Not meaning to spark any serious debate here but did President Obama really think he could call Kanye West a jackass in front of a camera and it would remain 'off the record'? I happen to agree with him, Kanye is a jackass (although I like a lot of his music) but really, that was obviously gonna get out!

ah but that's the way it works, its all a media campaign and Obama has gained a lot of support by making that statement. He was on target for once with 90% of the population

Ok i get what you're saying... it's all politics hehe

So how is Obama doing anyways? Since all the initial election buzz died down we haven't heard
too much about him over here in England, I'd be interested to know how some Americans are
feeling this far down the line?

Yeah it looks like unlike Bush who "doesn't care about black people"(Kanye's word), Obama makes no distinction between skin complexions and can tell a tanned man when he flipped out.

Showing him as the president of the USA as a whole, that's not too bad for the popularity.

true that^^

I don't think he made that statement with the intention of it staying in that conversation.

If thats true Gavel that would make him a dumb president, he knew reporters were everywhere and it this day and age cell phones cameras etc, there is no privacy and surely he cant expect it.

Posted By Adrenaline on 18 Sep 2009 07:14 AM
Ok i get what you're saying... it's all politics hehe

So how is Obama doing anyways? Since all the initial election buzz died down we haven't heard
too much about him over here in England, I'd be interested to know how some Americans are
feeling this far down the line?

What's the odds that someone "overheard" him talking about Kanye and never "overheard" him talking about some of the nutballs he's gotta deal with everyday...  I think Obama is a pretty clever guy, he knows what he's doing when it comes to that kind of stuff.

Hmmn... how's Obama doing?  Depends on who you ask, unlike England there are basically two parties here and in my opinion he's not very popular with either.  The right (which would be the left in England) are afriad he will actually do something to fix healthcare and education in this country and the left think that he's not using the majority he's enjoying in the congress to get these things fixed.  The economy still sucks and unemployment is as high as it was when he got in.  By the time the things he did to fix those problems take hold it will be at least Christmas (if not next summer) so... we'll see.

yep definitely depends on who you ask, AGC is still very optimistic that spending trillions of dollars and buying up banks and car companies was the right thing to do, I don't have those same feelings.

Hey AGC you said: "By the time the things he did to fix those problems take hold it will be at least Christmas (if not next summer) so... we'll see"

Can you elaborate on what "he did to fix those problems" or is it just your opinion that he has actually done something besides spending tons of our kids money. Ive never heard of spending your way out of debt. I hope you don't take offense healthy debates are good!

Posted By GP Studio on 20 Sep 2009 04:07 AM
yep definitely depends on who you ask, AGC is still very optimistic that spending trillions of dollars and buying up banks and car companies was the right thing to do, I don't have those same feelings.

Hey AGC you said: "By the time the things he did to fix those problems take hold it will be at least Christmas (if not next summer) so... we'll see"

Can you elaborate on what "he did to fix those problems" or is it just your opinion that he has actually done something besides spending tons of our kids money. Ive never heard of spending your way out of debt. I hope you don't take offense healthy debates are good!

Sure, "healthy debates" are great I just had one about what a jackass Kanye is so why not try to solve the U.S. economic problems and teach you what I learned getting my bachelor's degree in Economics from the University of Oregon in a short post on Warbeats.  That will change your mind and then we can take our "new found truth" to the President personally and convice him of the error of  his ways turn him from a Keynesian to a Monetarist like you and all will be well with the world.  Sounds great, except I'm a republican and I doubt there's is very much we would have to debate on since other than having heard about World War II and the New Deal as well as the Government expenditures of that period pretty much being universally accepted as the reason we got out of the Depression so quickly by every major economist including Milton Friedman.  I doubt we could have a debate pretty much cause it doesn't sound like you have a degree in economics and therefore there's not really much we could "debate" on. 

Having a "Government spending is always bad or always good" is not really a debate, it's a silly oversimpification that both political parties have fed to people who want some kind of bumper sticker that they can repeat whenever something challenges ideas they've been taught by their parents.  Can't say I'm really interested in that.  There are some great economics sites where people argue the Keynes vs. Friedman thing all day, kind of a boring arguement I think that they are both right about some things and both wrong about others.  If you want to "debate" about that kind of stuff you should check them out.  The youtube economic televangelist style thing is not my bag.

I think what your asking me is do I think that if half of the people in the country think that his "spending our kids money"  will cause them to have higher "expectations" (actuall economic term) causing them to spend more money and therefore rebounding the economy.  It is my opinion that these "expectations" will be the source of the economic rebound since that's pretty much what it says in any basic economic textbook printed in America since the 50's.

