| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
leonard78sp@primus.ca
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 8:04 pm Post subject: Change Means Never Having To Face Facts‹‹ Barak Hussein Moha |
 |
|
Change Means Never Having To Face Facts
By THOMAS SOWELL
Tuesday, July 15, 2008 4:30 PM PT
In an election campaign in which not only young liberals,
but also some people who are neither young nor liberals,
seem absolutely mesmerized by the skilled rhetoric of
Barak Obama, [only when he has teleprompter] facts
have receded even further into the background than usual.
As the hypnotic mantra of "change" is repeated endlessly,
few people even raise the question of whether what few
specifics we hear represent any real change, much less a
change for the better.
Raising taxes, increasing government spending and
demonizing business? That is straight out of the New
Deal of the 1930s.
The New Deal was new then but it is not new now.
Moreover, increasing numbers of economists and
historians have concluded that New Deal policies are
what prolonged the Great Depression.
Putting new restrictions on international trade, in
order to save American jobs? That was done by Herbert
Hoover, who signed the Hawley-Smoot tariff when the
unemployment rate was 9%. The next year the
unemployment rate was 16% and, before the Great
Depression was over, unemployment hit 25%.
One of the most naive notions is that politicians are
trying to solve the country's problems, just because they
say so ‹ or say so loudly or inspiringly.
Politicians' top priority is to solve their own problem,
which is how to get elected and then re-elected. Barak
Obama is a politician through and through, even though
pretending that he is not is his special strategy to get
elected.
Some of his more trusting followers are belatedly
discovering that, as he "refines" his position on various
issues, now that he has gotten their votes in the
Democratic primaries and needs the votes of others in
the coming general election.
Perhaps a defining moment in showing Sen. Obama's
priorities was his declaring, in answer to a question from
Charles Gibson, that he was for raising the capital gains
tax rate. When Gibson reminded him of the
well-documented fact that lower tax rates on capital gains
had produced more actual revenue collected from that tax
than the higher tax rates had, Obama was unmoved.
The question of how to raise more revenue may be the
economic issue, but the political issue is whether socking
it to "the rich" in the name of "fairness" gains more votes.
Since about half the people in the United States own
stocks ‹ either directly or because their pension funds
buy stocks ‹ socking it to people who earn capital gains
is by no means socking it just to "the rich."
But, again, that is one of the many facts that don't matter
politically.
What matters politically is the image of coming out on the
side of "the people" against "the privileged."
If you are a nurse or mechanic who will be depending on
your pension to take care of you when you retire ‹ as
Social Security is unlikely to do ‹ you may not think of
yourself as one of the privileged. But unless you connect
the dots between capital gains tax rates and your
retirement income, you may fall under the spell of the
well-honed Obama rhetoric.
Obama is for higher minimum wage rates. Does anyone
care what actually happens in countries with higher
minimum wage rates? Of course not.
Economists may point to studies done in countries around
the world, showing that higher minimum wage rates
usually mean higher unemployment rates among lower
skilled and less experienced workers.
That's their problem. A politician's problem is how to
look like he is for "the poor" and against those who are
"exploiting" them. The facts are irrelevant to maintaining
that political image.
Nowhere do facts matter less than in foreign policy issues.
Nothing is more popular than the notion that you can deal
with dangers from other nations by talking with their
leaders.
British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain became
enormously popular in the 1930s by sitting down and
talking with Hitler, and announcing that their agreement
had produced "peace in our time" ‹ just one year before
the most catastrophic war in history began.
Sen. Obama may gain similar popularity by advocating
similar policies today ‹ and his political popularity is
what it's all about. The consequences for the country
come later.
Copyright 2008 Creators Syndicate, Inc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
geno4321
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject: Re: Change Means Never Having To Face Facts‹‹ Barak Hussein |
|
|
A neo-fascist Republican factoid.
To be a weeny Repubrat you must pass 101 Once a liar always a liar.
