archBoston Presidential Poll 2012

[Justin7]

IS this serious? This is the funniest thing I have ever read, and thought it deserved to be reposted.

Perhaps you are unfamiliar with our resident raving lunatic? It is best to smile and nod.

 

[TheRifleman]

IS this serious? This is the funniest thing I have ever read, and thought it deserved to be reposted.

I actually did too when I started to read the theories.

Austerity cuts are coming sooner than you think. 2 or 3 years away in my opinion.
Choo its basic math. America is seriously fucked unless the Bernanke experiment rewrites economics history but reality is nothing survives the coming financial armegeddon.

From a friend who sums it with common sense
"Too few workers supporting too many nonworkers ultimately resulting in decreasing available revenue for ever increasing social entitlement "rights" People don't seem to believe that present revenue is sufficient to cover entitlements and interest on our debt. Everything else is floated by debt. Dem or repub doesn't matter - the numbers are simply too big and neither party can change the math or outcome while promising continued give aways and lying about the sad truth of the real state of affairs. Real austerity is coming sooner than we want to believe and whether we like it or not."

 

[statler]

Right, but you are jumping from 'there is problem that needs to be addressed' to 'OMG it's the END OF DAYS!!'

Rational people can (most certainly will) disagree on the best solution to the problem and eventually settle on an imperfect but workable solution, while irrational people will start building shelters and stockpiling.

Read some history. The US has faced some pretty serious threats to the nation and thus far we've figured out how to keep it going. Of course, there is no law of the universe that says the US is immune from collapse, and it's always tempting to think we live in exceptional times, but honestly the 'Great Recession' is most likely just going to be another chapter in some kid's boring history text book.

So while you are out panicking, sensible people will working on actually solving problems.

 

[underground]

honestly the 'Great Recession' is most likely just going to be another chapter in some kid's boring history text book.

Like Great Britain in the 70s, but with the upside of lower unemployment and down side of no Black Sabbath.

 

[bosdevelopment]

it's always tempting to think we live in exceptional times, but honestly the 'Great Recession' is most likely just going to be another chapter in some kid's boring history text book.

I strongly disagree. Something has to give. The fed has promises to keep near term interest rates near zero through 2014! Simply put, you cannot get something out of nothing.

"Smiling and Nodding" is exactly what our government is doing to address this problem. It's what Greece did. Keep in mind our debt to gdp ratio is far higher than greece's. Our economy is different in that we can put money in our left pocket just fast enough to pay the credit card bill out of our right whereas greece's was ill equipped to handle large margin calls. Unfortunately our economy doesn't produce anything that would come near to paying off the trillions that are owed. In the early 1900's there was some serious industry happening including planes, traines, automobiles, electricity, oil, the telephone, and this thing called steel. All we really have going right now is the internet which is nothing compared to any of what I just mentioned individually.

What is reasonably foreseeable is a short-term decline in debt to gdp followed by a decades long depression.

And by the way, the problem we're in would be the same had Romney been elected. However, any austerity measures and relaxation of regulations on industry he would implement would help out in the long-run.

No matter what happens the insanely out-of-touch left and its social-issue focused, child-like sycophant following will somehow seek to blame Bush for what will no doubt be a long period of misery.

 

[underground]

social-issue focused

You mean like the party that just can't stop itself, no matter how hard it tries, from repeatedly saying incredibly out of touch things about rape just to court the most fringe elements of the Christian right, even though they know themselves that it's a dwindling voter bloc? That party?!

 

[TheRifleman]

You mean like the party that just can't stop itself, no matter how hard it tries, from repeatedly saying incredibly out of touch things about rape just to court the most fringe elements of the Christian right, even though they know themselves that it's a dwindling voter bloc? That party?!

This is not Democrats vs Republicans and who is at Fault. Both parties should be arrested for treason. I have to disagree with Bosdev about the Bush Scenario, History will show that his Administration completely disregarded any-type of fiscal budget discipline and started WMD’s war with Iraqi & the unlimited Govt spending gravy train running full speed—in full throttle off a cliff. Bush’s biggest problem that he cannot escape was his willingness to Bailout the bankers. History will show that Bush bailing out the bankers hundreds of Billions of dollars in which turned the country from capitalism into corporatism then into a totalitarianism society (not there yet but very close).
Bush changed the bankruptcy laws in 2005 on the working class then issues bailouts for the bankers. If somebody fails they need to pay the price. File bankruptcy either liquidate or restructure.

Obama is just the socialist to put the nail in the coffin for the Bankers. Both Bush & Obama are puppets for the bankers. When all is said in the next couple of years-- Obama will be thrown out of office as a disgrace and will be blamed for most of America’s issues. The continued wars in the middle-east, Bankers corruption on Wall Street, and the complete social disorder from the class-ware fare. (AKA Europe like situation happening )
Remember bankers are in the business of making money not running a country. Governments come & go and America will end up being chewed up and spit out.
In the end the bankers could have their world currency in place for a world recovery with a world govt.
It’s just how I see this playing out under the current adminstration.

