Shared publicly  - 
 
Romney's disastrous education agenda: reward his donors, make sure money dominates politics

Much as I have been disappointed by many of the things Obama has done, or failed to do, stories like this convince me that re-electing him is essential. The reforms of student loans and the curbs on for-profit colleges are super important, and if Romney is really looking to undo these reforms at the behest of his corporate sponsors, that is very bad news.
148
46
Jennifer Pahlka's profile photoJeff Hall's profile photoJohn Schiel's profile photoKirk Becker's profile photo
88 comments
 
I agree completely. Obama may be a big disappointment in many areas, at least he's trying to serve the public. Romney sounds like he's only going to represent his corporate backers, and everybody else will be out of luck.
 
Dear President Obama and Mr. Romney:

1) Science. 2) Technology. 3) Knowledge Empowerment.

Screw that understanding up - You screw everyone, regardless of how much money or what side of politics they are on. Got it Sirs?

Respectfully Yours,
Firestorm
 
I agree. I actually bought the whole Obama change thing. Obviously he didn't deliver. He has done a lot I don't agree with but some things that I have. It's just that every four years it usually comes down to two guys I don't think should be President but you have to pick the lesser of two evil's and Obama is a better choice then Romney IMO.
 
+Josh Fisher Normally I oppose the idea of choosing the lesser evil, but Obama isn't that evil, and Romney definitely is.

Still, the system needs to change so good candidates will also have a chance.
 
We are only 15 trillion in the hole, my money (if I had any left) would be on Obama to get us to 20 trillion in just one more term...God forbid.
 
In politics, you can serve the interests of money, or the people. I can't tell you which is better, but I can tell you that it's really hard trying to cram some old woman into the coin slot in a vending machine when you want a drink. And trying to go to a top class restaurant and paying the bill with two of your children doesn't work that well these days.

Apparently there was some emancipation proclaimithingy that stopped people being negotiable currency and a measure of personal wealth. Well, until credit cards became popular and personal debt became an asset that was bought and sold. Modern times eh?
 
+Martijn Vos , maybe the lesser of two evils wasn't the best way to put it but I'm very disappointed in Obama's continued tax breaks for the extremely wealthy and continuation of being the world police. The US obviously has a lot of issues to address so I don't think billions of dollars should be going to fight wars in the Middle East (Granted, oil has a lot to do with that. +Paul Hill , I would vote for Ron Paul in a heartbeat, he's obviously the smartest of the three.
 
4 years isn't very long with the inertia of a country to move. Give the man some more time!
 
Yeah, a lot of things he promised are apparently a lot harder than expected. I understand you can't pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan right away. And I understand he needs Congress' help on the tax thing. But have those people been released from Guantanamo yet? Or have they at least been charged with something? A while ago it seemed he was trying to get other countries to imprison them without trial.

And then there's the TSA, the way Wikileaks and Assange were treated, and assassinating Bin Laden instead of arresting him. Those are all definitely things he has power over, but he's going in the wrong direction.
 
Do you think that Romney will reduce the tax beaks for the wealthy or give them more.....?
 
Yes +Matthew Newberry , let's blame all that on Obama, considering he was sworn into office in the worse time in our economy since the Great Depression due to W Bush. W Bush came into the office with the biggest surplus in US history and after eight years we were in the biggest deficit in US history. Great job by W Bush.
 
Once again I find myself in a voting year with no one on the docket worth voting for. Amazing how all the best leaders are labelled as "unelectable" and then vanish soon thereafter. Fixing the US (and make no mistake, it is broken) will not happen in DC, no matter who is put there. Read the preamble of every State Constitution. They were all founded on God. All 50, without exception. We fix the US by starting in our own homes with a return to the Creator of us all.

"If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land." 2 Chr 7:14

We're doing everything we can to usher Jesus out of this country. Name me one problem that has solved for the American people. Maybe we should try inviting Him back in.
 
