Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

Obama Supporters: Q&A

JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2012 10:05:08 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
1A - Do you agree with Obama that ATMs are bad, because they put bank tellers out of work?

1B - How do you feel about Obama's promise in 2008 to create pre-filled tax returns, so that Americans wouldn't have to hire tax preparers?

2A - Was it good for GM to go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?

2B - Is it proper for Obama and Biden to criticize Romney for suggesting in 2008 that GM go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?

3A - Do you think the government should establish price floors or price ceilings?
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2012 10:48:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/20/2012 10:05:08 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
1A - Do you agree with Obama that ATMs are bad, because they put bank tellers out of work?

I disagree.

1B - How do you feel about Obama's promise in 2008 to create pre-filled tax returns, so that Americans wouldn't have to hire tax preparers?

I'd be okay with this idea.

2A - Was it good for GM to go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?

Yes. It helped in the end.

2B - Is it proper for Obama and Biden to criticize Romney for suggesting in 2008 that GM go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?

Maybe. It is more important for the Obama team to promote their vision for America, which includes:

- Equal opportunity (talk about Obama's new loan program — which is a great improvement)

- Fair and simple tax reform

- Comprehensive immigration reform

- Investing in education

- Streamlining and simplifying gov't regulations and programs along lines of GAU report

- Expanding clean energy tax credits

Because in the end, people like hearing about a vision for America, and what values a person stands for, not mudslinging attacks.

3A - Do you think the government should establish price floors or price ceilings?

Heck no.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Apollo.11
Posts: 3,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2012 9:39:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/20/2012 10:05:08 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
1A - Do you agree with Obama that ATMs are bad, because they put bank tellers out of work?
I agree that on a large scale, they replace jobs previously taken by tellers. I disagree that this is bad. But Obama never said it was bad. He simply implied technology can contribute to small, short-term job demand decreases. I agree with that.

1B - How do you feel about Obama's promise in 2008 to create pre-filled tax returns, so that Americans wouldn't have to hire tax preparers?
Don't care.

2A - Was it good for GM to go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?
The bankruptcy was purely a technical matter. And jobs were not cut significantly under the Obama auto rescue. The primary actor were givernment loans (almost entirely paid back) and forced restructuring. Since he took office, the auto industry has added 200,000 jobs. So I agree with the bailouts, though that's not what your question words it as.

2B - Is it proper for Obama and Biden to criticize Romney for suggesting in 2008 that GM go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?
You can't honestly equate the two as the same. Romney's "Fvck it. Let 'em fail." and Obama's strategic loans as restructuring are completely different things. So hell yes.

3A - Do you think the government should establish price floors or price ceilings?
Nope.
Sapere Aude!
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2012 9:48:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/20/2012 10:05:08 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
1A - Do you agree with Obama that ATMs are bad, because they put bank tellers out of work?

First, could you point out the quote for that?

And regardless if he said it or not, I do not support that.


1B - How do you feel about Obama's promise in 2008 to create pre-filled tax returns, so that Americans wouldn't have to hire tax preparers?

Turbotax already does that for me. If the government wants to try to make something to compete with that, all the power to them.


2A - Was it good for GM to go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?

The government backed bankruptcy that lasted only a month (and a few days), was ideal.


2B - Is it proper for Obama and Biden to criticize Romney for suggesting in 2008 that GM go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?

A non-government backed, would have been worse and resulted in the bankruptcy lasting longer and more loss of jobs and profits. So yes, it was proper to criticize Romney for that.


3A - Do you think the government should establish price floors or price ceilings?

Yes
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2012 10:13:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/20/2012 9:39:32 PM, Apollo.11 wrote:
At 7/20/2012 10:05:08 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
1A - Do you agree with Obama that ATMs are bad, because they put bank tellers out of work?
I agree that on a large scale, they replace jobs previously taken by tellers. I disagree that this is bad. But Obama never said it was bad. He simply implied technology can contribute to small, short-term job demand decreases. I agree with that.

