State of the Union Thread

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Have you ever heard of a progressive income tax? Where the hell do you think most of the government's revenue comes from? Perhaps it's taxing the upper echelon of the tax bracket?

 

And don't even start me on the stupid horses*** of supply side economics and the trickle down effect. Every rational person knows why this may offset inflation in the short term, it causes unemployment (hello Phillips curve), a decrease in the ability for government to spend money (GDP component) and increases the amount of debt which is begging to blow up in our faces.

 

 

So tell me, if supply side economics is causeing unemployment then why are we hovering at 5% unemployment nowadays after 5 years of tax cuts?

 

 

[Rex Kickass]

So tell me,  if supply side economics is causeing unemployment then why are we hovering at 5% unemployment nowadays after 5 years of tax cuts?

Well if you wanna argue like that, in over five years, we've created an average of under 400,000 jobs per year and the percentage of adults in the workforce has decreased since 2000. So that's how. People are just dropping out of the workforce.

[Texsox]

So tell me,  if supply side economics is causeing unemployment then why are we hovering at 5% unemployment nowadays after 5 years of tax cuts?

 

We are also losing higher wage jobs and replacing them with lower wage jobs. I believe the military and military support industries are also hiring more people, which helps.

[Texsox]

She can wear that at the local McDonalds, but not at the State of the Union.  Her 15 minutes are up.

I would agree if she was shouting, carrying a sign, or something along those lines. She wasn't creating a disturbance. It seems as if they were looking for an excuse to get her out of there, and that may have been a good idea, I'd be really embarrased if she had caused a disturbance during the speech.

 

Yes, her 15 minutes are up, but things like arresting her just stretches it out.

[WCSox]

From Drudgereport.com

 

Cindy's crime? Wearing an anti-war t-shirt

 

I used to feel sorry for her loss, but it's clear now that she's just insane.

Edited February 1, 2006 by WCSox

[Rex Kickass]

She's a little crazy.

[mreye]

I think its great that the Bush administration set a goal - and a lofty one for energy policy in his speech. I just hope that he follows through. Previous energy policy from the administration has illustrated the opposite.

 

I think its great that the President is all about AIDS research too.

 

I think he talked a pretty good game today, but it is ultimately political theater. Has been since the beginning of the 20th century when the State of the Union became an address rather than a letter. A lot of good things I heard tonight. If he follows through, great. If he doesn't, it'll be like every other State of the Union since Ford was actually honest in 1975 and said the "State of the Union was not good."

Rex, we agree!

 

I think some of these goals are more attainable than in past years, though. I may be wrong here, but I didn't here as much "new" programs this year as in years past (Bush and Clinton). Maybe of we quit making so many lofty goals we can reach some of them. I'm hopeful he / they can start to curb the spending in Washington. I shook my head when he said he had a plane to cut the deficit in half by 2009. Why so long? Why not tomorrow? Why not yesterday. Stand up and tell Congress you'll veto any budget that doesn't cut the deficit in half THIS year! es, you have the power to veto, President Bush! Use it!

[NorthSideSox72]

Politics aside, Im most pleased with the President getting serious about ramping up alternative energy research.  That, above all, was what I wanted to hear.

 

For the first time ever, I am responding to a Nuke post with:

 

 

I do hope they are serious about it, and move on it. He talked this game a few years ago too, but we only spent 10 billion. Considering that's roughly a third of one year's profit for Exxon alone, I'd say that's not enough. We need to get serious, like Bush says he will. I hope we do.

[NorthSideSox72]

I have to say, I was a little annoyed with the Dems applauding the social security thing. I actually agreed with them, in that Bush's plan had major problems. But by applauding racously like that, they look like whiners. The negative stuff has helped push Bush's numbers down, which is good (people are waking up to how bad he really is). But, now its time to do something positive. Time to ramp things up - propose new initiatives. Let's see if they are capable of that.

[mreye]

Interesting flash poll from CBS. 700 Watchers approved of the speech 77-23. However only 32 percent of those watchers thought that those goals would be accomplished.

That sounds about right. Probably because of past experience.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

We are also losing higher wage jobs and replacing them with lower wage jobs. I believe the military and military support industries are also hiring more people, which helps.

 

 

Actually, if you look at the BLS statistics the biggest growth areas are in professional services ( read health care and financial services ), transportation and in construction. All of which are high paying jobs.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

For the first time ever, I am responding to a Nuke post with:

 

   

 

I do hope they are serious about it, and move on it.  He talked this game a few years ago too, but we only spent 10 billion.  Considering that's roughly a third of one year's profit for Exxon alone, I'd say that's not enough.  We need to get serious, like Bush says he will.  I hope we do.

 

 

He claims we can have Ethanol as a viable alternitive to gasoline 6 years from now. I think thats a little optimistic but that defenitely seems to be the best shot we have to kick our oil habit.