It is my opinion that most of the people who were not spending money were on the left.

It is my opinion that merely having Obama (or any democrat for that matter) as president will make these lefties open their wallet's a little.

It is my opinion that this will lead to an economic upturn.

This is called Economic Expectations,  basically if people believe the economy is going to get better they will spend more, at least that's the theory the teach in books in college.

In other words what he did is get elected and replace a president that very few people  had faith in anymore, that alone should help the economy.  If it doesn't by let's say Christmas, I think he's in trouble.

:disregard:  seems you edited your post...

anywho.... i think most of america is still "racist" and want to see obama fail regardless of what he does.. and thats the sad thing... and alot of those ppl are in the government that are suppose to folow him

wow and I thought ImageLine users were uptight Its sad that a person always has to start a sentence on these forums with things like "don't be offended" or "I hope your not offended" Maybe that's the way you always respond to people, which is cool you didn't really call me a JackAss cause that would be silly you don't know me at all.

Nice that we could have this little debate though, the problem with the government trying to spend their/our way out of debt, is that they are printing money to spend and that's where they are devaluing the dollar and the investments at the same time, I don't see that to be a wise move at all. Oh that makes me a Monetarist your right my bad Thanks for setting me straight!

I don't think that's true... if most people were rasist he wouldn't have gotten elected. Healthcare is not going to get fixed period... he doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of convicing people that either insurance mandates or government options will save them money in the long run. Education will not get fixed because people believe erroneously that if poor people get educated that that will somehow negatively impact their ability to get a job.

Until you remove the ability of people to donate twice by having PACs and corporations able to contribute large sums of money the will of the majority of Americans will go unheard. Campain reform is really the issue that is holding up any kind of progress in this country. Special interest groups on both sides will do anything to keep things the way they are. Labor uniouns and corporations have no interest in what's in the best interest of the majority of Americans... at least that's my opinion.

Printing money does lead to inflation that's true, can't argue that point. What major legislation that Obama signed did that?  Actually I'm a little closer to being a Monetarist than a Keynesian so I wouldn't take offense to that.  None meant, I'm just saying we are not going to solve the world's economic problems by "debating" it.

It's sad that people start conversations that are offensive by saying "don't be offended" IMAO.  If you didn't know it could offend someone you wouldn't have said "don't be offended".  GPO, it wasn't your politics or economic opinions that rubbed me the wrong way but the "is it your opinion that Obama did something besides" comment that made me think that you were not really looking to debate anything.  What you accuse him of was actually done by President Bush. 

The "printing money" arguement is not quite as simple as you put it, if you had to boil it down to one sentence that would be close but if economics was that easy we wouldn't be in the mess we are.  That's my point.  I'm not offended, I'm giving you my opinion that polititians mistake statisticians for economists so you have the blind leading the blind and the general public repeats these simplistic arguements on both sides and that this is really at the root of a lot of our economic problems.  You don't get an electrician to perform brain surgery and you don't ask a lawyer (what most politicains are) to fix the economy for you. 

Hank Paulson is a big time monetarist, why did he ask president Bush for the money?  If it was as simple as "this always good, this always bad" why did he do it?  That's all I'm asking you GP.  "No offense".

By the way, I was not implying that you were a "jackass".  I was mentioning a simalarly pointless discussion that I had earlier on another topic.  I was merely pointing out that these type of conversations always lead to people stating opinions that are pre-formed with no intention of seeing the other person's side which since you didn't address the "economic expectations" arguement I wonder...  maybee I was right.  Maybee it was pointless.  Maybee debating these type of issues without actual economic data or historical references and without any power to change it is pointless.

My actual point in the first post is that the bottom line is that without an economic upturn (which is in the short term based on "economic expectations") he's sunk.  Is it your opinion that economic expectations have not gotten better?  Most data I have seen on the subject seem to suggest otherwise.  That was the point I was making. 

The effect that spending our "children's money" has nothing to do with how he will do politically in the near term which was the question I was addressing.  At least that's my opinion.  I don't think most Americans are that concerned with "spending their children's money" when they are afriad they won't be able to stay employed. 

The "printing money" inflation arguement is dependent upon there being an "overheated" economy due to said government spending.  At least that's what the textbooks say.  I'm not sure we're in that neck of the woods yet.

Look GPO, I'm not trying to talk down to you or nothing, again I have a degree in Economics and I just find it kind of boring to have these kind of economic debates which turn into nothing more than a rehashing of two historical events and a brief overview of Adam Smith Manyard Keynes and Milton Friedmann.  Then you get into the oversimplification of "economic expectations", the "Laffer curve" and "overcrowding" caused by Government spending.  It would be incredibly boring for you and if not then we cannot really have a "debate" about it cause nobody who knows anything about what I'm talking about spends any time talking about it. 

