Economist agree overwhelmly with Obama's plan

Source economist.com

Academic economist agree with Obama's economic policies than McCain by 80%(Obama) to 20%(McCain).

Just so to make things clear these are Economist not random people in the street. They study and teach the economy in Universities and Colleges.

Now that the economy is better with Obama is there any reason to support McCain?

Or are economist just another result from liberal education?

Another thing to considered. Of the 44% that identified themselves as independent. More than 75% of them prefered Obama's economic policies.

When the economy is unstable the way it is now, it's natural for people to want the government to play a larger role. It makes sense, but it doesn't change my vote.fidosim

Who are you voting for? And when the economy is the biggest issue why would you not go with the recomendations of the economic experts.

Who are you voting for? And when the economy is the biggest issue why would you not go with the recomendations of the economic experts.

illegalimigrant

Because they might be wrong. The government has played too much of a role in the economy to begin with, and they could be the ones partially responsible for the recent crisis.

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

Who are you voting for? And when the economy is the biggest issue why would you not go with the recomendations of the economic experts.

Genetic_Code

Because they might be wrong. The government has played too much of a role in the economy to begin with, and they could be the ones partially responsible for the recent crisis.

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

illegalimigrant

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I would rather have the government be in control of our money rather than the Federal Reserve

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

Genetic_Code

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

That's Obama's plan help the people at the bottom more than the richest americans.

Do you care more for Ideologies than for result?

I would rather have the government be in control of our money rather than the Federal Reserve

Sam_Phisher

The Fed = The government. Same with FEMA. See why conservatives are so apprehensive about someone like Obama?

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

Genetic_Code

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

Yet another example of dog-eat-dog survival-of the-fittest mentality.

Were you raised to believe that this is what life is all about, or did you become this way through societal insular disillusionment?

[QUOTE="Sam_Phisher"]

I would rather have the government be in control of our money rather than the Federal Reserve

fidosim

The Fed = The government. Same with FEMA. See why conservatives are so apprehensive about someone like Obama?

The Federal Reserve is not a government agency or branch. It's a private bank owned by private shareholders that lends money to the government at interest since it has a monopoly over printing the fiat currency.

That's Obama's plan help the people at the bottom more than the richest americans.

illegalimigrant

If people receive more assistance from the bottom rung of society, then they will be content on staying there and feed off the higher class as they pay more taxes.

Do you care more for Ideologies than for result?

illegalimmigrant

Proper ideologies should yield proper results. Temporarily ailments may not do anyone any good.

Yet another example of dog-eat-dog survival-of the-fittest mentality.

Were you raised to believe that this is what life is all about, or did you become this way through societal insular disillusionment?

burpysmurph

My upraising has nothing to do with this debate. Let's argue concepts and not ask either/or questions.

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

Genetic_Code

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

Vilot_Hero

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government. The purpose of government is to benefit the whole population as a whole by managing and sharing resources. And also protecting sovernty. I think some people think that Obama wants to turn this country into Cuba. But that is not the case. Its just propaganda. Just like Obama the terrorist or Obama the racist is just pure propaganda which has no truth to it.

[QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

illegalimigrant

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government

That doesn't make sense. There were governments long before countries and before that there were tribes which worked much better anyway.

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

Who are you voting for? And when the economy is the biggest issue why would you not go with the recomendations of the economic experts.

Genetic_Code

Because they might be wrong. The government has played too much of a role in the economy to begin with, and they could be the ones partially responsible for the recent crisis.

Oh snap. better go to stop the bailout plan

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

gobo212

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government

That doesn't make sense. There were governments long before countries and before that there were tribes which worked much better anyway.

[QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

Vilot_Hero

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government

That doesn't make sense. There were governments long before countries and before that there were tribes which worked much better anyway.

They worked better because they were sustainable. They were around for a much longer time and they didn't face the innumerable problems that we face today.

[QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

gobo212

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government

That doesn't make sense. There were governments long before countries and before that there were tribes which worked much better anyway.

They worked better because they were sustainable. They were around for a much longer time and they didn't face the innumerable problems that we face today.

[QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

Vilot_Hero

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government

That doesn't make sense. There were governments long before countries and before that there were tribes which worked much better anyway.

They worked better because they were sustainable. They were around for a much longer time and they didn't face the innumerable problems that we face today.

