It's been close to a year... Thoughts on Obama

boo boo · 04-20-2010, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conan

Thirded!

Fuck the moon.

C'mon, it's not as simple as "oh hey we've been there already we go back?"

If we're gonna ever have a successful manned mission to Mars we're gonna need stepping stones. Taking funding away from the Lunar program is like giving a big f*ck you to 40 or so years of progress, preparation and research.

Guybrush · 04-20-2010, 01:41 AM

I'm not sure what the value of a manned mission to Mars would be, really. Sending up robots seems easier and much, much cheaper. Perhaps one could think of it as a step in a plan to terraform Mars, a planet with about 11% the mass of earth which has no electromagnetic field and can't hold on to an atmosphere .. but those plans can probably wait a presidential period or two. Stemcell research can benefit us in so many ways right here and now.

edit :

Sorry for the random reply .. This is about lunar missions of course

Manned missions to the moon is not something I would prioritize over stemcell research I guess is what I mean to say.

**Janszoon** · 04-20-2010, 04:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boo boo

C'mon, it's not as simple as "oh hey we've been there already we go back?"

If we're gonna ever have a successful manned mission to Mars we're gonna need stepping stones. Taking funding away from the Lunar program is like giving a big f*ck you to 40 or so years of progress, preparation and research.

As much as I think people going to Mars would be cool, I'm not really sure "it would be cool" is a valid enough reason to spend billions of dollars on something. As others have pointed out, there's a lot of scientific research that's a lot more important, even if it's less glamorous.

IamAlejo · 04-20-2010, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duga

Changing it now would not be for "the sake of changing it". Our economy has failed. Several times. I'd say that's pretty good evidence of it not working and that we should probably rethink it.

The economy is a cycle. I'm not sure you can say entering a recession is "failing". And if that's the case, just how many economies haven't "failed"?

boo boo · 04-20-2010, 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Janszoon

As much as I think people going to Mars would be cool, I'm not really sure "it would be cool" is a valid enough reason to spend billions of dollars on something. As others have pointed out, there's a lot of scientific research that's a lot more important, even if it's less glamorous.

Considerating the issue of overpopulation and using up our resources, I think there's more to colonizing other planets than it just being "cool".

Space colonization, the possibility of terraforming planets, it's DEFINITELY something worth thinking about regarding the future and prsoperity of the human race. Maybe not a hundred years down the line, but I think we need to look beyond that as well.

We can ensure that things will be better for us a few 50 years down the line, but we should also think about what will happen to us several centuries or even millennia from now, that's by no means a trivial thing, even if it's not terribly urgent. It's something worth thinking about and investing research in.

duga · 04-20-2010, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAlejo

The economy is a cycle. I'm not sure you can say entering a recession is "failing". And if that's the case, just how many economies haven't "failed"?

That argument is ridiculous. Entering a recession is a nice way of saying our economy just ****ed up. I'd call that a fail. So we should just all accept that every few years, we are going to have to put up with this? I'm sorry, but that just sounds dumb. Band-aiding the system and setting it up to do the exact same thing again years down the road is totally wrong. We should have changed the way we do things the first time everything went to hell.

IamAlejo · 04-21-2010, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duga

That argument is ridiculous. Entering a recession is a nice way of saying our economy just ****ed up. I'd call that a fail. So we should just all accept that every few years, we are going to have to put up with this? I'm sorry, but that just sounds dumb. Band-aiding the system and setting it up to do the exact same thing again years down the road is totally wrong. We should have changed the way we do things the first time everything went to hell.

So any time a country enters a recession it means that the economic system is a failure? Are you kidding me?

Your ideas on economy baffle me. For the third time, is this something you've been taught or just random thoughts out of your head?

duga · 04-21-2010, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamAlejo

So any time a country enters a recession it means that the economic system is a failure? Are you kidding me?

Your ideas on economy baffle me. For the third time, is this something you've been taught or just random thoughts out of your head?

So I'm not allowed to think critically? I guess we have something in common, because your acceptance of things "as is" baffles me.

I'm not talking about recessions. Recessions happen, and if they stayed recessions then we could all go about our business. I'm talking about full on crashes. We call what is going on now a "recession" just to keep people from freaking out. The economy may be recovering, but the job market sure isn't. What about the early 1900s? What about the Great Depression?