There are not only 2 choices +Tim O'Reilly ... the only waste of a vote is to vote for someone you don't fully believe in
 
+Josh Fisher I don't remember saying Bush did a great job, just don't think Obama even understands how the economy works. Let's see, I owe 100,000 to my creditor how do I get out of this hole, Oh I know I'll borrow and spend $65,000 more that always works!
 
+Robert Williams If you think the national debt is Obama's fault, you haven't done your homework. The folks trying to pin it on him are the ones who ran it up!
 
+Matthew Newberry And how much of that is due to Bush Tax Cuts that your congress won't allow to expire? How much is due to sustaining 2 expensive oversea's wars that were inherited? How much due to tax revenues falling off a cliff along with the economy in the biggest financial crash of our times?

Numbers are great. Context is better.

And considering that Romney announced plan for the economy involves not only cutting taxes further (which would cause a massive drop in revenue) but re-appealing measures that would cut spending and not presenting any solid plan to cut spending himself (just tinkering around the edges of some small ideological programs) I doubt he would do any better in fixing the debt problem.
 
+Jamie Hobbs I wish I could -1 you post. THERE IS TO MUCH RELIGION IN POLITICS. I know the majority of the US are Christians but what if you don't believe in Jesus?? Religion and Politics DONT belong together.
 
+Matthew Newberry if your 100k in debt you made some bad financial choices. Don't see how you can blame Obama for that one.
 
I didn't say anything about religion. I put zero stock in religion. It's an evil beyond anything this world has seen. Jesus has nothing to do with religion. If you don't believe me, read the Bible. He's very clear on His stance.
 
I vote Cuthulu. Why choose the lesser evil.
 
I don't think Obama is able to revert the tax cuts on his own, is he? So as long as Congress keeps blocking that, the debt keeps going up.

And if I'm not mistaken, the Bush tax cuts are the biggest part of the debt he created, even bigger than the two wars. And unable to revert those tax cuts or pull out of those wars on a moment's notice, it's not entirely fair to blame Obama for all of that debt. But he's not entirely without blame; there's still way too much money wasted on all sorts of fake security.
 
And not voting for Obama still gives a plus one too Romney!

Sent from my iPhone
 
It amazes me that we have to choose based on upon the concept of "the lesser of two evils"... Where are the other options? Like Ron Paul? Independents (whether Green or Libertarian Party)? Why do we put up with all the BS and just settle? They all have their best interests in themselves and their backers and if you think otherwise you have seriously diluted yourself. (stepping down off of soap box)
 
+Jamie Hobbs +Josh Fisher I think the US would be in a much better state if all the people who call themselves Christians acted like it. Love your neighbour, love your enemy, give half or all your possessions to the poor, visit the sick and imprisoned, turn the other cheek; the world could do with a lot more than that. But instead, religion is being used as a political stick without meaningful content (and what little there is, is hateful).
 
God is not required in the equation to balance good and bad thinking! Good, bad right wrong moral immoral are not based on god but on humanity and the belief in community!

Sent from my iPhone
 
God you guys don't get it, I never said that any of the past administrations did it right, but Obama has racked up more debt in four years than all the previous administrations combined. It is not a good thing and we need "Real Change". You can say I'm a kook all you want, but Ron Paul is the only one speaking any sanity to this issue.
 
+John Kutsor It's because of the retarded way the US electoral system works. Because of the first-past-the-post district system, only the two major parties get any meaningful representation at the national level, and it's possible to elect a president with less that 50% support of the people. Switch to equal representation and approval voting, and you'd get very different results.
 
Hear hear broadcast this to the world!

Sent from my iPhone
 
As far as the tax cuts go. Do you really think that corporation pay the tax increase? You increase taxes on a corporation, they increase prices to offset their cost, consumers pay more. You pay the tax increase on corporations. Revenue is not the problem, spending is the problem.
 
