kael03

She called it an ambush question and couldn't answer it because nothing was given to her on one of the pre-written interview note cards she's always carrying around. I've watched several interviews with her that had her answering questions by first restating the key word(s) of the question, then completely changing the subject to something not even remotely close to the topic while pushing her own agenda.

I'm pretty sure he saw the first moon rising.

Multi-partisan governments are horrible because they rarely ever agree with each other. It's stupid how people can't agree with each other over "duh" things like health care or this "war" or even figure out a way to get us out of this deficit.

The last is a major issue with the Republicans. They keep going on and on about how Obama has done nothing to help the national deficit when he stated in his first speech after becoming President "It will take time to fix this debt, possibly longer than the 2 terms I can possibly serve". Hell, during the interim period when Bush was leaving office and Obama was getting in, Obama was with a team of financial experts trying to figure out how to best fix this debt and the depression we're in (this was less than a week after he was elected, I might add).

Numinous

Damn, those incompetent note cards writers!

Truth to be told, many politicians are like that: no matter what is being discussed they'll push their agenda at all costs.

Oh they do, when they focus on a common enemy. Like the left wing ganging up on a certain party of the right wing and vice-versa.

I still don't get how a simple thing that works so well in Europe was such a flamefest. If it was only the health insurance companies bitching about the change, I'd get it, but it was an whole lot of people, even people that would benefit greatly from the change. Really, the whole "death panels" argument was baffling.

I know exactly what the problem is (since, as you might know, Portugal is also in economical turmoil) people want things NOW. They don't care if certain actions take their time, they must work IN THIS MOMENT! And even worse, people can't make some sacrifices. Be damned the possibility of the economy sink in a black hole, they won't give away an extra 2% in taxes and they'll RAEG if their 10 000+ dollar salary gets axed by 10~20% and people receiving no more than 500 dollars aren't axed! So there's another thing that is wrong with politics today: people aren't educated on their rights AND duties.

__________________

kael03

Damn them all to HELL!!

Well, yeah I know. But she never even bothered to answer the questions before going on about whateverthefuck she was babbling about. I never took her seriously so when she spoke my brain shut down.

...touche.

The best part of it was the people protesting with signs saying "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!". But yeah, no idea where the "Death Panels" fallacy emerged. I have no idea why we still don't have a national health insurance plan in place. It's an amazing idea and works well over in Europe. I guess it's the whole "keep government out of (insert asinine idea here)" mentality that is really a part of the Liberal ideology.

I know about the human condition of immediate reward. I'm studying Psychology, remember? It's that condition that allows people like me to put people like Palin in a box with 2 levers, some number of lights, and train them into pushing the lever.

I'll give an example of my home state, Michigan. A couple years ago we had one of the worst state deficits in the nation (and the worst unemployment rate). It was to the point that our former lolgovernor (I hated that bitch because it's her fault we were in that mess) actually shut the state down until the legislature could agree on a new budget. I had a great idea that would've helped the state deficit. Increase sales tax by 1% (it's currently 6% for taxable goods). It's a penny for every dollar, but with 14+ million people spending money, that tax would help the state pull itself out of debt.

Numinous

By what I saw, I think another reason why this was such a polemic phenomena: some Americans don't like the Government changing the nature of some aspects because of the fear of a communist overtake (I think I heard the expression "reds" being thrown around a few times in the news I had access to). Which really shows some people ignorance of what exactly is communism and where the government has all rights to intervene.

I know you're studying psychology, I was just pointing out another instance of it happening to annoying levels.

And I might add, that's an incredibly easy move to take, considering that 6% is pretty low as far as tax rates go.

__________________

kael03

Yeah, it's the fear of communism (actually Socialism or Fascism) that has these people up in arms. Honestly, if it's done right Communism is one of the best ways to govern a nation. Unfortunately, Communist states turn into dictatorships because of a thirst for power and control. Also, the people aren't all equal in the nation due to different levels of education and locations relative to the central governmental hub. The communism most people think of are bastardized ideologies created and popularized by Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Kim Jong Il.

The medicare thing is hilarious, though, since Medicare is a government organization for senior citizens who can't really work anymore and can still have some form of insurance.

Altering how taxes are set up is one of the easiest ways to help a budget. A fixed percentage to individual taxes (instead of the variable one that the United States has) would make things far easier. As it is, the more you make the less the government takes, or some shit like that. I'm unemployed right now and am not subject to the fucked up tax system our nation has.

Also, and this would cause a huge outcry from the top 1%, placing a cap on CEO salary rates seems like a good idea. I mentioned this before, as well. More money can flow down the corporation to increase pay rates among the general workforce. It can be committed to resources used in manufacturing goods which would, in turn, cause prices to drop on finished goods and stimulate the economy.

