let's not be stingy. Having lots of dosh apparently has obligations and problems all of its own. I can't vouch for this personally tho.
what market are you looking at? all summer when obama had a big lead the market was strong. its only since romney looks like he has a chance that the market is pulling back. i dont think the market will like romney that well.
Makes sense. In ancient greece only land owners had a say in voting. I'd rethink the extra vote for being a millionaire. As it is the top 1% made 90% of the wealth gains for the past decade, too much say by any one group can't be a good thing
It is a matter of degree and the lessor evil. The dangerous things about Romney are that he believes in failed economic theory, and worse yet, he believes more so than Obama that decisions in the oval office should be based on what is best for business! This is suicide for U.S. society. When you are President your decisions should be based on what is best for society and the people in general. Businesses, not government, should be responsible for making decisions on what is best for business! Government must base decisions on what is best for the country's citizens. Often these interests are aligned, sometimes they are not. When they are not, government must come down on the side of the people over business.
So many, especially Romney, try comparing the USA to Greece. Greece being more than 5 times smaller than Texas, with less than half of Texas' population. Greece hasn't had any real strength for a couple of thousand years or so. Fear mongers will try anything to get your vote.
Exactly. It is a fact that the stock market, as measured by the S&P 500, on average actutally fared a lot better in the past under Democratic presidents than under Republican ones. One has to keep in mind that the S&P 500 are the 500 BIGGEST publicly listed companies in America. And big business loves big government. Nothing new about that. An environment with complex regulations, big barriers to entry is one of the most favorable for the very large corporations, because they can create a distinct advantage in such an environment, for example by influencing legislation, creating specific loopholes and getting ahead of their (smaller) competitors.
Agreed. I fear that if Romney wins, the market will have catastrophic collapse. He's all about the bottom line, but just doesn't seem to understand that going into debt can actually have a positive outcome. Ask any wanna-be small business owner, and they'll tell you that if they can't get credit for start-up, then they can't get off the ground. It seems to me that fear is the main reason that voters are even considering electing Romney. It's certainly not his credentials. His (and the republican's) campaign has sowed those seeds for years now. Many doctor's offices and insurance companies across the country would likely benefit from a Romney win. Some are desperate to get back to those days where they can gouge insurance companies for whatever they like, and in turn the insurance companies could gouge the consumers. The heads of some of these firms are also very good at sowing fear into their employees that very dark days lie ahead if Obama wins. Wall street firms are also as desperate for a Romney win as he is. I find it ironic that so many on wall street rant on and on about the middle and lower class having a false sense of entitlement, when it seems to be the wealthy who feel entitled to all of the world's riches. They are livid that is doesn't come as easily as it could....like what's his face from Westgate Tech- threatening his employees' jobs and blaming Obama because he's only making billions instead of trillions. Sure, we might create a few more jobs by offering tax cuts to the wealthiest, and decreasing regulations, but let's think about it... Half of the Arctic ice caps have melted in the past 20 years, and we are endanger of losing countless species to extinction- not to mention potentially life threatening damage to our atmosphere and oceans. We have to implement change, even if it means we have to work harder for less. We just can't count on that to happen on it's own without passing some tough legislation. I've heard countless republicans spew rhetoric about our grandkids having to pay for Obama's bill, but I believe if these old cronies in the G.O.P. had it their way, we will all be gone within the next couple of centuries, by means of either unnecessary wars or by simply raping the planet to death. Whine about it all you want, but it is what it is (In my humble opinion). I'm not even a democrat, and I'm voting for Obama.
WE all do best as a country when everyone is doing OK. Maybe that's an unachievable goal, but it should be a goal nevertheless.
Nothing much is going to change, whichever gets in. The richest 5% own 95% of the wealth and the remaining 95% have to fight over the crumbs. Usually just about enough to ensure that some of the 95% turn up for work to produce electricity, transport etc. If the docile 95% woke up a bit there could be change. Is that why there are chemicals in most water supplies ? They put fluoride in ours, it is known to make people docile, togethor with aluminium sulphate, which is known to accelerate alzheimers. If you want to look into the future then study the past it has all happened before mostly. The mighty empires fell. Do you know why Athens, Rome etc. fell ? No ? Then study the past. The human race hasn't changed much and is already reverting back to violence.
The Delphi method ( /ˈdɛlfaɪ/ DEL-fy) is a structured communication technique, originally developed as a systematic, interactive forecasting method which relies on a panel of experts.[1] In the standard version, the experts answer questionnaires in two or more rounds. After each round, a facilitator provides an anonymous summary of the expertsâ forecasts from the previous round as well as the reasons they provided for their judgments. Thus, experts are encouraged to revise their earlier answers in light of the replies of other members of their panel. It is believed that during this process the range of the answers will decrease and the group will converge towards the "correct" answer. Finally, the process is stopped after a pre-defined stop criterion (e.g. number of rounds, achievement of consensus, stability of results) and the mean or median scores of the final rounds determine the results.[2] Other versions, such as the Policy Delphi,[3] have been designed for normative and explorative use, particularly in the area of social policy and public health.[4] In Europe, more recent web-based experiments have used the Delphi method as a communication technique for interactive decision-making and e-democracy.[5] Delphi is based on the principle that forecasts (or decisions) from a structured group of individuals are more accurate than those from unstructured groups.[6] This has been indicated with the term "collective intelligence".[7] The technique can also be adapted for use in face-to-face meetings, and is then called mini-Delphi or Estimate-Talk-Estimate (ETE). Delphi has been widely used for business forecasting and has certain advantages over another structured forecasting approach, prediction markets.[8] Maybe Govt by 1 person however competent is a thing of the past ?