+Martijn Vos , yes, i totally agree, he obviously couldn't just pull out of the two wars we were currently in when taking office (but he did start some new ones in a way) and he can't just end the tax cuts on his own. are whole government is corrupt and this is not a Dem or Rep thing, it's both. Lobbyist are evil, all they do is make politicians rich and push through big businesses agenda's which is sad. This whole censoring the internet thing was introduced by politicians who's main backers where people from Hollywood to stop piracy. If you have enough money then you have the ability to get the government to do (or at least try) to push your agenda through which is wrong on so many levels. Also couldn't agree more about the Religion thing, Christians are either some of the nicest people you meet or the most judgmental people you meet.
 
You can't spend your way into prosperity, and a house is not an asset, it's a liability.
 
Disaster? We spend more than any other nation on public school, yet our rankings are mediocre.....Teacher Unions look out for teachers first.....just look in NYC, how teachers who comitted sexual misconduct, yet due to the teacher union, could not be fired...
 
+Matthew Newberry Your math is off. Obama racked up quite a bit of debt, but not as much as Bush, who really did rack up much more than all administrations before him (and it was his own doing, rather than the guy before him!). Reagan too, by the way. He also increased the debt by much more than all before him. Reagan was where debt got really out of hand.

Well, Rooseveldt also got quite a bit of debt of course, but that was all quite quickly repaid after the war. After Reagan, people stopped bothering with repaying the debt entirely.
 
I didn't want to make this into an Obama bashing session, just was pointing out that their are no differences between the parties in reality. I could spend hours on the stupid, disastrous things Bush did, Obama has done, hell all the way back to Roosevelt, but the point is we need to stop thinking we can spend our way out of this.

We need to make real cuts and real concessions to get back into a reasonable financial situation or we will be Greece in very short order and that bodes ill for the whole world.

Stop spending billions on foreign wars, stop sending billions in aide to our enemies and start spending it on the infrastructure that is failing in our own country.
 
"Disastrous" is a strong word. I don't see anything in this RepublicReport article that points to impending disaster. Romney seems to favor some for-profit schools and there are certainly problems with such companies; the over-recruitment and high loan default rates are well documented but predate Romney's candidacy by decades.

The author also gratuitously claims a high level of support for Romney among some financial workers--what a shocker! Mr. Halperin, however, omits the fact that Obama received strong support from the financial sector in 2008.

I have the impression the author of this article doesn't like Romney and wants to attach controversial or failed policies to him to make his campaign look bad.

As for rewarding supporters, let's just look at the UAW and GM. Candidate Obama wrote to the UAW: "I stand with you." GM went into bankruptcy. Obama rewarded the UAW with 25% ownership. That's right, the same guys who struck GM as recently as 2006, costing it billions of dollars, dragging it down with archaic work rules, are now in the driver's seat. Let's not even get into the Democrat-driven "stimulus" to unemployed teachers that sure smells like a reward for their 90-95% support for Democratic candidates.

Politics is a dirty business, and it's all driven by money and power, Mr. O'Reilly. I would have thought you would understand such things by now.
 
+Matthew Newberry , I also agree that Ron Paul would be the best choice for the next president. He actually has a grasp on economics. It's just plain sad that no one is taking him seriously because Politicians like to focus on what I think right now are non issues compared to the real issues to keep the American people arguing over things that don't matter in the grand scheme of things. No one is EVER going to agree on abortion, everyone is going to have their own opinion on it but it comes up every four years, now its immigrants that are taking all are jobs. These are non issues to me compared to other issues we have. One thing we could do is not make it so easy for big businesses in the US to send all the Jobs overseas. You do know that all Apple products are made in China right?? We should tax businesses more to move overseas so they would keep the jobs here. If you have never heard of FoxConn, look them up, they are plain evil but produce most of the electronic devices us US consumers eat up.
 
+Matthew Newberry I think there is a difference between the parties: democrats are mostly incompetent, whereas republicans are mostly evil. But you're right, they're both corrupt and need to go. I doubt that's going to work in time for this election, however, and Romney's ideas sound far more disastrous than anything Obama has been trying to do.
 
Regarding student loans, I agree that loans that reward over-recruitment should be scrutinized because of their high default rates, but I don't see how Obama's reforms are going to work. Reducing the interest rates, or otherwise easing the burden for borrowers is great election year politics but will not encourage people to be more realistic.