I've heard your beats, quite good IMO.  How many long drawn out conversations do you get into about the step sequencer in FLStudio?  How interesting would that be to you?  If it seemed like I was talking down to you that was not my intention, I apologize.

Adreneline starts this thread with this "Not meaning to spark any serious debate here" lol ooops

Thanks AGC you make some very good points and for me you've helped me understand your position and more than likely the position of many people.

No your right its not as simple as "this always good, this always bad" but I still believe that debates/ or more simply put in this situation, conversations amongst people is a very good thing. I hate big government that does everything behind close doors because we simple people are not smart enough to understand it all, but what we simple people do understand is losing jobs, paying outrages prices for everything and having every right given to use by the constitution being slowly taken away.

I believe the problem is so much bigger than just the economy so there really is no point debating this as a single issue. I really don't understand the "economic expectation" statement. I expect that my dollar is worth a dollar but every day its worth less and less, that's my simple expectation. No you and I cant fix that but as a legal voter if democracy is still alive then I have a voice and people who are more educated like yourself should take every opportunity to teach people like me the truth so when I cast my vote its based on facts not politics.

On another note, I drew my conclusion that you were offended by your long post, more often than not when someone puts so much time into writing on a particular subject its because they are very passionate about the subject and have a strong stand to make. Yes it seemed you came back a little too strong, but I can take it and Ive realized too that you write longs posts on a lot of things, so now I understand you better and we can better communicate in the future

Sorry I misjudged your post, thanks for taking the time to give me some valuable info, its greatly appreciated!

Hey you know when i said i didn't mean to start a debate I meant one of those
typical internet forum debates that inevitably ends up descending into pointless
insults. You guys kept it civilised so it's cool.

I didn't expect to get such a lively response so thanks to all of you for that,
some interesting facts and opinions going around here! It's good to hear
from some genuine Americans on this.

And hey,this debate won't change the world but if more people really listened to each
other's points of view like you guys just did THAT would change things. Optimistic I know...

I'm going to try and simplify some things for those passing through, going WTF. Hopefully AGC can back me up here and just confirm that the theories I state are true, its been a while.

From the economies POV, in general, spending is good, saving is bad. Essentially, if you are saving, you are taking money away from the economy, if everyone stops buying things then no-one is making any money.

Or think of it alternatively, most of us see ourselves as buyers in the market. But as employees or workers, which (excl. the unemployed ofc, thats a different problem) we all are. In order to make money we all need someone to buy a product or service somewhere along the line. Whatever job you are doing, you are relying on someone else to give money to your business, who will then pay you. If people stop buying goods/services, then no-one gets paid, people lose there jobs. Thats what happened, thats how unemployment is created.

Government spending is intended to help everyone out, get the ball rolling, yes it creates more debt, but the intention is always to recoup that with taxes. And find me a developed nation without billions of debt...



(back to a point before, England too is really a 2 party country, Labour and Conservative, Left and Right (though both are so middle of the road you cant tell). The other parties are "also rans")

And really, we were well overdue a recession. History shows we have fluctuations, booms and slumps, and over the last decade or so weve had good times rolling. So when the sub prime market fell through, it triggered off a well over due and therefore hard hitting recession.

I agree with you on all your points 2nd but you didn't include anywhere the effect that printing trillions of dollars without assets to back it up has on the economy. The fact that China "and many others" are pushing for an alternative to the dollar shows its becoming worthless. So what caused that?

Well China pegs its currency, the Yuan doesnt have a free market value, its incredibly smart. China buys up different currencies such as the dollar, the euro the GBP, and trades these in order to maintain the value of the Yuan. This means China has a hell of a lot of money tied up in the dollar and doesnt like America messing about with the value of it. China is out to get its own, dont forget that, it doesnt really care for the American economy too much.

I'm not sure whether America is a mass importer or exporter, but I'll take a stab at it being an importer. Now a low value dollar creates a problem because where you could buy your cheap materials from abroad, you can no longer afford it. It is a big problem.

And guess who makes an awful lot of money exporting raw materials... yep, thats right. China will see its exports decrease if the dollar is devauled.
Really, China is looking out for its own, but it relies heavily (as any nation does) on the US.

But, no solution is perfect, as AGC has been saying, you have to make a choice between options, and all of them will have negatives.
But you need to get people spending, and spending is the best way to do that. Saving devalues the dollar to, it causes interest rates to stay low, and noone will invest in the dollar with low interest rates.

Yep...