so do you guys pay attention to whats going on in the news at all? I mean the economy every day is changing and there is always news. just wondering does anyone else keep an eye on it for fun?
it seems strange but its as though people are trying to completely avoid the topic. is there a reason for that?
politics
Moderator: Moderators
Re: politics
on the internet? Imo the reasons are obviousit seems strange but its as though people are trying to completely avoid the topic. is there a reason for that?
Re: politics
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21576
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21352
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21205
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21202
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21123
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=20567
People don't seem to make many lasting political topics, ostensibly because discussing politics here does not interest them.
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21352
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21205
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21202
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21123
http://springrts.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=20567
People don't seem to make many lasting political topics, ostensibly because discussing politics here does not interest them.
Re: politics
im to assume then that the world of fantasy is more interesting
Re: politics
That too.
Also most "political threads" startposts are just a link to a news site or youtube. No ground for discussion.
Also most "political threads" startposts are just a link to a news site or youtube. No ground for discussion.
Re: politics
those should be plenty of grounds for discussion
Re: politics
i can see that my topic has already become a failure
what about this do you guys agree with this?
http://wallstreetpit.com/13495-john-wil ... 22-percent
unemployment to reach 22%?
what about this do you guys agree with this?
http://wallstreetpit.com/13495-john-wil ... 22-percent
unemployment to reach 22%?
Re: politics
I'm totally ignorant of how things are going in other parts of the world atm, but here in Indiana, this recession has been a nightmare. The collapse of the housing market plus the bankruptcy filings of GM and Chrysler mean that we're pretty devastated.
Here in Indianapolis, my home town, you can see small businesses that have died over the last year, and it's very scary. They're services and resellers- IT firms, restaurants, small shops that were barely hanging on vs. competitors on the Internet. Most of those jobs won't be back, and without them, it's going to become very scary.
We have whole towns that will very likely either collapse financially and will become shells of their former selves, or will survive but with much lower populations as people move away, and that will make things really hard in the areas where the small towns died 30-40 years ago. That, plus the fact that the current lull in the price of oil is just a temporary phenomenon, means there are very serious structural problems coming to this state's finances, imo.
Overall for the U.S., I think that we have a fairly serious long-term problem in terms of employment. The global outsourcing phenomenon, which kept lowering prices for First World consumers for so long, seems to have really backfired now that we've lost the crust of employers who could make a profit when people still had money to spend.
At the same time, the only immediately-available policy tools are various flavors of trade-wars that will backfire almost immediately. We've avoided another Smoot-Hawley, but only barely, and I think the main reason it hasn't happened is because most of the First World owes so much money to so many parties. It's economic M.A.D., and in some ways, it's served as a buffer against some of the usual idiocy during a downturn.
Politically... I do not see a lot of evidence that either of our political parties has a reasonable plan yet. The Great Healthcare Debate has largely kept Americans looking elsewhere, but that can't last a lot longer, and I can sense the frustration when I talk to people about this.
I suspect that the first group that can articulate an optimistic but achievable set of goals beyond the vague idea of "trying to help" will probably achieve a fairly major shift in the current balance of power.
Personally, I think that the Democrats made the largest strategic mistake I've ever seen by trying to implement a New Deal health plan without figuring out how to clearly describe a New Deal economic policy that sounds like it will actually work. Most of the Keynsian stuff in the massive "stimulus" package has either not been spent, because it's stuck in process, or it's been spent and now it's just debt, and hasn't really altered the fundamentals.
I predict that we will see somebody get their thumb out soon, though. The midterm elections will probably hinge on whether somebody can get that "vision thing" working and present a plan to the public. If neither party does... tbh, I think that at that point, we might see a genuine third party arrive, because I think that we've reached a critical point in history, and the hot topics of the past seem rather antiquated.
Here in Indianapolis, my home town, you can see small businesses that have died over the last year, and it's very scary. They're services and resellers- IT firms, restaurants, small shops that were barely hanging on vs. competitors on the Internet. Most of those jobs won't be back, and without them, it's going to become very scary.