Universities raise their tuition and "fees" much more than inflation would justify, knowing that people will just borrow more to cover the extra cost.

If, instead of making it easier to borrow, we made it harder, it might cause enrollments to decrease, and that might just spur universities to better control costs and hold down tuition increases. Isn't this an idea worth considering?
 
+Matthew Newberry, How has Obama racked up more debt in 4 years? Sure the debt has increased in those 4 years but the clear facts are it was continuation of existing programs for the majority of it, not Obama's programs or actions. And that Obama has been taking action to wind up those programs. You can't quit a war overnight and despite repeated tries Republicans will not let the Bush Tax Cuts expire.

You seem to be into shooting the guy on watch, not the guy at fault.

You don't seem to understand basic economic theory either. If a guy borrows $10,000 and then uses it to start a business or conduct a project that returns more to him than the borrowing cost then he does indeed spend his way to prosperity. In fact that the only way people do produce prosperity, by using assets (ultimately financed by debt of some sort) to produce more than the asset (debt) value. That's called economic growth. There is in fact a saying, you must spend money to make money. I would suggest you read up on some economics, particularly by a very respected economist called Keynes.

You say revenue is not the problem, but spending is the problem. Except when you look at the numbers spending growth has been relatively constrained over the period from when the books were balanced last (Clinton Era) excluding one off costs such as wars and stimulus for the financial crash. The only real major growth in public spending has been healthcare which is what the healthcare reforms are supposed to start to put a lid on. However revenues have been cut due to unsustainable tax cuts that were enacted. Indeed the majority of the deficit in the result of lost revenue from various tax cuts which did not produce the promised growth to compensate (once again proving the failure of supply-side economic theory). Thus we can safely say that revenue is indeed the problem, not spending.
 
Obama is far from the change I (and quite a few others) voted for. For every good thing ("don't defend DOMA", ending DADT, saving the US auto industry), he has done several bad (force increase in Afghanistan, amnesty for the corporations who helped Bush warrantless wiretap, increased domestic surveillance, letting TSA ignore the fourth amendment - particularly at our borders, renewing PATRIOT, leaving Gitmo open, no accountability for Wall Street's executives). Still, he's far better than the crap sandwich that would be a Romney administration - that would be a return to the guilded age, complete with the elimination of the middle class and the agony of the poor.

Now for the paulbots: Ron Paul is a xenophobe and a closet theocrat. His (mostly naive) backers would have him withdraw from military engagements overseas only to their total surprise (or for those that are in tune with his dog whistles, delight) when he uses those forces to make our borders look like the Korean DMZ. He would have bibles in schools and minorities out on the street - or in internment camps. Paul is no more than a charismatic wingnut, just like Ayn Rand who inspired him.
 
This Republic Report article is highly partisan, and at best cherry-picks facts from the articles it references and is otherwise full of claims unsupported by evidence.

Before taking either side of the debate on education reform, I would encourage everyone to read more than a single, biased article.
 
To the gentleman who made the comment that he wished people who call themselves Christians would act like it... Amen. If you figure that one out, please let me know. I'll back your initiative 100%. That will save this country beyond anything an election can cure.
 
+Martijn Vos couldn't agree more. MOST republicans are evil (especially if the are on the far right) and democrats are incompetent (or to put it better pussies). When Obama first took office the democrats had the majority in the house and the senate, That's when he could of really got some stuff pushed through that I think would of helped this country. What happened instead?? The Democrats just argued with themselves and got nothing accomplished. One thing I can say for Republicans, they know how to get laws pushed through when they have the majority which is why Bush put so many crappy policies into effect.
 
+John Kutsor Ron Paul? Best for President? Not likely. Sure people might like him for his honesty of position and some ideological positions such as his opposition to foreign intervention and indeed most forms of intervention. But then you need to look at the rest of this policy positions. Which include:

1) Return to the Gold Currency Standard
See Greece, that's what happens to a country when they rack up debt and can't devalue their currency. Gold-Standard currency fixing leads to economic instability and hard shocks when a crisis occurs. America would no doubt still be deep in a depression if they could not devalue their currency through Quantative Easing.

