The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Off-Topic (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   US Elections 2008: Debate the Issues (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=152191)

Netto Azure September 9th, 2008 6:48 AM

Argh...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BRTD (Post 3924579)
I'm Sorry all of you believe revisionist lies. I thought this community was fair and balanced but yet you believe bolshevik lies.

SERIOUSLY do you even know the Truth? This is not a communist country. We are not in the Soviet Union or in China in the 50's-80's Ok? The Internet is one of the most Democratic Places on the World in the 21st Century...We are just showing opinions giving suggestions...NOW here's someone WHO'S ON THE FAR RIGHT.

Anyways I'll put the Immigration issue in the back burner because of this:

Federal Government takes over Fannie Mae and Fredie Mac:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26591359/

Temporary Consensus for Immigration: Legal Immigration is Great. Illegal Immigration should be debated by Congress on what we should do.


Thoughts?

Now I'm not being pessimistic but Americans did bite off more than we could chew...and See where that has gotten us MORE Taxpayer intervention.

Aurafire September 9th, 2008 7:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vtommy1 (Post 3925212)
SERIOUSLY do you even know the Truth? This is not a communist country. We are not in the Soviet Union or in China in the 50's-80's Ok? The Internet is one of the most Democratic Places on the World in the 21st Century...We are just showing opinions giving suggestions...NOW here's someone WHO'S ON THE FAR RIGHT.

Anyways I'll put the Immigration issue in the back burner because of this:

Feds take over Fannie Mae and Fredie Mac:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26591359/

Thoughts?

Kind of necessary I guess....The two biggest mortgage companies in the country going out of business would be a flippin disaster.

wolf September 9th, 2008 7:41 AM

Will the Soviet Union take over the Georgia (Europe) or will they destroy it?

Ivysaur September 9th, 2008 9:05 AM

About immigration, kicking all of them just because it's not the best option. If they come to the US (and to most of the developed countries) it's because they have no money to live. Kicking them won't solve anything, because, once they go back to their countries, they will still be in the same need as before, and they will probably try to come back. The only way to finish it is helping the poor countries.

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadowmightyena (Post 3925292)
Will the Soviet Union take over the Georgia (Europe) or will they destroy it?

...as far as I know, the Soviet Union disappeared in 1991 after Berlin's Wall was torn down o_o

Netto Azure September 9th, 2008 10:08 AM

Hmm...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aurasphere (Post 3925286)
Kind of necessary I guess....The two biggest mortgage companies in the country going out of business would be a flippin disaster.

But that's Socialism...
Anyways the Government is now essentially the Largest mortgage broker in the world...So now to be frank this mess is everybody's fault, Wall Street, The Government Regulators, The Middlemen (Mortgage Companies and Banks) even the General public for "biting more than we could chew" (Yes even my family's material "stuff" such as cars, credit cards, etc. are funded through loans and debt.) By living a little bit more extravagant than normal the debt of most Americans piled up that the "bubble" burst...Eh...I just hope MOSTLY EVERYONE learns their lesson and live a little bit more frugal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Went (Post 3925427)
About immigration, kicking all of them just because it's not the best option. If they come to the US (and to most of the developed countries) it's because they have no money to live. Kicking them won't solve anything, because, once they go back to their countries, they will still be in the same need as before, and they will probably try to come back. The only way to finish it is helping the poor countries.

That is true that is what we should be striving for. But we can't fund everything at once...so what is the short-term solution? (The million dollar question?) Just enforcing laws already streatches Homeland Security a lot.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Went (Post 3925427)

O_o Yeah...that's also true shouldn't everybody know that through their Grade 10 World History Class (even just the Simpsons is enough) and in College.

Xairmo September 9th, 2008 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadowmightyena (Post 3925292)
Will the Soviet Union take over the Georgia (Europe) or will they destroy it?

