Nothing's Getting Accomplished Next Two Years

[Andara Bledin]

Trickly down does work, just not fast enough for most folks. All of us that have jobs in the private sector are benefiting from trickle down economics.

Trickle down economics, much like communism, is a fine theory, but falls apart in the real world.

Part of it could be related to the Boots Theory of Economics. Poor people spend more for less because they can't afford to get the better value, thus circulating more money into the economy.

I suspect most of it has to do with how, and where different groups spend their money, and whether they spend it at all or choose to store or invest, instead.

^-.-^

[KitterCat]

Personally I don’t mind having both sides blocked by the other. Neither one seems to be able to balance a budget. Nether one actually keeps it’s promises. Admittedly the Democrats seem to do an even worse job than the Republicans but they both screw up.

As for Obama being out of office by 2012. I’m hoping it happens. Our economy’s messed up, the unemployment rate is insane and this guy keeps breaking promises. Our deficit currently makes Bush look like he only had a minor overdraft fee. And I’m just waiting for China to say they want Alaska or their not lending any more money to us.

We just have to find someone who’s sane. Who knows a politician that’s still sane? If you do please drag them forward for the next two years of “vote for me” speeches. Remember that they’ve got to have a lily white background or at the very least not care about their background.*

*Please tell me I wouldn’t be the only one to find it refreshing to hear a politician tell the public that yes they slept with that girl before they were married, and done -insert drug of choice-. That in the past they have lied, and done things that they regret / don’t regret. I think it’d be a bit refreshing.

[the_std]

Our deficit currently makes Bush look like he only had a minor overdraft fee.

This kind of thing drives me crazy. Bush had eight years plus countless other factors that started before him to make the deficit as climactic as it was. Obama has had two years to try to turn this around. Saying he sucks for not having stopped the descent into deficit is like saying a person sucks for getting squished by a freight train - it takes a lot more time, distance and work to stop a negative financial problem as mammoth as the US deficit than two years. Just because he hasn't miraculously fixed the deficit in this short time span does not mean he's an idiot.

Please note that I am only debating this very specific point about Obama. I don't really know much about American politics, I don't know if Obama is helping or hurting your country, but I do know that this argument is short-sighted no matter who you applied it to. If McCain had won and was dealing with the same flak as Obama for the same problem, I'd be saying the same thing. It's going to take an enormous amount of time and energy to get out of this insane hole your country is now in.

[BlaqueKatt]

This kind of thing drives me crazy. Bush had eight years plus countless other factors that started before him to make the deficit as climactic as it was. Obama has had two years to try to turn this around. <snip>Just because he hasn't miraculously fixed the deficit in this short time span does not mean he's an idiot.

and in that two years he has run up the deficit HIGHER than bush did in his total 8 years. As in his two year deficit total is higher than what Bush ran up in 8 years, while funding TWO WARS!

Bush deficit-8 year total-2751.9 billion(and yes that includes the war spending)

Obama deficit 2 year total-2867 billion

The Obama deficit total does NOT include the impact of the $787 billion Stimulus package approved by House Democrats in February. It also excludes any effect of an Obama contingency request for an additional $750 billion to use for bank rescue. If the contingency amount is included the total deficit for FY 2009/10 is $3.617 trillion

[Greenday]

You mean Obama spent money trying to do something to get us out of the mess Bush left us in and it's cost us a lot more money? Holy crap! Stop the presses.

Problems usually cost more money to fix than to make.

[Andara Bledin]

Our economy’s messed up, the unemployment rate is insane and this guy keeps breaking promises.

Supposedly he's managed to already keep about 120, compromised on about 40, broken about 20, and has either stalled or is still working on another 300 or so. I'd say his record is pretty good.

^-.-^

[Fire_on_High]

Mitt doesn't have a prayer. The true right loathes him, for the most part.

[joe hx]

Trickle down economics, much like communism, is a fine theory, but falls apart in the real world.

