09:52 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 03:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-09-2014 03:27 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Whether it happened naturally or because of what someone did, it's still getting better.
If we are no longer in a recession, it means the economy is no longer shrinking.

No, it's not getting better, it's just going through a cycle. It's like the moon doesn't get bigger going from new to full, or smaller going back from full to new. It's still the same moon, just going through cycles.
And I would argue that on balance it is getting worse. We're getting deeper and deeper into debt--both public and private sectors. We're importing way more than we export. And businesses and jobs are continuing to relocate overseas to get lower costs, lower taxes, and less intrusive regulation. Those are not signs of economic improvement.

You would have to compare what you think is economic growth with what everyone else thinks is economic growth because every standard that I have seen frequently used to determine economic growth clearly that we have been in recovery.

You are failing to address the point I am making, perhaps because you are failing to comprehend it.

Short term growth indicators tell us where we are in an economic cycle, not how healthy the economy is overall. Normally what happens with a downturn is that things go negative for a period, then things swing strongly positive for a period (usually, the harder you went in, the harder you come out), then level off and basically keep up with population growth for a while. What has happened here is that we had the downturn and went straight to the leveling off without ever having the rapid growth recovery mode.

Another factor to consider. Growth numbers are adjusted for inflation. A 10% increase in nominal GDP could be 10% growth or 10% inflation and 0% growth, or anywhere in between. There are a lot of indicators that current inflation measures are understated by excluding certain factors that should be included, and if inflation were higher then growth would be lower.

The indicators you are referencing 1) haven't been nearly as strong as they should be in a recovery, and 2) tell us where we are in an economic cycle, not how healthy the economy is as a whole. And quite frankly, 1) tells me that we aren't that healthy.