Yes you are correct Sean, my mistake. We are in an economy with growth, and at last measure it wasn't even particularly slow growth, at around 3%. Unfortunately, it FEELS like a recession to many people, due to various symptoms of an economy in flux, and I got drawn into the rhetoric a bit.
SELL AMERICAN !!!
- Thread starter La Treal
- Start date
- Status
RV4;
Thanks for the award! I'll take the cheese!
You can keep the dolls, maybe it will keep you away from your sister, by the way is she still your wife?
Thanks for the award! I'll take the cheese!
You can keep the dolls, maybe it will keep you away from your sister, by the way is she still your wife?
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/26/2002 4:09:27 PM Sean wrote:
Umm, last I checked it was congress who makes economic policy. the President cannot legislate. It's basic Political Science.
[/blockquote]
-------------
It's basic political madness.
----------------
[blockquote]
------------
Economic experts will tell you that you are dead wrong. The President has far less influence on the economy than does congress, which legislates economic policy.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Everytime Dubya opens his big fat war-mongering republican mouth it affects the economy...deeply!
----------------
[blockquote]
the President has XZERO direct effect on teh economy. he does have some indirect effect, as some portion of the economy is emotional, instead of logical.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Huh?
----------------
[blockquote]
Bush isn't starting the war, he's finishing what was started in 1991 and has led to escalating attacks on US interests culminating in the events of 9/11/2001. Perhaps had his predecessor actually done something about the first WTC bombing, the embassy bombings, the USS Cole, etc etc besides bombing an aspirin factory, 9/11/2001 never would have happened.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Don't blame Bill! Little Bush thinks that a war will get him re-elected. His father thought the same thing, and about the same country. His father was a one termer....too!
[blockquote]
------------
And PLEASE do not forget that the current recession is due primarily to three specific acute crises: the Telecom and Tech bubble burst of March 2000, the corporate accounting scandals which have been going on for AT LEAST the past 5 years before they were caught, and 9/11/2001.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Wrong, wrong, and wrong. Especially about 9/11. That significant date has nothing to do with the economy. All that date is, is an excuse for the actions being taking by a reactionary administration who sees an opportunity to clamp down on it's own citizens, strip them of their basic social and constitutional rights, and to spend like there's no tomorrow. If you don't think this sets a global tone for the economic strength of the U.S. Economy, and the global market's confidence in Bush as the president, think again.
I repeat, everytime Dubya opens his big fat war-mongering republican mouth, the economy takes a hit, and his jaws have been flapping like sheets in the wind ever since he took office.
No one ever seems to realize that everytime a republican gets into the white house, all he11 breaks loose and we end up in a war with some third world country. Why do the republicans always think that war will repair a weak economy? Bush has already outspent the three administrations before him!
----------------
[blockquote]
I agree with everything you pointed out DL except for one fact. There is no such thing as a current recession. The countries economy is growing.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Well....I've heard enough. Sorry but I disagree with you 100% on that.
Stop blaming Bill!
----------------
On 9/26/2002 4:09:27 PM Sean wrote:
Umm, last I checked it was congress who makes economic policy. the President cannot legislate. It's basic Political Science.
[/blockquote]
-------------
It's basic political madness.
----------------
[blockquote]
------------
Economic experts will tell you that you are dead wrong. The President has far less influence on the economy than does congress, which legislates economic policy.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Everytime Dubya opens his big fat war-mongering republican mouth it affects the economy...deeply!
----------------
[blockquote]
the President has XZERO direct effect on teh economy. he does have some indirect effect, as some portion of the economy is emotional, instead of logical.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Huh?
----------------
[blockquote]
Bush isn't starting the war, he's finishing what was started in 1991 and has led to escalating attacks on US interests culminating in the events of 9/11/2001. Perhaps had his predecessor actually done something about the first WTC bombing, the embassy bombings, the USS Cole, etc etc besides bombing an aspirin factory, 9/11/2001 never would have happened.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Don't blame Bill! Little Bush thinks that a war will get him re-elected. His father thought the same thing, and about the same country. His father was a one termer....too!