Quick question - is trickle down economics giving rich people money or letting them keep the money they've earned?

[Greenday]

Mitt doesn't have a prayer. The true right loathes him, for the most part.

LOL Politics has become all about appeasing the middle, since that's where most people are these days. And do you really think the true right would vote for the Democrat because they don't particularly like the Republican candidate? No way. They will vote Republican in the election no matter what.

[Fire_on_High]

Actually, most of them would leave it blank before voting for a RINO like Mitt. Or just stay home entirely as protest.

[HYHYBT]

His problem would be *getting* to the general election, then. The trick would be to find somebody simultaneously far right enough to get the nomination *and* center enough to win.

(Though I don't even remember enough about Romney to know where he falls. All I remember is that he's from the Northeast someplace. If he's in things when we're less than a year from the election, then I'll look up more information; until then, it doesn't matter.)

[FArchivist]

actually talk is they're looking to Mitt Romney-which Obama wouldn't stand a chance against.

Except that Mitt Romney doesn't have the support in his own party.
Establishment Republicans will vote for him, sure. But the Tea Partiers, who now count for about 1/3 of the Republican Party? They won't give him any support. He's:

a) Mormon, proud of it, and unwilling to convert
b) created state-funded health care in his state

All of the Tea Partiers I'm familiar with consider him a poison pill and a RINO. They want him out BAD.

[Andara Bledin]

Quick question - is trickle down economics giving rich people money or letting them keep the money they've earned?

It's about taking a smaller percentage of money from the people who need it the least in the hopes that they'll spend it and it'll somehow reach the people who need it the most.

I'll get back to you when I start seeing any of it...

^-.-^

[daleduke17]

As Fiance said last night: "Wooo, a split Congress!!! Now shit's not gonna get done twice as fast!" Sad but true. Personally, I'm more worried about the conservative dickwad who's taking over as KS Governor. Just when we need to increase spending for education (public schools are struggling, college professors haven't had a merit raise in about 4 years, etc.), he's going to slash taxes, to do things, "The Kansas way!!"

Come Back, Sebelius....Come BAAAACCCKKKKK!!!!!!

I'm sorry, but professors are overpaid. Maybe a non-tenured year professor may not be highly paid, but, they are better paid than a lot of people. Do the professors get their step increases for being employed by the school for a certain amount of time?

[AdminAssistant]

I'm sorry, but professors are overpaid. Maybe a non-tenured year professor may not be highly paid, but, they are better paid than a lot of people. Do the professors get their step increases for being employed by the school for a certain amount of time?

Not always. A promotion usually grants a pay increase, but those only come around at 6 years (tenure/associate professor) and at 10-12 years (full professor).

However, many schools are hiring more adjunct/lecturers for $2000 per class, no health benefits. So, a 4/4 teaching load (a LOT of teaching, usually the dreaded intro classes as well) grants a whopping $16,000/year. Add to that all of the time that we're supposed to spend doing outside research and publishing, and it's hard to make a living.

An assistant professor in the humanities will typically make $20,000-30,000 their first year. An associate...maybe $40-50 K. It isn't until you hit full professor that you start making good money, all the time working 60-70 hour weeks (if you combine the teaching, research, and service).

Besides, don't businessmen and those in the private sector bitch and whine about how they need raises and good salaries to stay motivated? Why does that not apply to those in higher education? Because we're not doing hard, gritty physical labor, we don't deserve a decent living? Nah, we're only educating the leaders of tomorrow.

The situation is much better in the hard sciences, social sciences, and professional schools (med, law, vet, etc.) I just read an article for class that talked about a study that was done on education funding. They found that colleges are taking money earned from tuition from humanities classes (especially English Composition) and rerouting it to science departments to fund research infrastructure...costs not covered by grants. So, basically, they're taking money away from me, giving it to them to keep the lights on, AND paying their TA's twice as much. Nice.