We have whole towns that will very likely either collapse financially and will become shells of their former selves, or will survive but with much lower populations as people move away, and that will make things really hard in the areas where the small towns died 30-40 years ago. That, plus the fact that the current lull in the price of oil is just a temporary phenomenon, means there are very serious structural problems coming to this state's finances, imo.
Overall for the U.S., I think that we have a fairly serious long-term problem in terms of employment. The global outsourcing phenomenon, which kept lowering prices for First World consumers for so long, seems to have really backfired now that we've lost the crust of employers who could make a profit when people still had money to spend.
At the same time, the only immediately-available policy tools are various flavors of trade-wars that will backfire almost immediately. We've avoided another Smoot-Hawley, but only barely, and I think the main reason it hasn't happened is because most of the First World owes so much money to so many parties. It's economic M.A.D., and in some ways, it's served as a buffer against some of the usual idiocy during a downturn.
Politically... I do not see a lot of evidence that either of our political parties has a reasonable plan yet. The Great Healthcare Debate has largely kept Americans looking elsewhere, but that can't last a lot longer, and I can sense the frustration when I talk to people about this.
I suspect that the first group that can articulate an optimistic but achievable set of goals beyond the vague idea of "trying to help" will probably achieve a fairly major shift in the current balance of power.
Personally, I think that the Democrats made the largest strategic mistake I've ever seen by trying to implement a New Deal health plan without figuring out how to clearly describe a New Deal economic policy that sounds like it will actually work. Most of the Keynsian stuff in the massive "stimulus" package has either not been spent, because it's stuck in process, or it's been spent and now it's just debt, and hasn't really altered the fundamentals.
I predict that we will see somebody get their thumb out soon, though. The midterm elections will probably hinge on whether somebody can get that "vision thing" working and present a plan to the public. If neither party does... tbh, I think that at that point, we might see a genuine third party arrive, because I think that we've reached a critical point in history, and the hot topics of the past seem rather antiquated.
Re: politics
If I choose to talk about politics, I generally do so with people more proximate, or on international forums focusing on the topic.
I believe that the health care push was misguided, not that a national health care system was unnecessary, but that there are more pressing issues - employment and infrastructure. Our canals, roads and bridges continue to decay, while we lack both high speed rails and general public transit. Many sewer systems and local power grids are years behind in maintenance. Of course, the obvious solution to both is to employ those unable to find jobs in the private sector in restoring our infrastructure. That would be predicated upon a cultural shift - the population needs to learn to consume fewer luxury goods, to invest less in superfluous endeavors, and to select superior options when possible.
I believe that the health care push was misguided, not that a national health care system was unnecessary, but that there are more pressing issues - employment and infrastructure. Our canals, roads and bridges continue to decay, while we lack both high speed rails and general public transit. Many sewer systems and local power grids are years behind in maintenance. Of course, the obvious solution to both is to employ those unable to find jobs in the private sector in restoring our infrastructure. That would be predicated upon a cultural shift - the population needs to learn to consume fewer luxury goods, to invest less in superfluous endeavors, and to select superior options when possible.
Re: politics
Meh, most of the money on infrastructure fixes has either already been spent, or is currently in process, IIRC.
The problem there is that we don't build highways with men carrying loads with wheelbarrows any more, because it just doesn't make any sense to do it that way, and won't make sense unless we do some seriously awful things to the global economy to make labor a lot cheaper here.
The politicians apparently forgot that, or hoped nobody would notice that mainly that funding got spent on a very small number of people, and very few new jobs were created.
The problem there is that we don't build highways with men carrying loads with wheelbarrows any more, because it just doesn't make any sense to do it that way, and won't make sense unless we do some seriously awful things to the global economy to make labor a lot cheaper here.
The politicians apparently forgot that, or hoped nobody would notice that mainly that funding got spent on a very small number of people, and very few new jobs were created.
Re: politics
I don't believe the money being thrown at our infrastructure problem is sufficient. This is a monumental undertaking with very little press and very little visible effort. Local and state governments still cut corners on maintenance across the board.
