View Full Version : official 10-22-2012 presidential debate thread
Unfortunately I am going to miss this due to maintenance at work so ill be flying instead of fuming at the television.
feel free to let me know the down and dirty until I can watch it!
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 18:34
Well there goes the damn stenographer!
You mean your choice is fly or watch the 3rd round?
Daaammnn.......
Goodburbon
10-22-2012, 18:43
IOP1
You're on the ball tonight.. This thread came earlier than usual methinks.
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:08
And the lies start- Obaloney saying he has killed the Al-Q leadership and decimated thier strength. Romney comes out strong, giving Obaloney credit for taking out his brother Osama but that we cannot kill our way out of this mess.
Its started off with a piss poor performance by Romney (lots of "uuhmm" and "those people") and the normal oration by Obama.
I wanna fly a plane like sniper
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 19:20
Its just not the same....[Bang].
Talking about Syria and O diverts to Libya, never mentions the Syrians.
R gets right back on topic.
The whole thing has a flat vibe......
O keeps mean muggin Mittens....
Rust_shackleford
10-22-2012, 19:27
Four more years
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:27
Romney keeps shooting Obaloney down, Obaloney keeps reeling off that hes already doing what Romney says do, Romney just counters, well this has been going on for a year and the exact opposite is being done, Obaloney keeps trying to make it out that Romney wants troops overseas, Romney keeps bringing it back into focus that he see no reason why we are over there at all with troops.
Rooskibar03
10-22-2012, 19:28
Mitt is getting his ass handed to him tonight..
Snap out of it. Someone get Mitt a 5 hour energy STAT.
Tinelement
10-22-2012, 19:29
Mitt is getting his ass handed to him tonight..
Snap out of it. Someone get Mitt a 5 hour energy STAT.
Don't buy it.
Wants to back out the middle east
tmleadr03
10-22-2012, 19:30
Have they in any way differentiated themselves from each other?
Have they in any way differentiated themselves from each other?
That's what I'm wondering. I've heard a lot of "I agree" tonight...
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:31
Mitt has the gloves off, calling out Obaloney on his weak policies, literally saying that the world as a whole does not respect us, and its because of the last 4 years.
Rooskibar03
10-22-2012, 19:31
Have they in any way differentiated themselves from each other?
No. In fact I just commented there is way to much complimenting each other tonight.
So fucing tired of hearing how Obama has 'ended the war in Iraq' - as if everyone is home and all is well.
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 19:33
The theme of this debate tends to focus on who presents themselves in the most Statesman like manner.
B-"we need to retrain our workers"
Re-education camps anyone?
So fucing tired of hearing how Obama has 'ended the war in Iraq' - as if everyone is home and all is well.
Yup
tmleadr03
10-22-2012, 19:34
No. In fact I just commented there is way to much complimenting each other tonight.
That is because the only difference between Red and Blue is how the media treats the actions overseas.
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 19:35
Mittens presents himself better and is more factual.
The comments on the major websites and the blogosphere are all negative on Romney. Even the conservative blogs. Lots of people talking about Mitt sweating.
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:36
That's what I'm wondering. I've heard a lot of "I agree" tonight...
Obaloney has to make it seem like he is saying the same thing as Mitt, because the last 4 years has sucked for foreign policy.
Mitt is agreeing with Obaloney about some points, but does not agree with the way its been handled.
Obama can only say that Romney is a rich guy, and O's plan is to make the wealthy pay a little more, and "invest" that money in education and technology, which we all know is a lie.
Mitt needs to stop being a nice guy.
Listening on a radio again.
"Eeehhhe well gov Romney...". -Obama
Rooskibar03
10-22-2012, 19:40
Not going well for mitt...
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:41
Obama again apparently cannot do math
I'm not feeling that either are doing well
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:44
WTF??? Did the guy who killed NASA just say he supports space programs???
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 19:44
Obama again apparently cannot do math
He only has to count to 270.
Obama is such a sarcastic mother fucker.
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 19:45
O Just went tard on Mittens on the Navy.
Totally condescending and belittleing prick and waaay below this format.
Robby30-06
10-22-2012, 19:46
Like Romney needs a child's description of an aircraft carrier.....wtf?
O Just went tard on Mittens on the Navy.
Totally condescending and belittleing prick and waaay below this format.
I thought it was hilarious, albeit immature.
I can't stand his purple lips
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:48
Obama is trying to come off as a military guy, and he obviously is not. The sarcasm is not going to win him any moderates, he just comes off as trying to be a bad ass, and he is not.
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 19:48
I thought it was hilarious, albeit immature.
It was a bit condescending, but it was a damn stupid comment from Gov. Romney to begin with.
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 19:49
It was a bit condescending, but it was a damn stupid comment from Gov. Romney to begin with.
Didn't catch it.
Rust_shackleford
10-22-2012, 19:49
4 more years
I can't stand his purple lips
So true! Toad.
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:49
Mitt comes off with specifics- specific methods, specific people and actions, really seems more knowledgable
His sarcastic attitude is out of control. Grow up liberal prick
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:52
Obama keeps saying we are doing what they are doing Romney says they are going to do, Mitt has that smirk that says, yeah right, you went over and kissed ass and we all know it.
4 more years
Four more years
What
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:53
BOOOM! Mitt throws out the Apology Tour! BOOOM Bitch!
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 19:54
Apology tour!
Good specifics as mentioned.
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:54
ANND He straight calls Obaloney out, practically called him a pussy!
It was a bit condescending, but it was a damn stupid comment from Gov. Romney to begin with.
This..
Tinelement
10-22-2012, 19:55
Fuck obayme on Iran.
And Obama lies and says that's.not true.
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 19:57
And Obama lies and says that's.not true.
That's all he has when confronted with the truth.
"You skipped Israel"
Twice.
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:57
Obama just said Iran is weakest in its history, Mitt almost burst out laughing, Then Mitt throws out that Iran is closer to a nuclear nation, and the past four years has been wasted.
That last blurb by Romney was pretty damn good
Tinelement
10-22-2012, 19:57
Why is obummer getting all the air?????????????
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 19:58
Opa-lama is lying through his teeth! Unbelievable!
This thread is not as good without Sniper7! [Weight]
Obama want to be reminded. He wants to get an idea! He does not know shit about American history or our culture
Awesome job Romney at stopping that bomber question
Robby30-06
10-22-2012, 19:59
BHO on Israel.......total BS just like BHO in the whole debate!!!!!!!
