# Reactions/Plan to the New House/Senate?



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Just curious as to reactions and plans for your personal life in regards to our new government. It has not stopped yet gents, I am still predicting a Hillary win in 2008, although I have modified that to a Hillary/Obama run.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

I'm seeing an accountant about one of those off-shore tax shelter thingies that I've heard so much about.

More seriously if you look at the types of democrats that were able to pick off republicans they are conservative to moderate. They will be hard pressed to tow the liberal/moveon.org/Michael Moore line and then have to stand seriously for re-election in 2008. The one nice thing about being in the minority is that no one holds you accountable. Now let's see how they do and if they can resist the temptation of moving toward their liberal pay masters.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

Well said, pt. The Republican party needs to get their house, so to speak, in order. Ideology aside, they did a good job of shooting themselves in the foot. I still expect a politician to act with a little self discipline. Saying things like "macaca" or that Hillary had plastic surgery was downright stupid.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

In my blue state, already there is feasting on soybean products and public smoking of marijuana. Liberals will build nightly bonfires in public squares and dance naked around them, breaking only to engage in extramarital gay sex with persons who do not shave or bathe. Abortions will be performed on the front lawns of elementary schools. Bibles will be burned with much merriment. Cars bearing yellow-ribbon decals will be confiscated, driven to the Mexican border and will be used to smuggle illegal immigrants to _your_ neighborhoods. Safe homes, paid with _your_ tax dollars, will be established for the harboring of terrorists in a kind of Underground Railroad system. No national ID will be required, but conservatives will be required to wear dunce caps whenever they leave their homes. Rush Limbaugh will be killed, stuffed and roasted on a spit, an apple wedged in his porcine mouth.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

crs said:


> In my blue state, already there is feasting on soybean products and public smoking of marijuana. Liberals will build nightly bonfires in public squares and dance naked around them, breaking only to engage in extramarital gay sex with persons who do not shave or bathe.


As an aside, when doing my graduate degree in public health (full of crunchy granola, liberal types) we had a party every weekend with much festivity. While getting my MBA we had I think one get together. Those people were dull compared to the MPH crowd. I have yet to figure out whether it was natural disposition or just the difference in the difficulty of the course load.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

crs said:


> In my blue state, already there is feasting on soybean products and public smoking of marijuana. Liberals will build nightly bonfires in public squares and dance naked around them, breaking only to engage in extramarital gay sex with persons who do not shave or bathe. Abortions will be performed on the front lawns of elementary schools. Bibles will be burned with much merriment. Cars bearing yellow-ribbon decals will be confiscated, driven to the Mexican border and will be used to smuggle illegal immigrants to _your_ neighborhoods. Safe homes, paid with _your_ tax dollars, will be established for the harboring of terrorists in a kind of Underground Railroad system. No national ID will be required, but conservatives will be required to wear dunce caps whenever they leave their homes. Rush Limbaugh will be killed, stuffed and roasted on a spit, an apple wedged in his porcine mouth.


Thank you, Ms. Pelosi. :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

This country is largely doomed over the near long term (i.e. about 100-150years) all the forces for self-destruction are already present and will grow increasingly powerful, divisive, and destructive – the West is dying and America is far from immune; it only takes us longer to contract the contagion. Whether one prefers Republican or Democrat is largely simply a matter of whether the foot is on the brake or the accelerator as we head over the precipice.


----------



## KenR (Jun 22, 2005)

crs said:


> In my blue state, already there is feasting on soybean products and public smoking of marijuana. Liberals will build nightly bonfires in public squares and dance naked around them, breaking only to engage in extramarital gay sex with persons who do not shave or bathe.


Sounds like your average night in Greenwich Village. :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Artisan Fan (Jul 21, 2006)

I am concerned that the split power state of the government will not allow for much to get done in an effective manner over the next 2 years.

I'm also a bit concerned our collective taxes will rise.



