What positive things can you say about President Obama?

Truly an excellent answer on all this!

I would love to get your response to my theory on what may have gone wrong with central banking policy up here in Canada?

http://www.politicalforum.com/canad...e-elliott-trudeau-save-world-environment.html

Did P. M. Pierre Elliott Trudeau save the world environment?



This is actually a quite serious question.

P. M. Trudeau made an error back in 1974, that may well come to be understood as one of the most important mistakes ever made by a political leader.

When P. M. Pierre Elliott Trudeau took Canada off the gold standard, (which incidentally had to be done for many valid reasons), a miscalculation was made that is the number one reason why our national debt has spiraled out of control.

But..... there is a very good side to this because all of us know that we humans have been in a somewhat similar mentality to our ancestors who shot, boiled, barbecued, roasted and fried passenger pigeons into extinction.

We are highly prone to OVER Consumptionism............. I addressed part of the background issues back in my 2006 provincial level campaign as an independent.

www.BankingSystemFlaws.blogspot.ca/

 

it's when I see this kind of pointlessly vindictive trash that I love Obama almost as much as I love rubbing his hater's noses in his 8 years of overcoming their total bs and will will enjoy watching him hand the country and supreme court over to the next lefty in much better shape and direction.

 

You mean you are hoping to turn over the country to another liar or ideologue instead of a solid citizen that has actually done something.

 

I am flattered that you would ask my opinion on this, but having a particular disdain for the "science" of economics, I can only offer that opinion from a logical perspective.
First of all, I would like to say that I concur with most of your analyses; in fact there are so many almost word-for-word similarities between your 2006 campaign blog and a book that I published years later that I hope you don't sue me for plagiarism. However, getting back to your theory, allow me to continue:

In the U.S., the finance industry contributes about 10% to our GDP. It is probably more in Canada, but is this addition really a positive indicator of universal prosperity?

I see the real culprit, though, as the stock exchange. Workers and consumers are no longer the principal concerns of the corporate sector, who are now focusing all attention on investors.

We need to consider the working relationship between the corporate sector, the financial sector, and the stock market. Stockholders seeking investment opportunities search for corporations with steadily increasing profits. In order to meet this criterion, corporate entities seek to continually reduce labor costs and frequently raise the prices of their products. Since workers are also consumers, they lose in both roles, while corporate enterprises and stockholders rack up huge profits by exploiting average American citizens to the fullest extent possible.

To make matters worse, the financial sector enables consumers to buy items that they cannot afford immediately on a payment plan. This helps the corporate sector by increasing demand and sales volume, thereby enabling higher prices, and also allows the financial sector to double or triple its investments through high interest rates and other finance charges. This inevitably decreases the already limited buying power of the consumer, forcing him or her into further indebtedness when credit is needed to finance basic necessities.

Workforce surplus = lower wages

Elimination of competition = higher prices

Higher dividends for stockholders and higher executive salaries and bonuses = lower payroll distributions and skyrocketing prices.

Regardless of what the experts say, inflation is primarily the result of greed.

You analogy concerning overconsumption is of particular importance in the analysis of our economy. We practice conservation of our natural resources, trying not to use more than we need, and recycling is highly recommended. We should adhere to the same principle with our economic resources, which are also finite. Money hoarded by the very wealthy is equivalent to waste, not being recycled, resulting in a rapidly growing insufficiency of capital available to the general public. This inevitably increases our outstanding indebtedness, and it is inevitably the responsibility of government to address this situation. On a final note, I see no ethical reasons why extreme surpluses should not be subject to additional taxes, rather than the government being forced to borrow from them.

I applaud your desire to serve your community and wish you the best of luck in future endeavors.

Incidentally, I am not a stalwart defender of President Obama because of his accomplishments, but rather his sincerity and integrity, and I am proud to be counted among the Americans who Gallup reported rated him “THE MOST ADMIRED PERSON IN THE WORLD”.

 

There are shortcomings in the ACA, as there were in Medicare, which evolved into a very efficient system, of which older Americans were highly appreciative. I deeply resent the fact that from the very beginning, Republicans tried to sabotage it rather than improve it, putting their personal hatred for Obama ahead of the welfare of ailing Americans.

Efforts to limit the harm ARE a good idea, but not efforts to limit the good.

 

The COBRA Act of 1980 mandated comprehensive healthcare and followup without regard to ability to pay. The ACA like all massive government programs serves primarily the government class - not the people. The ACA is designed to severely ration healthcare.

I suspect you know that.

 

The intent was to provide UNIVERSAL healthcare. Considering that it was the product of a COMPROMISE worked out by a panel of 6 Democrats and 6 Republicans, and all 6 Republicans voted against the bill, do you suppose their recommendations were made to ensure the success and passage of the bill, or to sabotage it?

 

Speak for yourself you certainly fail at doing so for me.

No such thing.

If that is what you choose to do so be it but dont paint tbe rest of us with your failings.

Yea you would rather have government make these decisions for you.

Now care to go back and address what I posted?