2) Reducing and eliminating taxes.
Halving company tax, eliminating repatriation taxes (allowing for some truly gigantic tax avoidance loopholes), permanently extend Bush tax cuts. You would see government revenue fall off a cliff. Again. Not good when a country owes a lot of debt.

3) Eliminate such things as social security and Medicare.
Apparently states should all individually be responsible for their safety nets. Honestly this sort of stuff makes the whole point of being the United States of America becoming redundant and reduced to a loose alliance of states rather than a strong united country. Some people might say that's a good thing. Some people haven't looked at the downsides it would cause including political and economic instability and the potential to lead to a new civil war.

4) Eliminate 'onerous' government regulation.
You know all the regulation that was put in place to stop the banks and financial firms from causing a repeat of the GFC? Yeah, say bye-bye to that.

And the list goes on...

As a ideologist and inspiration he might be doing some good but if he was actually in a position to enact this kind of stuff? Expect the economy to collapse.
Tim Box
 
Mind you the smells some people give of when you stand next to them often make me wish I could pull out a gas mask.
 
+Scott Barnden There was a persuasive article in the WSJ about two years ago advocating a return to the gold standard for the same reasons that you are saying--it would stabilize the currency and reduce cyclical problems. I don't pretend to understand such things--who really does?--but the article made some good points. My understanding is that Greece's problem is not with gold, but with over-extending itself in the public sector and failing to produce enough in the private sector to compensate. Isn't Greece's currency the Euro, by the way, which is not gold-based?

Romney is not an ideologue, but a pragmatist. Obama is an ideologue par excellence. His Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu, advocates high gasoline prices in order to spur the development of alternative fuels, a ridiculous attitude for a country in recession. The price of gasoline directly affects hundreds of millions of Americans in the cost of food, clothing, and transportation, and this idiot "believes" in raising prices? Obama clearly supports this kind of policy; he refuses to allow the Canadian pipeline to be built and has been largely silent about shale energy which, if allowed, would propel the U.S. into the role of a major energy exporter.
 
U all seem so passionate, bravo! Put on your thinking-caps now & ask yourself this: which candidate favors the 1% & which doesn't? AMERICA IS OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL!!
 
America started out exactly that way. Opportunity for all. And as bad as things have gotten, it still is. But it's definitely on the brink of being something entirely different. But one thing that we Americans seem to have forgotten is that this country did not create liberty. Liberty created this country. We need to get back to individual liberty if we're to survive. Because I guarantee everyone that Liberty will survive, in this country or elsewhere. I pray it lives here.
 
+Terry Traub Greece's currency is indeed the euro, but Greece doesn't control the euro, and can't devalue it. Germany, a far bigger economy, fights inflation at all costs, and the cost seems to be Greece.
 
+Terry Traub Returning to the gold standard can stabilize a currency but that can be a VERY bad thing unless you have a problem with hyper-inflation.

The point I made with Greece is that they are on the Euro, whose value is set by the amalgamation of the Eurozone. Effectively they have fixed their currency, just like what would happen with putting it against a gold standard. One of the currently proposed solution to Greece is to exit the Eurozone, which would un-peg their currency and allow it to float independently. When this happens the value of their currency would drop like a stone and likely halve in value and their debts would correspondingly drop. Thus their level of debt and spending would no longer be constrained by the currency value and would all of a sudden become much easier to service and no longer the issue it is. If they have trouble paying them then they accept a little bit of inflation and allow their currency to devalue, resulting in a lower debt burden with higher costs of imports, higher value of exports and devaluation of assets held in that currency.

Many experts pin the severity of the great depression on the adherence of the gold standard and the result after that is every country abandoned it.

