Obama-Economy Debate - Beckley, WV

scott090278 wrote:

Jesus you really need me to explain my vote.

machoflea wrote:

The 4% Solution that you speak of was written by 5 Nobel Laureates and a combination of some pretty bright conservative minds, but I have not read it yet, so I wouldn't be able to give you any kind of accurate opinion. I was only replying to your comment about CEO pays and its correlation to the loss of middle class jobs. Like I said, just an opinion and the ability to disagree or agree is wholly within you right. I just hope you maintain an open mind, so many these days refuse to do so.
If I may attempt to answer your question, however, is that growth will come slowly by means of a structural change in our economy. Outside of political policy, which is subject to polarizing criticism, a great deal of my colleagues and peers feel that the next driving factor for growth is a bit hazy. The middle class jobs lost to outsourcing will not be coming back in the same form as they were lost. Manufacturing, in most regards, is no longer viable in our country because we are not competitive in wage/labor rates as well as misc. costs. To achieve 4% is incredibly difficult, and to do so in this economic climate, outside of monetary, fiscal and political policy, will have to come from tangible growth in a new sector...be it financial, bio-tech, tech or even consumer service.
Historically, most of the economic recoveries have been anchored by growth in the housing market. And the tough access to capital and lending have made it difficult to obtain financing for the typical homeowner. The continued loss of jobs in the middles class have also made it difficult for the pool of homeowner candidates to increase. So in order to increase the number of potential homeowners that would help catalyze home sales, as well simultaneously increasing the number of middle class employed, we will have to see a combination of increased consumer confidence, certainty, and a new leader in an innovative industry. Obviously, this industry will have to wield the power to have a spill-over effect that carries over to other supplemental industries.

machoflea wrote:

Arguing with fog? Instead of trying to purely argue for the sake of promoting your political ideology, why not step away from the typical degradation of the conversations on here and have a real conversation that you or I may actually take something away from? I replied to your assertion that CEO’s were taking away from middle class jobs by showing that their compensation package had no direct correlation to the number of people employed by their respective corporation, and that their work load was something to be admired and emulated as they have a very specific talent that is analogous to a superstar athlete. You balk at the prospect that such an executive position requires a concerted effort that likely consumes 24 hours of their time 7 days a week, I counter by saying that any Chief Executive Position demands exactly that. I never said I had the answers to a sustained 4% growth, and most of those who claim to are likely to be promoting politically inclined monetary and fiscal policy. If you want to have that argument, go have that with someone else.
I was very clear in saying that 4% growth, or anything comparable in that realm derived from business contribution and not politics, can only be achieved by catalyzing the housing market, which is derivative in great part by instilling certainty, encouraging capital investment and re-establishing consumer lending to increase the pool of candidate owner-occupied home buyers. When I was referring to the Service Economy, I was referring to how outsourcing to countries like China and India was a direct result of their manufacturing based economy, and that the next industry here to anchor growth would be where the growth in middle class jobs will be created. And I hope I do not have to explain that almost every aspect of our economy including where the next growth engine will be, whether it be Financial, Hospitality, Retail, Health, Bio-Tech, Information Tech. and Social Media are all components of a service based economy and product offerings.

Earl wrote:

<quoted text>If you voted Obama you can explain one of your votes. It came off a tombstone. I can't believe anyone alive would be that dumb.

wool in eyes wrote:

If memory serves me correctly, Bush couldn't wait to get out of office fast enough. I would have loved to see him stayed in office for 6 more months. No other president ever left office with the auto industry going down the tubes. I never heard anyone say Obama is broken, they say wash dc is broken. When they got Bin laden they praised the seals, but if they had failed we all know who would be catching hell, now don't we? If Bush was still in power we could have Bush reading to the children once again except it would now be in Chinese

vanished wrote:

DEBT...private or national, has hurt everyone.
If we make 250,000 a year and go in debt for our home, cars and clothes, and never own anything....we asked for it. Greed is what is killing this nation. If I were to make 250,000 keep my old jalopy, that is still in good shape, wear the same clothes and paid off my humble home. I would own my home...no it is not the McMansions that everyone craves, but I own it. Possession is 9/10 ths of the law. Lol! Not having a mortgage has gave me freedom. If I get downsized, I will still have a home. I only need to worry about the food and taxes I have to pay.
If everyone made owning a modest home and living below their debt limit including the US, we wouldn't being crying today.
Americans tend to spend what we take in. We are still doing it. Even Obama is spending money he doesn't have...our children's children will never pay off the debt.