Obama thinks you are dumb! "Professional Politicans" know better than you!! (video)

reply to post by Kitilani


reply to post by Kitilani


Before I went back to the family business I spent 15 years working for city county and state governments.

You have know idea of the waste that goes on there. Or the card tricks that are played on department budgets.

Avg '04 Avg '08 Growth '04-'08 % Change Category 2009 Net Worth . . 41 Democrats . Gutierrez, Luis V (D-Ill) $47,503 $1,790,508 $1,743,005 3,669 >100% Gain $2,358,005 . Scott, David (D-Ga) $107,262 $3,008,001 $2,900,739 2,704 >100% Gain $3,758,001 . Sanchez, Loretta (D-Calif) $196,505 $2,547,501 $2,350,996 1,196 >100% Gain $2,474,001 . Sanchez, Linda (D-Calif) -$32,500 $342,500 $375,000 1,154 >100% Gain $751,010 . Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie (D-SD) -$112,000 $1,152,510 $1,264,510 1,129 >100% Gain $1,332,853 . Obama, Barack $300,002 $3,670,505 $3,370,503 1,124 >100% Gain $4,960,505 . Feingold, Russ (D-Wis) $8,000 $83,501 $75,501 944 >100% Gain $83,001 . Hinchey, Maurice (D-NY) $74,002 $727,509 $653,507 883 >100% Gain $743,508 . Eshoo, Anna (D-Calif) -$385,996 $1,508,003 $1,893,999 491 >100% Gain $1,683,503 . McGovern, James P (D-Mass) $474,002 $2,673,503 $2,199,501 464 >100% Gain $2,330,503

governmentgonewild.org...

While the rest of us are losing out shirts shorts and socks some of the Professional politicians are cleaning up looks like they are making money hand over fist .

Its like an elected monarchy.

Originally posted by Lostinthedarkness

Before I went back to the family business I spent 15 years working for city county and state governments.

You have know idea of the waste that goes on there. Or the card tricks that are played on department budgets.

You have no idea what I do, who I am, or what I have ideas of.

While the rest of us are losing out shirts shorts and socks some of the Professional politicians are cleaning up looks like they are making money hand over fist .

Its like an elected monarchy.

Sure does. Why any of you hope that just gets worse is the part that confuses me. Apparently you thought I said our government is already perfect. I did not. Thank you for completely failing to address my actual post.

Originally posted by Kitilani
reply to post by Lostinthedarkness

 

Too many "businessmen" seem to think that running a business and running the government are alike. I have to assume the purpose of your business is to turn a profit.

How is it different ? Both have to balance a revenue stream cash flow in and cash flow out . A business has similar obligations and expenses as do governments .

Governments are notorious of wasteful spending on our dime ! A business who uses department budgets will at the end of fiscal year roll over unused cash back to the business while a governmental agency will spend every last penny before the end of the fiscal year weather they need to or not . Many of these unused items will set for years in a warehouse till they are surplussed sold at a auction totally unused for a loss to all of us. Maybe governments should run more like a business !

Originally posted by Kitilani
reply to post by Lostinthedarkness

 

I have to assume the purpose of your business is to turn a profit. That is not the purpose of our government. That is the purpose of a monarchy.

The purpose may not be turn a profit. But its purpose is not spend its self in to oblivion !

The Professional Politicians have NEVER learned to live with in their means as long as they get more they will spend every last penny and ask for more .

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Indigo5

 

I will skip the "Marxist" and Humility bits.

As far as the above....you do enjoy reading and educating yourself?

Given that it was you brought the issue of humility into this thread, and given it turned around and bit you in the ass, it would behoove you to drop it.

As I stated in my last post. I have no interest in engaging in BS and personal baiting. That is why I am avoiding that nonsense you are employing in lieu of a reasoned response.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
As to the link you provided, and given you couldn't be bothered to follow it up with your own reasoning as to why you quoted what you did, this forces me to assume you did so to support your erroneous contention that retirement affects production. Yet, what you posted speaks to cost, earnings, and consumption. It doesn't speak to production at all.

Are you unaware of what GDP is?

Did you bother to read that which you quoted?

Yes, but apparently amongst the two of us I was the one who understood it.

All of what I quoted explained the MACROECONOMIC IMPACT of proposed solutions to the Social Security question. The affects on Macroeconomic variables.

As for the relation to Production that you claimed did not exist..

For your future reference GDP stands for Gross Domestic Product, which refers to the market value of all final goods and services produced within a country in a given period.

Originally posted by Indigo5

• Raise the retirement age: Lifetime benefits paid to retirees are reduced. This encourages workers to remain in the labor force longer, which means they earn more over their lifetime. The increase in lifetime income could lead workers to save less and consume more during their working years. In addition, the increased fiscal savings from reduced pension payments will have long-term positive effects on GDP growth by lowering the cost of capital and encouraging investment.

For someone that claims they objectively educate themselves and read large amounts of materials before commenting on an issue – I am not seeing that here.

Social Security is an economic issue. GDP and several other variables are significantly affected by changes to Social Security.

Keep on keeping on though. Ignorance by choice is a special thing.

reply to post by Indigo5

As I stated in my last post. I have no interest in engaging in BS and personal baiting. That is why I am avoiding that nonsense you are employing in lieu of a reasoned response.

Right. That's why you brought humility up to begin with, because you "have no interest in BS and personal baiting"...you apparently have no interest in honesty either.

Here in fact, is precisely what you posted:

This is where a less humble man would retort with an emotional idealogical argument and discount the logic.

That is the fact, and the truth of it. Whatever made you think you could simply just pretend you didn't post this is your business, but your willingness to behave deceitfully does not bode well for your unsupported arguments.

Are you unaware of what GDP is?