Very true. We can't go back to the way things were then but we can create a whole new system that recognizes that there were many advantages to a tribal system and incorporates those into modern society. I encourage you to read Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. It deals with this exact issue.

Let's argue your comment that if the poorer citizens receive welfare paid for by the more wealthy citizens, then that will encourage them to stay where they are on the economic ladder and just prefer to sap funds. Do you honestly believe this?!

burpysmurph

Why yes.

There are a multitude of reasons why people may currently not be in a position to become as wealthy as they might like to be. Many work for a greater cause, other than a primary focus on becoming wealthy, and they deserve the same level of healthcare and educational opportunities as the rest of us.

burphysmurph

I agree. There should be a line drawn in these situations to distinguish what is necessary and what is reserved to the privacy of individuals.

Many of them are likely more educated than you, but they don't consider the narrow-mined concept of monetary wealth as their primary goal in life. They might prefer to help others or contribute to the invaluable wealth of humanity and human wisdom.

burphysmurph

This isn't exclusive to one portion of society.

Because you are so narrowly focused on one shallow concept of human value, you are blinded and may never understand where I am "coming from". You were raised in a culture to only value monetary wealth as the only "rating system". In a global context, you are very deluded, and dare I recommend the cliche that it is high time you thought "outside the box".

burphysmurph

Tsk, tsk. Assumptions, assupmtions. I shall do the latter but please do not assume the former.

[QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

gobo212

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government

That doesn't make sense. There were governments long before countries and before that there were tribes which worked much better anyway.

They worked better because they were sustainable. They were around for a much longer time and they didn't face the innumerable problems that we face today.

Very true. We can't go back to the way things were then but we can create a whole new system that recognizes that there were many advantages to a tribal system and incorporates those into modern society. I encourage you to read Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. It deals with this exact issue.

[QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

Vilot_Hero

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government

That doesn't make sense. There were governments long before countries and before that there were tribes which worked much better anyway.

They worked better because they were sustainable. They were around for a much longer time and they didn't face the innumerable problems that we face today.

Very true. We can't go back to the way things were then but we can create a whole new system that recognizes that there were many advantages to a tribal system and incorporates those into modern society. I encourage you to read Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. It deals with this exact issue.

And attitudes like this is why we will never try to rectify old problems with new systems.I'm not saying such a system will be flawless but it might well take us in the right direction.

There seems to be another missconception. Some people think that the poor are poor because they don't work. When you get paid 8 dollars an hour for being the backbone of the country. 40 hours a week. You get about 1,280 a month. Think about rent, bills, food, and unforseen problems(injuries, car problems). Its not that hard to see why people struggle to get by. That's why I strongly agree with universal healthcare and education. Life has to be protected regarless of price and education is the only way most people have to succeed.illegalimigrant

Healthcare and education should be eased so it's accessible to every child and immigrant, regardless of social status or citizenship.

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

gobo212

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government

That doesn't make sense. There were governments long before countries and before that there were tribes which worked much better anyway.

So if a tribal system is so much better why aren't there any successful tribal system. Oh wait there is you see them in remote places of Africa and the Amazons. Yea I guess they are doing alright. They might finally use the wheel in a couple of decades.

[QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

gobo212

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government

That doesn't make sense. There were governments long before countries and before that there were tribes which worked much better anyway.

They worked better because they were sustainable. They were around for a much longer time and they didn't face the innumerable problems that we face today.

Very true. We can't go back to the way things were then but we can create a whole new system that recognizes that there were many advantages to a tribal system and incorporates those into modern society. I encourage you to read Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. It deals with this exact issue.

And attitudes like this is why we will never try to rectify old problems with new systems.

[QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

illegalimigrant

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government

That doesn't make sense. There were governments long before countries and before that there were tribes which worked much better anyway.

So if a tribal system is so much better why aren't there any successful tribal system. Oh wait there is you see them in remote places of Africa and the Amazons. Yea I guess they are doing alright. They might finally use the wheel in a couple of decades.

Wow you talk about "thinking outside the box" and then you completely reject different ideas... Good for you.

[QUOTE="burpysmurph"]

Let's argue your comment that if the poorer citizens receive welfare paid for by the more wealthy citizens, then that will encourage them to stay where they are on the economic ladder and just prefer to sap funds. Do you honestly believe this?!