> This country is largely doomed over the near long term (i.e. about 100-150years) all the forces for self-destruction are already present and will grow increasingly powerful, divisive, and destructive - the West is dying and America is far from immune


I certainly don't believe this. Our economy is very strong and we still lead in most of the important areas like jobs, quality or life, growth, etc.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Artisan Fan said:


> I certainly don't believe this. Our economy is very strong and we still lead in most of the important areas like jobs, quality or life, growth, etc.


Apparently you are in the minority AF, as am I. I have been listening to many voter interviews and political speeches and a great many people are convinced the economy is very, very bad and getting worse. I can not quite fathom this as just today, I authorized a 5k sign on bonus for nurse aides. If the economy is so horrible, why do I need to offer such a sign on bonus for a job that takes four weeks of training?


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Rocker said:


> This country is largely doomed over the near long term (i.e. about 100-150years) all the forces for self-destruction are already present and will grow increasingly powerful, divisive, and destructive - the West is dying and America is far from immune; it only takes us longer to contract the contagion. Whether one prefers Republican or Democrat is largely simply a matter of whether the foot is on the brake or the accelerator as we head over the precipice.


During the 1930's when we were in a depression and the USSR was on a roll many thought that the west and capitalism were dead. During the 1970's many thought the same thing however we have this nasty little habit of always coming back and converting whatever subversive elements penetrate our society into the mainstream. Why? Because people come here and discover how good things can be and buy into the idea that is America.


----------



## Artisan Fan (Jul 21, 2006)

> I have been listening to many voter interviews and political speeches and a great many people are convinced the economy is very, very bad and getting worse.


It has to be negative media....unemployment is just 4.4% (that's about as low as it goes according to most economists), Dow is at 12,000, Millions of jobs have been created, interest rates are very low and so is most people's mortgage and housing costs. Many companies like mine are seeing expanding sales and profits and skilled wages are rising. We have to pay a lot to attract talented workers.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

Artisan Fan said:


> I certainly don't believe this. Our economy is very strong and we still lead in most of the important areas like jobs, quality or life, growth, etc.


Things can change fast, capital is highly mobile - compare Britain of 1914 to Britain of 1954 - from Empire to food/cloth rationing. Granted two world wars were involved, but transfering funds and investing overseas can take place instantaneoulsy today. In 40 years it went from a pre-eminent world power to, well, a shadow of itself.

In any case - I wasn't talking about the economy; the forces to which I referred are social/cultural and they will take the economy with it.


----------



## Artisan Fan (Jul 21, 2006)

Capital is very mobile and it goes where it is treated best. The good ole USA is one of the places it can earn a great return on investment. It certainly will not as likely go to Europe where business grow far more slowly.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

Artisan Fan said:


> Capital is very mobile and it goes where it is treated best.


All the more reason to cut capital gains taxes and relax rules on foreign investment so that more capital will flow into the country. Try convincing the trade unions of that though.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

Artisan Fan said:


> It has to be negative media....unemployment is just 4.4% (that's about as low as it goes according to most economists), Dow is at 12,000, Millions of jobs have been created, interest rates are very low and so is most people's mortgage and housing costs. Many companies like mine are seeing expanding sales and profits and skilled wages are rising. We have to pay a lot to attract talented workers.


-Your national debt: 8,593,215,584,000 USD (and growing by 2.14 Billion per day).

-The US poverty rate has been steadily increasing for the past four years, with now about 40 million citizens below the poverty line.

-The annual budget deficit has been about 300-400 billion per annum for a few years now.

-US healthcare spending is 15 per cent of the GDP, yet it's only ranked 37th in the world - and is only 72nd in the world according to the World Health Organisation's ranking of premature death to disease. Plus, tens of millions of US citizens still have no healthcare.

So it seems the new congress has a lot of work to do.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

JLPWCXIII said:


> -Your national debt: 8,593,215,584,000 USD (and growing by 2.14 Billion per day).
> 
> -The US poverty rate has been steadily increasing for the past four years, with now about 40 million citizens below the poverty line.
> 
> ...


