Support NeoGAF

[ToxicAdam]

While the oceans and the atmosphere are major players in our climate, the sun is still the main driver. I figured that would be obvious.

You're being a little too literal here. When you are talking about Earth's climate, you are talking about what causes variability. Long-term and short-term.

At this point, it is not believed that the Sun's variability has an effect on our climate variability. So, for the purposes of the discussion we were having (droughts and the cause of) we are talking about what causes variability in the climate.

Short link

Long link

 

[mj1108]

Is part of the drought because all the trees were cut down to make farms?

Someone needs to ask Bachmann about it. She'll say Texas is having a drought because God hates Texas or God doesn't want Texas to see him weep for this country some bullshit like that.

 

[ToxicAdam]

I read this today:

Sept. 6 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama may press Congress for tax cuts that would exceed his past proposals as well as some of the offerings from House Republicans to strengthen his hand in talks on measures to boost the U.S. economy, according to a person familiar with the discussions.

With Obama set to lay out his plans in a Sept. 8 address to Congress, the administration is focusing on cuts targeted at middle-income Americans to spur consumer spending, which accounts for 70 percent of the economy, said the person, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

In a speech to a union crowd in Detroit yesterday, Obama said he would challenge Republicans on taxes.

Link


made me think of this:

"If Democrats are going to accept Republican premises, they shouldn’t be surprised if a majority of people eventually conclude that Republicans ought to be in charge of government policy," - Bruce Bartlett.

--- // ---

I know this is all for political show. But I think it's fiscally disasterous to marry MORE tax cuts to even more government spending. Even if it (reportedly) proves to be deficit-friendly down the road, it's still punting obligations for others to deal with.

 

[gcubed]

I read this today:


Link


made me think of this:




--- // ---

I know this is all for political show. But I think it's fiscally disasterous to marry MORE tax cuts to even more government spending. Even if it (reportedly) proves to be deficit-friendly down the road, it's still punting obligations for others to deal with.

at some point the band aid is going to have to come off. They keep trying to prop up the economy with tax cuts before the eventual tax increase has to hit. I'm assuming they are doing all they can to get the economy moving before the tax cuts expire next year. If they are fully extended again, i officially give up

 

[Invisible_Insane]

at some point the band aid is going to have to come off. They keep trying to prop up the economy with tax cuts before the eventual tax increase has to hit. I'm assuming they are doing all they can to get the economy moving before the tax cuts expire next year. If they are fully extended again, i officially give up

If?

 

[gcubed]

If?

i need some optimism in my life

 

[FLEABttn]

I've always said that the government has very few must-have responsibilities. Two of those are safety and security.

You're for UHC! Welcome to the team!

 

[GhaleonEB]

I read this today:

Link


made me think of this:

--- // ---

I know this is all for political show. But I think it's fiscally disasterous to marry MORE tax cuts to even more government spending. Even if it (reportedly) proves to be deficit-friendly down the road, it's still punting obligations for others to deal with.

From a purely tactical standpoint, it's also quite foolish. This was the approach Obama took to the stimulus bill, adding in a long list of tax cuts preferential to the GOP in hopes that would win support for the broader package. That didn't work out so well, and the current GOP is of a harder line and wield more power. It will not be a successful tactic, starting - once again - from a compromise.

 

[PhoenixDark]

I really don't see any logic in this compromise style. Compromising before negotiations doesn't strengthen your hand in negotiations. The other party can simply demand more before they come to the table, and why shouldn't they? It makes sense to take advantage of such a foolish opening move.

If this is a means to show voters how willing to compromise Obama is, it doesn't make sense either. Voters already believe Obama is willing to work with republicans, it's not like that point has not been hammered home. Nor are they particularly enthused by the various compromises and trial balloons that flout of out of the WH, from more tax breaks to raising the SS age.

Why not go in with nothing on the table, and put things on the table as republicans put things on the table. You know, a mutual process. So instead of giving up everything, you can say "alright, I'm willing to eliminate the smog rules and provide even more business tax cuts for A and B"

Instead we'll probably hear republicans argue "hey, we extended the gas tax, that's enough of us compromising"

 

[gcubed]

I really don't see any logic in this compromise style. Compromising before negotiations doesn't strengthen your hand in negotiations. The other party can simply demand more before they come to the table, and why shouldn't they? It makes sense to take advantage of such a foolish opening move.