And as for gas prices, sorry, no administration is in control of them. And building the Canadian pipeline would increase the cost of gas for most of America while having minimal effect on global oil prices. If you somehow think it would help with current gas prices, sorry, you have been lied to. Gas prices are currently set by speculation, not demand. And the pipeline is only about transporting oil from a domestic market where the abundance of supply is resulting in lower gas prices for North-West America to the international market where it can be priced and sold at the higher international benchmark price.
 
+Scott Barnden The sad thing for Greece is that devaluation might not reduce their debt. Their foreign debt is in euros and will stay that way. They only way to get out of that is some sort of bankruptcy.
 
+Scott Barnden The Great Depression had a number of contributing factors but gold's role is still debated. The stock market crash of 1929 signaled the beginning of the depression, and it was due not to a rigid currency valuation but to a stock bubble much like that of 1999. When that huge sum of artificial wealth evaporated, many banks collapsed and so did many people's life savings. To make matters worse, many people were in debt from "revolving payments" on goods they could not afford. Then in 1932 the Hoover Administration signed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff act which effectively ended foreign trade until after WWII. The icing on the cake was the enormous income tax increase in 1932, coupled with excise taxes, which undoubtedly helped to prolong the depression.

Gasoline price is a very hot political topic; it deeply affects every American, and most presidents especially in an election year have made it a priority. Obama is an exception. Of course we all want to get off dependence on foreign oil, and fossil fuels in general, but the fact remains that cheap energy is necessary in the short to medium term for economic growth. For example, cheap natural gas because of fracking is driving an increase in domestic plastics production. There are at least two new ethylene plants coming online that rely on natural gas. The ancillary economic activity surrounding energy production is massive--pipes, equipment, trucking, housing, etc. North Dakota is booming right now, with 3% unemployment, because of energy production.

Getting back to the topic... weren't we talking about student loans and how evil Romney is, or something like that?
 
+Martijn Vos Ah, but their debts are not in Euro's as such. Their debts are in Greek issued Euro's and Eurobonds. Each country in the Eurozone issues their own bonds and Euro currency independently even though the value is set across the Eurozone. If they left the block they would cease to be legal tender and swapped for Greek Drachma and Greek Drachma bonds which would then float independently and be able to be devalued. The result is a lot of foreign investors would see the value of their Greek holdings drop massively in value but Greece would not actually default on those debts, those debts would just be worth less than originally due to the devaluation.

That is the great flaw of the Eurozone. Each country issues its own version of the Euro and their own bonds based in that currency independently of the bloc. However the value of those currencies and bonds are agreed to be interchangeable, effectively fixing them against the external standard of the total bloc. Which is why German Euro Bonds are giving 0% interest and being snapped up while Greece can't even sell theirs.
 
Uh, corps, such as AARP who gave much $$$ will benefit to the tune of Billions when Obamacare goes through..
 
Consider the source! Bias reporting is worse then no reporting at all! There are numerous untruths in this article. Research for yourself for once
 
don't you just love how balanced the lead to the article is? re-electing Obama will not only bankrupt America financially, it will lead to continuation of the type of ludicrous "logic" that leads to serious people exposing when they should stick to their actual field of business ...
 
+Robert Zoky What untruths are you referring to? What are your sources that show other wise?
 
Read about Mittens' plans for higher education.
 
John Adams
2nd U.S. President and Signer of the Declaration of Independence

"Suppose a nation in some distant Region should take the Bible for their only law Book, and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited! Every member would be obliged in conscience, to temperance, frugality, and industry; to justice, kindness, and charity towards his fellow men; and to piety, love, and reverence toward Almighty God ... What a Eutopia, what a Paradise would this region be."
--Diary and Autobiography of John Adams, Vol. III, p. 9.
 
Thomas Jefferson
3rd U.S. President, Drafter and Signer of the Declaration of Independence

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever; That a revolution of the wheel of fortune, a change of situation, is among possible events; that it may become probable by Supernatural influence! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in that event."
--Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII, p. 237.
 
I'm gonna stop there, but if they had it figured out then, why in the world are we trying to rebuild the wheel? I'm praying that the "Christians" in America are revived to action!
 
