28
   

Tonight's Presidential Candidate Debate...

 
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 09:20 am
@Thomas,
Your test is far too binary and simplistic for the real world. A constant fraction of a rising GDP is an improvement, so even your arithmetic formula is misleading. As I wrote " much depends on how the process evolves". However, we can already see the effects of the new economy embracing a rising share of the population, and can expect that proces would continue.

Let me ask you a slightly different question to further illustrate your position. If a few years hence one found that the GDP share of the bottom 10% of the Indian population had shrunk slightly in relative terms, but was also slightly larger on a constant dollar basis, would you advocate the reversal of the economic liberalization?

Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 09:45 am
Re: the topic,

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/presidential/How_Big_Bird_can_teach_two_political_candidates_a_new_lesson.html

Quote:

Posted: Thu, Oct. 4, 2012, 3:45 PM
How Big Bird can teach two political candidates a new lesson

CONSTITUTION DAILY
The National Constitution Center is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization based in Philadelphia.

The biggest winner of the first presidential debate appears to be Big Bird, the iconic Sesame Street character who got a three-second mention on Wednesday night. But a look at the record shows Big Bird could teach the candidates a valuable life lesson.

According to Big Bird’s wiki (yes, he has a wiki), the character’s favorite saying is, “Asking questions is a good way of finding things out!”

And given the current political discourse, a few more questions from the candidates could do voters a lot more good than harm, when it comes to checking their statements.

Mitt Romney’s mention of the beloved Muppet isn’t the first time Big Bird’s name has popped up in an argument over public broadcasting funding. But this time, the mention went viral on Facebook and Twitter.

The phrase “Big Bird” was appearing 17,000 times every minute on Twitter. At midnight, CNN reported that mentions of Big Bird on Facebook were up an astronomical 800,000%.

Facebook later said Big Bird was the fourth most-mentioned topic on Facebook during the debate, getting more attention than topics like jobs, taxes, Jim Lehrer and Obamacare.


Romney briefly mentioned the big yellow one in a debate segment about cutting congressional funding for PBS when he told Jim Lehrer, Big Bird’s fellow PBS employee, that he couldn’t justify spending taxpayer money on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

“I’m going to stop the subsidy to PBS … I like PBS. I love Big Bird. I actually like you, too, but I’m not going to keep spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for it,” Romney said.

On Thursday, President Barack Obama used an afternoon press conference to add his own thoughts on Big Bird.

“Thank goodness somebody is finally getting tough on Big Bird!” Obama said, “We didn’t know that Big Bird was driving the federal deficit.”


Amazing what sticks with people. Nearly every American has good childhood memories of watching Big Bird on PBS. I don't think it was necessarily such a smart move for Romney to talk about cutting funding for popular social icons...

Cycloptichorn
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 09:47 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Amazing what sticks with people. Nearly every American has good childhood memories of watching Big Bird on PBS. I don't think it was necessarily such a smart move for Romney to talk about cutting funding for popular social icons...

Cycloptichorn


He used it as an example of borrowing money from China to pay for our own largesse. As an example, it is fitting.
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 09:52 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Amazing what sticks with people. Nearly every American has good childhood memories of watching Big Bird on PBS. I don't think it was necessarily such a smart move for Romney to talk about cutting funding for popular social icons...

Cycloptichorn


He used it as an example of borrowing money from China to pay for our own largesse. As an example, it is fitting.


Perhaps, but for two things:

1, most people seem to think that funding PBS is a good idea, as it's one of the only sources for quality kids programming on a daily basis;

2, the amount of money it costs is pathetically small, and focusing on it is a sop to right-wing ideologues, not some sort of sensible move for a fiscal conservative to make. It has more to do with the belief that PBS is some sort of left-wing institution - a belief commonly voiced by the far right - than it does any sort of smart priorities for our government to make.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  2  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 09:55 am
@McGentrix,
Quote:
$1.35 a Year

With a yearly federal investment of $1.35
per American per year, PBS stations return six times that amount in programming and services


source
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 09:56 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:
A constant fraction of a rising GDP is an improvement

. . . and both Catholic Social Teaching and Rawlesian Liberalism would record that as an improvement for that reason.

georgeob1 wrote:
so even your arithmetic formula is misleading.