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:00
Thats right Mitt! Bring it back to terrorism and jihad! Fuck that lying sumbitch!
Mitt started of rough but is doing better and Obama is struggling
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:02
obama has blown his wad, now he has to BS about what Mittens has said, Mitt is sitting there smiling waiting for Opa-lama to just hang himself in his lies
ANNND we are back to bin Laden
So now that purple lip fucker says that a few years ago gov. Romney you never were for now that... Look at you Obama gay marriage etc.
What a surprise you brought up bin laden
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 20:03
Oblammys "bleeding heart" story about the 4 yo.
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:07
Uh uh, Opa-lama is trying to make sure we all know he has decimated Al-Q
Oh great the first hag I mean lady was brought up
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 20:09
Pimpin da Wookie now!
BuffCyclist
10-22-2012, 20:09
Did Obama just say he wants all of the veterans to go back to work by building roads, schools, etc? Seems like he's saying thats all they can do. :rollseyes:
Tinelement
10-22-2012, 20:10
Seriously....
Why is obuckfuck getting all the time to speak!???
Seriously......... Fuck
The guy said Obama bin laden.
Haha I want to say that to her face
Did Obama just say he wants all of the veterans to go back to work by building roads, schools, etc? Seems like he's saying thats all they can do. :rollseyes:
I thought that is what it sounded like
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:11
Opa-lama preaches about BS, Mitt warns about Pakastani issues, but needs to strongly criticise Opa-lamas policies which are weakening what holds that country together
OneGuy67
10-22-2012, 20:11
I just noticed this...was this the same way at the last debates?
Romney is wearing a red striped tie and Obama is wearing a blue tie. Coincidence?
use of drones? what the hell kind of.... WHO THE FUCK CARES!
is this how the entire debate has been so far?
I know that the first debate Romney wore red Obama blue
Second debate Romney blue Obama red
Now this
Robby30-06
10-22-2012, 20:13
Did Obama just say he wants all of the veterans to go back to work by building roads, schools, etc? Seems like he's saying thats all they can do. :rollseyes:
He sure did.....i think he just had to say roads and bridges, regardless of the topic.....lol
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:13
BOOOM Mitt throws a roundhouse and completely nails the coffin on Opa-lama, Opa-lama will have to lie his ass off big time here!
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 20:13
I know that the first debate Romney wore red Obama blue
Second debate Romney blue Obama red
Now this
10:1 that's arranged behind the scenes.
Well...im on my phone quick so not much for comments but ill get to watch the last bit!
Looks like you guys feel mitt struggled then came back strong
Their little ones (Biden and the other guy) wore the same set up.
What is the greatest future threat to the country?
I hope Mitt says Obama being re-elected again... [ROFL1]
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 20:15
BOOOM Mitt throws a roundhouse and completely nails the coffin on Opa-lama, Opa-lama will have to lie his ass off big time here!
What point? My seven year old is making watch MNF, and I have to flip back to the debate during timeouts.
Tinelement
10-22-2012, 20:16
Fuck....
Can Romney get a word in?????
This is bullshit
What is the greatest future threat to the country?
I hope Mitt says Obama being re-elected again... [ROFL1]
This is truth sir.
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:17
Holy SHIT!!! Opa-lama just literally used Mitts very words about being tough on China WEHN THEY CHEAT! Mother fucker! What a lyin ass piece of crap!
Good move on .gov and business mitt
Too bad mitt did say the greatest threat to our country is sitting right next to him!
Fuck....
Can Romney get a word in?????
This is bullshit
Yeah I want to see the time breakout on this one..
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 20:18
From The Onion: "President Obama seems suspiciously knowledgable about foreign affairs for someone born here".
R: China = currency manipulator and has to play by the rules.
Thank you.
We will crush China in a trade war.
Damn im slow on my phone!
Well...mitt has a shit load of work to do on day one...calling china currency manipulators
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:20
What point? My seven year old is making watch MNF, and I have to flip back to the debate during timeouts.
Mitt pointed out that-
Is Iran closer to nuclear weapons? Yes
Is the Middle East in turmoil? Yes
And he laid it straight up on the Opa-lama administration.
Is Romney talking about the counterfeit airsoft gear?!?!
Obama brings up mitt shipping jobs overseas...
Brings up auto industry...yeah fucking right Obama. They would have went through bankruptcy just like a shit ton of companies have done before them in all types of business.
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:22
Opa-lama is trying to argue business with Romney, he is about to get his ass handed to him, you would think by now he would know better.
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 20:22
R: China = currency manipulator and has to play by the rules.
Thank you.
We will crush China in a trade war.
How do you see a trade war with China proceeding?
Goodburbon
10-22-2012, 20:22
Obama's segway to Romney's foreign investments was ... lame. It's been covered, beaten to death, resurrected and beaten again. Let it go.
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 20:23
If sniper was here, we'd be on page 30 by now.
CNN has the time breakdown on the screen..............it must be that listening to the pimp is so painfull that it seems longer.
Is Romney talking about the counterfeit airsoft gear?!?!
Like the assholes that counterfeit aimpoint, ACOG, eotech, LaRue mounts
Goodburbon
10-22-2012, 20:24
How do you see a trade war with China proceeding?
"Fuck the Chinese"
Lee Iacocca 1982 :D
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:25
Obama is calling for a record check- we know how that worked out for him before.
Well...go to detroit Obama. It is liquidated along with a few meth houses left over. Your bailout liquidated it.
you're wrong mr president.
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:26
Your wrong Mr. President....
haha...
Your progress is using debt to build something. You can't continue to print money and borrow money and expect it to work out continuously.
Oh snap throw out the facts Romney's. But save some for closing
"I certainly agree with moving forward, which is why I don't want to go back to the last four years" [ROFL1]
Robby30-06
10-22-2012, 20:28
"That our Military's not asking for" is that the sixth time BO has said that????
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 20:29
Your progress is using debt to build something. You can't continue to print money and borrow money and expect it to work out continuously.
Hey, keep your eyes on the horizon gauge!
How the Fuck have we made any Fucking progress
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:30
BOOM! Mittens flat out says we need to go forward, but not with the policies from the last four years. And he flat out calls Opa-lama on all his policies and how bad it has been for this country.
Romney had better have a good closing...
Rooskibar03
10-22-2012, 20:30
Obama is calling for a record check- we know how that worked out for him before.
Here is Mitts statement
"The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.