1B - How do you feel about Obama's promise in 2008 to create pre-filled tax returns, so that Americans wouldn't have to hire tax preparers?
Don't care.

2A - Was it good for GM to go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?
The bankruptcy was purely a technical matter. And jobs were not cut significantly under the Obama auto rescue. The primary actor were givernment loans (almost entirely paid back) and forced restructuring. Since he took office, the auto industry has added 200,000 jobs. So I agree with the bailouts, though that's not what your question words it as.

2B - Is it proper for Obama and Biden to criticize Romney for suggesting in 2008 that GM go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?
You can't honestly equate the two as the same. Romney's "Fvck it. Let 'em fail." and Obama's strategic loans as restructuring are completely different things. So hell yes.

I fully agree.

Needless to say, Romney's advice wasn't quite flattering to those around here.

3A - Do you think the government should establish price floors or price ceilings?
Nope.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 12:44:22 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/20/2012 9:39:32 PM, Apollo.11 wrote:
The bankruptcy was purely a technical matter. And jobs were not cut significantly under the Obama auto rescue. The primary actor were givernment loans (almost entirely paid back) and forced restructuring. Since he took office, the auto industry has added 200,000 jobs. So I agree with the bailouts, though that's not what your question words it as.

25% of GM jobs were cut.

GM isn't going to come close to paying back what they've been given. The longer the government holds onto shares, the better chance GM shares will continue to go down. Also, GM was given something like $40 billion extra in tax exemption after the bankruptcy, so the total unpaid cost is probably $60-$80 billion.

2B - Is it proper for Obama and Biden to criticize Romney for suggesting in 2008 that GM go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?
You can't honestly equate the two as the same. Romney's "Fvck it. Let 'em fail." and Obama's strategic loans as restructuring are completely different things. So hell yes.

Romney didn't say 'Fvck it. Let 'em fail.' He advocated for bankruptcy and restructuring, so they could come out profitable.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,246
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 12:49:58 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Because GM did not go through a true bankruptcy, they are still saddled with horrible union contracts.

No chance to change anything.
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 1:08:51 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 12:49:58 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Because GM did not go through a true bankruptcy, they are still saddled with horrible union contracts.

No chance to change anything.

True :)

I'm a bit fuzzy on all the details, it's been too long since I looked at it.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 1:49:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 12:49:58 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Because GM did not go through a true bankruptcy, they are still saddled with horrible union contracts.

No chance to change anything.

Except they are back to the #1 auto manufacturer in the world. Total revenue is up 50% from 2009.

The Gross revenue went from an $-8.8 billion in 2009 to $19 billion in 2011. I'd point out the net profit, but 2009 is skewed from the governmental assistance, but it would have been something like a $20+ billion dollar loss. And now it is looking at $9.2 billion dollar profit.

I wouldn't exactly say there was "no chance to change anything."
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 2:39:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 1:49:06 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/21/2012 12:49:58 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Because GM did not go through a true bankruptcy, they are still saddled with horrible union contracts.

No chance to change anything.

Except they are back to the #1 auto manufacturer in the world. Total revenue is up 50% from 2009.

The Gross revenue went from an $-8.8 billion in 2009 to $19 billion in 2011. I'd point out the net profit, but 2009 is skewed from the governmental assistance, but it would have been something like a $20+ billion dollar loss. And now it is looking at $9.2 billion dollar profit.

I wouldn't exactly say there was "no chance to change anything."

Gross revenue was negative $8.8 billion? I don't think so. Gross revenue is not net profit/loss.

2011 net profit was $9.2 billion on $150 billion in revenues. GM has now joined the ranks of successful companies operating on 4-6% profit margins. Of course, it helps that they got a tax refund, instead of the normal method of paying taxes. We've lost the money on teh government's shares that it's not going to recoup, and the billions of dollars in tax breaks GM is getting.

Revenues are on par with 2008, don't compare to 2009.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 3:19:07 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 2:39:04 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 7/21/2012 1:49:06 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/21/2012 12:49:58 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Because GM did not go through a true bankruptcy, they are still saddled with horrible union contracts.

