<scanners-head-explode.gif>
-
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 |OT2| Worth 77% of OT1
- Thread starter The Librarian
- Start date
- Status
<scanners-head-explode.gif>
Black Mamba
Member
Totally. The lack of infrastructure spending in the aftermath of the 2009 recession has been an egregious missed opportunity. Not only would it have provided short-term stimulus, the long-term benefits would have been considerable. Instead, we've muddled along with a crumbing infrastructure.
Far be it from me to agree with Erick Erickson, but it's science.
Irrespective of our policies, the resolution of the conflict will be inescapably gruesome. No level of intervention could have prevented the ever increasing severity of the conflict. And with both sides entrenched, the U.S. has even less leverage and influence. Now, the U.S. must consider the broader consequences of the Syrian conflict. Foremost, Syria has become a hotbed for extremist activity. Foreign fighters have flocked to Syria in droves and, to a remarkable extent, have integrated within the broader Syrian opposition. Given the opacity of the situation, our intelligence community has struggled to identify, not only all the relevant groups, but how they are linked.
Thus, the decision to arm the opposition, of which Europe is poised to act, would be a grave mistake. To vet the recipients, in addition to securing the weapons after Assad's deposition, is not feasible. Justifiably, Obama has hesitated to escalate our material support after our experience in Libya. The failure to secure weapons, and the provision of material support by NATO and its allies, not only contributed to instability in Libya, but has reverberated throughout the region. There was a direct link between the diffusion of armaments from Libya and the crisis in Mali and the resurgence of Boko Haram. I have been pleasantly surprised by the Administration's restraint.
To the risk of it escalating to a regional conflict, beyond the presence of proxies inside Syria, the worst-case scenario would be comparable to the Lebanese Civil War. However, I think the risk of direct foreign involvement is low. After two years of conflict, and the prospect of a protracted civil war, states are hesitant to interject themselves into a hornet's nest. And this is especially true of Turkey. Turkey has much to lose and little to gain by intervening. The refugee stream will swell regardless. and public support for greater involvement has been tepid. And I do not foresee another limited intervention. The conflict has evolved to the extent of multiple pro-government militias, many only nominally aligned, rather than a centralized military structure as in Libya. A no-fly zone or naval blockade would scarcely affect the balance of power.
el retorno
Member
Dat sarcasm
He said science, not anthropology.
el retorno
Member
i forget jackson's not a robot sometimes.
TacticalFox88
Banned
The Librarian
Banned
Has anybody made a thread about it?
We're too busy trying to restore the natural order of the household to do that. Sounds like women's work.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Seems appropriate for you to tackle it.
The Librarian
Banned
Fiiiiine.
Black Mamba
Member
Well, Dax is the breadwinner of Poli-GAF, so it makes sense for her to do it.
rocketknight
Member
Gogo.
That brings up an important question. Are the rest of us supposed to be Dax's spoiled kids or her good-for-nothin' husbands?
smokeandmirrors
Banned
Shotty spoiled kid.
Krugman is participating in a debate against Newt Gingrich and Arthur Laffer right now. I'm not expecting a great deal of substance, but Gingrich is always fun to watch and Krugman has a habit of being a really entertaining jerk in these sorts of things.
http://munkdebates.com/livestream
http://munkdebates.com/livestream
PhoenixDark
Banned
Krugman couldn't beat Scarborough in a debate, how can he compete with Gingrich.
Thanks, watching now.
lol, was actually just gonna write this.
As much as I enjoy these type of debates, and the very high probability of any scumbag right-winger getting owned, I do think it's kind of insulting to people of Krugman's stature to have to debate some pseudo-intellectual gasbag like the Newtster.
There could be life on Europa. Better be safe and ship them to Venus, where they can witness an out-of-control greenhouse effect for themselves.
The Librarian
Banned
rocketknight
Member
Wow. Theater of the absurd.
They didn't say anything about two-woman househelds, Dax. Ditch them to come break the curve with me.
Link
The Autumn Wind
I thoroughly support this initiative.
shadowsdarknes
Member
Anyone watch this debate? I just tuned in over an hour late and I suspect the good stuff has passed.
rocketknight
Member
I just started fifteen minutes or so ago and I'm satisfied with the amount of crazy nutjobs and exasperated Krugman I'm getting, but maybe my standards are low.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Gingrich makes some good points whereas Laffer is a crazy person.
The Librarian
Banned
I can't gay marry. I'm in NC.
shadowsdarknes
Member
Krugman does seem to know his stuff.
Laffer is an interesting guy to say the least.
