Economics Current Info - If you're not interested just pass it by!

[Dunkopf]

Quote:
It's amazing. Maybe we should all get together and take over a Sunday morning timeslot, sit at a big round table, and talk politics and chickens. It would be a lot better than what is there now.

CT here. Many friends and family have worked for Sikorsky and Pratt & Whitney, now both part of the United Technologies group. I service a lot of equipment for many machine shops in the area making parts for them.

Sure, let's send Q9. Those debates would make for some good TV.

That sounds like an outsource proof job.

 

[Organics North]

Good work gang!
PC, I am impressed... Sound logic in my mind at least..

I personally sometimes think Political parties should just be eradicated... They seem to cause more harm than good... Why not just look at issues without the "party line".???. It seems us citizens are too busy bickering about differences, while the DC elite laugh their way to power and wealth.

Dunkopf,
A month or two back I suggested Q9 get involved in politics....

You know this is going to start to go to the young mans head!!

Q9 for President in 2020...
...... Hmmmm lets see, that means we only have 10 years to get that young man to see things our way......

ON

 

[Dunkopf]

That's so true.

 

[PurpleChicken]

Quote:
Why thank you sir.


Quote:
It's like going up to a salad bar with only two choices, stale croutons and seedy cucumbers.

I'm convinced they are the same party and most of the bickering between them is just a distraction to make us think they are different. I see so much evidence of this in both action and lack of there of. Eventually something will unite the center 80% of the country and progress will be made.

 

[I have WHAT in my yard?]

Quote:
Why thank you sir.


Quote:
It's like going up to a salad bar with only two choices, stale croutons and seedy cucumbers.

I'm convinced they are the same party and most of the bickering between them is just a distraction to make us think they are different. I see so much evidence of this in both action and lack of there of. Eventually something will unite the center 80% of the country and progress will be made.



There is ample evidence that this is effectually true.

Every president in the early days before his inauguration has a meeting with the top financiers of the country. For the most part they have been the same people or the same organizations for the last 30 years.




I'd be afraid to elect Q9..... He would do what he says!

 

[Ridgerunner]

Quote:
I disagree. I'll use Mahonri's recent poll as a reference. We do not have an 80% center. We have about equal Liberal, Conservative, and Libertarian factions with about the same number of Centrists if you consider the ones "on the lines" with the Centrists. I think the idea that most are in the center is a myth, one I believed for long time. I don't know the margin of error in this poll but I don't think it is off by a whole lot. An election victory of 52%-48% is considered a solid win.

https://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=416924

As to my theory on why they all seem the same once they get to Washington. When a new legislator gets to Washington, they get a tremendous education. People tell them what is actually going on. They are usually pretty intelligent people (I know there are some real exceptions) and they are usually people that really do care about the country. Yeah, I know each and every one has a tremendous ego otherwise they would not have the confidence to run. And they are pretty much ruthless enough to say what it takes to get elected and do what they feel is necessary once they are in office. I'm not convinced ruthless is a bad trait for the position. But I think when they actually find there is substance in the issues and what is really involved, they rethink what they are going to do. I'll use Foreign Aid again as an example. It makes a nice sound bite to say you will cut Foreign Aid. But when you look at a specific one, you find out that cutting that one will cost X number of American jobs or maybe risk our supply of a strategic material. If you try to explain that to the American people, they won't listen because it takes more than a few words to explain. And your opponents in the next election will pick up a few sound bites to use against you. It is my theory that once they understand the actual consequences of their vote, it is a lot harder to stand firm on principle.

You make a joke about being scared of someone doing what he says. If someone is elected on sound bites instead of a real understanding of the consequences of the issues, that is scary.

 

[Q9]

Quote:
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

Now what are you going to do with the unruly residents and unemployed people who are starving?? It's like playing sim city - finding that balance between providing services and not burdening the people with high taxes IS a balancing act. The social fabric of society right not is fragile and easily torn asunder if you remove the bread and circuses.