In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check
Reduce our defect you are doing great papa smurf
I cannot believe we will impeach Clinton (not that I like Clinton) for what he did, but let Obama destroy this Country. This election should be won by Mitt by a landslide. Rant over carry on.
Yeah Obama...let's spend our way out by taxing the rich which will end up costing the poor at the cash register. Then you can give them help and be their savior and build our debt more.
sounds awesome.
I hope Romney says for everyone to watch 2016
Here is Mitts statement
"The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.
In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check
Wait..but Obama said...
Goodburbon
10-22-2012, 20:32
Romney's rehashing same ole same ole. Weak closing statements AFAIC.
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 20:32
Wait..but Obama said...
"The governor is not telling the truth."[ROFL1]
Aloha_Shooter
10-22-2012, 20:33
No knock-out shots on either side although Obama opened himself up with the number of out-and-out lies he spun tonight. Call it a draw as a debate but that's all Romney really needed since the main point is to show the American public that he's not the ogre Obama has been painting for the past year.
Then again, I have little use for these "debates" as they're more opportunities to slip in sound bites than actual debates where you have to cite sources and draw some inferential logic.
12 million new jobs. Get people off food stamps by getting them good jobs.
getting along with democrats.
Romney sounds very presidential right now!
"We have an opportunity to have real leadership..." [LOL]
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 20:34
How the Fuck have we made any Fucking progress
We were about [yay] close to a financial depression. Did we spend too much? That's pretty likely. However, in January 2009, did we know how much was too little or too much? Nope, that was a pretty unique situation. I'd rather have erred on the side of too much than too little, because we've seen what a great depression looks like.
Well you could have inflated a balloon with all the hot air in that room.
Holy crap I just spotted a squatch !
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 20:36
My take on Romneys closing statement: brief, genuine, factual and to the point. Sometimes less is more.
O just seemed to ramble on with his current speil.
Romney's rehashing same ole same ole. Weak closing statements AFAIC.I don't know I liked Romney's closing statement, it could have been better.
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 20:38
I am glad Romney finally came out and said flatly the Presidents policies have failed, and four more years means more debt, less jobs, and a weaker country for all.
Goodburbon
10-22-2012, 20:38
We were about [yay] close to a financial depression. Did we spend too much? That's pretty likely. However, in January 2009, did we know how much was too little or too much? Nope, that was a pretty unique situation. I'd rather have erred on the side of too much than too little, because we've seen what a great depression looks like.
Major Changes happen in a depression. Businesses without sound foundations fail. Banks without sound foundations fail. By bailing out the businesses "too big to fail" They short circuited the changes that needed to occur and replaced them with artificial "regulations". The upshot of that is prolonging the inevitable, and making the eventual consequences for the citizenry worse.
My take on Romneys closing statement: brief, genuine, factual and to the point.
O just seemed to ramble on with his current speil.Very well put.
Wasted my time watching another crappy debate. It is no longer a debate if one person can make comments completely devoid of any rational basis or factual information.
Rooskibar03
10-22-2012, 20:39
Well you could have inflated a balloon with all the hot air in that room.
Red Bull is planning another launch tomorrow..
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 20:39
Wasted my time watching another crappy debate. It is no longer a debate if one person can make comments completely devoid of any rational basis or factual information.
But Obama said......
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 20:41
Major Changes happen in a depression. Businesses without sound foundations fail. Banks without sound foundations fail. By bailing out the businesses "too big to fail" They short circuited the changes that needed to occur and replaced them with artificial "regulations". The upshot of that is prolonging the inevitable, and making the eventual consequences for the citizenry worse.
So you would have voted for depression?
Do you think we will see 4 more years? Or will we give Romney a chance?
Goodburbon
10-22-2012, 20:50
So you would have voted for depression?
Vs. Government borrowing money from our children because we don't have the balls to face the consequences of our decisions ourselves.
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 20:52
Vs. Government borrowing money from our children because we don't have the balls to face the consequences of our decisions ourselves.
Interesting and brave. Not a choice any politician would have made.
DSB OUTDOORS
10-22-2012, 20:54
All I can say is, F-Obama!!!!!!!!!!!! Get Er-Done and out of office!!!!!!!!!
Night, night!!
I listened on a radio, and anaylists said mitt kept cool.l
ChunkyMonkey
10-22-2012, 21:06
I listened on a radio, and anaylists said mitt kept cool.l
Yes, he was very presidential tonight - something that President Obama still needs to catch up on.
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 21:07
Do you think we will see 4 more years? Or will we give Romney a chance?
Even when O went for cheap shots R did don't fall for them, he stayed on task and focused.
Given the format for O to digress himself by the cheap shots and attempted humor was very poor strategy.
This was a formal debate and as such proffesionalism, poise, demeanor and presentation are key, all while wearing many hats.
Which one was more "Presidential"
In all three debates I feel that Mittens has presented himself as a calm, sharp and cool proffesional who is well versed and understands the issues and priorities.
I voted today.. by mail in ballot.. I voted Romney/Ryan.. I'd rather see Oblowme out than anything else.
BPTactical
10-22-2012, 21:09
Is that a he she in the discussion on Fox during Hannity?[ROFL1]
Although i did t wathch them, it seem like both were cool.
Obamas topic paragraph almost always started with attack.
Obama seems to interrupt more than mitt did.
Both showed little laughter.
Deninitely want to see how undecided thought about it on major poll.
Aloha_Shooter
10-22-2012, 21:12
We were about [yay] close to a financial depression. Did we spend too much? That's pretty likely. However, in January 2009, did we know how much was too little or too much? Nope, that was a pretty unique situation. I'd rather have erred on the side of too much than too little, because we've seen what a great depression looks like.
First, the depth of the recession was heavily overstated. One of the things I blame Bush for was buying the Chicken Little stories about how close we were to collapse. The economy was in far worse shape during the Carter administration. Unlike the 1970s, we actually had some points of vibrancy 5 years ago and the areas that were weak (overextended housing market and risk-ridden financial sector) needed to collapse to find their bottoms. I understand the press conveniently forgetting that fact but have been dumbfounded that Republicans and conservatives didn't fight the malarkey.
Second, yes, we DID know we were spending too much. Lots of financial analysts said we were spending too much; historical distance has shown us the Keynesian spending actually prolonged rather than relieved the Great Depression. Hell, lots of laymen knew we were spending too much on TARP.