If this is a means to show voters how willing to compromise Obama is, it doesn't make sense either. Voters already believe Obama is willing to work with republicans, it's not like that point has not been hammered home. Nor are they particularly enthused by the various compromises and trial balloons that flout of out of the WH, from more tax breaks to raising the SS age.

Why not go in with nothing on the table, and put things on the table as republicans put things on the table. You know, a mutual process. So instead of giving up everything, you can say "alright, I'm willing to eliminate the smog rules and provide even more business tax cuts for A and B"

Instead we'll probably hear republicans argue "hey, we extended the gas tax, that's enough of us compromising"

thats exactly what happens, but why come in knowing that, giving concessions to a group thats not going to vote for it anyway?

 

[Mortrialus]

You're being a little too literal here. When you are talking about Earth's climate, you are talking about what causes variability. Long-term and short-term.

At this point, it is not believed that the Sun's variability has an effect on our climate variability. So, for the purposes of the discussion we were having (droughts and the cause of) we are talking about what causes variability in the climate.

Short link

Long link

I was talking in the general sense. I wasn't talking about variability.

 

[ToxicAdam]

I was talking in the general sense. I wasn't talking about variability.

That's why it's important to ask for clarification before you emphatically determine something is wrong.

For instance, when people say 'Governor Perry doesn't believe in Climate Change', they don't mean that he literally disbelieves that climate changes. Only an asshole would constantly correct someone to say 'Governor Perry doesn't believe human activities are a main reason for significant changes in our climate'. Which is really what they mean.

 

[Mortrialus]

That's why it's important to ask for clarification before you emphatically determine something is wrong.

My issue is with you opening a statement on climate citing oceans as the main drivers.

For instance, when people say 'Governor Perry doesn't believe in Climate Change', they don't mean that he literally disbelieves that climate changes. Only an asshole would constantly correct someone to say 'Governor Perry doesn't believe human activities are a main reason for significant changes in our climate'. Which is really what they mean.

This isn't the best analogy because climate change has become synonymous with anthropomorphic climate change, while main driver of climate has not become "main driver of climate excluding the sun of course."

 

[mckmas8808]

Let me preview it for you

"In order to get out of this temporary economic situation, we must work together. Both sides. I am willing to work with speaker Boehner and the house republicans, and I trust they are willing to work with me. Spending money will not get us out of this mess, which is why all my proposals tonight will be paid for with cuts elsewhere.

Tonight I am proposing that alongside an employer and employee payroll tax cut extension, I am also willing to support a repatriation tax holiday for corporations that bring their business and profits back into the US economy."

I know I'm late, but if it goes like this then, yes that would be a failure of a speech.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Wasn't there a De Mint ass kissing forum yesterday in SC or something? Or is it today?

 

[GhaleonEB]

I know I'm late, but if it goes like this then, yes that would be a failure of a speech.

It would also be a failure in terms of negotiating tactics. And also, policy. That too.

 

[ToxicAdam]

My issue is with you opening a statement on climate citing oceans as the main drivers.

Oceans are the main drivers of climate variability and have a significant effect on our hydrosphere which in turn effects drought conditions. Which is what the conversation was about. Which is what prompted me to join in and say that. Context matters.


So, it would appear that your issue is that you are more concerned with being right than actually having a productive conversation where people can learn and share ideas.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

I know I'm late, but if it goes like this then, yes that would be a failure of a speech.

The Republicans will come around this time!

 

[zero_suit]

The Republicans will come around this time!

Different day, same story..

 

[Byakuya769]

Time for some positive destruction. I'm 35% of the way towards voting third party and/or republican.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Hey guys, I was thinking of starting a PoliGaf podcast of some sort.

Would you guys be interested?

Time for some positive destruction. I'm 35% of the way towards voting third party and/or republican.

That isn't going to help.

All that shows is that the people prefer republicans therefore the democrats have to go further right.

We need a new voting system.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

Time for some positive destruction. I'm 35% of the way towards voting third party and/or republican.

How would that be positive destruction?

 

[Clevinger]

Time for some positive destruction. I'm 35% of the way towards voting third party and/or republican.

Helping Gore lose with Nader sure moved the Democratic Party left.

