You have a link to this Galbraith article?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2013 |OT1| Never mind, Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
- Thread starter ClovingWestbrook
- Start date
- Status
TheLaughingStock
Member
So here's a shortened version of what he's arguing when he wrote to the Simpson-Bowles.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-k-galbraith/why-the-fiscal-commission_b_631269.html
This link is a link to pdf where he is a bit more nuanced.
http://www.levyinstitute.org/publications/?docid=1379
If anyone disagrees, then feel free to try chime in. Always looking to learn about this stuff. His father is a famous economist (he's not quite his dad) btw so that's why I looked to him for his input.
Wow great post, had I not known that it was a blog from poligaf I would of thought it was from on of those mainstream political websites.
Persuit? Is this a spelling mistake or some grammatical rule I don't know about?
RustyNails
Member
What I was thinking as well. Get your shit together Onion Joe!
Psht, leave it to you liberals to try and infringe upon our freedom of spelling. We don't need your mainstream media rules at dHP. We calls 'em as we sees 'em, and sometimes we see them spelled "wrong."
I'm surprised it wasn't me that did that, lol. Tiny silly but obvious after-the-fact mistakes are kind of my thing.
I'm surprised it wasn't me that did that, lol. Tiny silly but obvious after-the-fact mistakes are kind of my thing.
The Librarian
Banned
Are we allowed to link our posts here or not? I'm still confused on that part.
I think it's fine as long as it's for the purpose of discussion, rather than advertising the blog or administration.
What that means is that we should probably post at least the text we'd like to discuss with people here. Posting just a link would obviously be trying to 'advertise.'
Speaking of that, I had a sort of tongue and cheek post yesterday
I think this part is worth wondering about:
It was a pretty quick "I wonder" sort of assumption on my part, and I left it relatively unexpanded on. I know a few people have passed around the AWB being a sort of bargaining chip, but I just wonder if any of that was realistically cover to distract the NRA. Even if it wasn't on purpose, that seems to be a good effect of it. Not many are actually talking about his executive orders, which most of us agree were pretty good things to do.
Synth_floyd
Banned
Guns should be treated like cigarettes. They're legal but people should be discouraged from using them and they should be taxed heavily. Just like we used to be a smoking culture and got away from that, we need to get away from the gun culture.
Rubio, or some other perceived hispanic-friendly GOPer, will be on the 2016 ticket. I would be shocked if that wasn't the case.
bu..bu...but why don't minorities vote for the GOP? Oh that's right, because Dems give out handouts
Check-mate libruls. (FB)
bu..bu...but why don't minorities vote for the GOP? Oh that's right, because Dems give out handouts
RustyNails
Member
dHP notice:
Contributors, make sure you guys add categories to your posts and tag them. Think of tags as keywords that will get your post show up in search results. Think of anything. There's no such thing as less tags. Put as many as you can.
For Cateogry example, Dax' LBJ post would be categorized under History, Democrats, Politics. Or something like that.
Contributors, make sure you guys add categories to your posts and tag them. Think of tags as keywords that will get your post show up in search results. Think of anything. There's no such thing as less tags. Put as many as you can.
For Cateogry example, Dax' LBJ post would be categorized under History, Democrats, Politics. Or something like that.
Man I really doubt that...I just can't see Rubio getting through the primaries. I guess I just don't see the really red states voting in a Hispanic. I could see him as a VP pick though...
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I hate to put it like this, but I think Rubio stands a chance because he doesn't look...brown...
:lol I can't believe I didn't catch that. In the title, especially. That's what I get for doing this while wrestling with a one year old at 6 AM.
Thank you very much!
Rocket Scientist
Member
Just read Wonkblog's latest entry concerning the fillibuster. Someone needs to kick Reid in the nuttsack. That is if someone can find it.
This really jumped out at me from Maddow's segment on political Trolling:
Woe is the might of the National Rifle Association with the ignominious accolade of "worst return on investment" of any single outside lobby. They even managed to outfail Rove, whose $105,000,000 translated to $1,354,500 of success and a mental breakdown on live TV.
The hilarious (or abjectly depressing) thing is that the NRA's role would appear to be primarily trolling these days.
Woe is the might of the National Rifle Association with the ignominious accolade of "worst return on investment" of any single outside lobby. They even managed to outfail Rove, whose $105,000,000 translated to $1,354,500 of success and a mental breakdown on live TV.
The hilarious (or abjectly depressing) thing is that the NRA's role would appear to be primarily trolling these days.
The Librarian
Banned
Never understood the phrase "having balls = tough." They're such fragile things...
This really jumped out at me from Maddow's segment on political Trolling:
Woe is the might of the National Rifle Association with the ignominious accolade of "worst return on investment" of any single outside lobby. They even managed to outfail Rove, whose $105,000,000 translated to $1,354,500 of success and a mental breakdown on live TV.
The hilarious (or abjectly depressing) thing is that the NRA's role would appear to be primarily trolling these days.
Ouch. That's pretty terrible.