Apparently all you're aware of is that GDP stand for "gross domestic product", and are incorrectly interpreting this to be about production:

Gross domestic product (GDP) refers to the market value of all final goods and services produced within a country in a given period. It is often considered an indicator of a country's standard of living

For your future reference GDP stands for Gross Domestic Product, which refers to the market value of all final goods and services produced within a country in a given period.

Which means it is in regards to price, not production. But, of course, you are so caught up in your arrogance you continue to believe your mistakes of facts and misinterpretations have validity.

Perhaps you should take this tutorial to get a better understanding of what the GDP actually is:

The basic formula for calculating the GDP is:
Y = C + I + E + G where
Y = GDP
C = Consumer Spending
I = Investment made by industry
E = Excess of Exports over Imports
G = Government Spending

Of course, as this tutorial say's itself:

This formula is almost self-evident (if you take time to think about it)!

What is certainly self evident from the formula provided above is that along with investment made by industry, consumer spending, excess of exports over imports, and government spending are taken into account. So, when you hopelessly attempt to link Social Security to production simply because an article you linked claimed the GDP was affected by this, you are necessarily ignoring consumer spending, and government spending in order to take your blind leap of faith that all you have to do is cry GDP and be vindicated.
'
There are three ways to determine the GDP, which are the product approach, the income approach, and expenditure approach. You will often hear the GDP alternatively called the GDI, because of the income approach.

Simon Kuznets, who developed the formula for the GDP had this to say about it in his first Congressional Record appearance:

...the welfare of a nation can, therefore, scarcely be inferred from a measure of national income...

He was cautioning Congress as to the limitations to the GDP, which are numerous.

The GDP does not only not capture the economic surplus between price and subjective value perceived, it ignores subsistence production, new products, and/or improved products, nor does it take into account what is being produced.

Returning back to your bogus claim that you have no interest in BS and personal baiting:

For someone that claims they objectively educate themselves and read large amounts of materials before commenting on an issue – I am not seeing that here.

And, of course...

Keep on keeping on though. Ignorance by choice is a special thing.

If you had a valid argument to make, it is fair to think you would have made it by now.

Originally posted by Lostinthedarkness
How is it different ? Both have to balance a revenue stream cash flow in and cash flow out . A business has similar obligations and expenses as do governments .

This statement right here is exactly the problem. They are not the same. The purpose of my business is to make me money. What is the purpose of government? To make the president money?

Governments are notorious of wasteful spending on our dime ! A business who uses department budgets will at the end of fiscal year roll over unused cash back to the business while a governmental agency will spend every last penny before the end of the fiscal year weather they need to or not . Many of these unused items will set for years in a warehouse till they are surplussed sold at a auction totally unused for a loss to all of us. Maybe governments should run more like a business !

Wasteful spending is a completely different issue than trying to just run government like a profit driven business. There can be waste in anything and that is obviously not good but eliminating waste is not something you do just to run a good business. You do that to run anything well.

The purpose may not be turn a profit. But its purpose is not spend its self in to oblivion !

It's purpose is to take in the amount of money it needs to return the services the people expect from it with no personal profit left over. Tell me you run your business that way.

The Professional Politicians have NEVER learned to live with in their means as long as they get more they will spend every last penny and ask for more .

That is right. That is probably why the new freshmen ushered in by the TEA party have been called the most wasteful group of government officials yet in some circles. That does not change the fact that if you run America the same way you run Walmart, one person gets very rich while hundreds of thousands are left with little choice but to work for walmart.

reply to post by Kitilani

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by Lostinthedarkness
How is it different ? Both have to balance a revenue stream cash flow in and cash flow out . A business has similar obligations and expenses as do governments .

This statement right here is exactly the problem. They are not the same. The purpose of my business is to make me money. What is the purpose of government? To make the president money?

The purpose of the government is depending on if you use modern ideology or the constitution in either case the need to spend way beyond its means is not the purpose of the government. Unlike the professional politicians belief it is the the role of government. Services need met defense also needs paid plus many other items, but to pay for teaching Chinese prostitutes to drink more responsible is not ! I can search and find dozens of stupid grants that our dimes are going for . Professional politicians are agreeing to fund that crap.

Wasteful spending is a completely different issue than trying to just run government like a profit driven business. There can be waste in anything and that is obviously not good but eliminating waste is not something you do just to run a good business. You do that to run anything well.

Professional politicians evidently are not running it that well either the system is infested with waste!

It's purpose is to take in the amount of money it needs to return the services the people expect from it with no personal profit left over. Tell me you run your business that way.

That I agree . And no business do not run in a non profit mode . And the Government does have liabilities but to run in the red forever and to increase this debt year after year with no end in sight is governmental suicide .

The Professional Politicians have NEVER learned to live with in their means as long as they get more they will spend every last penny and ask for more .

That is right. That is probably why the new freshmen ushered in by the TEA party have been called the most wasteful group of government officials yet in some circles. That does not change the fact that if you run America the same way you run Walmart, one person gets very rich while hundreds of thousands are left with little choice but to work for walmart.

To be honest I have not heard that about the Tea party freshmen. If thats True then the voting public just trades one Professional politician for another and no change happened just like when people voted for Obama no real change .

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by macman
I just love hearing this asinine comparison.
Seeing that most Mechanics can actually fix an engine and almost every politician and economist can't fix the economy, I think it is high time that the mechanic got a shot at it.
Don't really see the mechanic making it worse, then what the professional elected idiot and his compatriots have brought us to.

edit on 13-7-2011 by macman because: (no reason given)

Who is the professional mechanic in your imaginary scenario? Is that anyone and everyone in the country or are there specific people you have in mind?

You again?

Go back and read the post I was responding to.

reply to post by macman




This is the best explanation ive seen on the subject...