 

[Byakuya769]

Bring us closer to a tipping point. This tepid bullshit isn't doing much for my interests either.

 

[Measley]

That isn't going to help.

All that shows is that the people prefer republicans therefore the democrats have to go further right.

We need a new voting system.

We need liberals who don't throw up their hands and go home because a couple of their pet projects didn't get passed.

Helping Gore lose with Nader sure moved the Democratic Party left.

+1

 

[Byakuya769]

We need liberals who don't throw up their hands and go home because a couple of their pet projects didn't get passed.

How many times can this be said regarding separate policy failures before it's widely ridiculed?

 

[empty vessel]

Helping Gore lose with Nader sure moved the Democratic Party left.

Gore didn't lose.

 

[Measley]

How many times can this be said regarding separate policy failures before it's widely ridiculed?

Serious question;

Did you expect the government to get MORE liberal after a record number of super-conservative Republicans took over the House of Representatives last November?

 

[Byakuya769]

I have a quickly waning desire to support a politician who frames his policies in conservative ideology while getting liberals blamed for their subsequent failures. I'd much rather those policies be enacted by parties I oppose so the blame can be appropriately placed and the nation can move forward.

Serious question;

Did you expect the government to get MORE liberal after a record number of super-conservative Republicans took over the House of Representatives last November?

No. I expect party leaders to fight for what I believe is best for the nation, instead of being pushed by ideologues with views that are even more conservative than the views, I believe, led to the failures that allowed them to be swept in. So either those aforementioned leaders do no agree with me and/or represent my interest, or they are really bad representatives for those said interests. Either way, I cannot be enthused about supporting them nationally, and would rather spend my political clout locally.

 

[Cyan]

It would also be a failure in terms of negotiating tactics. And also, policy. That too.

You would think that at some point, in an iterated prisoner's dilemma, the person cooperating every time would notice that the other person is defecting every time.

 

[Arrowgigantic]

We need liberals who don't throw up their hands and go home because a couple of their pet projects didn't get passed.

This. It does feel like justice isn't being done when liberal policies aren't being implemented, but to not vote democrat is never going to improve that feeling and will in fact make it worse.

 

[Invisible_Insane]

You would think that at some point, in an iterated prisoner's dilemma, the person cooperating every time would notice that the other person is defecting every time.

OH MY GOD THIS. Obama lives for the sucker's payoff, I swear.

 

[Byakuya769]

Most people I talk to vote off of perceived results and enunciation of clear principles; Obama is failing in the results department, and muddling my desired principles.

For example: I'm Keynesian. So is Obama. Obama articulates a stimulus predicated on getting Republican support, that is undersized, judging by the analysis of liberal economists, and skewed towards means with dubious effectiveness. The result? The stimulus does not live up to his promise (his not mine, I believed it was too small from the get go), and now "Keynesianism is proven to not work!"

That serves me very poorly.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Hey guys, I was thinking of starting a PoliGaf podcast of some sort.

Would you guys be interested?

Well?

I have a quickly waning desire to support a politician who frames his policies in conservative ideology while getting liberals blamed for their subsequent failures. I'd much rather those policies be enacted by parties I oppose so the blame can be appropriately place and the nation can move forward.

The problem is that people aren't this intelligent. The nation has the memory of a goldfish.

Under the Bush the nation got involved in two shitty wars, deregulation (or no regulation due to the government turning a blind eye to corruption) that caused a recession, Hurricane Katrinas shit handling. And what do people due two years after he's out of office? VOTE FOR REPUBLICANS AGAIN.

The nation has a memory of a gold fish. To get on to duder's previous point, its that liberals in this country are a bunch of vaginas. Gone are the union blue collar workers willing to strike and lose everything for their liberties. Today most liberals are too lazy to vote for their senators.

If you don't like the current democratic party then use the system to change it. It may not be IDEAL but it is POSSIBLE. Simply vote local for candidates you agree with and vote in the primaries. There it is possible to make at least a dent in politics (as the right has shown). But voting Republican in the election is doing exactly what you don't want.

Most people I talk to vote off of perceived results and enunciation of clear principles; Obama is failing in the results department, and muddling my desired principles.