Further, the best thing we could have done for the financial industry AND the auto industry was let them declare bankruptcy. Too-big-to-fail was a Geithner-inspired load of crap bought by both administrations. You want someone to quit playing with fire? Let them feel the pain of the burn -- don't let them burn someone else instead like Corzine and JP Morgan did with the blessing of the Chicago Futures Market and the SEC.
I understand you're liberal but at least do some research and thinking instead of mindlessly repeating the worn empty spin nuggets.
Rooskibar03
10-22-2012, 21:13
Is that a he she in the discussion on Fox during Hannity?[ROFL1]
Glad I wasnt the only one who spotted that obama shill. Pretty sure I saw an adams apple.
That group is full of idiots tonight.
Imho, I think obama s first debate changed his entire strategy of the 3. Debate.
Romney needs to do what Romney need to do to win.
Obama has to win what hr had to do, but I think obama s manager may have thought aggressiveness equals to win for Obama.
So, Obama got aggressive and more aggressive over debates.
Rooskibar03
10-22-2012, 21:27
Hey chuckle head behind Sean Hannity on live national TV, HANG UP YOUR PHONE.
You look like an idiot.
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 21:28
First, the depth of the recession was heavily overstated. One of the things I blame Bush for was buying the Chicken Little stories about how close we were to collapse. The economy was in far worse shape during the Carter administration.
I understand you're liberal but at least do some research and thinking instead of mindlessly repeating the worn empty spin nuggets.
Cite?
dwalker460
10-22-2012, 21:40
I am behind the Mitt. I admit that prior to the debates I was lukewarm on him. Kind of thought he was a candy-ass and a little too moderate. After the first debate that changed.
What I see.hear from Mittens-
Yeah, I know how to get things done, and sometimes that means compromise, I had 70% Democrat State Senate to deal with, and I got shit done.
The economy is where my focus is, I know how to fix it and I will get it done
I dont favor more government involvement than necessary. Get the Fed out of the State medicare and school administration, no new Federal gun laws, reduced Fed regulatory programs, put that burden on the state and local governments because they do a better job of it.
Rooskibar03
10-22-2012, 21:48
Debates been over for an hour and nothing on the Drudge front page. Doesn't bode well to a republican win tonight.
Aloha_Shooter
10-22-2012, 21:50
Cite?
Seriously? Unemployment over 10% versus 7.8%? Mortgage rates under 6% versus 13-16% (if you could even find a bank willing to write one)? Stagflation during the late 1970s meant you effectively LOST money by putting it in a normal savings account. Plentiful energy in 2007-2008 versus the energy crisis during Carter's administration? The fact I paid more for a gallon of gas under Carter than under Bush in inflation-adjusted dollars?
Anyone who was alive and conscious during 1977-1980 KNOWS the economy was worse then if they just sit back and think a bit. Like I said, do some research instead of repeating the worn empty spin nuggets.
TEAMRICO
10-22-2012, 21:51
O... just repeating his old tired lines, struggling, petty snipes, begging for another chance.
R.......Calm, collective, and cool as the other side of the pillow. PRESIDENTIAL!
Now now boys, what for the polls in a few days.
Romney=WIN.
Oh, what was O's plan for the next 4 years?.....didn't come away with anything new.
My 2 cents.
Aloha_Shooter
10-22-2012, 21:57
Rucker61, here's a place for you to practice your Google-fu. Look up "misery index". There's a reason the term arose during the Carter administration and was never used during the Bush administration. Figure out what today's misery index would be if used -- but use 1979's definition of "unemployment".
Stagflation sucks.
Sounds about right, but I would like to add something.
During carter admin, it ws more of a supply shock on inelastic goods.
Where as right now, it is demand shockon oil.
In terms diesel and octane price, i would like to also add short term supply problem from bottleneck from refinary.
Seriously? Unemployment over 10% versus 7.8%? Mortgage rates under 6% versus 13-16% (if you could even find a bank willing to write one)? Stagflation during the late 1970s meant you effectively LOST money by putting it in a normal savings account. Plentiful energy in 2007-2008 versus the energy crisis during Carter's administration? The fact I paid more for a gallon of gas under Carter than under Bush in inflation-adjusted dollars?
Anyone who was alive and conscious during 1977-1980 KNOWS the economy was worse then if they just sit back and think a bit. Like I said, do some research instead of repeating the worn empty spin nuggets.
Great-Kazoo
10-22-2012, 22:00
Hey chuckle head behind Sean Hannity on live national TV, HANG UP YOUR PHONE.
You look like an idiot.
HOLY SHIT, CHUCKLE HEAD[ROFL1][ROFL1][ROFL1][ROFL1][ROFL1] I haven't heard that in decades. That saying was one of many from my late grandfather,outstanding.
Rucker61
10-22-2012, 22:13
Rucker61, here's a place for you to practice your Google-fu. Look up "misery index". There's a reason the term arose during the Carter administration and was never used during the Bush administration. Figure out what today's misery index would be if used -- but use 1979's definition of "unemployment".
It wasn't used in the Bush Administration because the economy didn't start to fail until the very end. Both Bush and Obama put extreme measure in place to avoid the worst-case scenario. Since we never saw rock bottom, it's difficult to compare "what was" with "what could have been". No one knows what would have happened. Not even with hindsight. You can only assume.
Stagflation sucks.
Sounds about right, but I would like to add something.
During carter admin, it ws more of a supply shock on inelastic goods.
Where as right now, it is demand shockon oil.
In terms diesel and octane price, i would like to also add short term supply problem from bottleneck from refinary.
part of the bottleneck from the refinery problem is excessive regulation making it unprofitable to run several refineries. hell...delta airlines bought their own refinery in Trainer, PA to save on jet fuel. the plant and another up there in the east coast were shut down because they weren't making the "BIG OIL" any money. that "BIG OIL" only pulls profit margins around 2%. the only reason it is in the billions and people go ape shit over the numbers is due to the amount of oil that is used all over the world.
Now it is booming in a few states, obama denied the oil pipeline from Canada which took away tens of thousands of jobs from several states.
obama denied the oil pipeline from Canada which took away tens of thousands of jobs from several states.
The oil pipeline was going from Canada straight to the gulf coast ports to be exported. We never would have seen anything from it.
Ithink what delta did was one of the most innovative business decision of a decade.
My former boss believes that I am over crediting delta.
How delta did that, and Get a state subsidy is amazing business idea.