[blockquote]
------------
And PLEASE do not forget that the current recession is due primarily to three specific acute crises: the Telecom and Tech bubble burst of March 2000, the corporate accounting scandals which have been going on for AT LEAST the past 5 years before they were caught, and 9/11/2001.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Wrong, wrong, and wrong. Especially about 9/11. That significant date has nothing to do with the economy. All that date is, is an excuse for the actions being taking by a reactionary administration who sees an opportunity to clamp down on it's own citizens, strip them of their basic social and constitutional rights, and to spend like there's no tomorrow. If you don't think this sets a global tone for the economic strength of the U.S. Economy, and the global market's confidence in Bush as the president, think again.
I repeat, everytime Dubya opens his big fat war-mongering republican mouth, the economy takes a hit, and his jaws have been flapping like sheets in the wind ever since he took office.
No one ever seems to realize that everytime a republican gets into the white house, all he11 breaks loose and we end up in a war with some third world country. Why do the republicans always think that war will repair a weak economy? Bush has already outspent the three administrations before him!
----------------
[blockquote]
I agree with everything you pointed out DL except for one fact. There is no such thing as a current recession. The countries economy is growing.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Well....I've heard enough. Sorry but I disagree with you 100% on that.
Stop blaming Bill!
Dr;
Dont you mean predecessors? You claim that this was started in 1991, that would be under Bush the First right? If you are going to tie this all up in one neat little package then you have to start in Lebanon, where over 200 marines were killed. That was under Reagan. Oh yea,after that fiasco we attacked the almighty, all threatening, Grenada. The world was surely impressed and thankful that we eliminated that threat to world peace. Lets see, we havent got Bin Laden, elections are coming up, lets go after Saddam! Thats what Bush the first did but then we left him there, why didnt we finish the job then?
You got one thing right. Emotion has a tremendous effect on the economy. People tend to get emotional when they cant pay their bills. They tend to get emotional when the lose their jobs and they have no savings. For some reason they usually drastically reduce their consumption when that happens. Its the darndest thing!But we should not worry, Bush has a plan. When he cuts corporate taxes and taxes on the rich they will have loads of money to invest! Supply side-if we make it they will buy it- even if they dont have the money right?
The economy is driven by consumption. By reducing the real earnings of the majority of the population eventually consumption also decreases. Easy credit, and the ability to walk away from debts through bankruptcy have propped up the economy for a long time. Personal debt is at an all time high, savings at an all time low. Whats really alarming is that this is following the longest economic expansion we've ever seen! People should be in better financial shape. Most families have two incomes that doesnt even provide the standard of living that one used to. Can we blame all this on Bush? No, of course not but Bush's agenda does seek to make inequality even greater. He has not provided the population with any plan to repair the economy that makes sense. His failure to instill confidence in the consumer has made the economy worse. A few months back as Bush was making a speach on TV, the ticker tape on the bottom of the screen showed the market declining as he spoke. A regime change is needed-here at home!
Dont you mean predecessors? You claim that this was started in 1991, that would be under Bush the First right? If you are going to tie this all up in one neat little package then you have to start in Lebanon, where over 200 marines were killed. That was under Reagan. Oh yea,after that fiasco we attacked the almighty, all threatening, Grenada. The world was surely impressed and thankful that we eliminated that threat to world peace. Lets see, we havent got Bin Laden, elections are coming up, lets go after Saddam! Thats what Bush the first did but then we left him there, why didnt we finish the job then?
You got one thing right. Emotion has a tremendous effect on the economy. People tend to get emotional when they cant pay their bills. They tend to get emotional when the lose their jobs and they have no savings. For some reason they usually drastically reduce their consumption when that happens. Its the darndest thing!But we should not worry, Bush has a plan. When he cuts corporate taxes and taxes on the rich they will have loads of money to invest! Supply side-if we make it they will buy it- even if they dont have the money right?
The economy is driven by consumption. By reducing the real earnings of the majority of the population eventually consumption also decreases. Easy credit, and the ability to walk away from debts through bankruptcy have propped up the economy for a long time. Personal debt is at an all time high, savings at an all time low. Whats really alarming is that this is following the longest economic expansion we've ever seen! People should be in better financial shape. Most families have two incomes that doesnt even provide the standard of living that one used to. Can we blame all this on Bush? No, of course not but Bush's agenda does seek to make inequality even greater. He has not provided the population with any plan to repair the economy that makes sense. His failure to instill confidence in the consumer has made the economy worse. A few months back as Bush was making a speach on TV, the ticker tape on the bottom of the screen showed the market declining as he spoke. A regime change is needed-here at home!