<leonard78sp@primus.ca> wrote in message
news:C4A38629.114DB%leonard78sp@primus.ca...
| Quote: |
Change Means Never Having To Face Facts
By THOMAS SOWELL
Tuesday, July 15, 2008 4:30 PM PT
In an election campaign in which not only young liberals,
but also some people who are neither young nor liberals,
seem absolutely mesmerized by the skilled rhetoric of
Barak Obama, [only when he has teleprompter] facts
have receded even further into the background than usual.
As the hypnotic mantra of "change" is repeated endlessly,
few people even raise the question of whether what few
specifics we hear represent any real change, much less a
change for the better.
Raising taxes, increasing government spending and
demonizing business? That is straight out of the New
Deal of the 1930s.
The New Deal was new then but it is not new now.
Moreover, increasing numbers of economists and
historians have concluded that New Deal policies are
what prolonged the Great Depression.
Putting new restrictions on international trade, in
order to save American jobs? That was done by Herbert
Hoover, who signed the Hawley-Smoot tariff when the
unemployment rate was 9%. The next year the
unemployment rate was 16% and, before the Great
Depression was over, unemployment hit 25%.
One of the most naive notions is that politicians are
trying to solve the country's problems, just because they
say so ‹ or say so loudly or inspiringly.
Politicians' top priority is to solve their own problem,
which is how to get elected and then re-elected. Barak
Obama is a politician through and through, even though
pretending that he is not is his special strategy to get
elected.
Some of his more trusting followers are belatedly
discovering that, as he "refines" his position on various
issues, now that he has gotten their votes in the
Democratic primaries and needs the votes of others in
the coming general election.
Perhaps a defining moment in showing Sen. Obama's
priorities was his declaring, in answer to a question from
Charles Gibson, that he was for raising the capital gains
tax rate. When Gibson reminded him of the
well-documented fact that lower tax rates on capital gains
had produced more actual revenue collected from that tax
than the higher tax rates had, Obama was unmoved.
The question of how to raise more revenue may be the
economic issue, but the political issue is whether socking
it to "the rich" in the name of "fairness" gains more votes.
Since about half the people in the United States own
stocks ‹ either directly or because their pension funds
buy stocks ‹ socking it to people who earn capital gains
is by no means socking it just to "the rich."
But, again, that is one of the many facts that don't matter
politically.
What matters politically is the image of coming out on the
side of "the people" against "the privileged."
If you are a nurse or mechanic who will be depending on
your pension to take care of you when you retire ‹ as
Social Security is unlikely to do ‹ you may not think of
yourself as one of the privileged. But unless you connect
the dots between capital gains tax rates and your
retirement income, you may fall under the spell of the
well-honed Obama rhetoric.
Obama is for higher minimum wage rates. Does anyone
care what actually happens in countries with higher
minimum wage rates? Of course not.
Economists may point to studies done in countries around
the world, showing that higher minimum wage rates
usually mean higher unemployment rates among lower
skilled and less experienced workers.
That's their problem. A politician's problem is how to
look like he is for "the poor" and against those who are
"exploiting" them. The facts are irrelevant to maintaining
that political image.
Nowhere do facts matter less than in foreign policy issues.
Nothing is more popular than the notion that you can deal
with dangers from other nations by talking with their
leaders.
British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain became
enormously popular in the 1930s by sitting down and
talking with Hitler, and announcing that their agreement
had produced "peace in our time" ‹ just one year before
the most catastrophic war in history began.
Sen. Obama may gain similar popularity by advocating
similar policies today ‹ and his political popularity is
what it's all about. The consequences for the country
come later.
Copyright 2008 Creators Syndicate, Inc
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Bob LeChevalier
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:15 pm Post subject: Re: Change Means Never Having To Face Facts‹‹ Barak Hussein |
|
|
"leonard78sp@primus.ca" <leonard78sp@primus.ca> wrote:
| Quote: |
As the hypnotic mantra of "change" is repeated endlessly,
few people even raise the question of whether what few
specifics we hear represent any real change, much less a
change for the better.
|
The change at the very least is one of style, from an imperial
presidency based on ideology, to a populist presidency based on
leadership and building consensus.
