Author Topic: Oh the times they are a CHANGIN (Read 2834 times)

vicious796 · « **on:** August 27, 2009, 06:48:47 PM »

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090826/ap_on_go_co/us_stimulus_border_crossings

Now, Democrats are spending stimulus money on random bull shit and the Republicans are calling them out on it. Change!

lx4 · « **Reply #1 on:** August 27, 2009, 07:00:34 PM »

Even if the money is spent on random bullshit it should still stimulate the economy by creating demand for all the material and labor involved in building border stations in the middle of nowhere.

vicious796 · « **Reply #2 on:** August 27, 2009, 07:09:49 PM »

Temporary jobs, not permanent. Get someone work for a few days, maybe. You can't build infrastructure off temp jobs.

nates1984 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 27, 2009, 07:12:35 PM »

Quote

A sleepy Montana checkpoint along the Canadian border that sees about three travelers a day will get $15 million under President Barack Obama's economic stimulus plan.

What a monumental waste of money.

Quote

Even if the money is spent on random bullshit it should still stimulate the economy by creating demand for all the material and labor involved in building border stations in the middle of nowhere.

1) Buy gun.
2) Buy bullets.
3) Insert bullets into gun.
4) Point gun at head.
5) Pull trigger.

lx4 · « **Reply #4 on:** August 27, 2009, 07:32:02 PM »

Quote from: vicious796 on August 27, 2009, 07:09:49 PM

Temporary jobs, not permanent. Get someone work for a few days, maybe. You can't build infrastructure off temp jobs.

Construction jobs, architectural jobs etc are always temporary in a sense, you draw/build something then youre done. What matters is that the workers get paid and go out and spend that paycheck and in turn create demand for other goods.

If you believe in Keynesian style economics (which Im not so sure I do but Obama seems to) there is no such thing as government waste during a recession. Whatever the money is spent on doesnt matter as long as its injected in to the economy. You could hire people to dig holes and then fill them up again, or build great pyramids which Keynes proposed.

kyanwan · « **Reply #5 on:** August 27, 2009, 08:34:58 PM »

Times are a changin' indeed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carly_Fiorina

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hiltzik27-2009aug27,0,6844433.column

Boxer has competition. Smart, talented, experienced competition. Competition that is far better suited to be a Senator - far better suited to be a real leader - than she is.

On a side note - someone as talented & impressive as Fiorina ... entering politics ... rather than making money - I see this as a wonderful thing.

I think our best & brightest - are getting fed up with politicians.

sdedalus83 · « **Reply #6 on:** August 27, 2009, 09:45:04 PM »

There are a lot of people I'd rather see in office than Carly Fiorino; however, watching her obliterate Barbara Boxer in a debate would be well worth it.

Proin Drakenzol · « **Reply #7 on:** August 27, 2009, 10:05:51 PM »

Quote from: kyanwan on August 27, 2009, 08:34:58 PM

Times are a changin' indeed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carly_Fiorina

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hiltzik27-2009aug27,0,6844433.column

Boxer has competition. Smart, talented, experienced competition. Competition that is far better suited to be a Senator - far better suited to be a real leader - than she is.

On a side note - someone as talented & impressive as Fiorina ... entering politics ... rather than making money - I see this as a wonderful thing.

I think our best & brightest - are getting fed up with politicians.

From both the wiki page and the news article she looks... terrible. "Standard GOP fare" is strike one against her for those like myself, I want pretty much anything but GOP bullshit. And the only reason we have a "Republican" governor is because he's anything but standard GOP.

And she got fired from HP in 2005 after causing the company's shares to decline about 60%? Yeah, great fucking record right there.

On the contrary Boxer actually has a good record of bills she's sponsored or cosponsored, shares the same or similar ideology as a majority of California voters, and wasn't made to look like an idiot by her successor.

relic2279 · « **Reply #8 on:** August 28, 2009, 01:47:25 AM »

Quote

Change!

Um. This stimulus plan was already being voted on in congress before Obama got elected. And the GOP are the ones so nuts about border control. To pass the bill, I'm sure there were some 'compromises' in place long before on where some of the money would go. (compromises in quotes because you know how much the GOP love to compromise $:-\$ )

I wouldn't blame hardly any of this on the Obama admin. This is still largely fallout from the Bush admin.

Quote

If you believe in Keynesian style economics

I do. 'You need to spend money, to make money' is a tenant of Keynesian economics. And it's true. In a global economy which we are now living, a reversion to any other style would ruin a country as a whole. The chances of them rebounding would be incredibly slim, and it would condense most of the wealth into the top 1 percent of the population. Leaving not a gap between the mega rich, and the middle class, but eliminating the middle class all together.

Jski · « **Reply #9 on:** August 28, 2009, 03:53:19 PM »

Why dose it seem that humans have to be right at death before they will changes there habits? Its true things are changin they have been for a few years now and i do not see it stopping nor do i see it as bad. The question is are you going to be able to changes with it or just fall behind and hold to hate ideals.

vicious796 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 28, 2009, 07:05:29 PM »

Quote from: Jski on August 28, 2009, 03:53:19 PM

Why dose it seem that humans have to be right at death before they will changes there habits? Its true things are changin they have been for a few years now and i do not see it stopping nor do i see it as bad. The question is are you going to be able to changes with it or just fall behind and hold to hate ideals.

Me thniks htat sarcams escape the mnds of OBAMA spprtrs

Jski · « **Reply #11 on:** August 28, 2009, 07:19:05 PM »

Quote from: vicious796 on August 28, 2009, 07:05:29 PM

Quote from: Jski on August 28, 2009, 03:53:19 PM
Why dose it seem that humans have to be right at death before they will changes there habits? Its true things are changin they have been for a few years now and i do not see it stopping nor do i see it as bad. The question is are you going to be able to changes with it or just fall behind and hold to hate ideals.

