So why is the GOP proposing an alternate budget plan they know won't pass?
Asked by
Yuchen (
228
)
March 26th, 2009
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
60 Answers
Because politics is show business for ugly people.
FWIW, I’ve had very few complaints, if any, about how Fluther is moderated, but I’ve found today’s actions to be too far overboard and very much out of the ordinary. I’m not sure what’s going on with TPTB, but to me this seems really out of character and unreasonable. I’ve voiced my opinion to the moderators, but I also feel like I need to say it on the site proper.
Probably so Jindal can say that they had an alternative proposal when he is running for President.
no idea about the rest, haven’t noticed anything other than one thread
fluther v wis.dm comments and questions are getting pulled (for reasons that are a mystery to me.)
Kevbo: I understand it feels like too much of an overboard, but by deleting these questions, they’re basically losing members to this website. There must be a better way to filter out redundant questions.
Fireside: eh. I doubt that’ll ever happen.
@kevbo [mod says] We’ve been dealing with these types of questions for the past 5 days. A top level decision was made to re-focus the Fluther main page to actual questions, rather than re-hashing the Fluther vs wis.dm debates (as many are getting nasty) and the “Hi, I’m new here, what should I do?” questions. There are still multiple threads for people to share their thoughts regarding the wis.dm migration.
@Yuchen. Sorry you feel that way, but, if you scroll down or search for wis.dm using the search bar, you’ll find many questions that deal with wis.dm and how to navigate the site. Alternatively, feel free to contact me via PM and we can discuss further.
Yeah, this whole thing is pretty tiring.
Probably sucks for you mods to have to deal with.
@Yuchen – It’s getting to the point of losing people because they don’t seem to understand why this site is about answers and not questions, or losing people because there is so much tension and repetitive questions. Sucks either way.
@shilolo, appreciate the response and not to armchair quarterback the mods, but why wasn’t that communicated to folks who were participating in the deleted threads? It seems like we’re trying to make a case for disgruntled wis.dmers (and at least one disgruntled Flutherer). How many repeats of iPhone questions did we endure?
So, whatever. That’s the way it’ll play, but I still don’t agree.
Jindal will definitely try to run for President.
How do you do the whole ”@Yuchen” thing?
shilolo: I don’t have a problem with how to “find” wis.dm questions; I have a problem with the fact that the questions ARE legitimate but deleted anyway because it doesn’t satisfy the criteria of the moderators.
Fireside: shouldn’t it be the people’s choice to judge a question as valid or not? that’s what the flagging buttons are for, isnt it?
@Yuchen – Type @ and the username.
How do you know there weren’t people flagging?
again, I only saw one thread get removed and it was flagged by a user and should have been removed.
@fireside: I don’t claim questions aren’t being flagged, but why should a small group of moderators be deciding for the good of the community?
@kevbo Contrary to popular belief, we all have lives outside of Fluther and can’t be here 24/7. We aren’t monitoring the site every second. Also, sometimes we discuss things behind the scenes before coming to a group decision. Yes, it was an active thread that we still opted to remove. Sorry you feel inconvenienced.
@Yuchen. I don’t know to what question you are referring. With respect to the moderating policy, you can check the guidelines for an explanation (see the link at the top). Fluther is a moderated site, unlike wis.dm. 99% of users like and appreciate that. A small minority do not.
@shilolo: I believe they appreciate that because that’s how it’s always been. I don’t believe anything I say will change your policies, but like everyone else, I want my voice heard. So thanks.
@Yuchen – why should a small group of moderators be deciding for the good of the community?
Because they are moderators.
That is what they are here to do.
This is a business that uses servers that they have to pay for and if people load up the servers with a bunch of complaints about the site that have been addressed repeatedly, why should the company allow it? They need to monitor the site, so that the quality is maintained.
… and normally a mod pops in with a comment to everyone to get the thread back on track. Not today, I guess, and I don’t see how that implies an expectation of a 24/7 presence. I appreciate the apology. It’s less about feeling inconvenienced, though, than being sort of embarrassed to understand where some of the noobs are coming from.
To offer something different. This is what minority parties do. They’re attempting to stake out their territory and present the congress and American public with a real alternative.
@fireside: you don’t think people are complaining about their ways of moderating?
@kevbo: yeah…we are getting off topic. I just like to have the last word =) .... so don’t reply.
@TheIowaCynic: It’s a waste of the precious time that those minority members can be dedicating to something else more useful.
@Yuchen – Think about this comment in light of your other sidebar discussion:
“It’s a waste of the precious time that those minority members can be dedicating to something else more useful.”
@kevbo As I said, this was a top level decision to move the discussion on the main page away from infighting. There was no way (or reason) to get that discussion back on track.
