downwardspiral 0 #1 March 25, 2009 STRASBOURG, France — A top European Union politician on Wednesday slammed U.S. plans to spend its way out of recession as "a way to hell." Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek, whose country currently holds the EU presidency, told the European Parliament that President Barack Obama's massive stimulus package and banking bailout "will undermine the stability of the global financial market." http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510445,00.html Russian Prime Minister Vladamir Putin has said the US should take a lesson from the pages of Russian history and not exercise “excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state’s omnipotence”. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/02/putin_warns_us_to_eschew_socia.htmlwww.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SimonBones 1 #2 March 25, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7963359.stm The official stance of the EU is that the US 'just keep spending' technique is just plain FUBAR. This isn't being said by Republicans trying to bash Democrats, or Democrats trying to bash Republicans. This is being said by a large group of different countries with different cultures, histories, philosophies, experience, etc coming together to move the world forward in a better direction. They're not going to be running against Obama in 2012. They're neither republican nor democrat. I agree. Maybe Obama ought to listen.108 way head down world record!!! http://www.simonbones.com Hit me up on Facebook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ion01 1 #3 March 25, 2009 This is really being said by socialists and communists! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #4 March 25, 2009 What do you suppose was his motivation for saying this? Because he truly cares about the well-being of our nation? Or because he thinks the effects will not be to his nation/union's advantage? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SimonBones 1 #5 March 25, 2009 QuoteWhat do you suppose was his motivation for saying this? Because he truly cares about the well-being of our nation? Or because he thinks the effects will not be to his nation/union's advantage? Blues, Dave From the BBC article posted above: "Hours before his [Czech Prime Minister] remarks, President Obama appealed for all countries to bear the burden of spending to stimulate the world economy." No hidden agenda here. Just a response to a request. Maybe Obama should listen.108 way head down world record!!! http://www.simonbones.com Hit me up on Facebook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #6 March 25, 2009 His motivation? A desire for a stable global economy. When our allies tell us not to do it and our enemies tell us to go ahead with it....I worry that we just might be on the wrong track.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #7 March 25, 2009 Is this the same Czech Republic that had a "No confidence" vote and voted to dissolve their Government earlier this week?Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #8 March 25, 2009 QuoteHis motivation? A desire for a stable global economy. When our allies tell us not to do it and our enemies tell us to go ahead with it....I worry that we just might be on the wrong track. The motivation of Putin is definitely suspect, it's less clear about Czech. Certainly it's neighbors to the east are in a bad way right now with collapsing currencies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #9 March 25, 2009 Nope. It's a completely different Czech Republic.www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #10 March 25, 2009 Czech is about the missile defense right now. Part of their government is wanting the US to put its missile shield in their country but the party in power thanks to the disolvation of the government is on the side that they do not want the missiles around. What better way to keep the US from putting a huge investment and the strings that come with it then appearing to no longer fully support the US polices? They are not outright refusing the offer but by making the administration rethink their alliances with the Czech republic then they still win (don't have the missiles installed) without having to directly address the issue and suffer local political fall out from the decision.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #11 March 25, 2009 Obama is reducing the deficit over the next five years, from the > $1 trillion annual debt he inherited from Bush, down to $500 billion. Whether or not you believe it will balloon after that is dependent on how you think the economy will fair in general. If you go by the Congressional Budget Office figures, with a conservative growth, and you think the budget won't change in five years, then we can expect an increase after five years. If you go by the White House figures, which assume a moderate growth, and yo thin the budget won't change in five years, we can expect a continued decrease in the deficit, as happened under Clinton. If you expect the budget won't change in the next five years, you probably haven't paid too much attention to it so far. Personally, I believe Obama. I think, as he does, that by restructuring government, at the same time that we are reducing overall costs for the first five years, the results of the improvements to Health Care, etc, will result in a long term growth of the economy. Investment in a broken government now will pay off in the long term.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,473 #12 March 25, 2009 I can only imagine the shrill screams of faux rage that would emanate from the pages of conservative blogs across the US if Obama actually took the advice of a formerly communist country (and former enemy of the US) on the economy. "Did you hear? Obama is palling around with COMMUNISTS! He's letting our enemies determine our economic strategy! He is clearly unfit to be president." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
downwardspiral 0 #13 March 25, 2009 Ahem "I think as the president heads to Europe, he faces a huge public relations disaster," said Nile Gardiner, director of the conservative Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom. "Europe is increasingly turning against his massive spending plans, which most European leaders see as a destructive way to move forward for the global economy and will only add to a massive American debt burden," Gardiner told FOXNews.com. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/25/global-recession-tests-obamas-popularity-world-leaders/www.FourWheelerHB.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