Maybe Bob's right?
We should have elected Gore and allowed the Chinese political contributions to rule our country??
Bob, how do you know we haven't got Bin Laden yet? Are you now inside the circle of classified intelligence also?
And so you dont answer the seniority question again. Why?
Instead of Capital Gains tax to increase job growth, we should accept your proposal to increase Government welfare handouts and continue to extend unemployment? Then you will surely be on the board typing away about the deficits we are acquiring.
One thing is for sure. Eight years of liberal handouts instead of military spending sure didn't help prevent the current situation.
BTW, who was it that shut up Libya and Omar Qadhafi?
[b]In the evening of December 21st. 1988 flight Pan Am 103 exploded and pieces of the plane fell onto the Scottish town of Lockerbie, killing 259 people on the plane and 11 people on the ground.[/b]
Bob that appears to be before the 1991 prophetic belief of when this all began??
We should have elected Gore and allowed the Chinese political contributions to rule our country??
Bob, how do you know we haven't got Bin Laden yet? Are you now inside the circle of classified intelligence also?
And so you dont answer the seniority question again. Why?
Instead of Capital Gains tax to increase job growth, we should accept your proposal to increase Government welfare handouts and continue to extend unemployment? Then you will surely be on the board typing away about the deficits we are acquiring.
One thing is for sure. Eight years of liberal handouts instead of military spending sure didn't help prevent the current situation.
BTW, who was it that shut up Libya and Omar Qadhafi?
[b]In the evening of December 21st. 1988 flight Pan Am 103 exploded and pieces of the plane fell onto the Scottish town of Lockerbie, killing 259 people on the plane and 11 people on the ground.[/b]
Bob that appears to be before the 1991 prophetic belief of when this all began??
Boomer there may be some who want you to give it a rest also?
Unless you are a moderator, please allow for all others to have the right to adhere to the rules. If any one of us steps out of line, I believe the moderator(s) will handle it just fine. Your posts for the most part are informative. At times, in my opinion, you also need to give it a rest. However I have not taken a position as a moderator of this board nor will I. I as a user only ask that you give the same rights to other users as you have taken in the past. The attempt to divulge a users name by placing intials is out of line.
Unless you are a moderator, please allow for all others to have the right to adhere to the rules. If any one of us steps out of line, I believe the moderator(s) will handle it just fine. Your posts for the most part are informative. At times, in my opinion, you also need to give it a rest. However I have not taken a position as a moderator of this board nor will I. I as a user only ask that you give the same rights to other users as you have taken in the past. The attempt to divulge a users name by placing intials is out of line.
Buck,
I think that we both agree on the democracy part. I think we disagree that the individuals in question do not desire the same.
As far as other things, you're right.
I think that we both agree on the democracy part. I think we disagree that the individuals in question do not desire the same.
As far as other things, you're right.
I am not speaking for him or AMFA. Grow up. When will you and the AFL-CIO allow the membership to have a little democracy?
AMFADAVE, Administrator,RV4 ect;
If I wanted to go round and round with you I would go to your Message Board. I was tired of answering your questions while you avoided answering mine. I did not like it when you would delete entire threads when the discussion wasnt going your way.
It seems that every time we would debate you would say that your not going to waste your time anymore and leave the debate, yet you follow me from board to board seeking another debate.
A year or so ago when AMFA supporters from the line stations mocked you, you said that if they didnt apologize that you were going to take all of Tulsa and make sure that they never got AMFA. It appears that you are living up to that promise.
Sorry, Ive got better things to do than waste my time.
If I wanted to go round and round with you I would go to your Message Board. I was tired of answering your questions while you avoided answering mine. I did not like it when you would delete entire threads when the discussion wasnt going your way.
It seems that every time we would debate you would say that your not going to waste your time anymore and leave the debate, yet you follow me from board to board seeking another debate.
A year or so ago when AMFA supporters from the line stations mocked you, you said that if they didnt apologize that you were going to take all of Tulsa and make sure that they never got AMFA. It appears that you are living up to that promise.
Sorry, Ive got better things to do than waste my time.
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/27/2002 9:09:10 PM Bob Owens wrote:
AMFADAVE, Administrator,RV4 ect;
It seems that every time we would debate you would say that your not going to waste your time anymore and leave the debate, yet you follow me from board to boardseeking another debate.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Is this another one of your fantasies Bob?