Moreover, how they worded to investors , fund mgrs , and analysts were excellent.
It is like similar to Cisco acquiring sysco to save $$$$.
part of the bottleneck from the refinery problem is excessive regulation making it unprofitable to run several refineries. hell...delta airlines bought their own refinery in Trainer, PA to save on jet fuel. the plant and another up there in the east coast were shut down because they weren't making the "BIG OIL" any money. that "BIG OIL" only pulls profit margins around 2%. the only reason it is in the billions and people go ape shit over the numbers is due to the amount of oil that is used all over the world.
Now it is booming in a few states, obama denied the oil pipeline from Canada which took away tens of thousands of jobs from several states.
The oil pipeline was going from Canada straight to the gulf coast ports to be exported. We never would have seen anything from it.
source?
how would it possibly make it through the US without us seeing anything from it? No jobs at all? How is that possible
Ithink what delta did was one of the most innovative business decision of a decade.
My former boss believes that I am over crediting delta.
How delta did that, and Get a state subsidy is amazing business idea.
Moreover, how they worded to investors , fund mgrs , and analysts were excellent.
It is like similar to Cisco acquiring sysco to save $$$$.
definitely impressive if it works out for them. I think they are just about to start producing jet fuel. selling off the gasoline to lower prices for them nationally.
supposedly $300 million a year in fuel savings. a very small percentage of their annual fuel bill, but that is a good bit of cash. I'm amazed that if the numbers work out right, that in 1.5 years the plant will have paid for itself, they will have put a lot of people to work, and will have complete profit/savings from here on out if fuel prices don't drastically drop.
GilpinGuy
10-22-2012, 23:34
I missed most of the debate tonight. I heard about 15 mins of it on the radio and just yawned.
There was a conservative commentator I read earlier today (I forget who) who wrote that as long as Mitt held his ground and didn't totally crater that this debate would have little effect on things. Most folks are clueless on foreign policy anyway, so it makes sense to me.
Bailey Guns
10-23-2012, 10:59
The oil pipeline was going from Canada straight to the gulf coast ports to be exported. We never would have seen anything from it.
Ridiculous and wrong.
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 11:09
Ridiculous and wrong.
If business decisions dictated, then not so wrong. Oil and gasoline are commodities. We the people have nothing to say where the oil goes. We don't even have a say in where the workers to build the pipeline come from, if the contracts let allow for foreign (Canadian and Mexican, for example) workers. It's a Canadian company - why wouldn't they hire their own?
ChunkyMonkey
10-23-2012, 11:30
The oil pipeline was going from Canada straight to the gulf coast ports to be exported. We never would have seen anything from it.
You need to quit believing huffpost or left propagandas.
There is not much demand for crude oil from the US to abroad. There are however demand for US refined products. Either way, the Keystone Pipeline System is a pipeline to transport synthetic crude oil and diluted bitumen from Alberta, Canada to multiple destinations in the United States: Illinois Refineries, Oklahoma hub, and to the many refineries along the gulf coast of Texas.
The environmentalists are against the pipeline for just that, environmental concerns! There is already a pipeline from Illinois to the gulf called the seaway pipeline. Noone seems to have any issue with that one. The Keystone XL is larger capacity and would have been built directly from Canada for the obvious logistic reason (500 oil trucks a day at the moment are transporting this).
ChunkyMonkey
10-23-2012, 11:35
If business decisions dictated, then not so wrong. Oil and gasoline are commodities. We the people have nothing to say where the oil goes. We don't even have a say in where the workers to build the pipeline come from, if the contracts let allow for foreign (Canadian and Mexican, for example) workers. It's a Canadian company - why wouldn't they hire their own?
Speculative. One of the stipulations put onto Transcanada plan/contract is it is to hire local workers. The US State Department, which is siding w/ the White House (obviously) and must approve the multinational contract, has lowered its estimate to 5000 local jobs from 20000 local jobs previously estimated (read: political). So even if you use this low low end estimate, it still is 5000 more jobs locally. The indirect impact of 700000 barrels of Canadian oil is thousands more jobs at the US refineries as US gas production will increase by 5%.
Aloha_Shooter
10-23-2012, 11:39
What's ridiculous is that Ridge posted pure speculation as if it were solid known fact. The rationale for running the pipeline all the way down south was to get the oil to refineries, presumably so they could sell the products in the North American continent. The Canadians can already ship oil to other countries without an American pipeline. Does Canada have enough workforce to build the pipeline on their own? I don't think so.
Can you make a financial case to build the pipeline and then sell all the product abroad rather than domestically? Sure you can -- you can also build 21st century military tactics around horse cavalry (which we actually did in isolated cases in Afghanistan) if you choose.
Then again, Obama was more interested in sound bites and zingers than credible policy or demonstrated results so I can see why he'd rather talk about horses and bayonets than why he's telling the Navy and AF to live with less than their projections require or why he went to a fundraiser immediately after our embassy spent 7 hours fighting for their lives or why his economy is still the second worst since the Great Depression despite having a filibuster-proof majority in both houses for two years and having boosted government spending beyond Keynes' wildest dreams.
ChunkyMonkey
10-23-2012, 11:48
source?
how would it possibly make it through the US without us seeing anything from it? No jobs at all? How is that possible
Ignore that one, Justin.
Ridge is saying that boiling oil sands, building a $7billion pipeline then pumping through it for 3000 miles to the gulf coast just to export it will save the oil company tons of money compare to the current method of trucking it to the west coast ports for the same reason. [Tooth]
It is funny to me to sit hear and listen to the propaganda being poised against oil and gas. Take it from someone who works in the oil & gas industry, that most of what Rucker is saying is purely false. I always have fun sitting back and listening about energy debates when many out side if this industry have not a clue what goes on day to day. We just site back and enjoy our label "Big Oil" ...
Ridge im waiting to hear how a pipeline would create jobs in the united states if it went from canada to the gulf coast through several states.
Id love to see some sources
KevDen2005
10-23-2012, 13:20
It is funny to me to sit hear and listen to the propaganda being poised against oil and gas. Take it from someone who works in the oil & gas industry, that most of what Rucker is saying is purely false. I always have fun sitting back and listening about energy debates when many out side if this industry have not a clue what goes on day to day. We just site back and enjoy our label "Big Oil" ...
Since I know pretty much nothing of "Big Oil" can you give some examples?
Since I know pretty much nothing of "Big Oil" can you give some examples?