Needed to balance the budget, which would be a change from the Bush
era.
| Quote: |
increasing government spending
|
That is what Bush has been doing.
| Quote: |
and demonizing business?
|
I haven't heard much demonizing from the Obama camp. Demonizing is
the Karl Rove school of politics.
| Quote: |
The New Deal was new then but it is not new now.
Moreover, increasing numbers of economists and
historians have concluded that New Deal policies are
what prolonged the Great Depression.
|
On the other hand, they made it possible for real human beings to
survive it, and for our political system to survive. One need only
look at what happened in Germany and Russia to see what alternatives
can result in time of severe economic crisis.
| Quote: |
Putting new restrictions on international trade, in
order to save American jobs? That was done by Herbert
Hoover, who signed the Hawley-Smoot tariff when the
unemployment rate was 9%. The next year the
unemployment rate was 16% and, before the Great
Depression was over, unemployment hit 25%.
|
But it started going down, once the New Deal programs started.
| Quote: |
Since about half the people in the United States own
stocks ‹ either directly or because their pension funds
buy stocks ‹ socking it to people who earn capital gains
is by no means socking it just to "the rich."
|
Do pension funds pay capital gains taxes? I don't think so.
| Quote: |
What matters politically is the image of coming out on the
side of "the people" against "the privileged."
|
The image is one of increasing disparity of wealth between the
capitalist class and corporate management, and the ordinary people who
have to earn their money.
| Quote: |
If you are a nurse or mechanic who will be depending on
your pension to take care of you when you retire ‹ as
Social Security is unlikely to do ‹ you may not think of
yourself as one of the privileged. But unless you connect
the dots between capital gains tax rates and your
retirement income, you may fall under the spell of the
well-honed Obama rhetoric.
|
Pensions funds are tax-exempt. The capital gains tax therefore does
not affect their retirement income.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=1000851
<Arguments that the maximum CGT tax rate affects economic growth are
< even more tenuous: Capital gains rates display no contemporaneous
< correlation with real GDP growth during the last 50 years. Although
< the effect of capital gains on economic growth may occur with a lag,
< Burman (1999)1 tests lags of up to five years and finds no
< statistically significant effect.
| Quote: |
Obama is for higher minimum wage rates. Does anyone
care what actually happens in countries with higher
minimum wage rates? Of course not.
|
Poor people don't suffer as badly.
| Quote: |
Economists may point to studies done in countries around
the world, showing that higher minimum wage rates
usually mean higher unemployment rates among lower
skilled and less experienced workers.
|
But that has NOT been found to be true, here, and unemployment is at a
relative historical low.
| Quote: |
Nowhere do facts matter less than in foreign policy issues.
Nothing is more popular than the notion that you can deal
with dangers from other nations by talking with their
leaders.
|
That certainly is the verdict of history.
| Quote: |
British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain became
enormously popular in the 1930s by sitting down and
talking with Hitler, and announcing that their agreement
had produced "peace in our time" ‹ just one year before
the most catastrophic war in history began.
|
That war wasn't prevented by talking, but it likely wouldn't have been
prevented by any other means.
But how many wars have been prevented or stopped by talking since
then?
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
lojbab@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
leonard78sp@primus.ca
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:35 am Post subject: Re: Change Means Never Having To Face Facts‹‹ Barak Hussein |
|
|
On 7/16/08 2:15 PM, in article lles741cocaecom5v7aujo36bv96m4i6di@4ax.com,
"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
| Quote: |
"leonard78sp@primus.ca" <leonard78sp@primus.ca> wrote:
As the hypnotic mantra of "change" is repeated endlessly,
few people even raise the question of whether what few
specifics we hear represent any real change, much less a
change for the better.