+Terry Traub I didn't say that the gold standard CAUSED the depression. I stated that it worsened the severity of it. And that is backed up by the data. During the period of the depression every country abandoned the gold standard and the empirical data shows that the sooner they abandoned it the faster the countries recovery from the depression was regardless of any other action taken.

Also, the while the tariff bill did cause significant pain and make things worse the income taxes had marginal effect, as would be expected since income taxes are progressive and made on income not asset. In other words they don't reduce economic activity much due to the fact they are applied only to a portion of the benefits of the economic activity, not on the activity itself. And so long as they are not so high that the after tax reward for the activity is unattractive compared to the effort of the activity they do not reduce the engagement in economic activity.

The tax hike that made it worse was the 'check tax' passed at the same time which severely constrained money supply by charging people to spend money. In other words people had to pay a tax on engaging in economic activity regardless of it reward.

Income taxes were raised even higher afterwards by FDR to help pay for WW2 but due to good old Keynesian spending the economy was fine, and indeed it was application of Keynesian spending and inflationary monetary policy that ended the depression and returned to growth, even prior to WW2 although the growth was still anaemic prior to war breaking out.

And gasoline is a politically hot topic. Its also a fake one since neither administration would have any real control over it. Domestic exploration and production has greatly expanded under the Obama administration and really there would be no difference regardless of who is in the office. The Canadian pipeline has nothing to do with domestic supply at all since all it does it makes it cheaper for Canada to sell their product on the international market as a higher rate then they are currently getting domestically for it.

Indeed the only real relaxing of the price that happened due to any administrations actions or could happen short of changing taxation around it or introducing tariffs or subsidies was the release performed by the Obama administration from the Strategic Oil Reserve which dampened speculation and lowered the price.
 
+Scott Barnden Scott, your data is wrong concerning the gold standard during the depression. America was not on a true gold standard at all during the depression, as banks were only backing up a very small portion of paper money/notes with actual gold. It was their criminal lending practices and lending out inflated amounts of currency that caused extended the depression. If the gold standard had been followed as intended, then the depression would not have lasted as long as it did, nor would it had been as devastating. So, I would definitely recheck your available data, as it seems to be the same data that Bernanke seems to use in his so-called research.
 
This only goes to show that Romney is out of touch with mainstream Americans.
 
+Martijn Vos Relating to the public as a whole, Obama is hands down the best choice. IMHO.

Granted, he didn't keep some promises he made, when running for the presidency initially. But how much of that can be contributed directly towards congress.

If anyone remotely thinks that the blatant obstructionist practices by those who mortgaged their souls to the Tea Party and Grover Norquist's pledge, had nothing to do with some of those failures, is simply short sighted!

Now, thanks to the supreme court's ruling that 'Citizens United' is constitutional, the conservatives now have a nominee, that even they themselves don't like.

But..." corporations are people too", and they helped Romney out spend the very conservatives who warned other conservatives about Romney's behavior of jobs destruction via venture capitalism.

Some are now even crying for the implementation of policies - austerities - similar to those put in place in Greece, Portugal and Spain - although they're having a disastrous affect upon those countries economies that have survived for thousands of years.

My future - I believe - is better in the hands of someone who picked himself up by his bootstraps, went to college ( Columbia and Harvard), on student loans (and paid them all back), as opposed to someone who was born on a Kashmir sheet, rinsed with bottled water and slapped on the his ass with an Isotoner glove.

Yet, the hatred of our current president (by some) seems to eclipse their love for their country, which is a constitutional right. Hence, this is why we vote!
 
Tim O'Reilly is probably rewarding his donors with this post.
 
+D C Robbins , you tell me my data is wrong and then don't even give any kind of source to back that up?

There is a wealth of research from the period all showing that abandoning the gold standard and allowing currencies to float did more to bring countries out of the depression then any internal monetary policy. And the only people complaining about it all adhere to the Austrian School of economics which only has a passing relationship with data and reality and tend to publish their complaints in blogs or editorials as opposed a serious publications referencing real data. This is the school of economics that gave us "Austerity theory" and "Trickle down economic theory" remember?