Poverty rate is directly linked to our stupid/lax immigration (legal and otherwise) policies. Hey, if you let in 20 million people illegally who then disproportionatelly compete for jobs against the lowest paid and least educated Americans there are gonna' be problems with some citizens earning a fair market wage - Not that ranch owners like Bush or trust fund babies like murdering drunkard Ted Kennedy have to care.

Debt/deficit when compared to GDP - not a real big issue. Still, spending should be cut.

World Health Organisation and other such international studies have huge metric/sampling problems - for example: https://www.usnews.com/usnews/health/articles/060924/2healy.htm


----------



## Bob Loblaw (Mar 9, 2006)

Artisan Fan said:


> I am concerned that the split power state of the government will not allow for much to get done in an effective manner over the next 2 years.


I think that this is actually not a bad thing.


----------



## Artisan Fan (Jul 21, 2006)

> Your national debt: 8,593,215,584,000 USD


Percentage of Deficit to GDP is the better measure and it's been low recently. Otherwise, a large debt may just be a function of the size of the nation's commerce.

Poverty rates are skewed by ridiculous definitions of poverty which may be more indicative of middle class work.

Tens of millions do in fact have healthcare and the real number is said to be much lower.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

JLP,
While I understand that our national debt is an astronomical number allow me to cite another number, 12 trillion. That is our gross domestic product. Per capita GDP is nearly 40K (well above the 28K per capita share of our national debt).

Secondly take a look at this analysis of poverty in the U.S.

As for our budget deficit please look at CBO projections to see how the deficit is estimated to shrink. That tells me that a bit of fiscal discipline will bring things back to normal however we know how much politicians like to spend money.

As for your assessment of our healthcare system; well we've had that discussion before so I won't rehash those facts.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

Artisan Fan said:


> Percentage of Deficit to GDP is the better measure and it's been low recently. Otherwise, a large debt may just be a function of the size of the nation's commerce.
> 
> Poverty rates are skewed by ridiculous definitions of poverty which may be more indicative of middle class work.
> 
> Tens of millions do in fact have healthcare and the real number is said to be much lower.


Yeah, maybe. I know several economists who admit this possiblity, but they're also quite frank in their concern about these ridiculous numbers. It can go south fast, especially if the countries, like China, holding massive amounts of U.S. debt (particularly in housing) decide to pull the plug.

Just because it /might/ turn out OK doesn't mean it's wise fiscal policy to rack up this debt. I could do the same on my credit cards, hoping that, maybe, the banks will decide to drop the interest rates and it will all be fine.

Hmmm.

Guess we'll see, huh.


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

BertieW, 
You're absolutely right about having to manage the debt. However its not just defense expenditures but deficit/debt are largely a function of overblown entitlement programs. We need to trust at least a portion of these entitlements to the markets. 

As for China pulling the plug, I don't think this will happen although I agree it is possible. We are China's largest trading partner, period. What is good for us is good for China. With the Yuan pegged to the dollar any crash in our currency would mean a collapse of the Chinese economy.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

*So far so good.*

Gents,

In the day after the Democratic victories Bush has replaced Rumsfeld. This is good. I look forward to continued Democratic pressure to cut the budget, improve Homeland security, introduce a flat or national sales to replace the current income tax, reform and offer a semi-privatized Social Security option and to the Democrats leading the way on tort reform and offering greater incentives for private health insurance. Happy Days are hear again!

Karl


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

pt4u67 said:


> JLP,
> While I understand that our national debt is an astronomical number allow me to cite another number, 12 trillion. That is our gross domestic product.


So your national debt is 71% of your GDP. Is that your idea of fiscal conservativism?


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

Artisan Fan said:


> Percentage of Deficit to GDP is the better measure and it's been low recently. Otherwise, a large debt may just be a function of the size of the nation's commerce.
> 
> Poverty rates are skewed by ridiculous definitions of poverty which may be more indicative of middle class work.
> 
> Tens of millions do in fact have healthcare and the real number is said to be much lower.