Deep down Romney was probably a better person than Obama but both believe the Bankers can get us out of this economic quagmire. Both will be proven wrong.

The only people that can get us out of this economic mess is small businesses & the working class which prosper from a strong dollar but with a depressed dollar that will never happen.

 

[kmp1284]

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

He never asked for this.

 

[statler]

Rife, what are your thoughts on the UN and Agenda 21?

(Let's see if we can get the crazy train up to full speed)

 

[kmp1284]

He never asked for this.

Who is that? Not really up on my movie/television villains these days.

 

[TheRifleman]

Rife, what are your thoughts on the UN and Agenda 21?

Agenda 21 has to do with the protection of the Atmosphere? I'm not to familar with the Agenda.
I'm all for protecting the environment at all costs.

But let me say this I was watching something on the History channel about AREA 51. The show claimed that in AREA 51 The govt was burning chemicals & fuel into the atmosphere which ended up causing 3 govt employees to die. Their famalies sued the Govt but when this finally hit the courts the Govt lawyers claimed that AREA 51 did not exist. (What-ever)

My point is the Average citizen wants to Live life to its fullest. If we all have to chip and do our thing to protect the environment then we should do it.

But I believe its more the corporations & Govt R&D that continue to destroy the world. So I leave you with this.

“I have been saying for decades, I love the environment, but I hate environmentalists.:”

Being Green
“Checking out at the store, the young cashier suggested to the older woman, that she should bring her own grocery bags because plastic bags weren't good for the environment.

The woman apologized and explained, "We didn't have this green thing back in my earlier days."

The young clerk responded, "That's our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment for future generations."

She was right -- our generation didn't have the green thing in its day.

Back then, we returned milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were truely recycled.

But we didn't have the green thing back in our day.

Grocery stores bagged our groceries in brown paper bags, that we reused for numerous things, most memorable besides household garbage bags, was the use of brown paper bags as book covers for our schoolbooks. This was to ensure that public property, (the books provided for our use by the school) was not defaced by our scribblings. Then we were able to personalize our books on the brown paper bags.
But too bad we didn't do the green thing back then.

We walked up stairs, because we didn't have an escalator in every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn't climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks.

But she was right. We didn't have the green thing in our day.

Back then, we washed the baby's diapers because we didn't have the throwaway kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy-gobbling machine burning up 220 volts -- wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing.

But that young lady is right; we didn't have the green thing back in our day.

Back then, we had one TV, or radio, in the house -- not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the state of Montana. In the kitchen, we blended and stirred by hand because we didn't have electric machines to do everything for us. When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. Back then, we didn't fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn't need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity.

But she's right; we didn't have the green thing back then.

We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water. We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull.

But we didn't have the green thing back then.

Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service. We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn't need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 23,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest burger joint.

But isn't it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn't have the green thing back then?

Please forward this on to another selfish old person who needs a lesson in conservation from a smartass young person.”

 

[kmp1284]

Agenda 21 has to do with the protection of the Atmosphere? I'm not to familar with the Agenda.
I'm all for protecting the environment at all costs.

All costs? Meaning you would support further bans on natural gas and oil exploration that would lead to higher prices on fuel and consumer goods and potentially lead to hundreds of thousands of lay-offs?

 

[TheRifleman]

All costs? Meaning you would support further bans on natural gas and oil exploration that would lead to higher prices on fuel and consumer goods and potentially lead to hundreds of thousands of lay-offs?

I guess you really didn't understand my post. YES AT ALL COSTS. Bring all the world scientists together with all Govts. Present worst case scenarios. The problem is that our Govt is in bed with the Lobbyists who represent the corporations not individuals.

Do you really believe when Hank Paulson was the Govt Treasury Secretary that he wasn't a plant to protect Goldman Sachs Interests at all costs in the time of a Govt Bailout for the bankers?

Or how about Monsanto buying a research firm that claimed they are responsible for the Honey Bees dying off.
http://www.naturalnews.com/035688_Monsanto_honey_bees_colony_collapse.html

Monsanto & the Govt officials who over are supposed to oversee Monsanto are all ex Monsanto executives
http://rense.com/general33/fd.htm
Its like putting the fox in charge of watching the hen house.

If we continue to pollute and destroy the enviroment and make the Earth Un-habitable. Does the lay-offs of thousands of workers really matter since we are all dead.
Do understand what is going on.

Our GOVT officials are all traitors at this point. Its just about GREED & POWER

 

[bosdevelopment]

You mean like the party that just can't stop itself, no matter how hard it tries, from repeatedly saying incredibly out of touch things about rape just to court the most fringe elements of the Christian right, even though they know themselves that it's a dwindling voter bloc? That party?!