No chance to change anything.

Except they are back to the #1 auto manufacturer in the world. Total revenue is up 50% from 2009.

The Gross revenue went from an $-8.8 billion in 2009 to $19 billion in 2011. I'd point out the net profit, but 2009 is skewed from the governmental assistance, but it would have been something like a $20+ billion dollar loss. And now it is looking at $9.2 billion dollar profit.

I wouldn't exactly say there was "no chance to change anything."

Gross revenue was negative $8.8 billion? I don't think so. Gross revenue is not net profit/loss.

2011 net profit was $9.2 billion on $150 billion in revenues. GM has now joined the ranks of successful companies operating on 4-6% profit margins. Of course, it helps that they got a tax refund, instead of the normal method of paying taxes. We've lost the money on teh government's shares that it's not going to recoup, and the billions of dollars in tax breaks GM is getting.

Revenues are on par with 2008, don't compare to 2009.

http://finance.yahoo.com...

It was gross profit. And going back to 2008, they had $150 billion in revenue, but still had a $31 billion loss, and 2007, when they made $180 billion, they lost $43 billion. Now, in 2011, yes, they got a tax break where we paid them $110 million (not billions, and since in 2007, they paid over $35 billion in deferred taxes, and they paid over $600 million last year).

That is not what made the big difference. The $10 billion in bonus cuts from 2008 to 2011 was significantly more effective. We should also note that the 2011 gross profit is more than it has been in a long time. Sure, the revenue is the same as 2008, but it cost $20 billion less in expenses to generate that revenue.

http://www.marketwatch.com...

As for never getting the money back, we still own something like 33% and can sell that when the market is right. We provided a total assistance of $50 billion (from Bush to Obama), and right now almost half has been paid back (there is still $25.5 billion still out), and we have about 500 million shares (currently worth about $10 billion). But if profits remain strong, dividends for common stock may start coming out in which money will be made.

http://money.cnn.com...
http://www.thepoliticalguide.com...
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 3:35:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 3:19:07 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
http://finance.yahoo.com...

It was gross profit. And going back to 2008, they had $150 billion in revenue, but still had a $31 billion loss, and 2007, when they made $180 billion, they lost $43 billion. Now, in 2011, yes, they got a tax break where we paid them $110 million (not billions, and since in 2007, they paid over $35 billion in deferred taxes, and they paid over $600 million last year).

That is not what made the big difference. The $10 billion in bonus cuts from 2008 to 2011 was significantly more effective. We should also note that the 2011 gross profit is more than it has been in a long time. Sure, the revenue is the same as 2008, but it cost $20 billion less in expenses to generate that revenue.

Yeah, I know. They are operating on positive profit margin, not negative.

As for never getting the money back, we still own something like 33% and can sell that when the market is right. We provided a total assistance of $50 billion (from Bush to Obama), and right now almost half has been paid back (there is still $25.5 billion still out), and we have about 500 million shares (currently worth about $10 billion). But if profits remain strong, dividends for common stock may start coming out in which money will be made.

Except confidence isn't strong, and the market knows the government could unload at any time, so nobody wants to buy. We're not going to get the $25 billion back, maybe half if we just get it over with. On top of that are the $40 billion in tax breaks they are getting. Total cost to taxpayers, between $50-$60 billion.

http://money.cnn.com...

Hmmm, Romney said to sell at $25.40. GM is now at $19.3. Yeah, he's a real doofus.

Listen, Romney understands business. Nobody can say he doesn't. You can disagree with his methods, but he's not an idiot.

Your link says Analysts expect shares to hit $32 within a year. The price has steadily dropped since then. Nobody wants to buy when the government is planning to unload their shares.

Besides, the whole point is that Romney called for restructuring bankruptcy, and still continues to be criticized for it, while Obama is praised for it.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 5:33:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 3:35:27 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
At 7/21/2012 3:19:07 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
http://finance.yahoo.com...