Me thniks htat sarcams escape the mnds of OBAMA spprtrs

O do you mean the switch from Republicans complaining from Democrats complaining?

Semnae · « **Reply #12 on:** August 30, 2009, 06:21:45 PM »

Seriously, who cares if some checkpoint stations got bumped up above some busier checkpoint stations on the priority list? The article makes it seem like the less busy stations were way more run down that the more busy stations. It's not unreasonable to repair the stations in greater need of repair first.

Natheria · « **Reply #13 on:** August 30, 2009, 08:23:43 PM »

Quote from: Semnae on August 30, 2009, 06:21:45 PM

Seriously, who cares if some checkpoint stations got bumped up above some busier checkpoint stations on the priority list? The article makes it seem like the less busy stations were way more run down that the more busy stations. It's not unreasonable to repair the stations in greater need of repair first.

If your argument is that they are repairing the stations in greater need first (which is not necessarily a poor argument) why do they need 15 million dollars on such a station for repairs? I've been out in Montana. They don't need that kind of money. And no one even mentioned the station in Arizona that is getting 199 million. Why the hell do they need that much money!?

And saying that it doesn't matter where they put the money anyways because it all goes into the economy in the end is such a frail argument i can hardly find enough energy worthy of refuting it. Throwing money at something worthwhile is good. Wasting money on something that does not need it is a horrible investment and goes no where. How can you say that spending the money on "random bullshit" will effectively stimulate the economy? Why do you not go out every day and spend your own money on random things you don't need? Because it's wasteful and it could be used in places where it is needed!!! [/rage]

Proin Drakenzol · « **Reply #14 on:** August 30, 2009, 08:49:26 PM »

Quote from: Natheria on August 30, 2009, 08:23:43 PM

Quote from: Semnae on August 30, 2009, 06:21:45 PM
Seriously, who cares if some checkpoint stations got bumped up above some busier checkpoint stations on the priority list? The article makes it seem like the less busy stations were way more run down that the more busy stations. It's not unreasonable to repair the stations in greater need of repair first.

If your argument is that they are repairing the stations in greater need first (which is not necessarily a poor argument) why do they need 15 million dollars on such a station for repairs? I've been out in Montana. They don't need that kind of money. And no one even mentioned the station in Arizona that is getting 199 million. Why the hell do they need that much money!?

And saying that it doesn't matter where they put the money anyways because it all goes into the economy in the end is such a frail argument i can hardly find enough energy worthy of refuting it. Throwing money at something worthwhile is good. Wasting money on something that does not need it is a horrible investment and goes no where. How can you say that spending the money on "random bullshit" will effectively stimulate the economy? Why do you not go out every day and spend your own money on random things you don't need? Because it's wasteful and it could be used in places where it is needed!!! [/rage]

So luxury items shouldn't ever be purchased? Whatever.

Also, Keynesian economics.

vicious796 · « **Reply #15 on:** August 31, 2009, 12:22:59 PM »

Did you read the article, Sem? It clearly states that this station is listed as "marginal" but is being bumped ahead of others above it on the list. Also, don't you think $15 million is a bit high of a price tag for a small station that sees only a few people a day? You could build a new one for less, I'd bet.

Semnae · « **Reply #16 on:** August 31, 2009, 03:41:20 PM »

I've never been to a border checkpoint, so I have no idea what the money might be being spent on, but if it's anything like the customs check at the airport, then I can see why it would be so expensive. X-ray machines and surveillance systems aren't cheap, nor are fixes to leaky ceilings and rotting floorboards.

AceHigh · « **Reply #17 on:** August 31, 2009, 04:32:08 PM »

I think what Vicious is trying to tell is that for that money you could set barbed wire across the whole border.... maybe even throw in a few land mines

kyanwan · « **Reply #18 on:** September 02, 2009, 02:56:54 AM »

Quote from: Proin Drakenzol on August 30, 2009, 08:49:26 PM

Also, Keynesian economics.

Some people are ... ugh ... I want to visit UK so I can go take a shit on that guy's grave. $15M shouldn't be wasted just because it's "a good thing to do" and will "give someone a job". If we're really going to blow $15M - ok. Spend it on something that will have the greatest benefit to the greatest amount of people. I'd rather see it go to educating kids in NYC/underfunded school district - than repairing some backwoods hick outpost. ( * AND * If there aren't enough jobs in some rural area - the pool of employees in that area is TOO HIGH, or employers too low. Throwing money at the project for a temporary fix - is not a fix. Temporary fixes are just that: temporary. They're like slapping a band-aid on a cancer and calling it healed. It's still there - but you don't see it for the moment - until that band-aid falls off. )

Quote from: AceHigh on August 31, 2009, 04:32:08 PM

I think what Vicious is trying to tell is that for that money you could set barbed wire across the whole border.... maybe even throw in a few land mines

We've got a saying up in my part of the USA.

Good fences make good neighbors.

Our still-standing 18th century stone walls exemplify that. I still don't see why we can't do like every other country in the world does - and have our military patrol our border. It's a national security matter, they - our military - should be handling our security. Besides. It's real world training and experience. Spotting threats / enemies / intruders, that is.

Proin Drakenzol · « **Reply #19 on:** September 02, 2009, 03:22:48 AM »

Quote from: kyanwan on September 02, 2009, 02:56:54 AM

Our still-standing 18th century stone walls exemplify that. I still don't see why we can't do like every other country in the world does - and have our military patrol our border. It's a national security matter, they - our military - should be handling our security. Besides. It's real world training and experience. Spotting threats / enemies / intruders, that is.

I believe it's the Posse Comitatus Act that prevents that from happening. I could be wrong, though.