...Yeah, proof that No Child Left Behind is not working -_-'
Quote:

Originally Posted by Went (Post 3925427)
About immigration, kicking all of them just because it's not the best option. If they come to the US (and to most of the developed countries) it's because they have no money to live. Kicking them won't solve anything, because, once they go back to their countries, they will still be in the same need as before, and they will probably try to come back. The only way to finish it is helping the poor countries.

Easier said than done. Our country is already trillions of dollars in debt, how do you suppose we help poor countries? Do you suggest that go into their countries and tell them how they need to act? Cause honestly we've tried that approach quite a few times in the past and it led to half of the world hating America >.>
I personally don't think we should be meddling in the affairs of other countries, at least not right now. As for imaggration, it causes over-population and many vast problems for our citzens. Illegal immigrants take jobs from our legal citizens, which firther causes us economical problems. We must deport them, even if that means sending them to starvation and pverty. It's cruel but there is no way to appease all people. Our government has a duty to our citizens first and foremost.

Edit: I just like to clarify. I think immigration is fine, but I don't think illegal immigration is okay.

Mooshykris September 9th, 2008 10:41 AM

Heh, I don't know how I missed this thread so long.

Well, I don't have time for a full length discussion on everything right now, but I do have a quick note.

On politics: I am a McCain supporter, and I won't go into it further than that I believe McCain is the best choice for our Country. I'm not interested in debating how, why, my intelligence, or so forth.


On immigration: I agree that they should have a chance, but with that ability of being here, they should have the responsability of becoming citizens, learning our language, paying taxes, and working like every other American does.


On energy and the enviornemnt: I am a very strong believer in clean energy, and believe that we must act towards improving it. I do not, however, believe that we can change everything overnight. We need to start working on clean energy, but we must use fossil fuels so modern civilization doesn't come crashing down with no energy if someone were to just outlaw it, like how some people in the media do.

However, I am also not a believer in Global Warming. I do believe in Global Climate Change, but not in the way the media portrays it. I believe the media overestimates the effects we can cause overnight with fossil fuel emissions. (ie The Day After Tomorrow)

I feel that in the end, we don't really have a massive effect on the Global Environment on a long term scale, as the natural cycles are always at work.


Overall: Regardless of who is elected, or who's policy is what, no one can change the world overnight. So I believe who is expecting a drastic amount of change when the next president is elected is not thinking realistically.


I'll explain anything later in greater detail if anyone wants me to,


~Mooshykris

txteclipse September 9th, 2008 10:52 AM

Federal Government take over Fannie Mae and Fredie Mac

Buy lots of gold. Now.

There has been government intervention in the economy before. In fact, it happens all the time. As long as the company accepts the help, then I don't see why the heck not the government shouldn't jump in.

Netto Azure September 9th, 2008 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by txteclipse (Post 3925610)
Federal Government takes over Fannie Mae and Fredie Mac

Buy lots of gold. Now.

There has been government intervention in the economy before. In fact, it happens all the time. As long as the company accepts the help, then I don't see why the heck not the government shouldn't jump in.

Gold...Isn't that going back to the Gold Standard?

txteclipse September 9th, 2008 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vtommy1 (Post 3925886)
Gold...Isn't that going back to the Gold Standard?

Not if you do it as an individual. If the entire government backed up the economy with gold, then yes.

Netto Azure September 9th, 2008 12:56 PM

Hee...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by txteclipse (Post 3925891)
Not if you do it as an individual. If the entire government backed up the economy with gold, then yes.

You've been watching that infomercial haven't you?

txteclipse September 9th, 2008 1:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vtommy1 (Post 3925895)
You've been watching that infomercial haven't you?

Do NOT buy gold from an infomercial. XD They are usually scams that either make you pay more than the gold is worth or whatnot.

Sorry for going off on a tangent, but this website seems dependable. I linked to a page that explains quickly and simply why you should have gold.