The change at the very least is one of style, from an imperial
presidency based on ideology, to a populist presidency based on
leadership and building consensus.
|
As usual you are off the wall stupid.
You like your hero, do not care about facts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Titix
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:02 am Post subject: Re: Change Means Never Having To Face Facts<< Barak Hussein |
|
|
<leonard78sp@primus.ca> wrote in message
news:C4A38629.114DB%leonard78sp@primus.ca...
| Quote: |
Change Means Never Having To Face Facts
By THOMAS SOWELL
Tuesday, July 15, 2008 4:30 PM PT
In an election campaign in which not only young liberals,
but also some people who are neither young nor liberals,
seem absolutely mesmerized by the skilled rhetoric of
Barak Obama, [only when he has teleprompter] facts
have receded even further into the background than usual.
They're mesmerized by someone with skills to talk and |
accomplished something, things that we haven't seen for
almost a decade.
| Quote: |
As the hypnotic mantra of "change" is repeated endlessly,
few people even raise the question of whether what few
specifics we hear represent any real change, much less a
change for the better.
Specifics have been said over and over again, pay attention |
Anything will be much better than what we got now.
| Quote: |
Raising taxes, increasing government spending and
demonizing business? That is straight out of the New
Deal of the 1930s.
|
Wash your mouth with detargent, you stupid ass, Roosevelt
saved this country from that other Republitard that drove the
economy to the ground like we see today.
And there isn't an eqaul when it comes to government spending
under the Republitard administration. Our debt is now over $9.5
trillion (with aT).
| Quote: |
The New Deal was new then but it is not new now.
Moreover, increasing numbers of economists and
historians have concluded that New Deal policies are
what prolonged the Great Depression.
Economists like Gramm? and those advising Republitards? |
Our economy is down to the ground. Ask people in the streets
if they are better today than they were eight years ago.
| Quote: |
Putting new restrictions on international trade, in
order to save American jobs? That was done by Herbert
Hoover, who signed the Hawley-Smoot tariff when the
unemployment rate was 9%. The next year the
unemployment rate was 16% and, before the Great
Depression was over, unemployment hit 25%.
If I were you I won't even mention Hoover. He was a devout |
Republican, or are you neocons desowning him now?
| Quote: |
One of the most naive notions is that politicians are
trying to solve the country's problems, just because they
say so < or say so loudly or inspiringly.
Politicians' top priority is to solve their own problem,
which is how to get elected and then re-elected. Barak
Obama is a politician through and through, even though
pretending that he is not is his special strategy to get
elected.
|
I would vote for him a million times before I'd vote for any
trator republitard.
| Quote: |
Some of his more trusting followers are belatedly
discovering that, as he "refines" his position on various
issues, now that he has gotten their votes in the
Democratic primaries and needs the votes of others in
the coming general election.
Every body that run for office of the president has to adjust |
to the present conditions, unless he's a bull head cowboy.
| Quote: |
Perhaps a defining moment in showing Sen. Obama's
priorities was his declaring, in answer to a question from
Charles Gibson, that he was for raising the capital gains
tax rate. When Gibson reminded him of the
well-documented fact that lower tax rates on capital gains
had produced more actual revenue collected from that tax
than the higher tax rates had, Obama was unmoved.
The question of how to raise more revenue may be the
economic issue, but the political issue is whether socking
it to "the rich" in the name of "fairness" gains more votes.
The rich have been riding the gravy train for a while now, so |
now they'll go all out to preserve their gains, regardless what
happens to the country. (Patriotics, eh.)
| Quote: |
Since about half the people in the United States own
stocks < either directly or because their pension funds
buy stocks < socking it to people who earn capital gains
is by no means socking it just to "the rich."
Another bull sh**. |
| Quote: |
But, again, that is one of the many facts that don't matter
politically.
