Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
[Bob Woodward] Obama's madness
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
richk449 wrote:
Whether it is a threat or not, it was incredibly stupid of a white house official to write "you are going to regret this" to a reporter. Even if he did mean it in the helpful way that is now claimed, it is ambiguous enough that leaves him open to the charge of threatening a reporter.

Yeah, and not only that, but the White House should not be engaged in the systematic intimidation of journalists, which there is ample evidence of. Numerous journalists have complained of being intimidated and having their careers threatened or employers intimidated by the White House.

Good point. Another reason it was a stupid move by the white house is that it encourages all the loony conspiracy nuts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
richk449 wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
richk449 wrote:
I really don't think that the current deficit is a big enough problem to warrant this stand.

You think borrowing one-third of the money you spend year after year after year is "not a big problem"?

I am not sure why you put that in quotes, since it is not what I said. I do think that running a deficit is a big problem, any time it is done.

I see. Just "not a big enough problem" to warrant budget cuts to slow down the growth of government spending. Is that it?

http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2013/03/does_the_us_ris.html
Quote:
In my previous post I reviewed the recent experience of a number of countries whose sovereign debt levels became sufficiently high that creditors began to have doubts about the government's ability to stabilize debt relative to GDP. When this happens, the government starts to face a higher interest rate, which makes debt stabilization all the more difficult. Is there any danger of the same adverse feedback loop starting to matter for the United States?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-sachs/professor-krugman-and-cru_b_2845773.html
Quote:
Yet it's even worse on the economic front. Spending is not spending. The U.S. needs productive public investments, not wasteful spending. We need to modernize our infrastructure, retool our energy system, make our cities more resilient, and help to train a new productive labor force. All of that is hard work. It requires careful government programs, working alongside the private sector, and good coordination with state and local governments. It requires facing down vested interests in both parties all too happy to continue the wasteful ways.

Keynesians ignore or even disdain this kind of hard budget work. Just spend and cut taxes, we are told, and the economy will recover and go back to normal. Sad.

So, to summarize, what is crude Keynesianism?

(1) The belief in large, stable, and predictable multipliers on taxes and transfers;
(2) The belief that our problems are due overwhelmingly to a deficiency of aggregate demand, rather than to structural problems that need a long-term approach;
(3) The belief that a rapidly rising debt-GDP ratio is largely benign because interest rates are low today and will stay so indefinitely;
(4) The belief that "to a large effect, spending is spending," thereby catering to waste and vested interests while ignoring America's urgent investment needs.

In my view the result of this misguided approach, adopted by the Obama Administration, has been a large build-up of public debt with no long-term benefits for an economy that instead needs a public-investment-led recovery. If we had followed Mr. Krugman's long-standing advice to double down on this failed approach the situation would have been even worse. Yes, Mr. Krugman, I believe that you are a crude Keynesian at a time when we need subtler, surer, longer-term policies.

That subtler set of policies should include:

(1) Decade-long public investment programs in renewable energy, upgraded public infrastructure, fast rail, job training and the like;
(2) Adequate fiscal revenues (including tolls on infrastructure) to pay for these investments over the course of a decade, including a downward path of the debt-GDP ratio;
(3) Increased revenues through taxation on high net worth, financial transactions, high incomes, capital gains and carried interest, offshore corporate earnings, and carbon emissions, and a stiff crackdown on tax havens and phony transfer pricing.


Response:
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2013/03/crude-sachsism.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 763
Location: EU

PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 10:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
juniper wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
Old School wrote:
juniper wrote:
Old School wrote:
juniper wrote:
so I guess it's come out that this threat at woodward was bullshit?

Pretty much. But in the best tradition of Old School MSM print journalism, certain liberties with the truth can be taken to prove a point.


ummm. no. he basically said the admin threatened.

Yeah, I'm agreeing with you. And he took liberties with the truth. Understand?

He doesn't understand. He doesn't grasp the fine point that stretching intimidation, beratement, and ambiguosly ominous statements into "I was threatened" is taking liberties with the truth, as opposed to bullshit. Also, it being "bullshit" causes less cognitive dissonance for him.


at Old School: I guess "liberties with the truth" is the new euphemism make shit up.

You've got a lot of beefs with this admin. you don't need to shit up.

@BK: don't know what you are talking about.

Yeah, like I said, you don't understand.

This administration systematically intimidates journalists if they say anything negative about the President. It's been reported before numerous times. Also, you don't have any idea of what was "said", all you have is an email from the administration trying to smooth it over.

I think it's pretty obvious. When somebody raises their voice and uses the words, "you're going to regret this", that's a fucking threat. It doesn't matter if they later try, in writing, to make it look like they were giving you friendly advice.

The real question is this: why do you feel an irrational compulsion to deny it or cover it up, participating actively in the Obama Administration's concealment of it routine intimidation tactics.


correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the emails get released and it was found that it was an amicable exchange between the participants? or are you saying there was a verbal threat?

part of the problem here is that woodward is claiming he was threatened but is unwilling to give the specific details. Sorry, but unless you do, I can't really take you seriously.

As for other journalists, is this new? what are the specific instances? In free countries, this is a serious charge.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dmitchell
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 May 2003
Posts: 1159
Location: Austin, Texas

PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It was all make believe from day one.
_________________
Your argument is invalid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Old School
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 240
Location: West Bank of the Coast Fork

PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

juniper wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
Old School wrote:
juniper wrote:
Old School wrote:
juniper wrote:
so I guess it's come out that this threat at woodward was bullshit?

Pretty much. But in the best tradition of Old School MSM print journalism, certain liberties with the truth can be taken to prove a point.


ummm. no. he basically said the admin threatened.

Yeah, I'm agreeing with you. And he took liberties with the truth. Understand?

He doesn't understand. He doesn't grasp the fine point that stretching intimidation, beratement, and ambiguosly ominous statements into "I was threatened" is taking liberties with the truth, as opposed to bullshit. Also, it being "bullshit" causes less cognitive dissonance for him.


at Old School: I guess "liberties with the truth" is the new euphemism make shit up.

You've got a lot of beefs with this admin. you don't need to shit up.

@BK: don't know what you are talking about.


"Liberties with the truth" is an OLD euphemism for make shit up.

What I'm saying is that journalists (like politicians) make shit up all the time to further a point.

Get It? :?

Didn't know English was a second language for non Quebecois Canadians.
_________________
The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.
George Orwell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 763
Location: EU

PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Old School wrote:

"Liberties with the truth" is an OLD euphemism for make shit up.

What I'm saying is that journalists (like politicians) make shit up all the time to further a point.

Get It? :?

Didn't know English was a second language for non Quebecois Canadians.


and I am saying I don't like it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikpuppy
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 34
Location: Central Coast, NSW

PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2013 11:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would almost be prepared to bet, without any research, that Bob Woodward has another mind numbingly dull book coming out soon. This whole thing is indicative of publicity stunts cooked up by people who were famous once, but haven't done anything except putter along since on that fame (or infamy).

Debate on a non-issue got him into the papers, people go "Oh! It's the guy played by The Sundance Kid in the film that made no sense. I might buy his 300 page diatribe on modern politics it could be a fascinating read for my 14 year old..."

And then decide that they have to pin their scrotums to a board in order to iron them smooth, instead, because that's something else that they have never considered before.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Page 6 of 6

 
Jump to:  
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