Netto Azure September 9th, 2008 5:12 PM

Yup..
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by txteclipse (Post 3925929)
Do NOT buy gold from an infomercial. XD They are usually scams that either make you pay more than the gold is worth or whatnot.

Sorry for going off on a tangent, but this website seems dependable. I linked to a page that explains quickly and simply why you should have gold.

Yes..that has been recommended on that book called "How to be Invisible" (figuratively) by JJ Luna. Hide some amount of savings in a physical form (Money of different currencies, Precious metals, gems etc. (Great if you want to increase your privacy and yeah I read "weird" books)

Anyways since were in the issue of the Mortgage mess...Top issue for most Americans right now...

What do you think about the US economy?

Any suggestions on how we should deal with this? Since by "buying out" the GOE's Fannie May & Freddie Mac this administration has essentially dumped the problem to the next Administration and session of Congress...

Red1530 September 9th, 2008 6:35 PM

I am going to try and help define what a gold standard is. In the past the money in circulation was backed by gold. That meant if you wanted to you could exchange x amount of dollars to the equivalent amount of gold. Today however the currency is fiat. That means it has value because the government says it has value.

Netto Azure September 10th, 2008 10:09 AM

Yeah...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Red1530 (Post 3926796)
I am going to try and help define what a gold standard is. In the past the money in circulation was backed by gold. That meant if you wanted to you could exchange x amount of dollars to the equivalent amount of gold. Today however the currency is fiat. That means it has value because the government says it has value.


I know that...(I don't know why but I love History) and when we switched from the Gold Standard and instituted a "Floating Currency" which you could say epitomizes Capitalism since it only works if the People believe that the Paper Money is worth something...since Our current currency is just a form of a "promise". I think he was just talking about this individually as a form of savings...Not recommending that the Fed Government move back to the Gold Standard.

Anyways I was listening to "Talk of the Nation" on NPR (I know I should be doing my HW or watching "Bleach" or something....) (Check out: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/)

And they were talking about how the Federal Take-over of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac Does not mean that the Federal government gets $5 trillion more debt since it's backed by "loans" aka your house,cars, etc. or Mortgages. And that the Governments Debt aka Treasury bonds (Currently about $10 Trillion...Our GDP is about $13 Trillion) is just a promise by the government that they'll pay it back (an IOU) and it's not backed by anything (Such as Gold in Fort Knox)...

Wow this thread has slowed down...Is the economy THAT boring...

TRIFORCE89 September 11th, 2008 5:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vtommy1 (Post 3927923)
Wow this thread has slowed down...Is the economy THAT boring...

Not boring, just complicated. There are variety of different economic schools to prescribe to. Of all the issues, the economy would be the most complicated in my opinion and would have some the greatest differences between the candidates.

Stalin Malone September 11th, 2008 6:22 PM

Barack Obama is the most liberal senator and thus he would have the worst economic policy.

Netto Azure September 11th, 2008 6:34 PM

Ugh....
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BRTD (Post 3931714)
Barack Obama is the most liberal senator and thus he would have the worst economic policy.

What is up with you and progressiveness...??? I mean you come here, troll w/o evidence and keep on spouting that "liberalism" is bad. I mean even John McCain supports some "liberal" policies...Does that mean he's also a bad candidate????

ChronicEdge September 12th, 2008 3:37 PM

Meh, what I think would most benefit the economy (ending this oversea sweatshop BS) isn't supported by anyone. *Sigh*

WE NEED MORE FRIGGIN' JOBS!!! D:<

Abrogate Nadir September 12th, 2008 4:14 PM

Quote:

Barack Obama is the most liberal senator and thus he would have the worst economic policy.
While there are certainly people on the left with questionable economic ideas, simply being a liberal does not automatically mean you are one of those people.

I'd also like to respectfully point out that Bill Clinton was a liberal, and his reversal of supply side economics--which was put in place by George Bush Sr.--turned a massive debt into a massive surplus over his years in office.