Genetic_Code

Why yes.

There are a multitude of reasons why people may currently not be in a position to become as wealthy as they might like to be. Many work for a greater cause, other than a primary focus on becoming wealthy, and they deserve the same level of healthcare and educational opportunities as the rest of us.

burphysmurph

I agree. There should be a line drawn in these situations to distinguish what is necessary and what is reserved to the privacy of individuals.

Many of them are likely more educated than you, but they don't consider the narrow-mined concept of monetary wealth as their primary goal in life. They might prefer to help others or contribute to the invaluable wealth of humanity and human wisdom.

burphysmurph

This isn't exclusive to one portion of society.

Because you are so narrowly focused on one shallow concept of human value, you are blinded and may never understand where I am "coming from". You were raised in a culture to only value monetary wealth as the only "rating system". In a global context, you are very deluded, and dare I recommend the cliche that it is high time you thought "outside the box".

burphysmurph

Tsk, tsk. Assumptions, assupmtions. I shall do the latter but please do not assume the former.

Instead of playing "negativity propaganda politics", much favoured by McCain/Palin of late, would you care to actually address the fruit of these issues I raised?

Instead of playing "negativity propaganda politics", much favoured by McCain/Palin of late, would you care to actually address the fruit of these issues I raised?

burpysmurph

Another loaded question. Regardless if I say yes or no, you've already made the assertion that I haven't addressed the fruit of such issues. Therefore I will not answer your question, because by doing so with a simple yes or no will be an admission to your own faulty assertion.

You asked me a question. I answered.

You made a statement. I clarified, to some partial agreement.

You described a certain portion of society (while making a minor slap at me). I denounced it, saying that this isn't exclusive to just that portion of society.

You attacked me by raising baseless assumptions. I didn't even call you out on that other than addressing the issues with your statement and that I would consider thinking outside the box.

Explain to me what I did wrong there, or more importantly, what constitutes as "negativity propaganda politics".

[QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="gobo212"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"][QUOTE="Vilot_Hero"][QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

Vilot_Hero

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

I agree. That is why every country since the begining of civilization has had government

That doesn't make sense. There were governments long before countries and before that there were tribes which worked much better anyway.

They worked better because they were sustainable. They were around for a much longer time and they didn't face the innumerable problems that we face today.

Very true. We can't go back to the way things were then but we can create a whole new system that recognizes that there were many advantages to a tribal system and incorporates those into modern society. I encourage you to read Ishmael by Daniel Quinn. It deals with this exact issue.

And attitudes like this is why we will never try to rectify old problems with new systems.

It's unsustainable. Issues such as Peak Oil, the loss of biodiversity [1,2,3] and overpopulation are serious threats to both our society and our species. Also many, many people find the emphasis our society puts on the accumulation of material goods as the ultimate goal to be unsatisfying. I'm sure there are some out there that get a kick out trying to own everything but to me it is really unfulfilling. A tribal system eschews capitalist ideals and emphasizes community and social interaction while also remaining evolutionarily stable.

[QUOTE="burpysmurph"]

Instead of playing "negativity propaganda politics", much favoured by McCain/Palin of late, would you care to actually address the fruit of these issues I raised?

Genetic_Code

Another loaded question. Regardless if I say yes or no, you've already made the assertion that I haven't addressed the fruit of such issues. Therefore I will not answer your question, because by doing so with a simple yes or no will be an admission to your own faulty assertion.

You asked me a question. I answered.

You made a statement. I clarified, to some partial agreement.

You described a certain portion of society (while making a minor slap at me). I denounced it, saying that this isn't exclusive to just that portion of society.

You attacked me by raising baseless assumptions. I didn't even call you out on that other than addressing the issues with your statement and that I would consider thinking outside the box.

Then why do I get the feeling that you are trying to skirt the real issues with flashy one-liners?

Well I think we have to use logic. Tribalism are you serious? nough said.illegalimigrant

What is illogical about looking at what has worked for our species for millions of years and trying to adapt some of that to our society?

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]

So you are saying that its better to guess at the economy? If that's so why would it matter who wins?

Genetic_Code

No, it's better to take government out of the economy and reward the people who deserve it most less taxes.

Sorry, if this seems like s stupid question, but who are you referring to when you state, "Deserves it most?" Middle Class or upper class?