redlegphi 0 #14 March 25, 2009 QuoteAhem "I think as the president heads to Europe, he faces a huge public relations disaster," said Nile Gardiner, director of the conservative Heritage Foundation's Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom. "Europe is increasingly turning against his massive spending plans, which most European leaders see as a destructive way to move forward for the global economy and will only add to a massive American debt burden," Gardiner told FOXNews.com. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/25/global-recession-tests-obamas-popularity-world-leaders/ The European plan of adding regulations to prevent this from happening in the future without trying to stimulate the economy seems similar to deciding to put on a bullet proof vest after getting shot without treating the wound. While I agree that we need the regulation (and am shocked that the conservatives who want to drown the government in the bathtub apparently want to as well?), we also need an injection of capital into the economy to stimulate growth. The banks are either unable or unwilling to provide that capital at this time, so that pretty much leaves the government. Or we could just bleed out in our nice comfy vest. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rookie120 0 #15 March 25, 2009 QuoteObama is reducing the deficit over the next five years, from the > $1 trillion annual debt he inherited from Bush, down to $500 billion. Where did you hear that? How can you cut the deficit when your spending waaaaaay more than you take in?If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #16 March 25, 2009 QuoteQuoteObama is reducing the deficit over the next five years, from the > $1 trillion annual debt he inherited from Bush, down to $500 billion. Where did you hear that? How can you cut the deficit when your spending waaaaaay more than you take in? Because right now, the deficit spike is like companies writing off all their bad assets as one time special costs, and then looking great next quarter. Most of this spending in 2008/09 is one time stuff, not part of the base. Which does allow for a trending down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #17 March 25, 2009 QuoteObama is reducing the deficit over the next five years, from the > $1 trillion annual debt he inherited from Bush, down to $500 billion. Whether or not you believe it will balloon after that is dependent on how you think the economy will fair in general. If you go by the Congressional Budget Office figures, with a conservative growth, and you think the budget won't change in five years, then we can expect an increase after five years. If you go by the White House figures, which assume a moderate growth, and yo thin the budget won't change in five years, we can expect a continued decrease in the deficit, as happened under Clinton. If you expect the budget won't change in the next five years, you probably haven't paid too much attention to it so far. Personally, I believe Obama. I think, as he does, that by restructuring government, at the same time that we are reducing overall costs for the first five years, the results of the improvements to Health Care, etc, will result in a long term growth of the economy. Investment in a broken government now will pay off in the long term. Quotereducing the deficit is BS. Obama will increase the national debt by at least 7 trillion during his presidency. (the figures differ but this is the lowest I have heard) The deficit is what the govenment spends over what they bring in, then the deficit is added to the national debt. Whatever was spent under bush or clinton has no bearing on what is spent under Obama other than the total of the national debt. The democrats are spending the money faster than any time under bush and what is spent now has nothing to do with bush. Obama said that it is our responsibility to not leave our problems for future generations, Iguess the burden of the overspending is not a problem. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #18 March 25, 2009 QuoteObama will increase the national debt by at least 7 trillion during his presidency. Only if he gets reelected. Quote and what is spent now has nothing to do with bush. you can try making that argument, but you don't have much to work with. Non action is not really a valid option. And most of this spending continues the policies started last fall. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #19 March 26, 2009 I figured these fit nicely under the orinigal thread title. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeYscnFpEyA&feature=related -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhys 0 #20 March 26, 2009 QuoteI worry that we just might be on the wrong track. Pity y'all didn't think that forward 8 years ago when GW was running a mock. Imagine where you could have been now...."When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhys 0 #21 March 26, 2009 QuoteI worry that we just might be on the wrong track. Pity y'all didn't think that forward 8 years ago when GW was running a mock. Imagine where you could have been now...."When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #22 March 26, 2009 QuoteI figured these fit nicely under the orinigal thread title. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeYscnFpEyA&feature=related This guy is bullshit. He dresses up as Thomas Paine and expects respect for jingoism. If he had balls, he'd just be himself and say the same things. OR . . . is it that this is really being produced by some political marketing firm? I hate douch bags that hide behind internet anonymity.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #23 March 26, 2009 Quote This guy is bullshit. He dresses up as Thomas Paine and expects respect for jingoism. If he had balls, he'd just be himself and say the same things. Maybe you should be less cocerned about his clothes and more concerned with his words. But in the spirit of appeasment... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvrCOmPjLyY QuoteOR . . . is it that this is really being produced by some political marketing firm? No QuoteI hate douch bags that hide behind internet anonymity. Pretty much sums up this site. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #24 March 26, 2009 I think you missed the point of my last but in any case, he's still bullshit. He's not actually saying anything but jingoistic bullshit. He's started out by saying Thomas Paine, but he's more Howard Beal; all he wants you to do is get "mad as hell". That doesn't actually DO anything. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PNWQGjX4vk Note the similarities. He's whipping up a furor, but doesn't actually say anything. BTW, I'm still not convinced there's not somebody backing this guy.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #25 March 26, 2009 QuoteI think you missed the point of my last but in any case, he's still bullshit. Your first point was the he's bullshit for hiding behind a costume and "if he had some balls" he'd keep saying what he thinks. I just showed you he has. QuoteHe's not actually saying anything but jingoistic bullshit. He's started out by saying Thomas Paine, but he's more Howard Beal; all he wants you to do is get "mad as hell". That doesn't actually DO anything. The rumor is that he's been invited to the White House. I don't know if it's true or not, but that's sure as shit more than other "mad as hell" people have accomplished. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