Volkner's Apprentice September 12th, 2008 5:11 PM

I honestly think McCain (well not just think, but know considering anyone can Google his views on major issues) is a much more Moderate choice for America than most people think. Everyone I know who is going to vote for Obama (the vast majority of them anyway) go straight to "McCain is Bush. We'd be doomed for another 4 years. No way." Ummm...sorry, but McCain is not a second Bush. That isn't going to happen. John McCain tackles many issues in different ways than did Bush and on top of it all, he's openly disagreed with a lot of things the Bush administration did over the course of the past eight years. I was too little to fully get politics back in Gore/Bush and even in Kerry/Bush I wasn't crazily informed. Now that I'm older and I know how to research a bit more, I'm definitely choosing McCain over Obama for a good number of reasons.

I mean of course our nation needs change, everyone can see that. Change is good sometimes, but taking America by the ankles and shaking it for it's lunch money is probably not such a good idea. We don't want to turn what we know upside down and backwards, we want to ease into change. Hence the slow Iraq withdrawl.

You simply cannot up and run from a nation you've invaded. There was a quote from someone asking George Bush Sr. about an island near Australia that I might try to find relating to this topic. We can't just pack up and jet out of Iraq and let the place fall apart. That would be giving up on our world, giving up on the people in that nation. A lot of them don't want us there, but those extremists don't know what else to say. They've had what they think of as an "orderly" lifestyle and they don't understand how to react to the situation, so they rebel. If we were to leave, it'd be the same as turning our backs on Darfur.

speedinglight September 12th, 2008 6:55 PM

either way the next 4-8 years WILL be better than these last 8 FOR SURE

Allstories September 13th, 2008 7:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryan24 (Post 3933976)
I mean of course our nation needs change, everyone can see that. Change is good sometimes, but taking America by the ankles and shaking it for it's lunch money is probably not such a good idea. We don't want to turn what we know upside down and backwards, we want to ease into change. Hence the slow Iraq withdrawl.

You're talking about raising taxes, right? I hate to break it to you, but taxes need to be raised in any event. Even if McCain is in office. And why should change necessarily be slow? Our country is broken NOW.

Also, don't forget about McCain's disastrous pick of a VP. What if he dies? Would you suggest that Palin would be a qualified president? I just don't think our country can afford to take that kind of gamble.

Aurafire September 13th, 2008 9:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allstories (Post 3935091)
You're talking about raising taxes, right? I hate to break it to you, but taxes need to be raised in any event. Even if McCain is in office. And why should change necessarily be slow? Our country is broken NOW.

Also, don't forget about McCain's disastrous pick of a VP. What if he dies? Would you suggest that Palin would be a qualified president? I just don't think our country can afford to take that kind of gamble.

The exact same thing could be said about Obama. You believe the Palin is inexperienced and would be a disaster if she got into office. Well, I believe the exact same thing about Obama, except Obama is the one actually running for president! I wouldn't take Obama to be a qualified president in a million years.

And high taxes isn't necessarily a good thing. Raising corporate taxes and income taxes of wealthy families to obscene levels like 50% or more is not what we need right now. What do you think those people do with their profits? Let it sit in a bank account and collect dust? They invest it, create new jobs, give to charity, buy property, buy new cars...these are all things that drive the economy. Take away corporate and upper class purchasing power, and you're going to ruin the country even more.

We should create government programs that actually work: that help the lower class get themselves out of poverty. This does not mean hand-outs or tax breaks. It means giving them the means to help themselves instead of just throwing money at them, which does diddly-squat. I also think that lower class families should receive cheaper healthcare if they cannot afford it themselves. Really, if everyone just took some personal responsibility instead of sitting on their lazy butts and letting the government take care of them (not everyone, just some people), we wouldn't be in this much of a jam.

x Cutie x September 13th, 2008 10:12 AM

I like Barack Obama. I'd definitely vote for him if I had to make a choice.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 6:59 PM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.