It was gross profit. And going back to 2008, they had $150 billion in revenue, but still had a $31 billion loss, and 2007, when they made $180 billion, they lost $43 billion. Now, in 2011, yes, they got a tax break where we paid them $110 million (not billions, and since in 2007, they paid over $35 billion in deferred taxes, and they paid over $600 million last year).

That is not what made the big difference. The $10 billion in bonus cuts from 2008 to 2011 was significantly more effective. We should also note that the 2011 gross profit is more than it has been in a long time. Sure, the revenue is the same as 2008, but it cost $20 billion less in expenses to generate that revenue.

Yeah, I know. They are operating on positive profit margin, not negative.

As for never getting the money back, we still own something like 33% and can sell that when the market is right. We provided a total assistance of $50 billion (from Bush to Obama), and right now almost half has been paid back (there is still $25.5 billion still out), and we have about 500 million shares (currently worth about $10 billion). But if profits remain strong, dividends for common stock may start coming out in which money will be made.

Except confidence isn't strong, and the market knows the government could unload at any time, so nobody wants to buy.

The market knows that ANYONE can unload at anytime. Part of the reason that the price is going down is because the market is wanting them to unload. When a wave hits the selling floor, basic supply and demand dictates that the price will drop, so they are all holding out for that (causing current sellers to drop prices). If the government holds on to the shares, the market will eventually give up on waiting for the sellout and the value will return to normal. Also, since GM is making money, there is no reason to sell at a low price. Just collect dividends.

We're not going to get the $25 billion back, maybe half if we just get it over with. On top of that are the $40 billion in tax breaks they are getting. Total cost to taxpayers, between $50-$60 billion.

http://money.cnn.com...

Hmmm, Romney said to sell at $25.40. GM is now at $19.3. Yeah, he's a real doofus.

He is, he wants to accept a $15 billion dollar loss on a company that has just turned around and is now making money. After years of losing money, you want to pull out right as they start making money?


Listen, Romney understands business. Nobody can say he doesn't. You can disagree with his methods, but he's not an idiot.

Your link says Analysts expect shares to hit $32 within a year. The price has steadily dropped since then. Nobody wants to buy when the government is planning to unload their shares.

Besides, the whole point is that Romney called for restructuring bankruptcy, and still continues to be criticized for it, while Obama is praised for it.

Romney's restructuring bankruptcy =/= Obama's
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 5:44:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 5:33:52 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/21/2012 3:35:27 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
We're not going to get the $25 billion back, maybe half if we just get it over with. On top of that are the $40 billion in tax breaks they are getting. Total cost to taxpayers, between $50-$60 billion.

http://money.cnn.com...

Hmmm, Romney said to sell at $25.40. GM is now at $19.3. Yeah, he's a real doofus.

He is, he wants to accept a $15 billion dollar loss on a company that has just turned around and is now making money. After years of losing money, you want to pull out right as they start making money?

Just to focus on this, Romney is treating the economy as one giant stock exchange with no care for the people involved. Obama is trying to keep the people going, which obviously weakens efficiency. I'd prefer a more caring government over an mercantilist government.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 9:15:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/20/2012 10:05:08 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
1A - Do you agree with Obama that ATMs are bad, because they put bank tellers out of work?

You mean from this interview? If so, what's the problem? He never said they were bad, he made a factual claim, "There are some structural issues with our economy, where a-lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a-lot fewer workers." Either businesses have become more efficient or not, and this has led to unemployment or it hasn't. Then he ties it to a prescription of, "All these things have created changes in the economy, and what we have to do now, and that's what this job council is all about, is identifying where the jobs for the future are 'gonna be."

He never claimed they were bad, he claimed, in effect, that such changes to the economic landscape underlined a need to plan for the future, to be aware that such changes are going to take place, to try and predict them, and to make sure that, as far as possible, people aren't being trained for jobs which won't exist by the time they graduate or won't exist for long.