I'm sure what some politician said about rape is really going to be what people are complaining about from their leadership when there is a 10%+ decline in GDP. Social issues just aren't that important and is the lowest form of pandering.It's the economy, stupid.

For fuck's sake..WAKE UP!

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

Who is that? Not really up on my movie/television villains these days.

That's Adam Jensen, the protagonist of Deus Ex: Human Revolution. It is a good game and everyone should play it.

I'm sure what some politician said about rape is really going to be what people are complaining about from their leadership when there is a 10%+ decline in GDP. Social issues just aren't that important and is the lowest form of pandering.It's the economy, stupid.

For fuck's sake..WAKE UP!

No, it's the social issues, stupid.

If you really cared about fixing the economy and nothing else, you'd stop engaging in social policy debates. You'd stop including them in the party platform. You'd, to put it bluntly, embrace the "It's the economy, stupid" mentality and every time any social issue under the sun came up?

"Has the economy been fixed yet? No? No comment. Moving on..."

But that's not the GOP, is it? The GOP can't stay on that message.

If I had the amount of vigor and drive and interest in politics that I did when I was 16 (and I don't), I'd probably be screaming at the GOP and anyone who would listen to stop engaging, dumbass because if they could manage to reign their social conservatism, we probably could be having a referendum on the economy that resulted in something at all getting done. I'd argue that the Democratic Party is every bit as guilty as the Republicans because neither of our political parties can survive without the other - and, in fact, the Dems would HAVE to start talking economy if every time a social issue came up the GOP party line was 'say and do nothing.' After all, how can you have a discussion with only one person?

In fact, I'll make you this deal. If you find me a GOP candidate for any elected office at any level who talks about the economy and only the economy and refuses to engage on social policy at any level* ("What's your opinion on Roe v. Wade?" "No comment, I'm only concerned about the economy." "Do you support gay marriage?" "No comment, I'm only concerned about the economy." "What about the statements made by fellow party member X about social issue Y?" "No comment, I'm only concerned about the economy."), I'll vote for that candidate - hell, I will go to the ends of the earth to support that candidate.

Otherwise, I'm going to keep on making wasteful votes on candidates nobody's heard of, like Rocky Anderson, and I disavow myself of any responsibility for what happens as a consequence of those choices.

Or, hell, maybe I'll be the guy who goes out of his way to only vote on the transportation bond and leaves the rest of the ballot blank. That's an option, too.

See, I'll probably "WAKE UP!" when the doomsday scenario everyone's been promising me if I do/don't do X actually comes to pass, but the funny thing is that every time I've done or failed to do X that would result in doomsday, life went on pretty much as usual. I haven't been on the planet for a terribly long amount of time but I get the feeling I'm not singularly unique in that regard.

* Note: Refusing to engage includes abstaining from any social policy votes. Saying you have no comment and then voting to, oh let's say... pass a resolution condemning gay marriage, just as a hypothetical, that does not count as being singularly concerned about the economy.

 

[datadyne007]

^ There is much speculation and agreement by the (shrinking number of) sane people in the Republican party that Libertarianism will become the new Republican party. In our current society, a Republican president will never be elected ever again if they continue to run on a socially conservative platform. The "right side of history" has proven itself to be socially liberal. Hopefully in the coming elections we will see this happen and the only differences between the parties will be economic ideals, not social ones.

 

[statler]

Hopefully in the coming elections we will see this happen and the only differences between the parties will be economic ideals, not social ones.

Outside of abortion and religion, I'm really not sure how you can separate the two. Welfare, Social Security, military spending, infrastructure, education can all be seen from an economic and social angle. And, of course, how you approach the problem will directly correlate with your solution.

 

[datadyne007]

Outside of abortion and religion, I'm really not sure how you can separate the two. Welfare, Social Security, military spending, infrastructure, education can all be seen from an economic and social angle. And, of course, how you approach the problem will directly correlate with your solution.

That's very true and is actually the harsh lesson Republicans learned in this election when they started attacking women's rights/healthcare. They kept saying social<<economic issues and completely failed to realize that the two are actually tied together.

 

[Commuting Boston Student]

Outside of abortion and religion, I'm really not sure how you can separate the two. Welfare, Social Security, military spending, infrastructure, education can all be seen from an economic and social angle. And, of course, how you approach the problem will directly correlate with your solution.

Even just refusing to vote on or talk about anything related to religion or abortion would be a huge step forward in getting me to believe that you really are purely focused on economics. That would lend clout to saying 'we're approaching X,Y,Z as an economic problem, not a social one.'

I'd also be much more willing to believe you weren't allowing social issues to cloud your economic judgment if you were even attacking every government expenditure equally instead of picking one or two (healthcare's in vogue now) and focusing on those expenditures. Ideally, I'd like to see a rational discussion where all the expenses were laid out plainly and the discussion was about how to do more with less or how to transition broken systems into self-sustaining systems - but even going after road expenditures with just as much vigor as you go after welfare would be a marked improvement.