Well for example take anything and add "Big" to it and all of a sudden it becomes and axis of evil. We are just a small business trying to provide energy to America and support our family in the process. The only thing "big" in this company is my belly!
KevDen2005
10-23-2012, 13:35
Well for example take anything and add "Big" to it and all of a sudden it becomes and axis of evil. We are just a small business trying to provide energy to America and support our family in the process. The only thing "big" in this company is my belly!
I guess I was trying to ask, could you provide a few examples of what isn't false from Rucker. I haven't heard any of it and would probably disagree with Rucker anyway, but I am just curious.
The only thing that I could agree with is when he called oil & gas a commodity!
If business decisions dictated, then not so wrong. Oil and gasoline are commodities. We the people have nothing to say where the oil goes. We don't even have a say in where the workers to build the pipeline come from, if the contracts let allow for foreign (Canadian and Mexican, for example) workers. It's a Canadian company - why wouldn't they hire their own?
Ridge im waiting to hear how a pipeline would create jobs in the united states if it went from canada to the gulf coast through several states.
Id love to see some sources
First it runs right through North Dakota where we are having an oil boom. Currently all oil produced in that region is taken by truck or train to Texas. Yes it is all shipped to Texas because the one refinery that they have there is running at maximum capacity. The pipeline was specifically designed to tie into the oil fields that we are developing domestically and cut costs and raise production drastically. It was a joint venture with oil producers all the way across america to streamline oil production because as of now they just have to stop and wait until the next train arrives.
Then when people hear pipeline they have no idea how intricate and maintenance intensive an oil pipeline is. There are pumping stations, reducing stations, tie ins, and all kinds of associated preventative maintenance like DC corrosion prevention systems that charge the pipe and prevent electrolytic corrosion if the pipe happens to lay in metal rich wet earth. All of these systems would have to be run and maintained every day even long after the line stops pumping oil. These are all jobs for Americans, and the ability to increase production in the domestic oil fields would also grow those communities, and growing communities means more jobs down to grocery stores and basic needs. So beyond the projects projected 5000 - 6000 permanent jobs, 20,000 temporary manufacturing and construction jobs there would be a secondary effect of increasing our domestic production lowering our gas prices a little and developing a stronger more unified oil production platform in the center of our nation.
There are huge problems with our oil production and refining system. Right now some refineries are running at max capacity, and the excess crude that we mine is more easily shipped over seas where they pay 5 times the price per barrel. Then there are some refineries that could increase production if they had an increased supply of oil, but the oil company with the surplus would be losing money to keep the oil here domestically, and the refinery can not afford to make up the difference in cost to get the oil shipped to them. This is all due to, you guessed it, government regulations. There has not been a new refinery built in the US since 1979, and it is not because we dont need them, it is because the companies are not only regulated to the point of it being prohibitively expensive to build, but they are actually paid not to build new refineries. Oil subsidies are to pay oil companies to keep oil here and refine it here for a specified price. Otherwise they would ship everything out because everyone else pays more for it than we do.
ronaldrwl
10-23-2012, 13:59
Ridge im waiting to hear how a pipeline would create jobs in the united states if it went from canada to the gulf coast through several states.
Id love to see some sources
We have some friends that own a portion of a oil pipeline. I don't know how many jobs are required but they have 24 hour monitoring and maintenance. It's pretty expensive to keep it running.
Ridge, you get any of that?
Im waiting for your counter to all this info and how no jobs or benefits for America would be had from a pipeline.
And of course it is a lot more complicated than that, but those are just some examples of the lies the government tells you and the difference in perspective that you get from being in industry. Mostly it is a bunch of small oil companies that have to find a way to make it through the bureaucratic red tape and sell a commodity where they will get the best money for it. I don't want to write a book on it here, but there really is so much out there if you do the research that will just make you sick.
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 14:21
What's ridiculous is that Ridge posted pure speculation as if it were solid known fact. The rationale for running the pipeline all the way down south was to get the oil to refineries, presumably so they could sell the products in the North American continent. The Canadians can already ship oil to other countries without an American pipeline. Does Canada have enough workforce to build the pipeline on their own? I don't think so.
What you think isn't necessarily a good argument. One, the decision to build was just postponed; the pipeline isn't cancelled. Two, it was bad timing (IMHO); coming so soon after the BP gulf spill, folks are a bit more sensitive to environmental concerns.
Can you make a financial case to build the pipeline and then sell all the product abroad rather than domestically? Sure you can -- you can also build 21st century military tactics around horse cavalry (which we actually did in isolated cases in Afghanistan) if you choose.
Two separate situations. Once the oil gets to a port or to a refinery, the market sets the conditions for any sale. Note that the US is a net exporter of gasoline. The financial case could vary day by day, depending upon the oil market.
Then again, Obama was more interested in sound bites and zingers than credible policy or demonstrated results so I can see why he'd rather talk about horses and bayonets than why he's telling the Navy and AF to live with less than their projections require
http://www.public-consultation.org/pdf/DefenseBudget_May12_rpt.pdf
Interesting reading. A majority of Democrats and Republicans feel that the Defense budget should be reduced. Brings to mind something about "for the people, by the people..."
The Defense Secretary has also proposed significant cuts to the defense budget.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8244278/Robert-Gates-proposes-78-billion-US-defence-cuts.html
Vice Presidential candidate Ryan is in favor of defense cuts:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-57509048/ryan-defends-his-support-of-defense-cuts/
or why he went to a fundraiser immediately after our embassy spent 7 hours fighting for their lives or why his economy is still the second worst since the Great Depression despite having a filibuster-proof majority in both houses for two years...
A myth that's been debunked for some time.
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/did-the-democrats-ever-really-have-60-votes-in-the-senate-and-for-how-long/
Actual time with a majority: about 5 months, in two different periods.
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 14:22
It is funny to me to sit hear and listen to the propaganda being poised against oil and gas. Take it from someone who works in the oil & gas industry, that most of what Rucker is saying is purely false. I always have fun sitting back and listening about energy debates when many out side if this industry have not a clue what goes on day to day. We just site back and enjoy our label "Big Oil" ...
I'm more than happy to learn. What are my misunderstandings about the oil business? Please provide non-partisan cites, if possible.
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 14:24
I guess I was trying to ask, could you provide a few examples of what isn't false from Rucker. I haven't heard any of it and would probably disagree with Rucker anyway, but I am just curious.