So your point is that tens of millions in poverty and without healthcare is not a problem?


----------



## rojo (Apr 29, 2004)

JLPWCXIII said:


> So your point is that tens of millions in poverty and without healthcare is not a problem?


It's only a problem if you think it is.


----------



## Artisan Fan (Jul 21, 2006)

> So your point is that tens of millions in poverty and without healthcare is not a problem?


My point is that I don't see any hard evidence that the poverty number is in the tens of millions. We only have 300 million Americans and there just isn't a significant amount of poor here.


----------



## Artisan Fan (Jul 21, 2006)

A good article on poverty in America:


----------



## Artisan Fan (Jul 21, 2006)

Here's how one prominent survey thinks the U.S. stacks up against other countries:

https://www.heritage.org/index/countries.cfm


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

Artisan Fan said:


> A good article on poverty in America:


----------



## Beresford (Mar 30, 2006)

*I'm gonna pop an extra large bag of popcorn and enjoy the show*

Last couple of years were getting boring and predictable. This should shake things up.

I would even like to hope that in some of these new people being elected there may actually be one or two real leaders hiding there somewhere. God knows, at present they are conspicuously absent in both parties.


----------



## crs (Dec 30, 2004)

I notice now that the report I linked to referred to an earlier Heritage report on poverty, not the current one. However, people should understand that Heritage is not impartial in its research.


----------



## Beresford (Mar 30, 2006)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan 
I am concerned that the split power state of the government will not allow for much to get done in an effective manner over the next 2 years.



Bob Loblaw said:


> I think that this is actually not a bad thing.


You may be right:

Dow Reaches New High on Election Results
Nov 08 4:12 PM US/Eastern

By TIM PARADIS
AP Business Writer

NEW YORK

Wall Street ended higher Wednesday, with the Dow Jones industrials setting another record close, as investors grew more confident that a huge victory by Democrats in congressional elections would result in gridlock and keep lawmakers out of the way of business interests.

--snip--


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

JLPWCXIII said:


> So your national debt is 71% of your GDP. Is that your idea of fiscal conservativism?


If that 8 trillion had to be paid back in one year I'd say we were in trouble. Anyone who owns a home, 2 cars and throw in a few CC bills can easily say that his debt exceeds his annual income. I think your attempt at playing with numbers has fallen short of confirming any point you are trying to make.

p.s. According to the IMF the U.S. debt:GDP ratio is 64% which is not considered terrible.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Gents,

I am eager to see what budget cuts the Dems propose. Lets see if they can avoid the temptation to raise taxes. I think we should strive for budget cuts of 10-15% across the board not even the DOD should be exempt. We won't have a shooting war with China for 10-15 years so perhaps we should delay some F-35 deliveries.

Karl


----------



## Artisan Fan (Jul 21, 2006)

> Lets see if they can avoid the temptation to raise taxes.


Don't hold your breath on that one.


----------



## Shriver (Apr 23, 2005)

My first plan, which was executed today and this evening, was to go to school and then to a get-together with some young democratic friends dressed in my best Democratic Blues. (seersucker trousers, blue brooks ocbd, brooks blazer) 

Our man Harry Mitchell trounced the long-time incumbent JD Hayworth, who embodied most of what was wrong with the republican party.


----------



## Fogey (Aug 27, 2005)

pt4u67 said:


> If that 8 trillion had to be paid back in one year I'd say we were in trouble. Anyone who owns a home, 2 cars and throw in a few CC bills can easily say that his debt exceeds his annual income. I think your attempt at playing with numbers has fallen short of confirming any point you are trying to make.
> 
> p.s. According to the IMF the U.S. debt:GDP ratio is 64% which is not considered terrible.


Is your personal debt owed to this man?