Now publishing his/her SimCity score (with screenshots) should be part of a candidate's bio when running for office....that I can support

No hiding from I balanced the budget with no taxes (but everyone died) or "a chicken in every pot" (but the employers and high-income earners all fled).

the answer is somewhere in between....

Actually, my typical SimCity strategy is - wait for it - cut taxes across the board and spend as little as possible.

It takes longer, but in the end I get a smooth-running metropolis. Dirty industry stays on the OTHER side of a BIG forest, though.

 

[Q9]

I have WHAT in my yard? :

Quote:
Why thank you sir.


Quote:
It's like going up to a salad bar with only two choices, stale croutons and seedy cucumbers.

I'm convinced they are the same party and most of the bickering between them is just a distraction to make us think they are different. I see so much evidence of this in both action and lack of there of. Eventually something will unite the center 80% of the country and progress will be made.



There is ample evidence that this is effectually true.

Every president in the early days before his inauguration has a meeting with the top financiers of the country. For the most part they have been the same people or the same organizations for the last 30 years.




I'd be afraid to elect Q9..... He would do what he says!

I do believe that is the biggest compliment ever given to me by a person I disagree with.

 

[PurpleChicken]

Quote:
I disagree. I'll use Mahonri's recent poll as a reference. We do not have an 80% center. We have about equal Liberal, Conservative, and Libertarian factions with about the same number of Centrists if you consider the ones "on the lines" with the Centrists. I think the idea that most are in the center is a myth, one I believed for long time. I don't know the margin of error in this poll but I don't think it is off by a whole lot. An election victory of 52%-48% is considered a solid win.

https://www.backyardchickens.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=416924

As to my theory on why they all seem the same once they get to Washington. When a new legislator gets to Washington, they get a tremendous education. People tell them what is actually going on. They are usually pretty intelligent people (I know there are some real exceptions) and they are usually people that really do care about the country. Yeah, I know each and every one has a tremendous ego otherwise they would not have the confidence to run. And they are pretty much ruthless enough to say what it takes to get elected and do what they feel is necessary once they are in office. I'm not convinced ruthless is a bad trait for the position. But I think when they actually find there is substance in the issues and what is really involved, they rethink what they are going to do. I'll use Foreign Aid again as an example. It makes a nice sound bite to say you will cut Foreign Aid. But when you look at a specific one, you find out that cutting that one will cost X number of American jobs or maybe risk our supply of a strategic material. If you try to explain that to the American people, they won't listen because it takes more than a few words to explain. And your opponents in the next election will pick up a few sound bites to use against you. It is my theory that once they understand the actual consequences of their vote, it is a lot harder to stand firm on principle.

You make a joke about being scared of someone doing what he says. If someone is elected on sound bites instead of a real understanding of the consequences of the issues, that is scary.

When I say "unite the center 80%" I am not implying 80% are in the middle, if a middle exists. Political and sociological beliefs are multi dimensional. However I do believe that 80% of the population can come together under the right circumstances. The other 20% are the extremes that won't be changed, both on the left and right. Of course this is a general thought meant for an internet forum.

On your analysis of what happens when the politicians get to Washington I agree with you and enjoyed reading your thoughts. It goes back to every action having consequences. I do wonder about some of the bigger issues, like what really happened on 9/11 and the real reasons we are in Afghanistan and Iraq. Oh to be a fly on the wall for only a day...

I wasn't the one to joke about someone doing what they say however if politicians don't fulfill campaign promises then American politics will always be the frustrating dumb down BS they are today.

I have Jack Nicholson in my head screaming "You can't handle the truth!".

 

[PurpleChicken]

This may be off topic here but a fellow trader shared this link with me while we discussed China issues. I'd like to make a thread about it but think it may cause too much debate. It makes me sick. http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/amazing-pictures-pollution-in-china/