You are not signed in (Login or Join Free)   |   Help
Sploofus Trivia
Trivia GamesCommunityLeaderboardsTournaments
You are here:  Home  >>  Chat Forums  >>  The Salty Dog  >>  View Chat Message

View Chat Message

Pages:  1    

Cujgie  (Level: 182.1 - Posts: 754)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 1:11 AM

IF YOU HAD BEEN EECTED U.S. PRESIDENT... would you have solved the crises in housing, health care, and education?

Caramel1  (Level: 135.0 - Posts: 21587)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 4:22 AM

I believe I would by getting toxic assets off the banks as that is what Paulson started to do, but changed his mind. "Geithner the Great' was supposed to have a plan but was short on details. I don't know hows it can be done but he is the genius that is supposed to know.

I would quit saying anyone or anything is Too big to fail" without explaining in terms that the average person can understand not just saying it wuld be a ripple effect-way over used and now meaningless. People simply must see that whether it is Citigroup or gm it is not a bottomless black hole

If I am not trying to reward bad behavior in mortgages I would explain that well. Folks like myself kinda see it that way when they pay on time and their neighbor is getting their mortgage paid on their backs. I would discard the phrase "Greater Good" from my vocabulary as people are beginning to realize "GREATER" is not them.

I would not try and fool the average worker that the few dollars more that he sees in his pay check amounts to a tax cut while at the same time pushing GREEN" which will increase the costs of things he buys and certainly his utility bill-check my Green Jobs Thread for all of the manufacturing jobs that are in the US I would know that in a short time tat the math wouldn't add up for folks that taxes would increase only on the super rich,. Small, business falls into that category and fact shows they do the majority of employing. Couple the higher taxes with unionization-card check- and many will go belly up or simply leave the country. The super rich have always found ways to hide their wealth.

I would not push my agenda for massive change in social agenda by calling it stimulus or job creating. Giving Congress health care to write will end up the same mess that the stimulus thing did. While I was at it I would work Very hard to get term limits on the DC folks as they have clearly lost touch with America.

The public school system cannot be fixed unless/.until kids are made to behave so good teachers can teach, Then we might talk about merit pay to weed out the bad. However, if we are going tioo use standardized test scores tio determine that merit, we will have to have impartial folks administer that test. Then too a reality check would have to be made that all kids cannot learn at the same level.

If I promised "change we could believe in" would think that very important and would start by vetoing thedre OMNIBUS nightmare that Government could function just finew with the current budget until SEPT. Guess inevitable disappoint could be expected if I promised to be all things to allpeople.

Finally, i would quit lugging the teleprompter with me everywhere and even if I made a mistake my words might ring true> ifd you didn't like my plan i would not say you have to understand because I inherited this MESS. Even hated bush did not say that after 9/11 and the attacks were surely in the planning under Clinton. Need to sleep so I can buy a new tea bag as Chick stole mine linda

Caramel1  (Level: 135.0 - Posts: 21587)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 4:26 AM

Bad typist that I am-really do need to click on the light in puter room

Collioure  (Level: 113.7 - Posts: 9952)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 6:04 AM

No, Linda

I would not have.

I would be concentrating on the mortgage crisis and stabilizing and reviving the economy. Those are absolutely primary. Otherwise I know that my majorities in the Congress will evaporate after two years.

I'd have people working on those other matters for a little later on:

So I would be readying my expensive plans for reforming health care for the time when a strong economy could bear the cost.

I believe his education program will be focused on footing the costs of higher education for all. He would be better advised to concentrate on primary and secondary education and that does not require money.

Caramel1  (Level: 135.0 - Posts: 21587)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 7:22 AM

Before I call you the same name that Sandy called you explain in detail how removing the toxic assets off the banks is not the first necessary step that most good minds believe would revive the economy?
You are a great one for saying someone else is wrong but offering no plan of your own .
Believe I also said he should not push social policies off as stimulus thus implying any kind of health care should wait.
We have not agree on anything to do with public schools since i started that thread as you do not approach the problem from a practical standpoint. I do not dispute that money is not the root of the problem in public schools. parents being actively involved with their kids education and trying to educate all our youth by the same yardstick for free.
You are great for being a resident of France and solving US problems. please get over simply say NO, (name inserted) and then proceeding with your theoretical BS Thank you so much... Linda

Collioure  (Level: 113.7 - Posts: 9952)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 7:59 AM

Linda, you can call me anything you want. And if you want to post like Sandy did that people who own stocks are corrupt, and that "you have a FEELING that the bankers (the big ones) and their cronies are faring better than us with their retirement funds," it will be easy to respond to you as I did to Sandy.

I don't know what the solution to the mortgage/banking problem is, but I believe that and the economy must be the top priorities today. The first is Mr Geithner's problem, and I understand he is tearing his hair out but he does not yet have his team in place.

Goddess28  (Level: 92.6 - Posts: 5235)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 8:05 AM

I would not have gotten elected as I have nooooooo idea how to fix this mess. This has been brewing for a few years, I remember hearing about it long before now. I am not going to pretend to know more than I do by offering solutions, but I do know that some of the greatest financial minds are trying to find a way to fix it, I hope they can.

Caramel1  (Level: 135.0 - Posts: 21587)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 8:14 AM

I believe that is exactly what I said that Gheitner was touted as the man who should know if he doesn't then that is a huge problem.

If you take the time to check back think you will see that I said wall street is Main Street.

I gave specifics which leaves me ope to criticism if anyone points out how they specifically disagree with me and their idea of a better approach.

You might want to think about the way you go about disagreeing which many on either side of the political spectrum find offensive.