[Beer]
And of course it is a lot more complicated than that, but those are just some examples of the lies the government tells you and the difference in perspective that you get from being in industry. Mostly it is a bunch of small oil companies that have to find a way to make it through the bureaucratic red tape and sell a commodity where they will get the best money for it. I don't want to write a book on it here, but there really is so much out there if you do the research that will just make you sick.
Oh I completely understand. My best friends dad owns a trucking company that does work for the oil companies. Also hauling out the byproduct for coordinate in the past as well as budweisier. And hauling wood chips to turn into feed for cattle that is made from the beetle kill. The oil pays the best.
Bailey Guns
10-23-2012, 17:32
If business decisions dictated, then not so wrong. Oil and gasoline are commodities. We the people have nothing to say where the oil goes. We don't even have a say in where the workers to build the pipeline come from, if the contracts let allow for foreign (Canadian and Mexican, for example) workers. It's a Canadian company - why wouldn't they hire their own?
Many states are working on the pipeline in areas where they don't need fed approval. It must've made good business sense because lot's of American companies are investing in, and building, the pipeline despite Obama nixing the presidential permits.
Furthermore, there is a tremendous backlog of oil that can be transported from various states, to the Gulf Coast, where it can be refined. Not all of the refined gasoline, or oil, is going overseas, though surely some of it will. But we can't use it all. Besides...that how business works. And obviously lots of people will be put to work, including many thousands of Americans.
Bailey Guns
10-23-2012, 17:44
One, the decision to build was just postponed; the pipeline isn't cancelled.
Bullshit. Fat chance he's going to "un-postpone" it. Although, it wouldn't surprise me if all the concerns were resolved in the next few days so the permits could be issued.
Two, it was bad timing (IMHO); coming so soon after the BP gulf spill, liberals are a bit more sensitive to environmental concerns.
Fixed it...
Pipelines are very expensive to build and maintain. Lots of jobs involved.
The part about the pipeline I don't like is the diluted bitumen. The corrosivity by itself is not necessarily bad. The 'dilbit' can be some nasty stuff if they don't get all the water, sand, and sediment shit out of it... Basically its asphalt mixed with naptha and a potential abrasive. A big problem is when the water/sediment settles out in the pipe, which can cause severe corrosion. I'm fine with the pipe, but I'd personally rather Canada refine it, and then ship us usable fuel.
KevDen2005
10-23-2012, 18:00
Pipelines are very expensive to build and maintain. Lots of jobs involved.
The part about the pipeline I don't like is the diluted bitumen. The corrosivity by itself is not necessarily bad. The 'dilbit' can be some nasty stuff if they don't get all the water, sand, and sediment shit out of it... Basically its asphalt mixed with naptha and a potential abrasive. A big problem is when the water/sediment settles out in the pipe, which can cause severe corrosion. I'm fine with the pipe, but I'd personally rather Canada refine it, and then ship us usable fuel.
Dude, I have no idea what you just said.
Bailey Guns
10-23-2012, 18:23
Dude, I have no idea what you just said.
All I got out of it was that he likes laying pipe.
Pipelines are very expensive to build and maintain. Lots of jobs involved.
The part about the pipeline I don't like is the diluted bitumen. The corrosivity by itself is not necessarily bad. The 'dilbit' can be some nasty stuff if they don't get all the water, sand, and sediment shit out of it... Basically its asphalt mixed with naptha and a potential abrasive. A big problem is when the water/sediment settles out in the pipe, which can cause severe corrosion. I'm fine with the pipe, but I'd personally rather Canada refine it, and then ship us usable fuel.
I'd rather have the US increase jobs, find a way to counter the corrosion, the abrasiveness of the impurities in the oils...maybe better filtration at the input points to keep out the water and sediments and maybe build a refinery or two along the way for domestic production in the central US.
Why let others do the work and make the money when you can do it yourself right here at home?
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 18:57
I'd rather have the US increase jobs, find a way to counter the corrosion, the abrasiveness of the impurities in the oils...maybe better filtration at the input points to keep out the water and sediments and maybe build a refinery or two along the way for domestic production in the central US.
Why let others do the work and make the money when you can do it yourself right here at home?
Here's what dilbit is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilbit
And here's some of the concerns:
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/Dilbit/Swift072312.pdf
Dude, I have no idea what you just said.
Bitumen is the stuff they mine from the tar sands. dilbit is the shit they want to ship through keystone, it's bitumen diluted so that it flows through the pipe. It's been transported for many years through pipelines, mostly in a safe manner. But there is some debate on the safety of transporting it.
All I got out of it was that he likes laying pipe.
I tried to avoid all 'sextual' connotations...
I'd rather have the US increase jobs, find a way to counter the corrosion, the abrasiveness of the impurities in the oils...maybe better filtration at the input points to keep out the water and sediments and maybe build a refinery or two along the way for domestic production in the central US.
Why let others do the work and make the money when you can do it yourself right here at home?
People are working on this and I agree to the extent of your comment that we need the jobs. A little research will solve the problems of transporting it.
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 19:59
People are working on this and I agree to the extent of your comment that we need the jobs. A little research will solve the problems of transporting it.
Let's hope so, as the industry hasn't done too well so far with all of the dilbit currently piped. Google "dilbit enbridge" and see why folks^W tin-hat liberals aren't too keen about trusting pipelines full of dilbit running across aquifers.
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 21:03
Then again, we may not need Canuckistanian oil:
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/finance/20121023/US.US.Oil.Boom/
ChunkyMonkey
10-23-2012, 21:16
Then again, we may not need Canuckistanian oil:
http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/finance/20121023/US.US.Oil.Boom/
Yeah, the US will produce 19 million barrel per day. [Stooge] We will be a net importer for long time, and as long as we are importing, who would be a better business partner than Canada or Mexico? You are supposed to be good at math, mr. accountant [Beer]
^
Is he an accountant? I tought he was a securities/ financial analyst.
:)
ChunkyMonkey
10-23-2012, 21:26
That was my speculation... he talks like my lil bro who is a partner CPA for a major firm but has his head up his butt. [ROFL1]
That was my speculation... he talks like my lil bro who is a partner CPA for a major firm but has his head up his butt. [ROFL1]
Well, we can always ask.
He said he work for a financial firm, so I assume he was an analyst. Hehe
Rucker, which area of speciality do you work at ( if we may ask).
Thanks in advance.
