Uh, actually it is. Allow me to explain.Storamin wrote:got my MBA from a top b school 25 school and CPA license and stopped unless somebody was paying for my opinionDarnYak wrote:Storamin, I suggest you say more against what people say instead of just accusing them to not know what the fuck they're talking about, because at the moment that person looks like you.
You're certainly trivializing what Obama wants to do. I guess I don't understand -- paying for the army is somehow better spending than giving students access to the internet?DarkNemesis wrote: Moving on...
What I find funny and ironic is Obama bitching about Bush and his deficit, yet he want's to spend three times as much, or more, (800 billion-1 trillion) to so called "boost" the economy. There is no doubt Bush spent way too much, that's a no-brainer, but at least, for the most part, his spending went to stuff like defense and the army. Obama, however, wants to give all little kids in Arkansas high-speed internet access and hire government workers to screw in light bulbs in public buildings, as if it requires so much arduous labor.
Uknow the Library of Congress? Do you know how much information is in there? "It contains some 18 million books, 2.5 million recordings, 12 million photographs, 4.5 million maps, and more than 54 million manuscripts." Lot of stuff? Literally, a Library of Congress worth of information is created every 15 minutes on the internet. Hell, the time it took me to read this thread & reply another one was created. By providing internet access, you allow someone to access that information, and increasing their education. The relationship between education and the economy is well documented.
There are 2 major ways the government can influence the economy. Supply side & Demand side. Supply side is the Fed and controlling the dollar, and they're doing a pretty damn good job. Demand side is the government spending. As it is, government spending is ~35% of GDP. ANY increase in government spending has significant effects on GDP, and the economy. Then the trickle down theory kicks in...
Think of it this way: Go to any restauraunt. Look around you and what do you see: mass consumption. EVERYTHING in there is consumption, the chairs you sat on, the plate you ate off of, the food. Our economy has been built on this. For years other people have been willing to lend us the money so that we could spend it. People from China, Japan, all over the world. They saved money, which we borrowed and spent. This paradigm is over, and has significant impacts. Imagine what would happen if that shit just stopped.
And I agree with you, DarnYak, that we're afraid of letting companies fail. A lot of my former classmates are out there on the street... so I'm quite biased. It's much different when you get calls from friends who are on the street and want a bailout than if you think of them as stupid, rich fat cats with $$$$$
we blamed this crisis on the harvard MBAs. they dont know jack shit.
The Constitution states that Government (Congress) is supposed to fund and fight our wars. So money going towards these wars is both right and vindicated. However, nowhere does it state that Government is suppose to provide additional "care" to children/students. That should be left up to the state, not the president. The same is true with social issues, such as gay rights and religious freedoms. having a Supreme Court judge say what is acceptable is actually unconstitutional: i.e praying in school, gay rights, so on and so forth. I'm not saying what Obama is doing is wrong, just unnecessary and petty. We have a financial issue here and hes worried about some kid in Nevada that might not have blazing-fast internet. Just seems a little ridiculous to me.