Obama

[Charon]

Not only that, but inflation has been pretty bad too. Mom said she had trouble paying through college, and we make quite a bit of money in our household, so that's saying something.

All I have to say is this - no matter what you think about GM, if you want it to fall, you want the rest of the economy to fall as well. Think about it. Millions of workers are employed by GM, so if it falls, the impact on our society as a whole would be devestating. Werewolves in congress would be the least of our problems.

[MaxiPower]

Is the recession that bad? really like i hear all the time that the UK is in recession and even Ireland were im from is ment to be hit, however to me there is no difference, but i do see whats going on, the rich people cant handle the situation and the worse of people like myself arnt even being effected... I gotta laugh

all i can say is for us we've been through a killer famine, this "Recession" is nothing

[Rolina]

Recession alone is easily recoverable if the government LEAVES IT THE HELL ALONE.  But they never learn.  What's worse?  Not only do we have a recession, congress just ordered the spending of ONE TRILLION DOLLARS - which will most likely lead to not just inflation, but in this economic climate, HYPERINFLATION.  If we don't stand up as people and strongarm OUR government into changing how they do things, we're screwed.

[Charon]

Ah. That's why most of the people I know are saving money for moving! Just in case, you know, a certain someone screws up the USA more than it already is.

[twocows]

Recession alone is easily recoverable if the government LEAVES IT THE HELL ALONE.  But they never learn.  What's worse?  Not only do we have a recession, congress just ordered the spending of ONE TRILLION DOLLARS - which will most likely lead to not just inflation, but in this economic climate, HYPERINFLATION.  If we don't stand up as people and strongarm OUR government into changing how they do things, we're screwed.

Our government has free use of the latest military technology in quelling an uprising. They can use whatever weapons they want, whenever they want. They have F16s, real-time imaging of everything that's currently happening via satellite, and they can both brute force their way through a rebellion and stealth in to kill any leader figures.

I have a shotgun and a pistol.

Who's going to win in a confrontation?

My point is, the government's grown too strong to overthrow. The Whiskey Rebellion proved that over 200 years ago. We can protest them all we want, but they can bash our heads in and we can't do anything about it except raise a complaint with the same government we're fighting against.

It's unfortunate that in this modern age, the people lack the ability to remove a government from power if they are dissatisfied with their rule. Governments are supposed to exist to serve their people, not to subdue them. While the end of slavery was unarguably a good thing, the North's victory in the Civil War proved that no state has the right to disobey the federal government, regardless of how corrupt or unsatisfactory their rule. In other words, we're stuck with whatever decisions the federal government makes; if we don't like those decisions, we can either peacefully resist or leave. The government hasn't listened to peaceful resistance in half a century. Where does that leave us?

[Rolina]

Oh, yes, because we all know that they respond to the threat of being voted out of office with sheer brute force.

You'd be surprised how well the words "You're Fired" can work, you know.  We DO live in a republic, you know.

[Zach]

The one thing that I cannot fathom, is why the checks and balance system has not been utilized in this administration yet

[Charon]

The one thing that I cannot fathom, is why the checks and balance system has not been utilized in this administration yet

That's because there are only 3 parts to it, and there are two main political parties. Doesn't fit in very well. Both parties will do whatever it takes to make their word get out, so checks and balances are pretty worthless unless a third party gets either Congress, the president or the judicial branch.

An example:
Let's say Congress is Democratic and the Supreme Court and President are Republicas. Congress passes a bill that's against the Republican ideals. The President vetoes it. Congress gets a two thirds majority, and it seems that the democrats have won... BUT the Supreme Court can rule (even by using faulty logic, as what they say goes) that it was unconstitutional for the bill to be passed. Therefore, Checks and Balances fails, and the Republicans get their way.

Now that the Democrats are in the majority with the checks and balances, so therefore they get the easy ride. It's selfish, but there's not much we can do about it.

Also, has anyone noticed that similar financial collapses have happened about every 25 years or so? The Great Depression (1929), in the Kennedy era, the Reagan era and now? And every time the government pumped money into the economy. Did it work? NO. So will it work now? NO. Guess why Hoover didn't get reelected and FDR got the ticket, hmm?

[twocows]

Oh, yes, because we all know that they respond to the threat of being voted out of office with sheer brute force.

You'd be surprised how well the words "You're Fired" can work, you know.

[Charon]

No no no, Hoover spent money in the economy, so did Reagan and JFK. What he did was he gave money to the cooperations (hmmm!). But what FDR did was he actually made jobs for people on projects. (I think - we haven't read that part yet but I'm pretty sure what he did).

Nonetheless, it's still not working for Obama. Let's try not to fight over the history. Either that, or my history teacher is full of crap (and I'm pretty sure he's not).

[twocows]

No no no, Hoover spent money in the economy, so did Reagan and JFK. What he did was he gave money to the cooperations (hmmm!). But what FDR did was he actually made jobs for people on projects. (I think - we haven't read that part yet but I'm pretty sure what he did).

Nonetheless, it's still not working for Obama. Let's try not to fight over the history. Either that, or my history teacher is full of crap (and I'm pretty sure he's not).

