[the_dude]

PassedOut, on 2011-September-29, 09:24, said:

Honest business people who have done well and love the US for the opportunity it provides agree that tax rates for the wealthy are too low. That drives the free lunchers crazy:


Although the idea of acting for the common good goes against the grain of those constrained by "it-is-all-about-me" world views, each of us who lives comfortably now does so because others before us have promoted the common good. It's time to abandon pettiness and raise tax rates so our children and grandchildren can live well too.

The flaw in your argument the assumption that society receives greater value when the government spends your money than when it is spent/invested by those who earned it. If the government flushed your money down the toilet, would you still be itching to send more and more money in?

There are some things our gov't does well. There are some things are gov't does poorly but gains efficiency through centralized regulation. However I would argue that there are many, many more areas where the federal gov't is a massively inefficient bureaucratic waste of time and money.

Personally I would rather see them get out of the areas where they are doing a poor job before asking me for more money spend poorly.

[luke warm]

the_dude, on 2011-October-04, 13:03, said:

Personally I would rather see them get out of the areas where they are doing a poor job before asking me for more money spend poorly.

ain't gonna happen... likely to get worse

[Zelandakh]

blackshoe, on 2011-September-19, 07:32, said:

Depends on what you mean by "planet".

They have defined this clearly (for now at least). Hence Pluto lost its status giving 8 planets in our system.

hrothgar, on 2011-September-25, 09:40, said:

This suggests that there was actually a path to citizenship

I know that in the case of the gastarbeiter program in Germany citizenship/assimilation was never envisioned as a goal of the program.

It does not need to be a goal of the program because every immigrant in Germany is offered an Integration course which is not at all expensive and provides language training up to low-intermediate level, enough for basic conversation.

As for what makes people vote for any political party, well one should never underestimate voting the way of your parents or peers. I once had this exact same conversation with my mother who voted steadfastly for the right-wing party when she could never be in a position to gain from their policies. This was irrelevant to her - she had always voted for that party and always would. I suspect this is essentially the argument level of many the working class folks of The South in America.

For the middle classes something else is at work. Noone actually knows your income level so by voting Republican (and espousing their views in conversation) you are essentially telling your friends and neighbours that your income level is higher than they might think. You are also quite likely to believe that you will rise to this level in time, especially in an aspirational society like America.

Finally, Gerben mentioned the Green party. There are obviously committed Green voters the same as every other party. However, I think the rise of the Greens is primarily based on the fact that they represent an excellent way to protest against the system. Everyone in Germany knows that the government will be made up of the CDU or SDP plus smaller coalition partners. The FDP, Greens, Die Linke, and even the Bayern party fill this role for a protest quite nicely. Protest votes always go away for small parties that form a government too, so the Greens will naturally do well while the FDP are in power (and unpopular). The nuclear meltdown in Japan and the food scares have just been an added bonus. Give it a few cycles and things will probably return to normal.

[JLOGIC]

Rick Perry stock crashing on intrade. I am considering buying him, currently he is estimated to have a 12.5 % chance of winning the republican nomination. Does anyone here who is an expert feel like that is a horrible bet?

[cherdano]

JLOGIC, on 2011-October-11, 20:07, said:

Rick Perry stock crashing on intrade. I am considering buying him, currently he is estimated to have a 12.5 % chance of winning the republican nomination. Does anyone here who is an expert feel like that is a horrible bet?

Not an expert but Nate Silver thinks you shouldn't buy without having watched the debate (and the ensuing echo chamber of comments) - which I haven't.

P.S.: I agree thought that it seems like a good buy. I mean, Herman Cain at 9%? That guy doesn't even care enough to campaign instead of trying to sell his book, not does he know anything about issues.

[JLOGIC]

Nate Silver is god. In fact, as a direct result of him I killed it on intrade 4 years ago, he had obama at 80 % and obama was trading at 50, yum yum. Too bad he became super famous and now doesn't give his %ages out, he really would just set the market. I used to play limit hold em vs him all the time when he was an online poker pro, he was good at that too.

I could not watch the debates yet, but it looks like from twitter that Perry did poorly. I could have predicted that based on his stock crashing, but I cannot imagine that it was so bad, and no one is that high on Romney's debate from what I've seen.

It still seems like if Perry can win Iowa, it will be a close race (from a Nate Silver previous article). Let's say he wins 40 % of the time that he wins Iowa, does he really not win Iowa more than like a third of the time?

[mike777]

I think intrade has it 47% Obama.....36% Romney right now.

[jdeegan]

JLOGIC, on 2011-October-11, 20:07, said:

Rick Perry stock crashing on intrade. I am considering buying him, currently he is estimated to have a 12.5 % chance of winning the republican nomination. Does anyone here who is an expert feel like that is a horrible bet?