1B - How do you feel about Obama's promise in 2008 to create pre-filled tax returns, so that Americans wouldn't have to hire tax preparers?


Simplifying the tax code might make more sense, but it seems to work just fine in some countries.

2A - Was it good for GM to go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?


According to Daniel Akerson, GM's CEO, yes.

2B - Is it proper for Obama and Biden to criticize Romney for suggesting in 2008 that GM go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?


Whether it's proper or not, given the armor piercing oratory constantly directed at Obama, it's certainly very restrained. Has anything been said of Romney equivalent to, "He's a Muslim terrorist.", or, "He's not a real American."? Exactly. Team Obama have basically been forced to run a negative campaign by the sheer level of hate that's been directed at their guy, I mean, for a long time it was mostly ignored, overtures were made, but the bipartisan message has been dunked in a sea of ideological rejection for so long that, surprise, surprise, when they're given a chance to come up for air, they do so swinging.

3A - Do you think the government should establish price floors or price ceilings?

Usually no, in exceptional circumstances, it should be an option. I can't really think of a probable one though.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,246
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 12:44:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
If the GM experiment prospers,
expect all large businesses in the future to eventually have these two things-

1) Massive backing from tax funded coffers.

2) Union mandates.
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 12:49:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 12:44:35 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
If the GM experiment prospers,
expect all large businesses in the future to eventually have these two things-

1) Massive backing from tax funded coffers.

2) Union mandates.

They don't already? xD.
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 1:49:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I thought union mandates was the obvious one to be honest...
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
NixonianVolkswagen
Posts: 481
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 2:06:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 1:49:34 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
I thought union mandates was the obvious one to be honest...

Don't worry, between us we had it covered. :)
"There is an almost universal tendency, perhaps an inborn tendency, to suspect the good faith of a man who holds opinions that differ from our own opinions."

- Karl "Spartacus" Popper
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 3:40:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/21/2012 1:49:06 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 7/21/2012 12:49:58 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Because GM did not go through a true bankruptcy, they are still saddled with horrible union contracts.

No chance to change anything.

Except they are back to the #1 auto manufacturer in the world. Total revenue is up 50% from 2009.

The Gross revenue went from an $-8.8 billion in 2009 to $19 billion in 2011. I'd point out the net profit, but 2009 is skewed from the governmental assistance, but it would have been something like a $20+ billion dollar loss. And now it is looking at $9.2 billion dollar profit.

I wouldn't exactly say there was "no chance to change anything."

This.

And the Union contracts, they exist for good reason. They improved working conditions, which are pretty bad in the auto industry.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/21/2012 10:54:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Fool: Not a big fan of that kind of metaphysics, But as a Canadian. I Like Obama, because he is STABLE. At least you know that, let his parties plans unfold. You are not sure how another guy maybe. But you will be disrupting plans all over again. Just let him ride it out. Its in your best interest for foriegn relations right now also. He got the piece prize, other countries Trust him. If you get another zealious Christian up there you are begging for more terrorist problems. Keep Obama another term to let the dust settle a bit. Somebody else up there now will severe world relations.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Aaronroy
Posts: 749
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2012 9:16:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/20/2012 10:05:08 AM, JaxsonRaine wrote:
1A - Do you agree with Obama that ATMs are bad, because they put bank tellers out of work?

No.
1B - How do you feel about Obama's promise in 2008 to create pre-filled tax returns, so that Americans wouldn't have to hire tax preparers?

He is a politician; promises will always be broken by his kind. There will never be , or ever was, an American president that fulfilled his/her promises.
2A - Was it good for GM to go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?

Yes, otherwise GM would have been dismantle in totality.
2B - Is it proper for Obama and Biden to criticize Romney for suggesting in 2008 that GM go through bankruptcy, restructure, close factories, and cut wages and jobs, in order to become profitable?

Given the number of Chevrolets vehicles that Romney probably owns, yes.
3A - Do you think the government should establish price floors or price ceilings?
Price ceilings, if I had to chose between the two.
turn down for h'what