Democrat Party

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

not to be slighted by not having a thread of its own like the GOP, aficionados of the democrat philosophy and MO can gleefully post here, and chime in with the logic of being democrat. No doubt SanJoaquinSooner can and will post here, since he offered no comments in that other thread.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

C'mon blue staters, tell us why we should go blue.

[badger]

C'mon blue staters, tell us why we should go blue.

Because we want a higher population?

Because we want more mass transit options?

Because we wish we lived next to an ocean?

:P

[okiewaker]

They will tell you, LOUDLY, they are the keepers of the planet. Yet,,,their EBT users are stinking up the planet by throwing their used up bags of fast food out da freaking car while being in another dagon drive thru.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Are we smarter peeps for holding a microscope to the republican party, and expecting improvement and excellence from them, while not agressively complaining about the democrat party being a socialist/fascist boondoggle that is hopeless.

[cleller]

Show me an area that votes very heavily Democrat, and about 75% of the time its somewhere you wouldn't want to live or feel safe to drive thru.
Show me an area that votes heavily Republican, and you should be safe and relatively stable.

[sappstuf]

not to be slighted by not having a thread of its own like the GOP, aficionados of the democrat philosophy and MO can gleefully post here, and chime in with the logic of being democrat. No doubt SanJoaquinSooner can and will post here, since he offered no comments in that other thread.

There's the problem with this thread... There is no logic.

[Midtowner]

Because we value education?

Because we think workers should be treated fairly?

Because we want the weaker folks in this country to have a voice?

[XingTheRubicon]

Because we value throwing money at education?

Because we think workers should all be rich, too?

Because we want the weaker folks in this country to have 2 flat screens?

fixed for reality

[olevetonahill]

fixed for reality

Heh :cheerful:

[cleller]

Because we value education?

Because we think workers should be treated fairly?

Because we want the weaker folks in this country to have a voice?

I think that's all true for the Dems, and they go at it in a way they think will logically help in the quickest way possible. Unfortunately, some of those fixes have either not worked as planned, or created other unforeseen problems.

Its kinda like debating how long the stick should be that holds the carrot.

[olevetonahill]

I think that's all true for the Dems, and they go at it in a way they think will logically help in the quickest way possible. Unfortunately, some of those fixes have either not worked as planned, or created other unforeseen problems.

Its kinda like debating how long the stick should be that holds the carrot.

The Democrats are the same people who Thought using Kudzu for a ground cover was a Great Idea.

[sappstuf]

I think that's all true for the Dems, and they go at it in a way they think will logically help in the quickest way possible. Unfortunately, some of those fixes have either not worked as planned, or created other unforeseen problems.

Its kinda like debating how long the stick should be that holds the carrot.

That does lead to a good reason to be a Dem... Never having to apologize. No matter how badly you $^&* it all up, blame it on the Repubs and move on to the next bad idea.

Sorta like telling family members that their loved ones were killed because of a video, but when it comes apparent that the video had nothing to do with it, you just leave the family member out in the cold.

[IGotNoTiming]

If you honestly think that either party will deliver you from your problems... you have already lost.

[IGotNoTiming]

YOUR party is controlled by a board room.... not by a guiding sense of principles to further improve the state of our nation.

That goes for Republicans as well as Democrats.

[Midtowner]

I think that's all true for the Dems, and they go at it in a way they think will logically help in the quickest way possible. Unfortunately, some of those fixes have either not worked as planned, or created other unforeseen problems.

Its kinda like debating how long the stick should be that holds the carrot.

Not all liberal programs are hated.

I got a list here of successful governmental programs. I tend to agree with everything on the list:

http://www.governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=7

Regulation of the Business Cycle
Public Health Programs (CDC, NIH, etc.)
The Interstate Highway System
Federal Deposit Insurance
Regulation of the Financial Markets
Social Security and Medicare
GI Bill
FHA
Consumer Protection (CPSC)
Anti Discrimination Policies
Clean Air and Water programs
Workplace Safety (OSHA)
The Military
The National Weather Service
Poverty Policies (Food stamps, rent subsidies, etc.)
Student Financial Aid Programs
Food and Drug Safety Programs (FDA)
Funding basic science research
Rural Electrification
The Army Corps of Engineers

Have there been some potential negative side effects of some of those things? Sure. But I'll bet y'all out in the sticks are big fans of the REA.