 

Believe me, as much as I defend the oil companies right to profit, I want to see us get rid of our foregin oil dependence as much as anybody. Id like nothing more than to be able to divorce ourselves from the Middle East and tell OPEC and s***bags like Chavez and the Iranian dictator to go to hell.

 

Another thing too. Its going to be Venture Capitalists, not so much the government, that really drive this technology forward. I was reading an article in Money magazine online where they are supposedly lining up to fund this research because thats where they think the big growth is going to be. The private sector should drive this while government gives an assist with lessening red tape and providing tax credits.

Edited February 1, 2006 by NUKE_CLEVELAND

[NorthSideSox72]

One more thought to share.

 

Bush has said since his 2000 campaign that he is a uniter, not a divider. Evidence has of course shown otherwise. He wants to say debate is OK, but only in his particular framework. Its kind of a joke, and his speech had that laughable line in it again about "responsible criticism".

 

But the Dems have been just as nasty back. If they really want to start some momentum going into the midterms, this is their chance to look like the uniters. Give Bush a couple things he wants, and show the press over and over again ow the Dems compromised. Support him on the non-partisan stuff - alternative energy spending, etc. Then introduce your own initiatives to make real changes. And save the negative stuff for the handful of issues the Dems just can't abide.

 

This is a huge year for party balance. Its time to see if the Dems can be as good at positive marketing as they are at Bush-bashing. And its time to see if the Republicans in Congress clean the dirt off, and stop the internal fracturing.

[Rex Kickass]

I have to say, I was a little annoyed with the Dems applauding the social security thing.  I actually agreed with them, in that Bush's plan had major problems.  But by applauding racously like that, they look like whiners.  The negative stuff has helped push Bush's numbers down, which is good (people are waking up to how bad he really is).  But, now its time to do something positive.  Time to ramp things up - propose new initiatives.  Let's see if they are capable of that.

 

Applause lines annoy me anyway. This isn't a freakin rock concert. It's supposed to be a policy speech and assessment of the direction of this country. It's turned into a farce. Ford and Carter were relatively honest about where our country was in their SOTU speeches, but since then its been nothing but apple pie and sunshine. Because its all about the memorable one liner, its all about the applause meters and the focus groups and the other crap.

 

It oughta be about making good government and being honest and open and accountable.

 

You know what I'd love to see? A State of the Union where the President doesn't stop for applause every 15 seconds. Where he comes out from behind the rostrum rather than criss-crossing the hall and shaking hands with every Congressman, Senator and hack in the place. Where rather than announce 15 new programs that won't even see a bill, focus on a couple of goals and plans, illustrate a couple of challenges - finish the damn thing up in a half an hour - which is how long it would take without all the applause and everyone can go to Denny's for a nice Moon over My Hammy.

 

Honestly, It's Time For A Change.

[Texsox]

He claims we can have Ethanol as a viable alternitive to gasoline 6 years from now.  I think thats a little optimistic but that defenitely seems to be the best shot we have to kick our oil habit.

 

Believe me,  as much as I defend the oil companies right to profit, I want to see us get rid of our foregin oil dependence as much as anybody.  Id like nothing more than to be able to divorce ourselves from the Middle East and tell OPEC and s***bags like Chavez and the Iranian dictator to go to hell.

 

There are so many reasons to kick our oil habit, and they generally should unite our country. Many alternates are better for the environment, or at least not as bad as current technology. It doesn't seem that we've advanced as fast as some would have believed a few years ago. I think having two oil men at the top of the government has both helped and hindered that process.

 

And of course there is always a balance. These s***bags are also customers for every US corporation from McDonalds to Coke and from AMD to Intel. When their economy goes belly up, it will have world wide ripples. It never is that simple.

[Texsox]

Thinking about the debt posts from last night, I want to share one more thought on the matter.

 

In the years before Reagan, we had "tax and spend" Democrats and fiscally sound Republicans. The Dems would want to start/expand a program and the GOP would fight because of cost, that it would raise taxes. Things would have to be cut in other areas, programs would have to be more modest, do more with less, and finally it sometimes came down to higher taxes or no program.

 

Today, there is no check and balance. We don't have to cut other programs, we don't have to scale back, we just have to borrow more money from China. Reagan tought us we could have all this government spending *and* tax cuts. Open the flood gates to spending that's good for the economy (actually it just makes us feel better) and cut taxes.

 

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until a majority of voters discover that they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury." Alexander Tyler (in his 1770 book, Cycle of Democracy)

 

Ironicaly this quote was sent to me by a good friend and conservative as example of why Democrats would ruin this country. To me it reflects both parties equally.

 

We are doomed when the only way for our economy to flourish is by borrowing money from China, and the oil scum bags that Nuke referenced.