@Yuchen To follow our own policy, I will not derail your question any further with the moderation policies of this site. Your voice has been heard. Yes, this isn’t the free-for-all that wis.dm was. Feel free to enjoy Fluther for what it is.
@Yuchen
The budget that has been proposed is HIGHLY controversial. I’m not sure I understand your logic. Are you suggesting they should do nothing? Minority parties present alternatives. That’s what they do. That’s how it works, so that when the next election cycle comes, people like you won’t be able to say “well, did you propose anything better?”
You seem to be against the idea of having a minority party in congress.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the topic is the Republican budget “plan”.
We were watching MSNBC this morning and they gave the Republican leadership an opportunity to talk about their alternative plan after the ‘town hall’. One after another they stood at the microphone and said President Obama was wrong and his budget was too expensive and one party govt was fascism (like 2000–2006?). After several repetitions the commentator broke in and explained that they were not doing what they promised. She said AP was distributing a copy of their plan which was universal health care (??) and cutting taxes and spending with no specific programs named and no numbers.
I followed the link in the question to a Republican Party site that said only that Obama was wrong and said nothing about a plan of their own except that they have one.
HOW STUPID DO THE REPUBLICANS THINK YOU ARE??
@galileogirl: Republicans aren’t necessarily stupid; they just choose to agree with whatever it is as long as it’s not Obama’s spending spree.
I didn’t say they were stupid. I asked how stupid they think Americans are.
@galileogirl: I thought it was implied since an overwhelming number republicans seem to agree with their ‘alternative’ budget.
Aren’t you getting it? There is no alternative plan. Please find it, show me. “President Obama is wrong” is NOT a plan or a budget. It is saying something over and over again and hope repetition of an unfounded opinion will make it fact.
I don’t think you’re understanding my sarcasm when I put ‘alternate’ in quotation marks.
@galileogirl
The republicans, simply by suggesting that over a trillion dollars of the new spending proposed by Obama is a REALLY bad idea, are actually presenting a valid alternative.
If somebody said “It’s better to jump off a building from the 3rd floor than from the 20th floor,” they’re actually making a valid proposal.
Who I wonder thinks we’re stupid, are the people in the Obama administration and the Fed, who seem to think that one can spend money on whatever one likes, without any concern for how it will get paid for. Or that we can simply print money without devaluing our currency.
They aren’t saying jump off the 3rd floor, they are saying stay in the burning building and hope for a storm.
@TheIowaCynic – “who seem to think that one can spend money on whatever one likes, without any concern for how it will get paid for”
That’s funny, i heard the same thing for the past 6 years too.
@galileogirl That’s a nice analogy but that’s not the gist of their concern at all. what they’re saying is that spending this amount of money will bankrupt the country and cause massive inflation. Pointing out the error of something and saying we’d better of without it, doesn’t require an alternative. What the GOP is proposing is a budget that spends a great deal less money….......
Currently, the GOP is proposing that next week they hope to have more specifics on a plan that they want to put forward.
Show me the beef, don’t just promise you’ll have it “someday”.
@TheIowaCynic: We are currently experiencing deflation, or close to deflation, I believe. A bit of inflation wouldn’t hurt – it’s better than letting all those unemployed individuals suffer. Doing something is always better than doing nothing, which is what the GOP is proposing.
@fireside That’s right…..something most conservatives are rather angry about. Explain to me how raising a budget deficit from $400 billion to 2 trillion dollars is a good idea.
@Yuchen We are most certainly NOT experiencing deflation right now. That’s a silly rumor. What is WORSE than letting all those unemployed suffer is tripling the money supply and now resorting to simply PRINTING money…..just making it up. Massive inflation is on the horizon. We are straddling our future generations with a crushing debt and all for avoiding some well overdue, short term pain.
@TheIowaCynic – It’s Keynesian economics. Nobody knows if it will work, but nobody really has any idea what to do either.
@fireside Nobody, not Keynes and not anybody else, ever proposed piling up a debt that was twice your GDP and deficit spend at 13% of your GDP. What is being proposed is insane…...European countries are laughing at us. They almost can’t believe a country would be so fiscally irresponsible.
@TheIowaCynic: Well, let’s look at it from a common sense point of view. Things are bad in our economy right now, correct? Therefore, people are afraid to spend money and are instead saving their salaries. In response, businesses are forced to lower their prices of goods to attract customers….but consumers won’t make purchases as they expect the prices to drop even further and of course they want the best deal for their buck. Doesn’t that lead to deflation?
In addition, the future generation will NOT be any better off if this crisis is not solved. What you’re proposing is for us to sit and wait it out. Sorry to burst your bubble, but I don’t believe the economy will fix itself at this point.