[Midtowner]

YOUR party is controlled by a board room.... not by a guiding sense of principles to further improve the state of our nation.

That goes for Republicans as well as Democrats.

True.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

YOUR party is controlled by a board room.... not by a guiding sense of principles to further improve the state of our nation.

That goes for Republicans as well as Democrats.Ah yes, the moral equivalency technique to sour and depress the conservative vote, or stimulate 3rd party voting... Gosh, never seen that one before.

[IGotNoTiming]

Ah yes, the moral equivalency technique to sour and depress the conservative vote, or stimulate 3rd party voting... Gosh, never seen that one before.

I could give a rat's crap about what labels you wanna use... you are an American and so am I. Unless you are the CEO of a multi-billion dollar company (millionaires don't count anymore) you should REALLY care about trying to change Citizen's United, rewriting the tax code, watching closely what the Medical and Pharma industries are doing, watch even more closely what the petroleum industries is doing.... Oh and by the way coming from one of the only states who nearly elected a socialist governor that was championed by the farmers of Oklahoma. You should REALLY REALLY keep an eye on Monsanto and what they are trying to do.

[TAFBSooner]

Not all liberal programs are hated.

I got a list here of successful governmental programs. I tend to agree with everything on the list:

http://www.governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=7

Regulation of the Business Cycle
Public Health Programs (CDC, NIH, etc.)
The Interstate Highway System
Federal Deposit Insurance
Regulation of the Financial Markets
Social Security and Medicare
GI Bill
FHA
Consumer Protection (CPSC)
Anti Discrimination Policies
Clean Air and Water programs
Workplace Safety (OSHA)
The Military
The National Weather Service
Poverty Policies (Food stamps, rent subsidies, etc.)
Student Financial Aid Programs
Food and Drug Safety Programs (FDA)
Funding basic science research
Rural Electrification
The Army Corps of Engineers

Have there been some potential negative side effects of some of those things? Sure. But I'll bet y'all out in the sticks are big fans of the REA.

Transcontinental railroads
Land Grant universities (even though they now run conservative)
NASA
TVA (which Obama is now wanting to sell off, igniting Republican opposition - this would be funny except that it isn't).
the Post Office, for most of its history

[TAFBSooner]

I could give a rat's crap about what labels you wanna use... you are an American and so am I. Unless you are the CEO of a multi-billion dollar company (millionaires don't count anymore) you should REALLY care about trying to change Citizen's United, rewriting the tax code, watching closely what the Medical and Pharma industries are doing, watch even more closely what the petroleum industries is doing.... Oh and by the way coming from one of the only states who nearly elected a socialist governor that was championed by the farmers of Oklahoma. You should REALLY REALLY keep an eye on Monsanto and what they are trying to do.

(Paraphrasing, from a recent thread) We don't care about the effect on farmers. Monsanto is operating close enough to legally that the lawyers can cover the gap, so we're good.

OK, the first six words are from Trust Fund Man, on another subject.

[olevetonahill]

Not all liberal programs are hated.

I got a list here of successful governmental programs. I tend to agree with everything on the list:

http://www.governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=7

Regulation of the Business Cycle
Public Health Programs (CDC, NIH, etc.)
The Interstate Highway System
Federal Deposit Insurance
Regulation of the Financial Markets
Social Security and Medicare
GI Bill
FHA
Consumer Protection (CPSC)
Anti Discrimination Policies
Clean Air and Water programs
Workplace Safety (OSHA)
The Military
The National Weather Service
Poverty Policies (Food stamps, rent subsidies, etc.)
Student Financial Aid Programs
Food and Drug Safety Programs (FDA)
Funding basic science research
Rural Electrification
The Army Corps of Engineers


Have there been some potential negative side effects of some of those things? Sure. But I'll bet y'all out in the sticks are big fans of the REA.

Not really, I lived here for almost 3 years with out Lectric. If I hadnt had to move My Mom out here I would still not have it,

[REDREX]

Not all liberal programs are hated.