I don't get how people are making more money than the President. Aside from Obama, who has a supplementary income due to royalties from some books he wrote when he was a Senator, the President makes ~$400k each year he's in office. After leaving office the President gets a "retirement package" consisting of his own Secret Service and ~$180k (I think). I don't see why people are making more money than one of the most powerful people in the world.

Numinous

Exactly. But what really gets me is people fearing communist fascism and not equally as bad which is conservative fascism (which by political side is the opposite but in practice pretty much the same) and, by what I see, some parts of the US have symptoms of the latter kind of fascism (like running back to "the proud tradition" and avoiding touching some matters).

Let them cry. It won't hurt them not to buy the latest fad car.

If that was the only problem. I don't know about the US, but in other countries there are people paid to do absolutely NOTHING. With all the political secretariats and departments, some of them are completely redundant or some even still subsist when they should be closed eons ago. And these are people that easily gain tens of thousands of dollars every month to scratch their butts when other people work their sore body everyday and get measly salaries.

__________________

kael03

Back on topic Shirley Phelps, leader of the Westboro Baptist Church, had an interview on a Canadian radio show (scroll down for the audio clip, Shirley Phelps, Jan 11.) under the promise that she, and her cult, not picket the 9 yr old girl's funeral. Holy fuck, she is insane.

For those that don't know. The Westboro Baptist Church is a group of fucktards that protest the funerals of soldiers, of victims of gay hate crimes, and all this other asshatery that only religious nut jobs think is a good idea.

ask me anything

It's actually the opposite. The more you make the higher percentage they take. To me this seems to punish success rather then encourage it.

http://www.bargaineering.com/article...-brackets.html



I personally don't care what these CEO's make as long as they're doing their jobs. I see no reason to interfere with how much they make. In the end they have to answer to their stockholders. The government definitely needs to do a better job at regulating the industry, and provided investors with a clear picture of how their company is doing. As long as that is accomplished it's up to the investors what kinda of policy they make. I doubt they would have a "don't give a fuck" attitude when they have their own money at risk, and the CEO's salary will reflect just how much they think he's worth. Most CEO's make more money from actual bonuses then base salary, so that's another incentive for having a solid company that does well. Personally speaking, I have a 401K plan, and as long as I'm doing well, the people that are making me money should do well too.

As for Obama's salary, I don't think it's really relevant. Money already has too much influence in Washington as it is. We don't need politicians with inflated salaries. It would make things far worse.

__________________

kael03

I only pointed his income out because he makes more than the average president by way of his book (he claimed something like $1 mil from royalties or some shit).

Oh, I agree. Politicians bend themselves over a table to get votes/financial backing by not passing laws that would help most people, but hurt the CEOs of various companies (BP, for instance). Most of Obama's salary isn't actually due to being the President. It's due to him writing a book that was, I guess, well written and received.

ask me anything

Holy shit!! Those people are insane. It's people like that I can't stand. They got too much free time on their hands to be doing stuff like that. Plus they have no damn business protesting at funerals. If they were true Christians they would see that funerals are a place to honor the lost and pay last respects, not to make a political freak show out of. That wreaks of hypocrisy.

__________________

LonelyNinja

"Violent rhetoric does not inspire violent acts. But criticism of violent rhetoric incites hatred and violence." Sarah Palin.

Alright, I'm done.

Well, not really. ACT, I pay attention to Palin's insanity because she scares the shit out of me because a person of such incompetence is a leader of this country. The people of the nation watches her because they either have the same beliefs as her (which is the cause for my compulsive rage disorder and ulcers), they find her hilarious (I do, until I realize she's being completely serious), or they're fucking stupid (it's more likely than you think).

__________________

Dagoro

I think one of the best examples regarding this type of situation is Brazil. The minimum wage is around 540 real a month, and it took years to get to that point. Last year their deputies/senators and other public servers had a huge salary increase. Some of them in the higher echelons are making 26000+ a month, and the voting to green light this adjustment in their salaries took 5 MINUTES, with unanimity. Some of the benefited had a 200% increase with the measure, and most of them are knee deep in scandals and crime related accusations.

__________________

LonelyNinja

It's Brazil, what do you expect?

__________________

Dagoro

Well things should have changed for the better there in terms of politics, specially since they had a good 8 years with an excellent president, and their economic situation is pretty good. From 09-10 they collected over 1 trillion dollars in taxes, and the politicians still debate if some poor sap who works him/herself to death isn't making too much cash with 540 a month. Pretty sad.

__________________

alengrew

thanks for sharing with us.