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 21:42
Yeah, the US will produce 19 million barrel per day. [Stooge] We will be a net importer for long time, and as long as we are importing, who would be a better business partner than Canada or Mexico? You are supposed to be good at math, mr. accountant [Beer]
Good point, and it's all based on the price of oil. It has to stay above $75 a barrel, apparently, to make US oil drilling economically feasible. Once it falls below that, cheap Mideast oil is our best bet. What's better for America, producing more of the imports we need at $75+ with the resulting higher gas prices but higher employment, or importing cheap oil with cheaper gas but producing less ourselves with loss of oil industry jobs?
Also, is anyone still willing to have a dilbit pipeline run across their back yard now?
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 21:44
Well, we can always ask.
He said he work for a financial firm, so I assume he was an analyst. Hehe
Rucker, which area of speciality do you work at ( if we may ask).
Thanks in advance.
I never said I worked for a financial firm, or in that industry. My education is in math, accounting, operations management and combat engineering. I work in high tech supply chain.
Still, interesting that we could be the world's largest oil producer, neh? Whodathunk?
ChunkyMonkey
10-23-2012, 21:48
Very good news indeed.
I never said I worked for a financial firm, or in that industry. My education is in math, accounting, operations management and combat engineering. I work in high tech supply chain.
Still, interesting that we could be the world's largest oil producer, neh? Whodathunk?
I must have confused with other forum member.
Give you a prop for studying math-math.
So many people out there in the financial firm thiking they studies math, but they actually studied business math. Business math almost never even uses highschool calc.
Great-Kazoo
10-23-2012, 21:52
Good point, and it's all based on the price of oil. It has to stay above $75 a barrel, apparently, to make US oil drilling economically feasible. Once it falls below that, cheap Mideast oil is our best bet. What's better for America, producing more of the imports we need at $75+ with the resulting higher gas prices but higher employment, or importing cheap oil with cheaper gas but producing less ourselves with loss of oil industry jobs?
Also, is anyone still willing to have a dilbit pipeline run across their back yard now?
If the jobs guarantee and lower fuel cost at the pump were there, then yes.
Environmentally we have been hosed for years, why not recoup it economically?
O's policies would increase regulation to the point that US companies would not shut, but slow down to the point they were just covering their nut.
One thing we seem to forget in the back & forth regarding O & R is this. No matter who is in office, with out congressional backing, their ideas / policies will never see the light of day.
O has bitched about his in ability to get anything down, when those of use who can remember (sometimes) more than the last week, know he had full democratic backing the 1st two years in office.
My biggest concern, as i have read others here, is O's ability, If re-elected, to nominate 1 possibly 2 SCOTUS judges.
Combine that with his distaste for America and blatant ass kissing of Islamist etc have us treading water in the shitter.
I am concerned with the possibility of the military budget getting smaller. I joined during the Clinton cuts area and got out in the 3rd year of the war. I can tell you that a military that has no money is a dangerous place. The Marines have the smallest budget of all the services and my unit just like many could not afford much. Before the war when we trained in MOUNT town we had to yell bang because we couldn't afford blanks. Our training Ops were cut short because we would always run out of fuel. Our rag top humvees would break down constantly. My gas mask was broken and my NBC suit had holes in it (I deployed with this BTW). My Unit was not issued SAPI plates for our deployment. Our NVG's were very scarce. Most of the time we did our night blackout driving without them. I can tell you from all these experiences that a military that does not have adequate funding is a dangerous place for the war fighter and it should be avoided at all cost.
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 23:16
I must have confused with other forum member.
Give you a prop for studying math-math.
So many people out there in the financial firm thiking they studies math, but they actually studied business math. Business math almost never even uses highschool calc.
Actually, the financial firms are heavily recruiting the hard sciences, especially math and CS. It's kind of sad.
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 23:18
I am concerned with the possibility of the military budget getting smaller. I joined during the Clinton cuts area and got out in the 3rd year of the war. I can tell you that a military that has no money is a dangerous place. The Marines have the smallest budget of all the services and my unit just like many could not afford much. Before the war when we trained in MOUNT town we had to yell bang because we couldn't afford blanks. Our training Ops were cut short because we would always run out of fuel. Our rag top humvees would break down constantly. My gas mask was broken and my NBC suit had holes in it (I deployed with this BTW). My Unit was not issued SAPI plates for our deployment. Our NVG's were very scarce. Most of the time we did our night blackout driving without them. I can tell you from all these experiences that a military that does not have adequate funding is a dangerous place for the war fighter and it should be avoided at all cost.
The problem with the Marines is that they are funded by the Navy. The Corps is way down their list of funding priorities, and always have been. It's too bad. You guys would get more stuff under the auspices of the Army.
Rucker61
10-23-2012, 23:22
If the jobs guarantee and lower fuel cost at the pump were there, then yes.
Environmentally we have been hosed for years, why not recoup it economically?
O's policies would increase regulation to the point that US companies would not shut, but slow down to the point they were just covering their nut.
We'll have to agree to disagree here.
One thing we seem to forget in the back & forth regarding O & R is this. No matter who is in office, with out congressional backing, their ideas / policies will never see the light of day.
O has bitched about his in ability to get anything down, when those of use who can remember (sometimes) more than the last week, know he had full democratic backing the 1st two years in office.
The Democrats enjoyed a filibuster free Senate for just over 5 months in Obama's current term, in two different time periods.
Actually, the financial firms are heavily recruiting the hard sciences, especially math and CS. It's kind of sad.
Very true, because even a phd econ or cfa guys have hard time solving basic equations like basic second order ode, linear alg problem.
If they ran multiple random samples to calculate lapasche or other index, they would have hard time.
This is why even a good fund managers can't even beat s&p500 and other ETFs listed in the market. Not to mention huge ass loads funds have on top of it.
Also they are looking to recruit econ and finance heavy guys who had a career inside the sector that they will cover.
mevshooter
10-24-2012, 07:52
The problem with the Marines is that they are funded by the Navy. The Corps is way down their list of funding priorities, and always have been. It's too bad. You guys would get more stuff under the auspices of the Army.
My dad has been in the Army basically since he was out of high school and said something similar to me. When weighing the goals and responsibilities of what the army does vs. the navy it seems to make more sense that the Marines should be under the Army's network rather than the Navy's.
My dad has been in the Army basically since he was out of high school and said something similar to me. When weighing the goals and responsibilities of what the army does vs. the navy it seems to make more sense that the Marines should be under the Army's network rather than the Navy's.
Never
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.