----------



## DocHolliday (Apr 11, 2005)

Artisan Fan said:


> We only have 300 million Americans and there just isn't a significant amount of poor here.


Clearly, we've been hanging out in different places. I have no interest in joining the political side of this debate, but I don't see how anyone can argue that poverty is not widespread in this country.


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Doc,

What do you consider widespread? By every standard America's poor are relatively affluent compared to the rest of the world. Now does this mean that there is no work to do? Of course not, but if one believes that government can totally eradicate poverty than perhaps they will be interested in a bridge I have for sale in Brooklyn.

Karl


----------



## pt4u67 (Apr 27, 2006)

In the U.S. nearly 50% of those considered to be "living in poverty" own property.


----------



## Artisan Fan (Jul 21, 2006)

> In the U.S. nearly 50% of those considered to be "living in poverty" own property.


This is one of the facts about U.S. poverty that make the earlier cited numbers of "tens of millions in poverty" ring hollow. There are very few Americans who are truly indigent but I do believe there is some role for the public and private sector to help those who are. My point is that they are a very small part of the overall population. I do not mean to suggest we can't do better.

Another thing or two to think about is the high degree or mobility to higher income brackets (strong in the U.S.) and the impact of illegal immigrants on those poverty stats.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Beresford said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Artisan Fan
> I am concerned that the split power state of the government will not allow for much to get done in an effective manner over the next 2 years.
> 
> ...


No, no, no! Speaker Pelosi and her cohorts have finally convinced me Wall Street is *NOT* a barometer of how the economy is doing! Same with unemployment rates, etc. Our new index is the "WFSTV" or better known as the "Wal-Mart Flat Screen TV" index which is the ratio of income to the minimum payment due for one's high interest credit card used to make this purchase. It is a much more accurate reflection of "the heartland".

Regards


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

I'm buying a oneway ticket to the U.K. I plan on suffering amnesia after misplacing my documents. JPLW can support me financially for an extended period on his nation's superior medical and social programs. I will have flashes of memory requiring visits in the company of a attractive female nurse; Stonehenge, the Imperial War Museum, the Lake Country, Saville Row, Abbey Road. Eventualy MI5 will locate a dusty file of Irish Northern Aid membership and photographed talking to Phillip at the Royal Windsor Horseshow. I will be hurried aboard a British Airways 747 in first class to the tune of the Flower Duet from lakme. I'll sign a contract with one of those brit tabloids to tell my story and appear with a page 3 girl. Armed with my medical needs resolved, a nice vacation, a nicer check, two bespoke suits and that page 3 lady's phone number I shall return home to run in the next election in a newly emerged party from the old Greens. Call us- The Pinstripes, dedicated to ousting men in Black.


----------



## NewYorkBuck (May 6, 2004)

Artisan Fan said:


> I am concerned that the split power state of the government will not allow for much to get done in an effective manner over the next 2 years.


One can only hope. The less government does, the more I like it.....


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

Ugh, Hayworth. That guy was still doing the sports segment on local TV news when I was living in Arizona.



Shriver said:


> My first plan, which was executed today and this evening, was to go to school and then to a get-together with some young democratic friends dressed in my best Democratic Blues. (seersucker trousers, blue brooks ocbd, brooks blazer)
> 
> Our man Harry Mitchell trounced the long-time incumbent JD Hayworth, who embodied most of what was wrong with the republican party.


----------



## BertieW (Jan 17, 2006)

Citation please.

I'm listening, but am Reaganesque in my desire to "trust but verify."



pt4u67 said:


> In the U.S. nearly 50% of those considered to be "living in poverty" own property.


----------



## Rocker (Oct 29, 2004)

Ah well, Thomas Sowell has an article today in National Review which expounds on my earlier point "Whether one prefers Republican or Democrat is largely simply a matter of whether the foot is on the brake or the accelerator as we head over the precipice." Somehow people seem to think that as long as there are jobs or a certain ratio of debt to GDP, we're just the great - I don't think so. Culture/society matter too:


----------



## whnay. (Dec 30, 2004)

JLPWCXIII said:


> Is your personal debt owed to this man?