Re: politics
Discussing politics here is just troll-bait. Look at the 'roflwhalers' discussion. There's some very intelligent people in this community but not enough to stop threads turning into the same boring left-vs-right wing stereotypes which leave both sides looking like idiots.
Frankly, the concept that everyone who hates Bush must also hug trees and eat tofu and everyone who hates Obama is a racist corporate overlord is what puts me off these debates.
There is nothing simple about any political issue, there is no black-and-white when you're talking about more than one person (and not even then). The very concept that something is political, as opposed to just "common sense" implies there must be more than one view point. This does not mean, however, that there is exactly two views (ie, right or wrong, left or right) or that either side is right. It's just as common in such debates that both sides are wrong.
Frankly, I think the two-party system that dominates most western countries is complete FAIL. Most of time I don't want to vote for either party. A truely representative democracy would have hundreds of parties, each with equal airtime and representation.
I blame the news media for most of this, specifically television and radio. Their insistence on cramming complex issues into 30-second sound-bites just fuels the problem of people jumping to easy conclusions. They don't allow enough time to really consider what is being said or provide more than 2 viewpoints.
Frankly, the concept that everyone who hates Bush must also hug trees and eat tofu and everyone who hates Obama is a racist corporate overlord is what puts me off these debates.
There is nothing simple about any political issue, there is no black-and-white when you're talking about more than one person (and not even then). The very concept that something is political, as opposed to just "common sense" implies there must be more than one view point. This does not mean, however, that there is exactly two views (ie, right or wrong, left or right) or that either side is right. It's just as common in such debates that both sides are wrong.
Frankly, I think the two-party system that dominates most western countries is complete FAIL. Most of time I don't want to vote for either party. A truely representative democracy would have hundreds of parties, each with equal airtime and representation.
I blame the news media for most of this, specifically television and radio. Their insistence on cramming complex issues into 30-second sound-bites just fuels the problem of people jumping to easy conclusions. They don't allow enough time to really consider what is being said or provide more than 2 viewpoints.
Re: politics
Hi! I take it you're new on the internet?Scratch wrote:so do you guys pay attention to whats going on in the news at all? I mean the economy every day is changing and there is always news. just wondering does anyone else keep an eye on it for fun?
it seems strange but its as though people are trying to completely avoid the topic. is there a reason for that?
Re: politics
He is a inocent firestarter, living for the flame alone.
Re: politics
Nope, in fact I don't have cable for that reason.Scratch wrote:so do you guys pay attention to whats going on in the news at all?
you mean, the market is volitile? holy heck, I don't believe you, I mean really when did supply and demand ever start fluctuating in a world where goods are constantly changing both in supply, quantity and quality!Scratch wrote:I mean the economy every day is changing and there is always news.
sure, I like to do it after I watch the grass grow.Scratch wrote:just wondering does anyone else keep an eye on it for fun?
Because most people here are not market experts or even qualify as amateurs, hell most of the people here are probably not active in the stock or commodities market. I wouldn't be surprised if most spring players regard their nrfb copy of ota as an investment. Even so, even the "experts" people like Greenspan, Shaw or Buffet do not really know where the market is going.Scratch wrote:it seems strange but its as though people are trying to completely avoid the topic. is there a reason for that?
it is just stupid to waste time speculating on something you are not actively vested in.
Re: politics
There's a recession? Oh, I didn't notice, since Canada didn't deregulate all the things that makes our financial system not implode upon itself.
Ok yeah, we had it a bit: we can't sell our things to you for a profit anymore because an American dollar isn't worth the effort it would take to piss on it.
Blindly adhering to things at all costs like "deregulation", "free market", and "privatization", is retarded and borne of the same spirit of unproven moral superiority that got you into a 16-way clusterfail in the middle east, and self-centered attitude that made you not feel the need to specify that you were talking about American politics when you posted this. A totally free market does not automatically bring any more inherent benefits than it does inherent massive, world-destroying, dystopian-future-creating risks.
Doubly so when the people in power are all too happy to watch their opponents' constituents burn for as long as they can hold on to power, and then trade places and get more bitter and vengeful every four years. Promising, of course, that it won't be like last time, when somehow that guy who betrayed the flag infiltrated their party and got elected.