I got a list here of successful governmental programs. I tend to agree with everything on the list:

http://www.governmentisgood.com/articles.php?aid=7

Regulation of the Business Cycle
Public Health Programs (CDC, NIH, etc.)
The Interstate Highway System
Federal Deposit Insurance
Regulation of the Financial Markets
Social Security and Medicare
GI Bill
FHA
Consumer Protection (CPSC)
Anti Discrimination Policies
Clean Air and Water programs
Workplace Safety (OSHA)
The Military
The National Weather Service
Poverty Policies (Food stamps, rent subsidies, etc.)
Student Financial Aid Programs
Food and Drug Safety Programs (FDA)
Funding basic science research
Rural Electrification
The Army Corps of Engineers

Have there been some potential negative side effects of some of those things? Sure. But I'll bet y'all out in the sticks are big fans of the REA.-----The problem is that the programs never end-----I think the goal of Rural Electrification was accomplished about 50 years ago but they are still in business

[Midtowner]

-----The problem is that the programs never end-----I think the goal of Rural Electrification was accomplished about 50 years ago but they are still in business

Rural Electrification is ongoing. There are rural electric coops everywhere. I though some of y'all out in the sticks would be aware of that. The REA still allows for federally backed low-cost financing for rural electric projects.

[REDREX]

Rural Electrification is ongoing. There are rural electric coops everywhere. I though some of y'all out in the sticks would be aware of that. The REA still allows for federally backed low-cost financing for rural electric projects.----I don't live in the sticks-----And the program completed its objective years ago-----But what the hell lets just keep spending money

[IGotNoTiming]

(Paraphrasing, from a recent thread) We don't care about the effect on farmers. Monsanto is operating close enough to legally that the lawyers can cover the gap, so we're good.

OK, the first six words are from Trust Fund Man, on another subject.


Okay you just completely lost me.....

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I could give a rat's crap about what labels you wanna use... you are an American and so am I. Unless you are the CEO of a multi-billion dollar company (millionaires don't count anymore) you should REALLY care about trying to change Citizen's United, rewriting the tax code, watching closely what the Medical and Pharma industries are doing, watch even more closely what the petroleum industries is doing.... Oh and by the way coming from one of the only states who nearly elected a socialist governor that was championed by the farmers of Oklahoma. You should REALLY REALLY keep an eye on Monsanto and what they are trying to do.Welcome(I guess) to one of the newer socialist members of the Soonerfans group.

[KantoSooner]

"Regulation of The Business Cycle?"

Is that a department or something? It has a lot of capitalized letters in it. And what does it mean? That goverment somehow has the knowledge and power to smooth out the national economy so that things just get steadily better and better without any nasty hills and valleys? How long has this program been going on? 'Cause it sure as shiite hasn't had any effect in my lifetime. What was this little kerfuffle we just had for the last five years or so? That little business cycle sure as hell was regulated that I could tell.

And this is the problem. While I am all for an army who answers to civilian authority in the form of an elected national government, for example; government is not the solution to each and every problem we encounter. And yet we continue to plop fat wads of cash into departments that are ill suited to the tasks with which they are entrusted and are surprised when things don't turn out well. Giving free spending authority to politicians is, in P J O'Rourke's famous construction, like 'giving whisky and the car keys to teenaged boys. It doesn't end well.'

[Midtowner]

----I don't live in the sticks-----And the program completed its objective years ago-----But what the hell lets just keep spending money

Is that a serious question? Do you think that local REAs just sit back and cut checks for the system they built back in the 1930s? Or perhaps it's of some benefit for these coops to be able to access capital for infrastructure upgrades and maintenance? REAs exist because it wouldn't have been profitable at the time for your big electric companies to build out in the sticks and it's an area I doubt many of them are interested in serving.

[TAFBSooner]

Okay you just completely lost me.....

Sice'Em (who indicated he is the beneficiary of a trust fund, which the group in turn concluded has to have an effect on his beliefs), said that he doesn't consider the effects of a given course of action, just whether or not it's consistent with his beliefs.