That's the only reason?
rocketknight
Member
Ouch
Yeah, Laffer isn't crazy but he doesn't seem to want to ground his discussion in the real world either.
Early on there was lots of "punishing the rich" talk from the Cons. Krugman said he was "pissed off". Laffer (who I've been finding very annoying) opened with an inappropriate joke* and gave a long statement listing off tax cuts and asserting that there was lots of growth and revenue growth after each (though there was some obvious lawyering). Greek dude was big on the importance of not having concentrations of power, and one of the Pros came out and accused Gingrich of only wanting government to serve big business.
*Something like he went into a gym and saw a beautiful woman, and asked a trainer what machine he had to use to get a woman like that interested in him, so the trainer took him across the street to an ATM.
*Something like he went into a gym and saw a beautiful woman, and asked a trainer what machine he had to use to get a woman like that interested in him, so the trainer took him across the street to an ATM.
The Librarian
Banned
rocketknight
Member
Ending with a dig at Tom Ford, heh.
Edit: Oh wow, the MORE TAXES group picked up all the undecideds, it seems. Or was that something else?
Edit: Oh wow, the MORE TAXES group picked up all the undecideds, it seems. Or was that something else?
PhoenixDark
Banned
Whoa, Laffer advocating a tax on unrealized capital gains. I'd love to see the right wing response if Obama said that.
That being said, most of Laffer's arguments are so disingenuous. The United States economy has boomed with taxes as high as 70%. On one hand he praised JFK for "cutting taxes" (from 90% to 70% mind you), on the other hand he argues high taxes kill growth. If the US economy could flourish at a 70% tax rate it'll survive Obama's meager tax rates.
The bigger problem is that we're not investing in the future, while much of the world is. We could raise taxes and use that extra revenue to finance unemployment training, not just handing people a check. We can use extra revenue to provide daycare services for working mothers. We can use extra revenue to build more community colleges, or rebuild infrastructure, etc. But we don't.
That being said, most of Laffer's arguments are so disingenuous. The United States economy has boomed with taxes as high as 70%. On one hand he praised JFK for "cutting taxes" (from 90% to 70% mind you), on the other hand he argues high taxes kill growth. If the US economy could flourish at a 70% tax rate it'll survive Obama's meager tax rates.
The bigger problem is that we're not investing in the future, while much of the world is. We could raise taxes and use that extra revenue to finance unemployment training, not just handing people a check. We can use extra revenue to provide daycare services for working mothers. We can use extra revenue to build more community colleges, or rebuild infrastructure, etc. But we don't.
The Librarian
Banned
Did he say JFK? Because that wasn't JFK.
TacticalFox88
Banned
shadowsdarknes
Member
JFK advocated these things, but I don't think it was passed into law until after his death.
The Librarian
Banned
Then why didn't he just praise LBJ who actually got it done? I haven't watched the debate, but that dude doesn't sound too smart.
He isn't.
This was basically Krugman's big idea throughout the whole thing. The reason things like cutting food stamps gets support is that "we don't have enough money". State university tuition needs to be subsidized, etc. Higher taxes on the rich are an effective way to get more money, and it doesn't slow growth or anything like that.
Greek guy's angle was that inequality is bad. Leads to crony capitalism and corruption and whatnot.
Gingrich didn't think it was fair to tax the rich.
Laffer didn't think taxing the rich worked. I'm pretty sure his arguments commit him to arbitrarily low tax rates.
PhoenixDark
Banned
It was JFK's legislation/proposal. Obviously he didn't sign it in 1964.
The Librarian
Banned
A lot of things were JFK's proposals. Doesn't mean he should get credit for it.
PhoenixDark
Banned
It was more than a proposal, it was an actual bill that his administration created. It's generally considered JFK's tax cut. I congratulate you for your recent LBJ knowledge but it doesn't change the general fact that a bill on JFK's desk when he died would still be his bill regardless of who passed three months later.
The Librarian
Banned
I honestly can't tell if you're trolling me or not. Guess I shouldn't have replied. Oh well. You said this: "On one hand he praised JFK for "cutting taxes" (from 90% to 70% mind you)."
JFK did not do that. He was dead.
PhoenixDark
Banned
You're arguing semantics. The Revenue Act of 1964 was JFK's tax reform package. Laffer's argument was based on the effect of that bill, which indeed cut taxes. Him saying "JFK cut taxes" is accurate, and generally accepted because it was his bill, passed 3 months after his death.
Anyway, I must say that was Krugman's best debate in some time. Usually he's rather disappointing.
eBay Huckster
Member
ugh how am I even about to be graduating before you
- Status