Check this out:
Bob Owens
Member
Total Posts: 77
Last Post: 9/27/2002
Member Since: 9/9/2002
Member ID #: 901
RV4
Member
Total Posts: 23
Last Post: 9/27/2002
Member Since: 8/20/2002
Member ID #: 91
Bob, unless you now belive that I also control the member data from this site, it would appear that you arrived here 20 days after I did, and you also have a member ID number that is about 810 later than mine.
WHO IS FOLLOWING WHO BOB?
----------------
On 9/27/2002 9:09:10 PM Bob Owens wrote:
AMFADAVE, Administrator,RV4 ect;
It seems that every time we would debate you would say that your not going to waste your time anymore and leave the debate, yet you follow me from board to boardseeking another debate.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Is this another one of your fantasies Bob?
Check this out:
Bob Owens
Member
Total Posts: 77
Last Post: 9/27/2002
Member Since: 9/9/2002
Member ID #: 901
RV4
Member
Total Posts: 23
Last Post: 9/27/2002
Member Since: 8/20/2002
Member ID #: 91
Bob, unless you now belive that I also control the member data from this site, it would appear that you arrived here 20 days after I did, and you also have a member ID number that is about 810 later than mine.
WHO IS FOLLOWING WHO BOB?
Bob,
You continue to make claims that I duck out of debates and fail to answer questions. Yet, any reader of the available bulletin boards, this one included, will easily conclude that in fact you are describing yourself and your own actions.
Do you make up these same fantasies when dealing with AA management as a union officer? You know, kind of like the fantasy you live about believing in craft unionism, while oathing an allegiance to the most docile union in the industry that is nothing more than a bus shrine. Maybe you could get your local liberals to tax the bus a rail corporations so Carty will stop feeling shorted.
[blockquote]
Testimony of Donald J. Carty
President and CEO, American Airlines
Before the Subcommittee on Aviation
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
September 24, 2002
Compared to any other mode of transportation, air travel was overtaxed to begin with following the nearly $1 billion per year tax increase imposed on the industry in 1997. Today, federal taxes and fees on airline tickets account for $51.16, or 26 percent, of a $200 roundtrip ticket involving a single connection—that’s a $11.16 federal ticket tax, $12 federal flight segment tax, $10 federal security surcharge, and up to an $18 airport passenger facility charge. This is a 26 percent tax burden on airlines -- up from 15 percent five years ago – compared to 11 percent on a bottle of rum, 9 percent on a pack of cigarettes, and 0 percent on bus and rail tickets. Moreover, in addition to the taxes on tickets outlined above, airlines pay a federal fuel tax of 4.3 cents per gallon.[/blockquote]
Your pipe dream about unification of all AFL-CIO mechanics unions into one Air Transport Division is still the biggest laugh to date. How is that progessing of late anyway comrade?
You continue to make claims that I duck out of debates and fail to answer questions. Yet, any reader of the available bulletin boards, this one included, will easily conclude that in fact you are describing yourself and your own actions.
Do you make up these same fantasies when dealing with AA management as a union officer? You know, kind of like the fantasy you live about believing in craft unionism, while oathing an allegiance to the most docile union in the industry that is nothing more than a bus shrine. Maybe you could get your local liberals to tax the bus a rail corporations so Carty will stop feeling shorted.
[blockquote]
Testimony of Donald J. Carty
President and CEO, American Airlines
Before the Subcommittee on Aviation
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
September 24, 2002
Compared to any other mode of transportation, air travel was overtaxed to begin with following the nearly $1 billion per year tax increase imposed on the industry in 1997. Today, federal taxes and fees on airline tickets account for $51.16, or 26 percent, of a $200 roundtrip ticket involving a single connection—that’s a $11.16 federal ticket tax, $12 federal flight segment tax, $10 federal security surcharge, and up to an $18 airport passenger facility charge. This is a 26 percent tax burden on airlines -- up from 15 percent five years ago – compared to 11 percent on a bottle of rum, 9 percent on a pack of cigarettes, and 0 percent on bus and rail tickets. Moreover, in addition to the taxes on tickets outlined above, airlines pay a federal fuel tax of 4.3 cents per gallon.[/blockquote]
Your pipe dream about unification of all AFL-CIO mechanics unions into one Air Transport Division is still the biggest laugh to date. How is that progessing of late anyway comrade?
- Status
