If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#391
|
|||
|
|||
Air France? Ptui!
mrtravel wrote: Tchiowa wrote: mrtravel wrote: Geoff Miller wrote: ant writes: : Absolutely. Trade is a two-way street: other countries need our : commerce as much as we need theirs. You have a point. We'd all be lost without McDonalds. If you really believe American trade is limited to McDonalds, you're too ignorant to be allowed to participate in public debate. So, Geoff.. Since you think King George has been so good for the economy, what do you think of the huge increase in the National Debt since he took office, due to his love of deficit spending? The budget deficit as a percentage of GDP is among the lowest in the G7. I was comparing it to the previous administration, not the other countries of G7 You have to compare it with what is good. A zero deficit is not always good. Further, comparing it with previous or subsequent administrations is not necessarily an indicator of whether or not it is good. So your question simply muddies the issue. |
#392
|
|||
|
|||
Air France? Ptui!
"Tchiowa" kirjoitti legroups.com... Very dishonest response. As he said, he did *not* blame Clinton or his administration. The fact that Bush inherited an economy in recession is Perhaps you homo trim the list of receiving groups a bit. You are crossposting this **** to travel groups. stay away from travel groups. |
#393
|
|||
|
|||
Air France? Ptui!
Tchiowa wrote:
You have to compare it with what is good. A zero deficit is not always good. Further, comparing it with previous or subsequent administrations is not necessarily an indicator of whether or not it is good. So your question simply muddies the issue. I didn't say it was always good, but at some point you can't continue to overspend, and we have reached that point, especially if your spending is partially due to a war that you should not still be involved in. In the BEST picture, the US State Department says that 2/3 of the Iraqi's don't want us there. In nearly sense of the word, we are "losing". |
#394
|
|||
|
|||
Air France? Ptui!
Markku Grönroos wrote:
"Tchiowa" kirjoitti legroups.com... Very dishonest response. As he said, he did *not* blame Clinton or his administration. The fact that Bush inherited an economy in recession is Perhaps you homo trim the list of receiving groups a bit. You are crossposting this **** to travel groups. stay away from travel groups. Didn't you just do that? |
#395
|
|||
|
|||
Air France? Ptui!
"mrtravel" wrote in message . com... Tchiowa wrote: You have to compare it with what is good. A zero deficit is not always good. Further, comparing it with previous or subsequent administrations is not necessarily an indicator of whether or not it is good. So your question simply muddies the issue. I didn't say it was always good, but at some point you can't continue to overspend, and we have reached that point, That's a judgement call on your part. Some, especially economists, might with good reason claim that the threshold is (based on precedent) somewhat higher, both from a standpoint of the current annual deficit as a percentage of GDP/GNP or as compared to total national debt. Personally, I'm far, far more concerned with looming ever-larger deficits from the Medicare program, incurable without forcing the young to pay far more for their elders' ills. especially if your spending is partially due to a war Even the most conservative of economists have never had much trouble in advocating piling up deficits during wartime - especially since losing causes a lot of debt to disappear in the inferno while (at least in the good old days) victory allowed some recouping. that you should not still be involved in. Again a judgement call, in my eyes, the inevitable consequences (if worse hadn't ensued) of our joint, collective (Remember the "Coalition") to finish the affair at the end of Gulf War I. In the BEST picture, the US State Department says that 2/3 of the Iraqi's don't want us there. In nearly sense of the word, we are "losing". I'd accept a rewrite, using your Freudian omission of "every" to say we are not currently doing much "winning" (but then in a far more - at least in political and international eyes - cause among the Afghans, we are not only no longer winning, but losing ground. I'm sure that in 1945, substantially more than 2/3 of either the Japanese or the Germans would have preferred that we neither came nor stayed. We were wise enough to understand that worse fiascos than paralleled our pullout in 1919 would occur in Germany and that in 1945, a large, ornery vacuum filler would have welcomed our departure from two prospective additions to his larder. Pulling out of Iraq sounds good but reality suggests (a) some type of autonomous Kurdish state certainly likely to cause the fragile secular government in Turkey to be overtaken by a more fundamentalist Islamic regime dead set on devouring Kurds within Turkish Borders and in the Kurdish fragment of Iraq, (b) a Shia section of Iraq achieved by shooting, bombing, dissecting or transporting several million Sunni (mostly to desert sites without food, water, or giving a damn), and (c) an Anbar/Anwar province, beholden to Syria, filled with the surviving Sunni, and serving as a training/recruiting/organizational HQ for Al Qaeda and related endeavors. I have no little respect for Tchiowa, his mainsail reefed to run as close to the wind from the right as he can claw, just as I've continued to ignore those who target you for attacks that surpass even my hyperbole involving idiots' mothers given to practicing commercial transactions in the form of knee tremblers in dark, dank alleys. Unlike most of them, you're capable of rational discourse and argument and know something of air travel, as well. Both of you are hardy pragmatists, but in his case, the cynical edge has too acutely sharpened and narrowed his perspective, while yours is dulled by lack of exposure to anything beyond the Pablum of the modern media. But compared to most of the posters here, ranging from the outright cretinism to some obviously typing behind there backs with their arms encased in straightjackets by the attendants of the institutions to which their parents had them committed (or should have) when they realized just what monstrosities to which they had given birth and sustenance. Long ago, briefly, but not near briefly enough, and before it became so bloodily serious as it did, I went to a war, liked nothing of what I saw, and became convinced that it was unwinnable, not because we would not give our very best, but that our allies, the locals in whose behalf we were struggling, had a less than sincere commitment to the purpose we envisioned as joint and merited. Then as now, we misjudged the folks whom we meant to aid, not understanding that as a group or groups they were unwilling, unmotivated and unlikely to make the sacrifices, compromises and accommodations necessary to survive as a country. I've become increasingly convinced that along with our prewar reliance upon an Iraqi dissident movement as crooked as a desert sidewinder, a wartime decision to disestablish the Iraqi Army, and an unwillingness to admit that having disestablished that portion of the US military dedicated to occupation and military government in about 1950, we didn't have the means or the capacity to control circumstances. Add our (USAian) continued incapacity to ever view any event, place or belief system in any perspective but our own, and we were pretty muchly f*cked going in, and the odds of success grew longer my the minute. TMO |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
France, Belgium Publish Carrier Blacklist | Earl Evleth | Europe | 2 | August 30th, 2005 02:35 AM |
Air France jet landed too far down the runway, probe finds | Fly Guy | Air travel | 38 | August 9th, 2005 07:30 PM |
Air France / KLM "merger"gets go-ahead | Sjoerd | Air travel | 5 | February 11th, 2004 09:39 PM |
France Turning Its Back on 'Le Halloween' | Earl Evleth | Europe | 25 | November 13th, 2003 11:30 AM |