We also had a recent thread about Monsanto, in which the conservative majority here seemed to be pretty much OK with Monsanto's control of any intentional or accidental sprouting of their patented seeds. I figured you had read it since you mentioned Monsanto; if not, the thread is worth your consideration.

Oh, and I was being sarcastic, as I'm NOT OK with Monsanto controlling so much of our food supply.

[Midtowner]

"Regulation of The Business Cycle?"

Is that a department or something? It has a lot of capitalized letters in it. And what does it mean? That goverment somehow has the knowledge and power to smooth out the national economy so that things just get steadily better and better without any nasty hills and valleys? How long has this program been going on? 'Cause it sure as shiite hasn't had any effect in my lifetime. What was this little kerfuffle we just had for the last five years or so? That little business cycle sure as hell was regulated that I could tell.

FTA:


Until the financial crisis that began in 2008, most of us had forgotten how dependent we are on the federal government to prevent economic depressions. Since the 1930s, the government has used a variety of monetary and fiscal policies to limit the natural boom and bust cycles of the economy. Before government took on this responsibility, severe depressions were a routine and recurring problem in this country – occurring in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893, 1907 and 1929. Thanks to government intervention, we have been able to avoid the enormous amount of human suffering caused by these massive economic meltdowns – the widespread joblessness, the destitution, the rampant hunger, the disease, the riots, the hopelessness and the despair. By any measure, eliminating these depressions and this misery has been one of the greatest – and often unheralded – achievements of our federal government.


And this is the problem. While I am all for an army who answers to civilian authority in the form of an elected national government, for example; government is not the solution to each and every problem we encounter. And yet we continue to plop fat wads of cash into departments that are ill suited to the tasks with which they are entrusted and are surprised when things don't turn out well. Giving free spending authority to politicians is, in P J O'Rourke's famous construction, like 'giving whisky and the car keys to teenaged boys. It doesn't end well.'

No one is saying the government is the solution for everything...well..okay, some people probably say that. I'm just saying that the government has access to economies of scale that private entities can't touch and the government is capable of acting without a profit motive, theoretically for the 'common good.'

It's easy to get frustrated because the government screws up so many of its core functions. As we've discussed, disability social security is a ridiculous joke which is going to be hell on our kids and grandkids to pay off. That said, it's capable of getting things right as well.

[SoonerorLater]

----I don't live in the sticks-----And the program completed its objective years ago-----But what the hell lets just keep spending money

REDREX apparently you don't realize the vital nature of these programs. A quick glance at just the Department of Agriculture and I was able to find these programs that are critical to the well being of every man, woman an child in America. :topsy_turvy:

Agencies & Offices

Agricultural Labor Affairs Coordinator: The ALAC serves as USDA's focal point for agricultural labor issues, including regulations and immigration issues, and is responsible for coordinating activities with other Federal agencies.

Sustainable Development: The Director of Sustainable Development leads and coordinates cross-mission area work in sustainable development and represents the Department in both domestic and international arenas on issues relating to sustainable development.

World Agricultural Outlook Board (WAOB): WAOB serves as USDA’s focal point for economic intelligence and the commodity outlook for U.S. and world agriculture.

Climate Change Program Office (CCPO): CCPO ensures that USDA is a source of objective, analytical assessments of the effects of climate change and proposed response strategies both within USDA and for our partners. CCPO is also responsible for coordinating activities with other federal agencies, interacting with the legislative branch on climate change issues affecting agriculture and forestry,

Office of Environemntal Markets (OEM): OEM supports the Secretary in the development of emerging markets for carbon sequestration, water quality, wetlands, biodiversity, and other ecosystem services.

Office of Energy Policy and New Uses (OEPMU): The Office of Energy Policy and New Uses (OEPNU) assists the Secretary of Agriculture in developing and coordinating Departmental energy policy, programs, and strategies.

Office of Risk Assessment & Cost-Benefit Analysis (ORACBA): ORACBA's primary role is to ensure that major regulations proposed by USDA are based on sound scientific and economic analysis.

[TAFBSooner]

"Regulation of The Business Cycle?"