Disagree all you want to but but something out there that does not just exist in your theoretical mind. Think it is also wearing rather thin that you seem to think you know EVERYTHING about EVERYTHING from the environment to education IMHO- Linda

Clevercloggs  (Level: 27.4 - Posts: 1246)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 8:15 AM

This'll be popular,embrace socialism. The world works better when everyone gets what they need, before the few get all they want. For decades we have heard "Communism doesn't work". It's never really been tried, but i doubt it can work either. We are now seeing that rampant capitalism doesn't work either, and millions in the third world have known that for centuries. The other thing is to boot religion as far away from politics as far as you can get it. Serious decisions that affect everyone should not be made at the whim of interpretations of various imaginary friends. Yup, i'm a pinko heretic !!!

Caramel1  (Level: 135.0 - Posts: 21587)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 8:56 AM

Cleverclogs, good to see new folks in the debate. I am not quite sure how socialism works but have lots of claims that is what is in place in many countries in some form. If it works so well, why is there rumblings about some kind of global bailout?? Linda

Donden  (Level: 112.5 - Posts: 2127)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 9:09 AM

Anybody that would vote for me deserves to suffer.

Clevercloggs  (Level: 27.4 - Posts: 1246)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 2:15 PM

Linda wrote "If it works so well (socialism), why is there rumblings about some kind of global bailout?? " Just about everyone agrees that the current global fiscal callamity was started by irresponsible lending (mortgages) in the US. Let me say immediately that things weren't much better here (Britain) either. The shakedown has resulted in many losing their jobs, due to the fact that banks won't finance companies any more. This "global bailout" is all to do with governments trying to salvage their own banking systems, to enable banks to start lending again, and to try and stem the loss of jobs. This is hardly socialism, this is governments doing what they feel they need to do in a crisis. Nobody can deny that it was capitalism that got us into this mess though. Under socialism the banks would have been nationalised, and the bankers and financiers could have forgotten about getting their bonuses.

Felix  (Level: 109.3 - Posts: 2500)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 2:24 PM

I would enforce personal accountability and let nature takes its course. I think Capitalism still works, so If you crash and burn your own business then live with it. Who cares if execs that lost millions flee because of no bonus. I would also make Hillary Clinton wear a minimum of two bags over her head at all times. Put Congress on a commission system. No profit no pay. Send that fat headed Kennedy guy to rehab and slap the pork out of politics. Well you asked. God Bless Our Troops!

Caramel1  (Level: 135.0 - Posts: 21587)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 2:39 PM

I think you made your own point, Dave, the types of socialism tried in European countries have not lead to prosperity. Personally very wary of Government running anything-own two US businesses-Post Office and Amtrak neither of which seem to be very well run so why in the world should they run the banks? The rest of it I am with Felix especially the bag. thing and Hilary- Linda

Collioure  (Level: 113.7 - Posts: 9952)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 2:40 PM

Right, Linda, there are many to whom facts are disagreeable. Some of these folks even call facts mean-spirited. In fact they have lots of terms for facts which contradict their dogma.

I think I meet opinion with opinion in a very polite way, but neither you nor I have much patience with BS.

Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4593)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 7:17 PM

Realistically, if I were elected President, I would be at odds with a democrat congress and not much would get done....which might actually be a good thing.

Now, fantastically, first thing I'd do is make them take me to Area 51 and open all the files and tell me everything there is to know about UFOs and USOs (unidentified submerged objects), I'd meet the guys who are so advanced (whether of Earth or elsewhere in the universe), get in a big room with them and all the other brightest minds of the country and learn what they know.

Then I would fast and pray for 40 days, learn what the creator of the Universe wants done, and try to do it!

Caramel1  (Level: 135.0 - Posts: 21587)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 7:32 PM

Impossible for me to reply to that...We just don't approach things from the same angle, I guess, Jank. You approach your political choices and beliefs based on your religious beliefs and while I think we most likely end up about on the same page we are miles apart from where we begin. How you do things is your choice though. Personally I am going to launch an all out campaign against the 4 Republicans who crossed over and passed that Omnibus nightmare. The Democrats who voted against it have earned my respect as would Obama if he vetoed it as it iis filled with what he says he opposes. Have no illusions that he will, though - Linda

Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4593)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 8:09 PM

That's ok, Linda. We each have made up our mind about what our core principles are. I've made my choice and every thing I do needs to fit within those principles. Everybody has to make up their own mind and go with their choices.

Caramel1  (Level: 135.0 - Posts: 21587)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 8:28 PM

I apologize, Jank. We just disagree that one must embrace certain religious tenets to arrive at our core beliefs or the choices we make ourselves or allow others to make determined by their own beliefs. This is certainly not worth an argument-said before believe you to most likely are a good woman. It is just when you post something liked that in a political thread that leaves someone like me who basically with exceptions most likely makes the same political choices that you do pretty speechless, can only assume that anyone who opposes you politically you believe are without are "core" values. I could be wrong in my assumption and it is not worth pursuing- Linda

Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4593)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 8:36 PM

Oh, absolutely not. I'm just saying how I come up with mine. Everyone comes up with theirs within their own belief system.

Mine is not religion or a way of life. Mine is truly just Christ living in me and me in God. How would I ever make choices to change the course of my own life (or as president the course of millions of others' lives) by stepping out of Christ? That's impossible for me. I in Him, Him in me, we're one. There is no doing anything or choosing anything outside of a 24/7 dependence, love, acceptance of Jesus.

There are unknown gazillions of wonderful people on earth who don't live or believe what I believe. But they each have a core belief and I hope their actions are based on that core belief. Doesn't mean I don't think they have them because they're not the same as mine.

Pages:  1    

Copyright © 2003-2017 Sploofus Holdings LLC.  All rights reserved.
Legal Notice & Privacy Statement  |  Link to Sploofus