A lot of political hay is made out of this for some reason, I blame it on an elementary understanding of the global markets or just pure politicking.

China has a direct interest in owning US debt because it acts as a hedge to its massive trade surplus with America. The inflow of dollars coming into China are better utilized when they are reinvested in US securities, you take out the FX violatility out of the equation. US treasuries are and will continue to be the most sought after and safe investment in the world, dumping them on the open market would only hurt China's economic situation.

As far as our national debt, looking at it from a pure dollars perspective as others have commented is sort of silly. In the field I work in we deal with multiples of leverage usually on a firms cash flow, in the case of the US gov't a real understanding of our financial situation would come from a multiple of national debt over yearly tax revenues less expenditures. Other than that using national debt over GDP will at least give you a ballpark of what kind of trouble, if any, we're in.


----------



## pendennis (Oct 6, 2005)

JLPWCXIII said:


> -Your national debt: 8,593,215,584,000 USD (and growing by 2.14 Billion per day).
> 
> -The US poverty rate has been steadily increasing for the past four years, with now about 40 million citizens below the poverty line.
> 
> ...


· In any equation of debt and income, one must take into consideration the total ongoing enterprise value, which includes the national assets. They include the value of government owned land, buildings, military assets (ships, planes, missiles, etc.), minerals below ground, off-shore ocean assets, etc. The national debt is only one part of the total equation.
· The so-called poverty level amount is contrived, and does not include any payments received from sources outside income (medicaid, welfare, food stamps, private aid, clothing vouchers, etc.). America's so-called poor are vastly better off than those in other countries. Count the number of Americans below the "poverty level" who own cars, televisions, and vastly more assets than those in other countries.
· The "deficit" must always exist because of the way the US government does its accounting. It's completely different than that of the private sector. Government books include some forecasted expenditures pulled into the current account. When the government doesn't have a deficit, in real dollars, a recession always follows. If a private company did accounting the way the government does, the CFO would end up in jail (see Sarbanes-Oxley legislation). The government does not pay taxes.
· All poor have access to health care. There is a huge difference between health care access and insurance coverage.
· We would be best served if Congress stayed out of the economy, and repealed all the socialist welfare programs enacted since the 1930's.
· Freedom and capitalism work successfully, and ongoing, every time they are tried.


----------



## pendennis (Oct 6, 2005)

JLPWCXIII said:


> -Your national debt: 8,593,215,584,000 USD (and growing by 2.14 Billion per day).
> 
> -The US poverty rate has been steadily increasing for the past four years, with now about 40 million citizens below the poverty line.
> 
> ...


· In any equation of debt and income, one must take into consideration the total ongoing enterprise value, which includes the national assets. They include the value of government owned land, buildings, military assets (ships, planes, missiles, etc.), minerals below ground, off-shore ocean assets, etc. The national debt is only one part of the total equation.
· The so-called poverty level amount is contrived, and does not include any payments received from sources outside income (medicaid, welfare, food stamps, private aid, clothing vouchers, etc.). America's so-called poor are vastly better off than those in other countries. Count the number of Americans below the "poverty level" who own cars, televisions, and vastly more assets than those in other countries.
· The "deficit" must always exist because of the way the US government does its accounting. It's completely different than that of the private sector. Government books include some forecasted expenditures pulled into the current account. When the government doesn't have a deficit, in real dollars, a recession always follows. If a private company did accounting the way the government does, the CFO would end up in jail (see Sarbanes-Oxley legislation). The government does not pay taxes.
· All poor have access to health care. There is a huge difference between health care access and insurance coverage.
· We would be best served if Congress stayed out of the economy, and repealed all the socialist welfare programs enacted since the 1930's.
· Freedom and capitalism work successfully, and ongoing, every time they are tried.


----------