Is that a department or something? It has a lot of capitalized letters in it. And what does it mean? That goverment somehow has the knowledge and power to smooth out the national economy so that things just get steadily better and better without any nasty hills and valleys? How long has this program been going on? 'Cause it sure as shiite hasn't had any effect in my lifetime. What was this little kerfuffle we just had for the last five years or so? That little business cycle sure as hell was regulated that I could tell.


Seriously? The 2008 recession happened because we cut back on the regulating! Bill Clinton and Phil Gramm (may he live for many years in Texas, without air conditioning) reversed the separation of investment banks, commercial banks, and insurance companies that was put in place after the Great Depression of the 1930's.

Now, obviously there were hills and valleys between 1933 and 1999, but none of them to compare with the Great Depression or the recent 'kerfluffle.' Bank regulation kept business cycles within limits such that millions of people weren't bankrupted by them.

We never did regulate derivatives, and the banksters (officers) got in, made their bundle, and got out, leaving the bank stockholders and the nation as a whole out of luck.

[cleller]

Not really, I lived here for almost 3 years with out Lectric. If I hadnt had to move My Mom out here I would still not have it,

Da-yam. You were either old-school, hard-core, or off-medication.

[TAFBSooner]

Da-yam. You were either old-school, hard-core, or off-medication.

Maybe all three, depending on whether you consider OVJ "medication."

[olevetonahill]

Da-yam. You were either old-school, hard-core, or off-medication.

I prefered it that way, I moved here to get the **** away from people. I had a Generator,used 2 1000amp batteries that I would charge ,had 12 volt lights salvaged some electric radiator cooling fans off cars in the windows for coolin the shack, ran the wires thru a rheostat to control the speed . Oil lamps fer the winter.

[REDREX]

Is that a serious question? Do you think that local REAs just sit back and cut checks for the system they built back in the 1930s? Or perhaps it's of some benefit for these coops to be able to access capital for infrastructure upgrades and maintenance? REAs exist because it wouldn't have been profitable at the time for your big electric companies to build out in the sticks and it's an area I doubt many of them are interested in serving.---- Today what percent of the population does not have access to electricity?

[Midtowner]

Thanks to the continued existence of the REA and continuing ability to lend out cheap money, 100%.

That's a successful government program by any standard.

[REDREX]

Thanks to the continued existence of the REA and continuing ability to lend out cheap money, 100%.

That's a successful government program by any standard.----That accomplished its goal and is no longer needed

[Midtowner]

----That accomplished its goal and is no longer needed

Its goal is ongoing. You need to research this thing. Rural co ops depend on those low rates to break even.

[REDREX]

Its goal is ongoing. You need to research this thing. Rural co ops depend on those low rates to break even.----Prove it---- The REC has outlived its purpose-----But being a Gov't agency it will never die

[KantoSooner]

Buenas Dias TAFB and Mid,
So, fed governemnt regulation of the economy has helped out. Indeed. Mid cited 7 major crises over approximately 130 years prior to the installation of the sainted Keynes and his 'experts' at the controls. That's one every 18.5 years or so. Since then, in the succeeding 84 years, we've had such crises in: 1950, 1975, 1980, 1999, and 2008. You could throw in 1933 for the Big D double dip, but let's leave that off for now. That one every 16.8 years.
I'll do you a solid and we'll call those numbers close enough to be a push. Sum total positive impact of Keynesian economics in controlling the frequency of economic crises? Zero, zip, nada.
I'm not against regulation per se. I like me my tested pharmacological products. I like driving on roads, on tires, in cars, that have to comply to some notion of safety standards, and so forth and so on. And I'm willing to pay taxes for the necessary bodies to oversee these things.
But let's be honest and analytical with ourselves: presidents don't control the economy. The Federal Government doesn't control it. Both can retard it and gum up the works, but they can't make it do what they want in any way other than breaking it to a lesser or greater extent. And their attempts to nudge and steer the economy, over time, serve little purpose other than to warp it and exacerbate occilations when they finally do break out. ... As we saw, most precisely, in 2007-8

[FaninAma]

The problem is centralization of government power.
It has corrupted the whole political process in this
country. Politicians become detached from the average
citizenry after cocooning in the DC environment for
just a short while.