How so? The test and you both agree that your scenario above is an improvement. In the future, please make an effort to understand a test before you dismiss it as "binary", "unsuitable" for the real world", and "misleading".
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  0  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 10:00 am
@Thomas,
To finish the thought, and to procrastinate from real work I'm supposed to be doing, I worked my own homework assignment. Here's the result.

Code:CIA Factbook 1999(*) 2012(+) growth
==============================================
per-capita GDP $1.720 $3.700 5.6%
in 2011 USD $2.420 $3.700 3.7%
10% share 4.1 3.6 -13.0%
10% income $705 $1.332 4.6%
in 2011 USD $945 $1.332 2.5%

__________
(*) Data from 1997
(+) Data from 2011

So the answer to George's question is: Yes, India's free-market reforms were good for the country. While their income (in 2011 US dollars) didn't grow at the same rate as the Indian average (3.7%), it did grow (2.5%), very likely at a faster rate as it would have without the reforms. Catholics like George and liberals like Cycloptichorn should both approve of India's free-market reforms.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  0  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 10:01 am
Christ, it sure would have been better if Obama had brought his A-game - or even B-game - to the debate, but at least he's voicing the right arguments now. From his campaign stop in VA today:

Quote:
But after he said that, then he backtracked and said, no, wait, at least I’ll make sure to cover folks with pre-existing conditions. And then I explained, well, actually, your plan doesn’t do that. And then his campaign had to come out and say, actually, that’s not true, our plan wouldn’t do that. So Governor Romney was fact-checked by his own campaign. That’s rough. That’s rough.


The truth is that Romney basically repudiated most of his campaign promises and rhetoric during the debate, in an attempt to tack to the middle. I hope Obama continues to point this out and in the next debate skewers him with the fact his positions have changed constantly.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  0  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 10:03 am
@revelette,
You mean PBS is screwing me. They charge me $100 a year to watch it!
Thomas
 
  0  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 10:16 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:
Let me ask you a slightly different question to further illustrate your position. If a few years hence one found that the GDP share of the bottom 10% of the Indian population had shrunk slightly in relative terms, but was also slightly larger on a constant dollar basis, would you advocate the reversal of the economic liberalization?

I would not, and I can't see how you get that idea from my initial answer to you. As I said from the beginning, the measure that counts for liberals and the Catholic Church is real income, in constant dollars, adjusted for purchasing power, of a country's poorest people. If the top 90% did even better than the bottom 10%, good for them.

Getting back on topic, however, America's free-market reforms beginning with Reagan utterly fail the Catholic/Rawlesian test. Which is one reason Tuesday's presidential debate saw the most fictitious, dishonest performance by the Republican candidate ever.
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 10:25 am
@RABEL222,
One dollar and thirty five cents. And its more than just cartoons, they also have educational programs such a free GED and other free educational programs for kids.

Thomas
 
  4  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 10:34 am
@revelette,
And just to compare and contrast, how many federal PBS subsidies did the needless, deceptively-sold war in Iraq cost? (It's a fair question because Paul Ryan voted for it.) Is it something like a thousand of them, or only a couple hundred?

Wait wait, don't tell me. It's too depressing.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 10:41 am
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:
Wait wait, don't tell me.

<snicker>
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 10:47 am
Whether cutting PBS funding is meaningful or not, it sure has lead to a lot of conversation - and political cartoons:

http://i1172.photobucket.com/albums/r563/dmillerparker/and100512blog-1.jpg

Cycloptichorn
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 10:53 am
@Cycloptichorn,
I don't get it. Who is the guy on Obama's platter?
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 10:54 am
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

I don't get it. Who is the guy on Obama's platter?


I'm pretty sure that's Bin Laden's head

Cycloptichorn
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 10:56 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Oh. Of course!
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 12:15 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

I don't get it. Who is the guy on Obama's platter?


You must not watch enough PBS.
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 12:35 pm
@parados,
Very Happy
Indeed I prefer NPR, which doesn't run cartoons.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 12:35 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
You are nuts Finn,

Obama is not a Muslim, a Kenyan, a terrorist a socialist or a child

This is a battle. Obama was outfought in the first round, but that happens. He is still winning, he is still in control of this campaign and he is still a formidable opponent.

I think you will see a very strong, agressive performance from Obama in the next debate that will confront Mitt on the obvious flaws and inconsistencies in his positions,

BTW I just got about 50 shares at $6.50 a piece for Obama on intrade (and I am very happy for the bargain). Are you putting your money in?
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/27/2021 at 12:09:19