Seriously, what has Obama accomplished? Absolutely nothing.

FREEDOM. for insurance companies. sigh.

Well, you know, when you're stuck against a wall, just scream out freedom without differentiating between positive and negative liberty.

The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
John Kenneth Galbraith

 

Define "amongst other things", as it takes one to rather be a cynic when it comes to America to assume wars are conducted in terms of economic policy (which of course they are, but hey!).

 

You can't hide behind freedom when justifying sexism.

 

No one is going to do that bigokie.

 

Which are owned and run by people.

Are you implying it eliminates the freedom of others?

You don't understand freedom (I doubt you were born in America). Freedom means not having to morally justify your choices to others. Health insurance companies should be able to offer whatever they want whether you or anyone else finds their offers immoral.

 

"Deflate the dollar"

Pray tell me, texxx, how the president of the United States can deflate the dollar? Does he slip magic potion into the FOMC's coffees, or wait until they all resign so he can appoint severe RBC hawks?

Though your first point is promising. Are you beginning to see the light? A stronger CFTC hmm?

The last two hold very little lasting sway over global oil prices, especially in the light of the speculation that has invaded these markets. Only a global coordinated release of all SPRs would move oil for a bit, before the markets took over again.

 

Yes, I'm implying that charging different insurance rates for different people violates the equal freedom to access (read positive liberty) for people undifferentiated by economic rationale, and is fundamentally unjust.

If one made the argument that this price discrimination was solely economic and rules-based in nature, I'd listen. But it'd have to be a good argument. I can smell fish-butter of "intangible skills" research and "maternal leave" probability all over again (not to mention separate but equal!).

 

nobody will offer me the contract/deal I want therefore my freedoms have been violated.......

If only I had known this when I was buying a car.

Have any of you knuckles stopped to think that women are different then men biologically and should therefore be charged differently. That's not sexism, it's common sense.

 

Tell me how the gendered difference is based on purely economic rationale.

Think of a story. Come on. Pregnancies. Longer life expectancy for women (whoops!).

Then maybe we'll take about how the car contract was discrimination based on your perceived level of negotiation aptitude (which given your complaints, seem not to be too high).

 

Really? You can't come up with a decent counterpoint, so you call my argument a red herring. You can do better than that my friend...

I'm no Obama apologist so I actually believe there are plenty of things that the administration could've done to lower unemployment further. However, you can't choose labor force participation increase and unemployment decrease as two "impactful" accomplishments, and then ignore the fact that labor force participation was already decreasing and unemployment already skyrocketing by the time Obama took office.

I suppose I really shouldn't expect decent intellectual discourse. For example, even though I've already schooled you multiple times about the differences between reserves and money, you still trot out the "Fed printing press" argument every time.

Seriously? For while there, I just thought your macro outlook was neo-classical and just a bit outdated...but the fact that you actually view deflation as a good thing shows me that your economics knowledge is utterly bunk. I doubt even Peter Schiff (another guy who doesn't know the difference between reserves and money) would advocate deflation.

 

I didn't ask you. But glad you piled in. Though I asked what the PRESIDENT could do, not the FOMC. Might want to read up on monetary policy.

You could have made a tangential attempt at defending yourself on fiscal policy even if it Congress that makes the budgets, but hey, who am I to question "enlightened" people, who phase in and out and find nothing better to do than pick at people's personal traits---which by and large they themselves realize is the biggest sign someone has lost.

 

You don't understand freedom. What you're talking about eliminates freedom of others for sure. If insurance companies can charge what they want to who they want, and not sell to who they want, that eliminates the freedom to choose to buy insurance away from anyone not uber-wealthy with a pre-existing condition.

They are not given that choice. Their freedom is gone.

 

You whining about the fact that extensive lists of accomplishments have been passed, and you are unable to recognize them doesn't change the fact that they've still been accomplished.

 

Preformed better than "Dubya."








For starters.

 

*Performed

 

You doubt Obama was born in America. Based on your definition, Wesley Snipes was free to not pay his taxes, Zimmerman was free to kill a black youth in his neighborhood, and BP was free to pollute the Gulf.

You're defining freedom as anarchy, I am defining freedom as liberty. And I know which definition the rest of America would choose.

 

i do?

citizen's aren't free to violate others' rights. Despite what you think, you do not have the right to get whatever contract/deal you think is morally fair. aka your statement is wrong.

Nope. It is amazing how a basic concept like 'freedom', which this country was founded on, can be foreign to so many today.

 

so basic yet so hard for you to articulate.