For example: I'm Keynesian. So is Obama. Obama articulates a stimulus predicated on getting Republican support, that is undersized, judging by the analysis of liberal economists, and skewed towards means with dubious effectiveness. The result? The stimulus does not live up to his promise (his not mine, I believed it was too small from the get go), and now "Keynesianism is proven to not work!"

That serves me very poorly.

I see where you are coming from, but people in general aren't that smart. The nation has a memory of a gold fish. 90% of the population think keynesian is a nationality or a type of food.

 

[HamPster PamPster]

Well?

I'd listen and provide poorly thought out feedback

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Which would hurt Obama's re-election more. The Greek situation being resolved in a manner that is negatively affecting the economy and drops the DOW to below 10k again (Not sure if that's bankruptcy so that's why I phrased it this way) in 2011 but the affects aren't as catastrophically bad as expected. Or, Greece stays functioning throughout the campaign but the fears of what is about to happen drops the DOW around 10k points and everyone is really afraid of what's going to happen. Neither situation would be good at all for him, but I think it's a little interesting (though clearly much scarier than interesting) to think about which scenario would cause a more negative reaction.

 

[Black Republican]

i cant believe how much michelle bachmann has dropped in the gop polls

 

[Byakuya769]

I'm not really persuaded by "the nation is stupid" type arguments. Most people haven't etched out the time to be concerned with what's on cspan today. That doesn't mean those people are too stupid to understand their interest. I believe it means that people aren't taking the time to vigorously frame those interests. Furthermore, I think a lot of people who could explain issues to them, and yes sometimes facing angry resistance, choose not to because they've already written them off.

Social democracy wasn't successful in US after WWII because the nation was somehow magically more intelligent. Leaders framed policy in terms of shared cause and common purpose. Obama is not doing that, and I fear he is doing long term damage to my interests. So my vote is becoming more and more into play for various reasons.

 

[ToxicAdam]

i cant believe how much michelle bachmann has dropped in the gop polls

Why? There has been a concerted attack on her from the left and (some of) the right. Most of it her own fault.

That's why there is great doubt about the viability of Rick Perry as a candidate, because he's going to go through the same wringer for the next 4 months.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

I'm not really persuaded by "the nation is stupid" type arguments. Most people haven't etched out the time to be concerned with what's on cspan today. That doesn't mean those people are too stupid to understand their interest. I believe it means that people aren't taking the time to vigorously frame those interests. Furthermore, I think a lot of people who could explain issues to them, and yes sometimes facing angry resistance, choose not to because they've already written them off.

Social democracy wasn't successful in US after WWII because the nation was somehow magically more intelligent. Leaders framed policy in terms of shared cause and common purpose. Obama is not doing that, and I fear he is doing long term damage to my interests. So my vote is becoming more and more into play for various reasons.

Yes it is true. The nation isn't "stupid" but more so "uneducated". People are unaware what goes on in the political spectrum. People are too preoccupied with their lives or the media and have a general disinterest in politics. But this doesn't change the fact that the general populace tends to have goldfish syndrome. Again it was TWO years after the "tyrant George Bush" and his icky Republican party fell from power and what do people do? Reelect the party.

Also, I COMPLETELY agree that the Democratic party has a huge problem with framing their topics, but there were other reasons that severely helped social democracy in the past after WWII. Mainly for two reasons: #1 The Great Depression not being in the distant past. #2 The fall of the Soviet Union, thus flagging the signal "left is wrong".

 

[Byakuya769]

Also, I COMPLETELY agree that the Democratic party has a huge problem with framing their topics, but there were other reasons that severely helped social democracy in the past after WWII. Mainly for two reasons: #1 The Great Depression not being in the distant past.

What kept the people of the past from having a goldfish memory over something that happened a decade prior to social democracy's hegemony?

#2 The fall of the Soviet Union, thus flagging the signal "left is wrong".

I'm not sure what you mean here. You posit that the Soviet Union working allowed for a strong social democratic state that was consistently and aggressively in opposition to the ideas of the USSR, and that the failing of said state led to the people remembering, for decades now, that the "left was wrong", right?

 

[reilo]

Lack of education is only a secondary problem when we still haven't overcome the issue that people are willfully ignorant. Solve the latter and the former will come into place.