It feels like a complete reversal from the Reid just after the election.
thanks, very interesting, completely missed this
he is, and she is awesome
We don't let them drink either, which is the real crime here.
The Librarian
Banned
"Erupts" is a bit of an exaggeration.
Yeah, I was definitely expecting a lot more. Too bad, because I'd like to see someone rip Ron a new asshole sometime...
The Librarian
Banned
So Nate has a new post up about presidential rankings. He has this chart in the article:
I'm a little dispirited to find Reagan above LBJ. Yeah, Reagan didn't have something like Vietnam, but aside from tax cuts for the rich and some harmful deregulation, what exactly did he do that was so great? His domestic record was pitiful compared to Johnson's.
I'm a little dispirited to find Reagan above LBJ. Yeah, Reagan didn't have something like Vietnam, but aside from tax cuts for the rich and some harmful deregulation, what exactly did he do that was so great? His domestic record was pitiful compared to Johnson's.
Arrowgigantic
Member
He won the office (of the president) pool for "Soviet Union collapses".
when i ask why he was so great to people that love him the only single answer i get is because he talked tough to the soviet union and is collapse.
They toned it down from "Clinton jumped over her desk and stabbed him in the heart".
Reagan deserves some credit, but not in the way people want to think. It's when he started sitting down and talking that we made progress.
Of course, this is after reigniting nuclear brinkmanship. That gave us some great 80s films though, so it wasn't a total blunder.
It's also just flat out wrong answer.
The Soviet Union was pretty much ready to end the cold war, but Reagan campaigned against détente in 1980 and pretty much killed it once he got into office.
Him and his merry team of idiots most likely delayed the fall of the Soviet Union by a good decade (and along the way managed to be wrong about fucking everything), though it might not be a terrible thing, as I doubt he would've handled the collapse of the iron curtain nearly as good as Bush I.
The man was so fucking afraid of communists, he thought Grenada pose a real threat to the US, he truly was the pussy in chief (too bad people die for that though).
Reagan campaigned against talking with the Russians ("détente is what the turkey has with the farmer before thanksgiving" and all that bullshit) and when in office pretty much ended it.
It's true that in his second term he did sit down and talked with them, but for real, Gorbachev kinda forced his hand there not to mention that as far as the US stance, he merely went back to the Nixon-Ford-Carter policies, only 10 years later.
Well as annoying as that it, it sorta make sense Ray-gun would be higher than LBJ. Vietnam was a huge fuck up and overshadowed pretty every everything he did on the domestic front. Reagan did a lot of harmful things of course, but none of them were as visibly negative as Vietnam. Plus he presided over a good economy and "won" the Cold War.
I'm actually more surprised that Clinton is that low.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Vietnam shadows everything LBJ did, as it should; if not for it he'd certainly be a near worthy successor to FDR in many ways. The man literally perpetuated a lie to escalate the deadliest US war since WWII. That matters. And while he is one of the most fascinating, most effective, most interesting presidents, we can never forget he is personally responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.
It's like the Polanski effect. Yea he made Chinatown, but he also raped a child.
It's like the Polanski effect. Yea he made Chinatown, but he also raped a child.
The Librarian
Banned
Edit: Nevermind.
http://endoftheamericandream.com/ar...he-nazification-of-america-is-almost-complete
This article has been passing around my Facebook feed. Hilarious.
This article has been passing around my Facebook feed. Hilarious.
I've seen that and frankly I haven't seen something that dumb or just factually wrong in a while.
Agreed. Johnson was a fascinating man and his domestic achievements are god-tier, but Vietnam is not something anyone should gloss over. I think his rank is appropriate there. If not for Vietnam, I have no doubt that he would be in the top five.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Why don't more black people do this just to prove a point?
Fenderputty
Banned
Reagan is the reason our current war on drugs is still chugging right along and the reason top down economics is still being spouted by my friends as though it still needs time to be tested in reality. The fact that I still have to hear, "But Dom, if we tax the very rich, how will they create jobs?!?!?!" coupled with the fact that we incarcerate more people than China, is reason enough to move him FAR FAR down that list IMO.
lol, it started off okay with the infringement on privacy stuff, but then went back to the typical complaints about regulations and health care.
On the health care front, 2 problems in particular with that correlation that right wingers use:
1. The German health care system was already set up by Bismarck many decades ago.
2. Do these douches realize that Germany currently still has UHC?
JFK was kind of an asshole. Extremely overrated.
Mercury Fred
Banned
God damn, this makes me want to see her run in 2016 more than ever.
Cool, then we can make the minimum age to join the military 21.
The Librarian
Banned
For me, it's not so much glossing over Vietnam as it is weighing the effects of what he did then against what effects his legislation continues to have on the country today. Probably many lives have been saved thanks to Medicare and Medicaid, many students have gone to (and continue to) go to school thanks to scholarships, more equality through the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act (which is still necessary today), and so on.
But on the other hand, there's Vietnam...ugh. On a whole, though, he's in my top ten.
Handled the Cuban Missile Crisis well.
- Status