 

Why haven't Obama and the Democrats tried to fix it then? What are they admitting are the problems what want are their soloutions to fix it? The Republicans have said it is Beyonce tweaking the whole system is unworkable and has been a disaster for those who had insurance and I liked their insurance and their doctors and now can't afford to use them anymore.

 

The COBRA Act of 1980 in fact did provide "UNIVERSAL" healthcare. Very few people know that. The ACA OTH exchanges that universal comprehensive healthcare for limited COVERAGE. It would appear that you know the difference.

Every page of the ACA was paid for by special interests/crony capitalists. The fights between Democrats and Republicans are always about money or its equivalent paid to politicians personally.

 

Wow!

I am in something of a state of awe here to have gotten back such a comprehensive and supportive response to my analysis!

I began a discussion with a quotation from you:

http://www.politicalforum.com/canada/440381-brilliant-analysis-my-2006-campaign-writing.html

A brilliant analysis of my 2006 campaign writing!



This may seem like putting the cart before the horse... .but I just got back such a phenomenally well thought out analysis of my 2006 campaign writing that I am in something of a state of awe here!

 

Here's one of my favorites from Obama fans. "He's a good family man."

Really? How many good family men spend that much off-time playing golf instead of being with his family?

 

Government MUST make those decisions for us if we fail to make them ourselves.

No, I don't wish to comment on your previous assertions, as they are merely denials which will lead to non-productive argument.

 

Apparently that act was never implemented

 

From the outset, before obama even took office
The gop leadership was amazingly clear in setting an agenda to defeat obama

Their agenda was not to work to improve anything... Especially the aca

They thought they could stop the aca
And instead just gave special interests more power in shaping the final result

 

I believe our current chief magistrate of the Union has a mandate to emancipate the People and abolish "wage slavery" with a simple executive order.

 

Do you think that the party that has concentrated so hard on DESTROYING the ACA would cooperate with efforts to amend it and make it more workable? Implementing the system naturally requires an initial investment, but Republicans have gone all-out to eliminate ALL sources of funding. However, we have yet to see any evidence whatsoever that the GOP is even CONSIDERING an alternative replacement.

Unfortunately, the fate of the ACA will be in the hands of the next administration.

 

The question still in my mind is whether Obama will allow it to be over?

 

The GOP has gone so far in promoting division between Republicans and Democrats that a third-party dominance is becoming imminent.

 

most likely true
But if they break it, they will own the results
Likewise, if they want to renounce the
Iran agreement and bomb iran, its on them
And if they want to invade syria and re invade iraq,,., thats on them
And if they want to eliminate social security and medicare
Thats on them
And if they want to promise 10% per year sustained growth
Or 0% unemployment
Or a return to the gold standard, or congress running the federal reserve
It all on them

There are lots of gop ideas on how to fix the country
Lets see the results

 

It was the budget bill - it was passed. Subsequent COBRA and OBRA budgets refined the healthcare provisions in the 1980 law.

GW Bush tried to revise the heath care mandate to reduce the costs that had to be absorbed by private healthcare orgs.

The official GOP outrage against the ACA or even single payer is all shuck and jive. COBRA 1980 and its amendments was impacting a powerful special interest and had to be eliminated.

 

Both parties promote division among the voting public - shuck and jive to raise money. There is very little real division between Democrats and Republicans in Washington.

 

Yes he will. He has the left still somehow believing he is some great person or president. If he did something to continue his reign and potentially block their great Hillary from the chance at the White House, the left will bring the pitch forks and chase his ass out.

 

If you intend to reinitiate your campaign, I would like to reinforce my reflections on the stock exchange in the hopes that you will promulgate them.

Corporate exploitation, motivated by stockholder demands, has made it impossible to perpetuate a sustainable market.

Our economy is now dominated by corporate entities, subsidized by the stock market, which have sufficient funds to enable them to make their businesses grow, become more cost efficient, and buy out or bankrupt their smaller competitors. Exclusivity by eliminating competition and possession of patent rights allow arbitrarily high price-setting. Profits made are divided between stockholders, CEO’s and their top executives. Lower-paid salaried and hourly employees are more or less a fixed cost and usually do not receive additional compensation for increased profits. Measures designed to maximize profits to make corporations appear more attractive to the stock market traditionally involve minimizing labor costs by layoffs, automation, reduction of employee benefits, and outsourcing of work to take advantage of cheaper labor in foreign countries. But, supposedly to stimulate the economy, the corporate sector has been given special tax breaks which further reduce the government’s ability to fund its budget.

Higher profits realized by this corporate sector have not provided the labor force with a proportional share of benefits, resulting in an ever- increasing imbalance in our economy. Is it really fair that stockholders and executives are rewarded for the successes of the corporate entities, while the hard work and dedication of the productive employees who are directly responsible for those successes do not justify additional compensation? Their only reward is that higher goals will be set for them to achieve.

Wages that are not sufficient to purchase overpriced commodities is the main reason for our overuse of credit and high interest rates. Regulation of the stock market possibly could limit the investment opportunities of some from translating into indebtedness in others. The symbiotic relationship between big business and the stock exchange cannot be allowed to totally consume our economy.

 

Now you've lost ALL your credibility. Apparently it's a scripted reality show to you.