 

[gcubed]

Which would hurt Obama's re-election more. The Greek situation being resolved in a manner that is negatively affecting the economy and drops the DOW to below 10k again (Not sure if that's bankruptcy so that's why I phrased it this way) in 2011 but the affects aren't as catastrophically bad as expected. Or, Greece stays functioning throughout the campaign but the fears of what is about to happen drops the DOW around 10k points and everyone is really afraid of what's going to happen. Neither situation would be good at all for him, but I think it's a little interesting (though clearly much scarier than interesting) to think about which scenario would cause a more negative reaction.

neither. I think the DOW has little to do with the percieved effectiveness of a president. The DOW could be 8000 because the Euro no longer exists, Italy, Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Greece are all bankrupt and France is next, but if the US has been hiring 200-300,000 people a month in the 6 months prior, Obama would win in a landslide

 

[Byakuya769]

neither. I think the DOW has little to do with the percieved effectiveness of a president. The DOW could be 8000 because the Euro no longer exists, Italy, Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Greece are all bankrupt and France is next, but if the US has been hiring 200-300,000 people a month in the 6 months prior, Obama would win in a landslide

Yep. The DOW roaring back in 09/10 didn't help him in the mid-terms. It's all about the perception of jobs being created.

 

[KtSlime]

Lack of education is only a secondary problem when we still haven't overcome the issue that people are willfully ignorant. Solve the latter and the former will come into place.

This makes me sick. What the hell is wrong with people? Why were they taught that it is okay to do that? Why are there 300 Million+ people in the US that think it is their right to be stupid whenever they want to be.

 

[Ecotic]

Why? There has been a concerted attack on her from the left and (some of) the right. Most of it her own fault.

That's why there is great doubt about the viability of Rick Perry as a candidate, because he's going to go through the same wringer for the next 4 months.

It's not the attacks that made Bachmann drop, 90% of it was Perry getting into the race. He had Bachmann's conservatism and authenticity but with the gravitas of a long-standing Texas Governor. Bachmann's poll support was just a placeholder that Perry took.

 

[reilo]

This makes me sick. What the hell is wrong with people? Why were they taught that it is okay to do that? Why are there 300 Million+ people in the US that think it is their right to be stupid whenever they want to be.

A lot of people aren't naturally intellectually curious. They are okay with what they know and who they know. Venturing out into different realms that is outside their comfort zone is not something many people like to do.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Why? There has been a concerted attack on her from the left and (some of) the right. Most of it her own fault.

That's why there is great doubt about the viability of Rick Perry as a candidate, because he's going to go through the same wringer for the next 4 months.

Some of the right? All of the establishment has attacked her. And any attacks she has gotten from the left were brought on by her being stupid; saying God sent hurricanes to "wake up" the American people? She continues to label herself as the most fundamentalist candidate in years.

Perry has sucked up half of her supporters, which has damaged her more. And like Bachman, he has a history of saying outrageous things which the media will hype over the next 6 months.

 

[Something Wicked]

neither. I think the DOW has little to do with the percieved effectiveness of a president. The DOW could be 8000 because the Euro no longer exists, Italy, Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Greece are all bankrupt and France is next, but if the US has been hiring 200-300,000 people a month in the 6 months prior, Obama would win in a landslide

There's actually a very real correlation between the performance of the DOW (or other market indices) and employment/unemployment.

The higher the DOW -> more cash companies have to expand -> eventually more jobs offered

The above is reason why the stock markets' point values are known as "leading indicators" of national economic performance, while unemployment is considered a "lagging indicator."

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

What kept the people of the past from having a goldfish memory over something that happened a decade prior to social democracy's hegemony?

The Great Depression was far worse than anything in recent history, including the Great Recession.

I'm not sure what you mean here. You posit that the Soviet Union working allowed for a strong social democratic state that was consistently and aggressively in opposition to the ideas of the USSR, and that the failing of said state led to the people remembering, for decades now, that the "left was wrong", right?

Kind of. What I meant is that because of the USSR functioning and being successful people believed that both a left and right political mindset can exist (though it was really far left vs center right). But after it collapsed people somehow got the idea that "left is bad". Hence the "Socialism" ad hominem.

This is all against the point. Your original point was that you were going to vote Republican or third party to stick it to the Democrats. When in reality the reason why the Democrats aren't doing their job is because there isn't a strong pull from the left begging for things that we desire. It would be more productive for you to vote local and in the primaries.