[clue-talk] it's over!

[Nate Duehr]

A couple points.

Warren Buffett is a Democrat who knows businesses not economies. He's  
also obviously concerned about taxes enough that he buys warrants at a  
discount. No capital gain until they are called in and he can wait  
years for that while still accounting for them as profit as long as  
they're in the money. The terms he gets are almost always never under  
water.  He has the luxury of voting any way he wants to and taking his  
profits whenever he wants. If you want to know how the "economy" is  
doing, you don't ask the richest guy in the country and you don't ask  
the poorest.  You watch the relative wealth of the middle.  Or just  
watch the best economic indicator of them all. The unemployment numbers.

--
Nate Duehr
Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 6, 2008, at 10:43, David Rudder <david.rudder at reliableresponse.net 
 > wrote:

> Collins Richey wrote:
>> I disagree a little bit. There are 2 reasons that Obama is  
>> President elect.
>>
>> 1. George Bush
>> 2. George Bush
>>
>>
> I've been thinking on your post, and I have to disagree.  I thought  
> McCain did an okay job of distancing himself from GWBush.  That line  
> in the 3rd debate..."if you want to run against George Bush, you  
> should have run 4 years ago".  The American electorate doesn't tend  
> to vote against someone.  And, if the American electorate wanted  
> anyone but Bush, they would have voted in Kerry 4 years ago....the  
> makings of all these disasters were obvious then.
>
> Early on, Obama got hammered on Obama.  On his lack of definite  
> policies, on his lack of experience, etc.  His poll numbers only  
> really took off after the 1st debate, where people heard his  
> policies and got to know him personally.  To an extent, you're right  
> that Bush poisoned the Republican party....Obama faced a threshold  
> issue.  It wasn't that he really had to be *better* than McCain, he  
> just had to be good enough.  But, he did have to be good enough, and  
> if he wasn't there was no amount of Republican fatigue that would  
> have gotten him into office.
>> In any case, if the elected him to fix the economy, they weren't
>> really listening to his campaign pledges that will be more likely to
>> F#@! the economy.
>>
>>
> This is a conceit.  The idea that anyone who disagrees with you  
> knows nothing about the economy.  As an example, Warren Buffet is an  
> Obama supporter.  Are you really saying you know more about the  
> economy than Warren Buffet?  Are you saying that Buffet didn't  
> listen to Obama?  That he enters into financial agreements without  
> reading the terms?  Or, are you implying that Buffet has ulterior  
> motives?
> On the other hand, you've heard McCain's pledges.  More of the same,  
> at least on the economy, as Bush's.  And yet, despite all evidence  
> to the contrary, you still think those policies will succeed?  Have  
> you not seen the stock market recently?  Read a paper?
>
> Here's an example of where I think the Republican ideals on economy  
> fail.  McCain claims that lowering taxes will spur innovation*.   
> But, most people in the technical industry will point to the fact  
> that most innovation is done in startups, not in established  
> businesses.  Startups don't make money, so they don't pay taxes, so  
> lowering their taxes doesn't help.  McCain will point to the fact  
> that lower capital gains taxes and lower taxes specifically on  
> dividends will encourage investment in startups.  And yet, why was  
> there greater and more consistent investment under Clinton than  
> under Bush, despite the fact that taxes under Clinton were higher  
> than Obama is promising to make them? And besides, if you encourage  
> the taking of dividends, you discourage investment back into the  
> company, and you halt what little innovation comes from public  
> companies.
> Seriously, was the economy under Clinton bad?  Obama's policies are  
> not far off from Clintons.  I remember a rolling economy that ended  
> with real gains in productivity and per capita wealth, as well as  
> raising the living standards of absolutely everyone.  Why is it that  
> Republicans can't remember 10 years ago, and yet consistently claim  
> that it's Democrats that don't understand the issues?
>
> -Dave
>
> * From his staging site (he's taken down his campaign site)
> Keep Tax Rates Low: Entrepreneurs are at the heart of American  
> innovation, growth and prosperity. Entrepreneurs create the ultimate  
> job security -- a new, better opportunity if your current job goes  
> away. Entrepreneurs should not be taxed into submission. John McCain  
> will fight the Democrats' crippling plans for a tax increase in  
> 2011. Left to their devices, Democrats will impose a massive $100  
> billion tax hike, almost $700 per taxpayer every year.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> clue-talk mailing list
> clue-talk at cluedenver.org
> http://www.cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue-talk
>