142 people 10% of which were reuplican.....so 14 republicans took the survey. Not biased at all.

McCain's trade policy is a lot better than Obama's......

At least that is what my econ teachers say.....Particular my international econ teacher who is an Obama supporter.

They mainly sighted that keeping low-skilled labor oriented jobs here had a high economic cost to the US as a whole. They suggested that if we outsource these jobs and import these goods there is a net economic gain. Using the net economic gain we can educate the people who lost jobs for new fields and still have an increase in GDP. The US sugar industry is a prime example of this, it has goverment protection. The net economic cost of a job in the sugar industry is 200k, they pay around 30k though. So the net economic lose from keeping the job here is 170k per worker........

Obama wants to keep the jobs here, and the loses, and McCain wants to educate workers into new fields using the net economic gains from outsourcing.

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]Well I think we have to use logic. Tribalism are you serious? nough said.gobo212

What is illogical about looking at what has worked for our species for millions of years and trying to adapt some of that to our society?

Genetic_Code, political debate is not supposed to be about a superficial match of wits, it is about putting forth a valid argument, and addressing it as such.burpysmurph

Excuse me if I sound witty. I was just trying to be brief. I'm not one to elaborate when my insight of any topic is insufficient compared to my insight in others.

Sorry, if this seems like s stupid question, but who are you referring to when you state, "Deserves it most?" Middle Class or upper class?

FallofAthens

That is not a stupid question and I do not have an answer at this time that couldn't be described as stupid, because the image of an Exxon CEO virtually doing nothing but receiving so much wealth because he has a way at manipulating people for his own interests and not theirs comes to mind. That being said, categorizing people into certain groups can be faulty because there are always exceptions. Ceteris parabus, those that contribute the most to society deserve wealth the most.

Also, I'm through for the night. My apologies are offered to you burphysmurph if I'm rather irritating to communicate with.

[QUOTE="gobo212"]

[QUOTE="illegalimigrant"]Well I think we have to use logic. Tribalism are you serious? nough said.Vilot_Hero

What is illogical about looking at what has worked for our species for millions of years and trying to adapt some of that to our society?

You are right, I misspoke (mistyped?). While the Homo genus has been around for millions of years, Homo Sapien has been around for a couple hundred thousand years. My point still stands as our ancestors and cousins (in an evolutionary sense) lived in tribes. Our society is based on agriculture which was only developed a mere 10,00 years ago. In this sense, our way of living is still but a small fraction of our species lifespan.

[QUOTE="burpysmurph"]Genetic_Code, political debate is not supposed to be about a superficial match of wits, it is about putting forth a valid argument, and addressing it as such.Genetic_Code

Excuse me if I sound witty. I was just trying to be brief. I'm not one to elaborate when my insight of any topic is insufficient compared to my insight in others.

Sorry, if this seems like s stupid question, but who are you referring to when you state, "Deserves it most?" Middle Class or upper class?

FallofAthens

That is not a stupid question and I do not have an answer at this time that couldn't be described as stupid, because the image of an Exxon CEO virtually doing nothing but receiving so much wealth because he has a way at manipulating people for his own interests and not theirs comes to mind. That being said, categorizing people into certain groups can be faulty because there are always exceptions. Ceteris parabus, those that contribute the most to society deserve wealth the most.

Who contributes more than those with the hardest jobs? Does someone who invests in in real estate really deserve more than a farmer or factory worker? After all you could get by without the real estate mogul but not without the farmer.

Who contributes more than those with the hardest jobs? Does someone who invests in in real estate really deserve more than a farmer or factory worker? After all you could get by without the real estate mogul but not without the farmer.

gobo212

Another wrench in the system. There is no satisfiable answer.

[QUOTE="gobo212"]

Who contributes more than those with the hardest jobs? Does someone who invests in in real estate really deserve more than a farmer or factory worker? After all you could get by without the real estate mogul but not without the farmer.

Genetic_Code

Another wrench in the system. There is no satisfiable answer.

Well you gotta be smart with money. Some people know how to make money work for them.

[QUOTE="gobo212"]

Who contributes more than those with the hardest jobs? Does someone who invests in in real estate really deserve more than a farmer or factory worker? After all you could get by without the real estate mogul but not without the farmer.

Genetic_Code

Another wrench in the system. There is no satisfiable answer.

Which is exactly why we need a new system.