[jackie hayes]

Applause lines annoy me anyway. This isn't a freakin rock concert. It's supposed to be a policy speech and assessment of the direction of this country. It's turned into a farce. Ford and Carter were relatively honest about where our country was in their SOTU speeches, but since then its been nothing but apple pie and sunshine. Because its all about the memorable one liner, its all about the applause meters and the focus groups and the other crap.

 

It oughta be about making good government and being honest and open and accountable.

 

You know what I'd love to see? A State of the Union where the President doesn't stop for applause every 15 seconds. Where he comes out from behind the rostrum rather than criss-crossing the hall and shaking hands with every Congressman, Senator and hack in the place. Where rather than announce 15 new programs that won't even see a bill, focus on a couple of goals and plans, illustrate a couple of challenges - finish the damn thing up in a half an hour - which is how long it would take without all the applause and everyone can go to Denny's for a nice Moon over My Hammy.

 

Honestly, It's Time For A Change.

All through the 1800s, the speech was delivered on a piece of paper. It's such bad theater now, I really wouldn't mind a return to that.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Well if you wanna argue like that, in over five years, we've created an average of under 400,000 jobs per year and the percentage of adults in the workforce has decreased since 2000. So that's how. People are just dropping out of the workforce.

 

 

You also started out those 5 years in recession and then had 9-11 thrown in on top of it. Thats like getting out of the starting blocks 5 minutes after the starting gun goes off.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

There are so many reasons to kick our oil habit, and they generally should unite our country. Many alternates are better for the environment, or at least not as bad as current technology. It doesn't seem that we've advanced as fast as some would have believed a few years ago. I think having two oil men at the top of the government has both helped and hindered that process.

 

And of course there is always a balance. These s***bags are also customers for every US corporation from McDonalds to Coke and from AMD to Intel. When their economy goes belly up, it will have world wide ripples. It never is that simple.

 

 

Frankly, if it means we get to kick our oil habit then US multinationals can go to hell. Im as pro-business as they come but this is a national security issue above all. We're dependent for our energy from a group of nations who are lukewarm in their relations with us at best and downright nasty at worst.

[Texsox]

Frankly, if it means we get to kick our oil habit then US multinationals can go to hell.  Im as pro-business as they come but this is a national security issue above all.  We're dependent for our energy from a group of nations who are lukewarm in their relations with us at best and downright nasty at worst.

 

BTW, and this worries me just as much. We import so much food, and have reduced our capacity so greatly, that we could not feed ourselves without imports. The only reason we aren't more worried is the nice South Americans don't openly hate us, and even if they did, they don't have the resources to do much.

 

Look at Jewel tonight, where did those strawberries come from? Look at the produce? What is "in season" in February. There is no national burger chain using American beef, and only a couple local ones.

 

If there was a Tomato Cartel dressed differently than us, and controlling the tomato prices, and pizza went to $30 for a large, we'd be worried.

[Rex Kickass]

You also started out those 5 years in recession and then had 9-11 thrown in on top of it.  Thats like getting out of the starting blocks 5 minutes after the starting gun goes off.

 

Clinton started in a much deeper recession and 29 million jobs were created under his watch.

 

Not that either person was responsible for any job not directly related to the federal government.

[Balta1701]

Clinton started in a much deeper recession and 29 million jobs were created under his watch.

 

Not that either person was responsible for any job not directly related to the federal government.

Well...in that case...it's also interesting to note that some studies suggest that without job creation due to government growth, we would still be at a lower total number of jobs than we were in Jan 2001. Link. At least according to that source's data...increased government spending has accounted for more than 100% of the jobs created since Bush took office.

[RockRaines]

I have to say, I was a little annoyed with the Dems applauding the social security thing.  I actually agreed with them, in that Bush's plan had major problems.  But by applauding racously like that, they look like whiners.  The negative stuff has helped push Bush's numbers down, which is good (people are waking up to how bad he really is).  But, now its time to do something positive.  Time to ramp things up - propose new initiatives.  Let's see if they are capable of that.

How about being annoyed with the constant applauding period. Its so dumb and high-schoolish. The republican side would have stood and clapped if Bush sneezed. They should just stand up and sit down if they support his points, a la parliament.

[Texsox]

How about being annoyed with the constant applauding period.  Its so dumb and high-schoolish.  The republican side would have stood and clapped if Bush sneezed.  They should just stand up and sit down if they support his points, a la parliament.

 

 

Plus some of it is staged, they know when the President wants applause. (ALL Presidents) Again, this is the same, no matter who is delivering the address.

[NorthSideSox72]

Plus some of it is staged, they know when the President wants applause. (ALL Presidents) Again, this is the same, no matter who is delivering the address.

 

It does seem worse with Bush, because his speeches are usually made up of shorter sentences, smaller words and more succinct dialogue (not inherently bad, just the way his speeches are written and delivered). This makes for more pauses.