Ethre Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Please - take it easy. Both of you. No need to get angry. Reading the thread I really don't see what happened, but can we forget it? I think the media is probably expecting a second term, but I'd also guess that Obama desires one. Quite likely it was an intentional decision by him (or his speech writers) to use "my first term". He could also have been thinking in longer terms - and a presidential term is a pretty handy time division if he's making plans for the country. Even though Obama is supposed to be above "politics as usual", politicians are by nature tied to the campaign trail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michlo Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I took it as him being more of a realist and someone not glossing over the facts than we are used to from previous administrations. I took it as him saying things are not going to be fixed overnight, that's all. I don't think we need read more into it than that but sheesh, we have the media doing stories on his being left-handed for goodness sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethre Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Well he definitely went directly to the "issue". There was an interesting comment in the FactCheck article on the speech about him "stating projections as fact" though. we have the media doing stories on his being left-handed for goodness sake.I missed that one. But oh my! He's a southpaw? Oh no!!! :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michlo Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 Well he definitely went directly to the "issue". There was an interesting comment in the FactCheck article on the speech about him "stating projections as fact" though. we have the media doing stories on his being left-handed for goodness sake.I missed that one. But oh my! He's a southpaw? Oh no!!! :P Hehe, yup, here at the NOC I work out, since we lost our news mix channel (which had streams from a bunch of news stations at once) we've had to switch to CNN so we see this "news" over and over and over and over and did I mention over again all night (we don't have the sound up at least). It is almost reassuring though, to realize that there can't be anything of great import happening in the world if they focus on these things. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragonpen61 Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I am glad that Obama got elected as it gives hope not just for the USA but for other countries like mine, Australia, to deal with the growing crisis. Of course I could not vote for Obama as I am not an American citizen but like many people around the world I was supporting him anyway. But despite this Obama is only one man and can do only so much to fix up the world's problems. Governments, corporations and the people will in the end have to face the truth that the world is changing and old ways of dealing with new problems are not really going to work any more. The current economic crisis is something like past crises but there are important differences that seem to have struck at the deep structures of world economy in a way that even the Great Depression didn't seem to do. One example is that many of the wealthy who in the past were able to ride out even the Great Depression are in trouble and the same gos for banks and other institutions. In truth it took World War II to bring the USA out of the Great Depression despite Roosevelt's efforts. I hope that in desperation the world does not seek the same sort of path again because I fear such a war would finish us all. :mage: I still hope for the best! :banana: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LHammonds Posted February 26, 2009 Share Posted February 26, 2009 I might be just too simplistic to grasp this whole "debt" thing on a world / government level but when we have debt to take care of (meaning spendatures are exceeding income), the 1st thing I do is stop spending. It is easy to stop the frivoulus stuff and obvious "wants" vs "needs" but once you go red, you need to go further than just avoiding going negative...you have to go positive (saving income) in order to pay of current debt. And once you reach that point, keep on track for saving to give yourself a "buffer" before you start spending on "wants" again and ensure you do NOT go negative again. I see none of this happening in the government. I am seeing the direct opposite and have been since the dollar started to decline in the 70's. This is pure insanity and the current amount of debt each "working" American citizen has on their head because of government is a staggering number (this is above personal debt mind you!). If you check numbers being published, they take the current debt and divide it by the TOTAL amount of people in America which includes babies, children, homemakers, criminals and bums...not the total number of people actually "paying" tax. It is just plain disgusting and irritating. ** walks away...looking for tea to dump out ** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sniperwhere Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 The minute people stop spending, is the minute the economy plunges into a freefall. it's the ones who spend that put money in circulation. When they stop, the money dissapears, and then the economy tanks. Then, even more stop spending furthering the collapse. it's those who actually continue to spend money during these times that keep it from completely falling apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michlo Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 I might be just too simplistic to grasp this whole "debt" thing on a world / government level but when we have debt to take care of (meaning spendatures are exceeding income), the 1st thing I do is stop spending. It is easy to stop the frivoulus stuff and obvious "wants" vs "needs" but once you go red, you need to go further than just avoiding going negative...you have to go positive (saving income) in order to pay of current debt. And once you reach that point, keep on track for saving to give yourself a "buffer" before you start spending on "wants" again and ensure you do NOT go negative again. I see none of this happening in the government. I am seeing the direct opposite and have been since the dollar started to decline in the 70's. This is pure insanity and the current amount of debt each "working" American citizen has on their head because of government is a staggering number (this is above personal debt mind you!). If you check numbers being published, they take the current debt and divide it by the TOTAL amount of people in America which includes babies, children, homemakers, criminals and bums...not the total number of people actually "paying" tax. It is just plain disgusting and irritating. ** walks away...looking for tea to dump out ** Hmm and you kicked out us British because? ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LHammonds Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Hmm and you kicked out us British because? ;)Well, truth be told, we just did not like or "get" your jokes really. All the other stuff in the history books are just fluff. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michlo Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Hmm and you kicked out us British because? ;)Well, truth be told, we just did not like or "get" your jokes really. All the other stuff in the history books are just fluff. ;) *gasps* An American just made a funny? See, we're rubbing off on you!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.