Not an expert, but I can tell you that even at 14.9% he is no bet. He has been falling like a stone after some public appearance gaffes.
My wife is probably the best barometer. She is a nice SMU girl & CPA from Dallas who wanted to vote for Hillary in 2008, and her best friends thought that electing GW in 2004 was "important".
Now, she thinks Perry is "creepy". I guess country just ain't that cool anymore. Too much testosterone is interesting, but not an election winner even in these precincts. The only thing that is clear to me is that Perry is done.
I did see that Steve Forbes just endorsed Perry. Knowing Steve, I don't think this bodes well for Senor Perry.

[kenberg]

Maybe Romney could win with the slogan "Not as weird (or creepy ?) as the others".

Actually, I sort of liked Kathleen Parker's (http://www.washingto...bm4L_story.html) summary:

Quote

Here, for example, is a distillation of Tuesday’s debate:

Rick Santorum: Mitt, you’re a lying hypocrite, and I’m the only one here who cares about family.

Ron Paul: I’d eliminate the federal government and not even go to work.

Herman Cain: Nine apples, nine oranges, nine lives, whatever.

Mitt Romney: Shut up, I won already.

Rick Perry: I hate your guts, Mr. Vitalis, and I’m gonna take you down.

Newt Gingrich: Yadda-yadda-yadda. You’re all stupid.

Michele Bachmann: I will hunt Mexicans with predator drones, and Barack Obama’s cake is cooked.

More or less.

[luke warm]

there's very little doubt that newt is the smartest guy running and, probably, the only one that would beat obama in a debate

[hrothgar]

hrothgar, on 2011-August-15, 08:43, said:

Personally, I don't think that Perry should be viable on the national stage.

His jobs message can't be generalized outside Texas (we're not all going start putting oil wells in out back yard)
His a religious nut case and was playing around with secession...
He is genuinely stupid

The following necessitates an additional post

[PassedOut]

That was painful to watch. I actually felt sorry for the guy.

[kenberg]

Spinmeister's response: See, the government has become so large I can't remember the names of the agencies I will eliminate.

It would be good for the country if the Republicans could find a credible challenger. Or at least someone who is not an embarrassment.

[Zelandakh]

Should he become President...

"Well I have these 3 keys, a house key, a car key and um, what is this third key again? Oh, I don't know, let's just try it..."
...pause...
"Oops!"

[luke warm]

perry is done, i hope... the only man running who understands the job and has the intellectual wherewithal to compete is newt... i doubt he wins the nomination, though

[kenberg]

As a college prof, I have gotten to know a lot of smart people that I would not want to see running the country. Newt seems like one of them. Maybe I am wrong, I am open to hearing about it.

[PassedOut]

luke warm, on 2011-October-24, 15:39, said:

there's very little doubt that newt is the smartest guy running and, probably, the only one that would beat obama in a debate

And Newt has zoomed by Herman Cain in the latest polls...

[Winstonm]

And the hits just keep on coming...

Quote

Even after Bill O’Reilly played President Obama’s entire comments, which show the president was referencing the government and business sector not Americans, Perry still clung to his belief.

“He said we’ve been a little lazy,” Perry said. “I think he’s talking about Americans.”

“Do you really?” O’Reilly asked. “Is that what you took away from that?”

“Absolutely,” Perry said. “I think that’s exactly what he’s talking about. I think this is a man who really, if he believed that Americans were hardworking, that they were ready to ignite this economy, then we wouldn’t have the tax policy, wouldn’t have the regulatory policies in place that are killing jobs in this country.”

Perry did not hide his contempt for the president and his policies and directly labeled Obama a “socialist.”

“Absolutely,” Perry said. “I think Barack Obama is a socialist.”

How completely out of touch with reality is the Republican Party - seriously? When whackos like Bill O"Reilly start pointing out batshite crazy claims of candidates is it time to call in the men in the white coats?

[PassedOut]

Winstonm, on 2011-November-18, 23:29, said:

How completely out of touch with reality is the Republican Party - seriously? When whackos like Bill O"Reilly start pointing out batshite crazy claims of candidates is it time to call in the men in the white coats?

I suppose Perry figures he can't afford another "oops."

[cherdano]

kenberg, on 2011-November-10, 18:19, said:

As a college prof, I have gotten to know a lot of smart people that I would not want to see running the country. Newt seems like one of them. Maybe I am wrong, I am open to hearing about it.

I think you are wrong, he is not one of them. Newt is one of the not that smart people that I would not want to see running the country.

Seriously, I understand that Newt got the reputation of being an intellectual politicians, and an ideas guy, twenty years ago. I have started following US politics more closely maybe 5-8 years ago. I haven't seen him say something that requires being smart or intellectual yet.

(The smart politician in the Republican field is Huntsman, from what I know.)