"Ohh we'll take back Congress/Senate/something in 2010, just you wait, and then things will get better." Like they did in 2004. I mean 2000. But that was the fault of the dirty foreigners that don't believe in your god and have strange names though, wasn't it?
Enjoy the mess you've made out of your own arrogance and willful ignorance. Be sure to visit in July for some great skiing opportunities. Now I'm depressed and angry I have to live near you, I'm ordering a pizza...
~~~~~
To my American friends here, this wasn't directed at you. It's directed at Jesusland and teabaggers. To my American enemies here, I was forced to write this by a dangerous foreign power in order to steal your rightful freedom-from-reading-this-post.
Ok yeah, we had it a bit: we can't sell our things to you for a profit anymore because an American dollar isn't worth the effort it would take to piss on it.
Blindly adhering to things at all costs like "deregulation", "free market", and "privatization", is retarded and borne of the same spirit of unproven moral superiority that got you into a 16-way clusterfail in the middle east, and self-centered attitude that made you not feel the need to specify that you were talking about American politics when you posted this. A totally free market does not automatically bring any more inherent benefits than it does inherent massive, world-destroying, dystopian-future-creating risks.
Doubly so when the people in power are all too happy to watch their opponents' constituents burn for as long as they can hold on to power, and then trade places and get more bitter and vengeful every four years. Promising, of course, that it won't be like last time, when somehow that guy who betrayed the flag infiltrated their party and got elected.
"Ohh we'll take back Congress/Senate/something in 2010, just you wait, and then things will get better." Like they did in 2004. I mean 2000. But that was the fault of the dirty foreigners that don't believe in your god and have strange names though, wasn't it?
Enjoy the mess you've made out of your own arrogance and willful ignorance. Be sure to visit in July for some great skiing opportunities. Now I'm depressed and angry I have to live near you, I'm ordering a pizza...
~~~~~
To my American friends here, this wasn't directed at you. It's directed at Jesusland and teabaggers. To my American enemies here, I was forced to write this by a dangerous foreign power in order to steal your rightful freedom-from-reading-this-post.
Last edited by Caydr on 09 Jan 2010, 22:34, edited 8 times in total.
Re: politics
Politics? You must mean this.
Re: politics
I love that edit button so much I could cry.
-
Forboding Angel
- Evolution RTS Developer
- Posts: 14673
- Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43
Re: politics
The new healthcare bill, among many other things, is slated to put the hardcore whammy on small business.
It's tragically funny tbh. Democrats do their best to try to do things that are "good for the little guy", but in the end, what they do ends up destroying the "little guy".
With small businesses getting hardcore assfucked, it's no real wonder why unemployment is rising, and will rise even further until small businesses are given a break from all the ridiculous burdens they have to bear (burdens originally meant for large corporations). This would be democrat version of "trickle down economics".
BTW, ITF, politics = trollbait
Edit: Caydr, did you just insinuate that 911 was ok because americans are to stupid to see "other religions" as being valid? WHere did that logic come from?
Edit2: in 2000-2008, the republican congress became drunk with power. Thats a widely known fact. Do you think we're happy about it? Taking back means taking back from the dems yes, but also taking back from the repubican retards who got sauced on their power and hardcore fucked up as well.
It's tragically funny tbh. Democrats do their best to try to do things that are "good for the little guy", but in the end, what they do ends up destroying the "little guy".
With small businesses getting hardcore assfucked, it's no real wonder why unemployment is rising, and will rise even further until small businesses are given a break from all the ridiculous burdens they have to bear (burdens originally meant for large corporations). This would be democrat version of "trickle down economics".
BTW, ITF, politics = trollbait
Edit: Caydr, did you just insinuate that 911 was ok because americans are to stupid to see "other religions" as being valid? WHere did that logic come from?
Edit2: in 2000-2008, the republican congress became drunk with power. Thats a widely known fact. Do you think we're happy about it? Taking back means taking back from the dems yes, but also taking back from the repubican retards who got sauced on their power and hardcore fucked up as well.
Re: politics
Have you considered something other than a two party system?