You can argue ideology all you want but in the end the raw data shows a strong correlation between economies leaving the gold standard and their rate of recovery after doing so with a compelling theoretical model all supported by decade of economic data and currently being well demonstrated by the events happening in Greece because even though their currency is pegged by the value of the Euro-bloc as opposed to gold, it still is the exact same principle, just replace gold with German Eurobonds. You want to argue against Bernanke's analysis of the great depression show me some refuting papers which reference the raw data which demonstrates why his analysis is wrong. His analysis which also happens to be held by the consensus of world economists, fringe Austrian School economists aside
 
I couldn't disagree with you more... like your tech books though.. : )
 
Lots of claims in this thread. Where's the homework? Give us some better information. This looks reasonable, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget

3.8 trillion dollars is a lot of power for 486 people to wield. Why would you expect outside influence to not get involved? Why would you expect that this outside influence would not come in the form of businesses?
 
The man suggests that parents gain control over how federal education funding is executed on behalf of their children and he's suddenly carrying water for corporations. You are so very wrong. My solution would include removing federal funding for education all together.
 
+Justin Virly Spending on wars is part of the military industrial complex that this country has surreptitiously embraced as being patriotic! That is why many conservatives treasure it so much.

Even Ron Paul - who I think is a nut job on most things - is right on this point!

Going into weaker countries, with vigilante quotes from Hollywood movies, isn't foreign policy!

But it makes some feel tough. Yet, at the nation's expense, while defense contractors profit!

Investing in our future is viewed as socialism by some. But investing in military might is somehow unquestionably chivalrous.

I wish people would realize that muscle flexing jargon like, "Go ahead; make my day!" and "I'll be back!", isn't a threat to those who believe that killing themselves - in the process of killing us - is glorious!

Defense spending is necessary, but only when its used in justifiable defense. Investing in education, infrastructure and people should be a paramount priority.

Although it's clear that, swinging through the jungle, 'bare chested' and armed, doesn't frightened the natives anymore, some will continue to call it patriotism, and anything outside of it - socialism!
 
+Ryan Tanton you're gravely mistaken, sadly. The trouble with plausible-sounding wrong ideas is that they sound plausible. Try reading some of the literature on the subject of privatised education, maybe a book or two, by social scientists who study the topic, not Ann Coulter or Ayn Rand. Ah heck, why do I bother? You probably think climate change and evolution are communist conspiracies.
 
Sorry, as a District Technology Coordinator, I have watched the federal money allocated to technology in public education dwindle down to $0. It has become painfully obvious that President Obama will say whatever he can to get re-elected.
 
+Jonathan Harker I should hire you to write my autobiography since it appears you can easily complete a conversation between us without bother of my side of the discussion. You've successfully circled your liberal wagons around the typical pillars of insecurity and ensured that fact and responsibility are well trampled under wheel. By the way you forgot to compare me to Hitler in your comment. I certainly do not think climate change and evolution are Communist conspiracies, anyone with half a brain knows they are mere deception tactics keeping us from realizing Tom Cruise really is a vampire.
 
+Ryan Tanton sure whatever. Please explain how "removing federal funding for education all together" can be aligned with anything resembling "facts", much less real-world evidence.
 
Looks like everyone forgot about Jon Hunstman. Sure, he's a quirky dude that can speak Mandarin, but he's a proven leader in Utah that i think should have had a fair chance in the primaries.

Also, it's time to get rid of the two-party institution. Eliminating the need to have fear of the other party will allow our govt to focus rather than quarrel and bicker.
 
Why can't state and local governments play a bigger role in funding education?
 
+Anthony Topper Good question. Probably because there are many people in power in state/local gov'ts that don't want it taken away from them.
 
I would like to see more community colleges offering 4-yr degrees (there are some). This could help put downward pressure on the cost with traditional colleges.
Add a comment...