[FaninAma]

Kanto, the most entertaining spectacles
we will witness over the next several
months will be the gyrations of the
economy and the markets as Helicopter
Ben and the Fed try to unwind their
enormous balance sheet.

Why was the market up yesterday and
down today?

[KantoSooner]

The biggest mistake we've made is in failing to understand the role of fear, nay terror, in a healthy economic system. Terror of losing one's azz is what keeps investments conservative and safe. Terror of going to jail is apparently, the only thing known that will restrain the behavior of money managers (it's not their money, so they don't give a **** about losing it. They also appear to be remarkably amoral people, so whereas a normal person might be constrained by simple, pedestrian rules of good manners and fellow feeling, Wall Street bankers (sociopaths) are likely only constrained by credible threats of spending the next several decades in the stony lonesome grabbing ank in the shower for Bubba.)
We WANT instability because, paradoxically, that's what keeps folks on the straight and narrow. It is wrong for our government to try and soften the blows.

[TAFBSooner]

Buenas Dias TAFB and Mid,
So, fed governemnt regulation of the economy has helped out. Indeed. Mid cited 7 major crises over approximately 130 years prior to the installation of the sainted Keynes and his 'experts' at the controls. That's one every 18.5 years or so. Since then, in the succeeding 84 years, we've had such crises in: 1950, 1975, 1980, 1999, and 2008. You could throw in 1933 for the Big D double dip, but let's leave that off for now. That one every 16.8 years.
I'll do you a solid and we'll call those numbers close enough to be a push. Sum total positive impact of Keynesian economics in controlling the frequency of economic crises? Zero, zip, nada.
I'm not against regulation per se. I like me my tested pharmacological products. I like driving on roads, on tires, in cars, that have to comply to some notion of safety standards, and so forth and so on. And I'm willing to pay taxes for the necessary bodies to oversee these things.
But let's be honest and analytical with ourselves: presidents don't control the economy. The Federal Government doesn't control it. Both can retard it and gum up the works, but they can't make it do what they want in any way other than breaking it to a lesser or greater extent. And their attempts to nudge and steer the economy, over time, serve little purpose other than to warp it and exacerbate occilations when they finally do break out. ... As we saw, most precisely, in 2007-8

You're right that Keynesian economics hasn't prevented downturns, or made much change in their frequency. However, it reduced their severity while we were practicing it. Between Glass-Steagall and Gramm-Leach-Bliley, we had recessions, but none that came close to the impact of the Great Depression or the recent recession. I would argue that the recent recession wasn't a result of regulation, but of de-regulation (GLB), and never having regulated derivatives in the first place. I agree that the government can't (nor should it) control the economy, but proper regulation can and does have a beneficial effect on the economy.

[TAFBSooner]

The biggest mistake we've made is in failing to understand the role of fear, nay terror, in a healthy economic system. Terror of losing one's azz is what keeps investments conservative and safe. Terror of going to jail is apparently, the only thing known that will restrain the behavior of money managers (it's not their money, so they don't give a **** about losing it. They also appear to be remarkably amoral people, so whereas a normal person might be constrained by simple, pedestrian rules of good manners and fellow feeling, Wall Street bankers (sociopaths) are likely only constrained by credible threats of spending the next several decades in the stony lonesome grabbing ank in the shower for Bubba.)
We WANT instability because, paradoxically, that's what keeps folks on the straight and narrow. It is wrong for our government to try and soften the blows.

Don't there have to be laws and regulations to have a chance of putting these sociopaths in jail in the first place? (I will buy the first round if we can have a tailgate to watch Jamie Dimon or Lloyd Blankfein doing a televised perp walk!)

There is no terror of losing one's literal azz's security if the government won't prosecute and jail them.

There is no terror of losing one's shirt if the government bails these guys out whenever they fail/foul up/lose other people's money.

I would have (reluctantly) accepted the bail-outs if there had been a quid pro quo: throw out the "leadership" of the too-big-to-fail banks. As it was, we handed out the checks, called them in to Congress's hearing rooms to mildly complain, and let them go back to doing to all of us what Bubba should be doing to them.

The government failed, by not regulating enough.