No, you're correct. He tried to let the economy fix itself by sinking a lot of money into it, and making large projects such as the WPA is equivalent to creating a demand for labor. Basically, exactly what you just said (I was a bit groggy when I made the last post).

[Rolina]

FDR turned the great recession into the Great DEPRESSION.  He did all of this spending and made things worse.  In the economy, he was made of epic fail.  The reason he kept getting re-elected was because he instilled hope into the people... Oh, and because he promised not to get involved in World War II (until Pearl Harbor, that is).

[twocows]

FDR turned the great recession into the Great DEPRESSION.  He did all of this spending and made things worse.  In the economy, he was made of epic fail.  The reason he kept getting re-elected was because he instilled hope into the people... Oh, and because he promised not to get involved in World War II (until Pearl Harbor, that is).

Dang, this guy sounds familiar. Like someone we elected in the past six months.

[Charon]

(cue GERMANY! GO INVADE POLAND OR SOMETHING!)
Eheheheheh... wasn't trying to boost FDR or anything. He was hope, not the solution.

Anyhow, I feel that nothing's going to get better unless something drastic happens worldwide, similar to WWII. And after this, we're definately going to have to restrict how much you can buy off of credit.

Idiots. All of them.

[twocows]

(cue GERMANY! GO INVADE POLAND OR SOMETHING!)
Eheheheheh... wasn't trying to boost FDR or anything. He was hope, not the solution.

Anyhow, I feel that nothing's going to get better unless something drastic happens worldwide, similar to WWII. And after this, we're definitely going to have to restrict how much you can buy off of credit.

Idiots. All of them.

The problem is, next time there's a confrontation similar to WWII, there's the risk of nuclear strikes. At best, it'll be another Cold War, where both sides are too fearful of the consequences to use their weapons (luckily, this is probably what would occur). Otherwise... well, go play Fallout 3 for one way things could play out.

[Rolina]

(cue GERMANY! GO INVADE POLAND OR SOMETHING!)
Eheheheheh... wasn't trying to boost FDR or anything. He was hope, not the solution.

Anyhow, I feel that nothing's going to get better unless something drastic happens worldwide, similar to WWII. And after this, we're definitely going to have to restrict how much you can buy off of credit.

Idiots. All of them.

The problem is, next time there's a confrontation similar to WWII, there's the risk of nuclear strikes. At best, it'll be another Cold War, where both sides are too fearful of the consequences to use their weapons (luckily, this is probably what would occur). Otherwise... well, go play Fallout 3 for one way things could play out.

You're exactly right.  Unlike in the past, now we have the potential to actually destroy our enemies, and to have them destroy us back.  This is why war in the modern world is a critical threat.  The concept is called Mutually Assured Destruction, or MAD for short.  We cannot rely on a full-scale war to get us out of this, because if we do that, then there won't be anything left to come home to.

We've grown too powerful for our own good as a species - Modern Medicine inhibits natural evolutionary processes, and Thermo-Nuclear Weaponry causes cyclical war cycles to become imminent extinction events.

What's that you say?  We're not that stupid?  I have two quotes that will prove that wrong.

"Never underestimate the stupidity of humanity."
"There is no species on Earth that is so eager to kill itself over petty issues other than Mankind."

War has now become the worst case scenario, because this time there is no getting out of it.

[Miyabi]

Yeah, and that is why anyone who opens their mouth and says, "Just bomb them" is instantly seen as idiotic, uneducated, and stupid in my eyes.  If you think that simply starting the worst world war we will have seen to date is the answer, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about and all of your opinions should be omitted from consideration.

Yellow font can be painful to the eyes. - Charon

[Rolina]

First - STOP USING YELLOW FONT.  It's murder to the eyes.  

Second - I have to agree.  "Just Bomb Them" is what the terrorists had in mind on 9/11.  That does nothing but cause more conflict.

Especially in this day and age, since we now have the ability to wipe ourselves off of the face of the Earth, it's imperative that we try to avoid warfare at all costs.  I understand that some people, such as radical extremists, you don't have a choice with, but for the love of God, get back in and help clean up the mess afterwords, or you'll just get a bunch of people that blame you for smashing things up!

[weckar]

Discussions like these make me glad I live in a traditionally neutral nation (unless others try to involve us, ofcourse).

And our politics works, because we don't have two mayor parties, but closer to 6 (with tons of minor parties, but I think you have those too). Everyone is represented. Every aspect of a decision carefully weighed.... And we have some of the best nuclear scientists in the world.

[Rolina]

No, you're involved too, Weckar.  The US is like 20-30% of the GLOBAL economy, so when our epic fail president runs our country into the ground, ALL OTHER COUNTRIES feel it.  That, and the dude seems to love you foreign peeps way the hell more than his own country, as he tries to suck up to you (and FAILS!) more than he tries to run the our nation.  Now we've gone from a pretty bad deficit in 2008, to FOUR TIMES THAT MUCH in just one hundred freaking days.

Obama is fail incarnate with a silver tongue, and the people of my country are nothing more than a bunch of gullible morons.