What matters politically is the image of coming out on the
side of "the people" against "the privileged."
Well, republitards have been winning elections mostly with |
issues like homosexuality, abortion and gun control. Are they
going to drop that this year? They tell church people what they
want to hear.
| Quote: |
If you are a nurse or mechanic who will be depending on
your pension to take care of you when you retire < as
Social Security is unlikely to do < you may not think of
yourself as one of the privileged. But unless you connect
the dots between capital gains tax rates and your
retirement income, you may fall under the spell of the
well-honed Obama rhetoric.
|
Why don't you tell us how the republitards are going to fix
the Social Security by privatizing it. That will spell better with
republitard agenda.
| Quote: |
Obama is for higher minimum wage rates. Does anyone
care what actually happens in countries with higher
minimum wage rates? Of course not.
Republitards in geral are for slave labor. If you can work for |
food that is good enough. What matter is for corporations to
make more profit.
| Quote: |
Economists may point to studies done in countries around
the world, showing that higher minimum wage rates
usually mean higher unemployment rates among lower
skilled and less experienced workers.
Yah, just pay them peanuts. Isn't that the reason all these corporations |
have moved to communist China?
| Quote: |
That's their problem. A politician's problem is how to
look like he is for "the poor" and against those who are
"exploiting" them. The facts are irrelevant to maintaining
that political image.
Are you really admitting somebody is being exploited? |
Some improvement on your part.
| Quote: |
Nowhere do facts matter less than in foreign policy issues.
Nothing is more popular than the notion that you can deal
with dangers from other nations by talking with their
leaders.
No, the policy we have is for not talking, just go bomb them. |
Isn't that what McCain wants to do in Iran?
| Quote: |
British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain became
enormously popular in the 1930s by sitting down and
talking with Hitler, and announcing that their agreement
had produced "peace in our time" < just one year before
the most catastrophic war in history began.
Sen. Obama may gain similar popularity by advocating
similar policies today < and his political popularity is
what it's all about. The consequences for the country
come later.
The consequences of not talking got us in Iraq. It seems this |
administration is now listening to Obama, is talking to North
Korea, and just this morning I heard Bush is sending one
undersecretary for talks with Iran. I'd say some improvement.
| Quote: |
Copyright 2008 Creators Syndicate, Inc
VOTE FOR OBAMA AND HAVE PEACE IN THE WORLD. |
AND PROSPERITY AT HOME. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Wayne H. Wilhelm
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 2:32 am Post subject: Re: Change Means Never Having To Face Facts<< Barak Hussein |
|
|
"geno4321" <eugenefkent@fuse.net> wrote in message
news:dc190$487e1551$d8442319$6938@FUSE.NET...
| Quote: |
A neo-fascist Republican factoid.
To be a weeny Repubrat you must pass 101 Once a liar always a liar.
|
To be a weeny Democrat, you must pass 102 Always use a teleprompter.
| Quote: |
leonard78sp@primus.ca> wrote in message
news:C4A38629.114DB%leonard78sp@primus.ca...
Change Means Never Having To Face Facts
By THOMAS SOWELL
Tuesday, July 15, 2008 4:30 PM PT
In an election campaign in which not only young liberals,
but also some people who are neither young nor liberals,
seem absolutely mesmerized by the skilled rhetoric of
Barak Obama, [only when he has teleprompter] facts
have receded even further into the background than usual.
As the hypnotic mantra of "change" is repeated endlessly,
few people even raise the question of whether what few
specifics we hear represent any real change, much less a
change for the better.
Raising taxes, increasing government spending and
demonizing business? That is straight out of the New
Deal of the 1930s.
The New Deal was new then but it is not new now.
Moreover, increasing numbers of economists and
historians have concluded that New Deal policies are
what prolonged the Great Depression.
Putting new restrictions on international trade, in
order to save American jobs? That was done by Herbert
Hoover, who signed the Hawley-Smoot tariff when the
unemployment rate was 9%. The next year the
unemployment rate was 16% and, before the Great
Depression was over, unemployment hit 25%.