@Yuchen There is nothing in history to compare with our proposed 2 trillion dollar deficit. This would require a much bigger discussion. We’re going through a deleveraging cycle and what the government is attempting to do is insane.
In 10 years from now, over HALF of the money we pay in taxes will be going to servicing the interest on our debt.
We will be living in a sharecropper society.
@TheIowaCynic: So what you’re saying is that if nothing has happened in history that can be related to this circumstance, then a solution that we’ve never tried in history before would be absurd to suggest in these times?
@Yuchen
Some of the consequences we DO know. By your logic, I might suggest that we throw half of the buildings in the U.S. into the ocean because that will create new construction jobs. Prove to me that it won’t work.
@TheIowaCynic: You’re taking it to the extreme. Essentially, we ARE creating new jobs to FIX the already-done damage. Your analogy doesn’t correspond to this situation since we’re trying to FIX the issue, not create an issue to fix.
@Yuchen
You seem…...I dunno…...somehow the idea of these unbelievable deficits doesn’t really seem to phase you. The biggest expansion of the economy, during any presidential term was Ronald Reagans second and first terms, respectively. He took the exact opposite approach to Obama, tightening the money supply, cutting taxes and putting a hold on spending, particularly spending that will crowd out private investment. What Obama is doing is following the exact opposite formula…...not to mention…..let me point this out again.
In 10 years, half of the federal budget will be going towards paying off the debt. It will be over 1 trillion dollars per year, meaning that every single man, woman and child in America will be paying $3,000 in taxes…..per year…...just to pay off the debt already accumulated. It’s insane. That would mean a family of 4 will be paying $12,000 per year in taxes, just to service interest on past deficits.
This is a formula for completely destroying a sound economy.
Um, this “sound economy” is in shambles right now.
@TheIowaCynic: Yes, I see the problem but you are not offering an alternative. What do you suggest we do instead? Let those starving people starve since it’s for the good of the future? Reagan’s plan to cut expenses and taxes didn’t go exactly as planned, if you remember correctly.
@Yuchen
Starving people? There aren’t “starving people,” in America. Engaging in massive, inflationary spending will make everybody poor. Here is the point about Reagan…..his policies (his and volkers) = massive economic growth. It is fair to assume that taking the exact opposite approach will lead to the exact opposite results.
@TheIowaCynic: I think it’s impossible to come to an agreement since we are essentially arguing the fundamental differences in the beliefs of a republican and democrat. I say whatever happens, happens. We’ll see who’s right or wrong in the future. If it goes badly, you can blame me and slap me.
“There aren’t “starving people,” in America”
Wow.
@fireside
That’s correct fireside….....here is a challenge I am presenting to you. Show me a news article of the last person in America who starved to death.
Poor people eat Mac and Cheese…...the rich eat Steak and veggies.
Starving to death and starving are very different.
You know why you won’t see that?
Because the government spends money to help people.
@fireside
OK, so you’ve admitted that people aren’t allowed to starve to death here in America and that’s actually only one part of the equation. We produce enough food to feed people. that’s why people don’t starve. Furthermore, it doesn’t take a 3 trillion dollar budget to feed people.
No, it takes a 3 trillion dollar budget to stimulate the economy since lending had dried up and businesses are failing.
Obama is pointing out growth sectors where he intends to push the economy forward.
It’s not like all the money went away, some of it is just being held until a safe investment vehicle can be found. As those growth sectors begin showing promise, people will put money in and they can hire more staff. This will help to alleviate the massive amount of people on unemployment right now who are living (and feeding themselves) off the government dollar.
@fireside
It’s amazing the credit people are willing to give to Obama “sectors where HE intends to push the economy forward”
Spending money we don’t have is hideously irresponsible. Spending 2 trillion dollars we don’t have is even crazier. You don’t see the big picture right now but you will soon….....this “budget/spending spree” is a formula for gargantuan inflation. We no longer have anything backing up our dollar. More money is being put into an economy while the productive sectors…...banking/manufacturing etc…..are being strangled..
We’ll see, won’t we? But in the meantime, the people in congress who are saying “WOA!!! this is insane!” have got one hell of a point.
Banking is a productive sector?
I can’t continue this conversation with you. Sorry.
@fireside
I know you can’t. You’re somebody who thinks Americans starve to death. You completely misunderstood what I“m saying. Unfortunately, whatever shape they happen to be in, banks contribute to the process of growing an economy and so are in the “productive sector” of the economy, while the public sector only operates off of the wealth creation of the private sector…........Obama is putting a stranglehold on the productive sector and massively growing the unproductive sector…..it is a recipe for disaster, inflation and bankruptcy
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