One of the most naive notions is that politicians are
trying to solve the country's problems, just because they
say so < or say so loudly or inspiringly.
Politicians' top priority is to solve their own problem,
which is how to get elected and then re-elected. Barak
Obama is a politician through and through, even though
pretending that he is not is his special strategy to get
elected.
Some of his more trusting followers are belatedly
discovering that, as he "refines" his position on various
issues, now that he has gotten their votes in the
Democratic primaries and needs the votes of others in
the coming general election.
Perhaps a defining moment in showing Sen. Obama's
priorities was his declaring, in answer to a question from
Charles Gibson, that he was for raising the capital gains
tax rate. When Gibson reminded him of the
well-documented fact that lower tax rates on capital gains
had produced more actual revenue collected from that tax
than the higher tax rates had, Obama was unmoved.
The question of how to raise more revenue may be the
economic issue, but the political issue is whether socking
it to "the rich" in the name of "fairness" gains more votes.
Since about half the people in the United States own
stocks < either directly or because their pension funds
buy stocks < socking it to people who earn capital gains
is by no means socking it just to "the rich."
But, again, that is one of the many facts that don't matter
politically.
What matters politically is the image of coming out on the
side of "the people" against "the privileged."
If you are a nurse or mechanic who will be depending on
your pension to take care of you when you retire < as
Social Security is unlikely to do < you may not think of
yourself as one of the privileged. But unless you connect
the dots between capital gains tax rates and your
retirement income, you may fall under the spell of the
well-honed Obama rhetoric.
Obama is for higher minimum wage rates. Does anyone
care what actually happens in countries with higher
minimum wage rates? Of course not.
Economists may point to studies done in countries around
the world, showing that higher minimum wage rates
usually mean higher unemployment rates among lower
skilled and less experienced workers.
That's their problem. A politician's problem is how to
look like he is for "the poor" and against those who are
"exploiting" them. The facts are irrelevant to maintaining
that political image.
Nowhere do facts matter less than in foreign policy issues.
Nothing is more popular than the notion that you can deal
with dangers from other nations by talking with their
leaders.
British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain became
enormously popular in the 1930s by sitting down and
talking with Hitler, and announcing that their agreement
had produced "peace in our time" < just one year before
the most catastrophic war in history began.
Sen. Obama may gain similar popularity by advocating
similar policies today < and his political popularity is
what it's all about. The consequences for the country
come later.
Copyright 2008 Creators Syndicate, Inc
|
---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News Provider ----
http://www.pronews.com offers corporate packages that have access to 100,000+ newsgroups |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Bob LeChevalier
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:58 am Post subject: Re: Change Means Never Having To Face Facts‹‹ Barak Hussein |
|
|
"leonard78sp@primus.ca" <leonard78sp@primus.ca> wrote:
| Quote: |
On 7/16/08 2:15 PM, in article lles741cocaecom5v7aujo36bv96m4i6di@4ax.com,
"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
"leonard78sp@primus.ca" <leonard78sp@primus.ca> wrote:
As the hypnotic mantra of "change" is repeated endlessly,
few people even raise the question of whether what few
specifics we hear represent any real change, much less a
change for the better.
The change at the very least is one of style, from an imperial
presidency based on ideology, to a populist presidency based on
leadership and building consensus.
As usual you are off the wall stupid.
You like your hero, do not care about facts.
|
Not "my hero", though McCain is doing a good job of running away from
any possibility of my support by pandering to the ideologues.
And you have no "facts", only ideological op-ed pieces.
And stupid attempts at character assassination, coupled with your
incessant crossposting of off-topic nonsense to the education
newsgroup, demand a reply.
lojbab
Bob LeChevalier - artificial linguist; genealogist
lojbab@lojban.org Lojban language www.lojban.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
106 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