Have you seen the unemployment rate? Have you been paying attention to the retarded ****ing ways the government has been trying to fix it? As someone on the receiving end of that, I think I have a reason to think things don't work the way they should. Where is it written that we should just bend over and take it because "that's just the way it works".

There are acceptable limits of economic fluctuation, but in my opinion (and yeah...it's my opinion)...this is WAY BEYOND THEM. I call that a ****ing failure.

Now, instead of just picking at my arguments how about you provide something valid. As in, how do you think we just have to accept this? Why do you think we should just leave things the way they are? So far, you haven't said anything at all to convince me otherwise.

IamAlejo · 04-21-2010, 03:17 PM

Unemployment rates are a lagging indicator, if the economy is recovering, the first signs would be shown in the market and then unemployment follows. So pointing that the market is recovering while jobs aren't doesn't prove much of anything. That has nothing to do with how any economy is run (you can't work around it), that's just economics.

And great point with the Great Depression, when we started to get out of it the Government thought it would be a great idea to not run on so much of a fractional reserve, and doubled the Reserve Ratio, thinking banks would be willing to lend out more because they had more in their reserves and didn't have to worry about a run on their accounts. Instead the opposite happened, banks held on to even MORE money than before, and liquidity came to a halt. This led to the double dip.

Liquidity was one of the major problems with the recent economic downturn, following right along side the housing bubble which was because of bad loans given out by the banks and shady people lying on their loan applications.

You can't just point to every problem and go "oh, it's cause the central bank". No, it's not.

You can think critically all you want, but you're thinking poorly and don't have any idea as to what you're talking about.

duga · 04-21-2010, 03:38 PM

I was simply pointing to the unemployment rate as an indicator of how bad things actually got, not how they look now. As much as things are bad right now, I have no doubt it will get better at some point. I mentioned it simply because it is my opinion that our system should not have even allowed for it to get so bad. With 100 years behind the Federal Reserve, economists accurately predicting slumps and recessions, and several recoveries thus far we should have been able to prevent this. However, we can all sit back and beg the Reserve to do something different, but they don't have to listen at all.

If it seemed like I was blaming every single problem on the central bank, I wasn't. Sorry if it came off that way. However, since having a central bank is the most basic point of how we run our monetary endeavors, I can say that it has even an indirect hand in the aspects I don't agree with. I just flat out hate the idea of a central bank, and that feeling might be why it seems I am just blaming everything on that.

We've tried the little fixes, and surely they have worked in recovery thus far. However, if all it does is get things settled until the next big recession, I think things need to be fixed at the source.

04-20-2010, 01:41 AM	#82 (permalink)
Guybrush Juicious Maximus III Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Scabb Island Posts: 6,525	I'm not sure what the value of a manned mission to Mars would be, really. Sending up robots seems easier and much, much cheaper. Perhaps one could think of it as a step in a plan to terraform Mars, a planet with about 11% the mass of earth which has no electromagnetic field and can't hold on to an atmosphere .. but those plans can probably wait a presidential period or two. Stemcell research can benefit us in so many ways right here and now. edit : Sorry for the random reply .. This is about lunar missions of course Manned missions to the moon is not something I would prioritize over stemcell research I guess is what I mean to say. __________________ Something Completely Different

04-21-2010, 03:17 PM	#89 (permalink)
IamAlejo Muck Fusic Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Virginia Beach Posts: 1,575	Unemployment rates are a lagging indicator, if the economy is recovering, the first signs would be shown in the market and then unemployment follows. So pointing that the market is recovering while jobs aren't doesn't prove much of anything. That has nothing to do with how any economy is run (you can't work around it), that's just economics. And great point with the Great Depression, when we started to get out of it the Government thought it would be a great idea to not run on so much of a fractional reserve, and doubled the Reserve Ratio, thinking banks would be willing to lend out more because they had more in their reserves and didn't have to worry about a run on their accounts. Instead the opposite happened, banks held on to even MORE money than before, and liquidity came to a halt. This led to the double dip. Liquidity was one of the major problems with the recent economic downturn, following right along side the housing bubble which was because of bad loans given out by the banks and shady people lying on their loan applications. You can't just point to every problem and go "oh, it's cause the central bank". No, it's not. You can think critically all you want, but you're thinking poorly and don't have any idea as to what you're talking about. __________________ a man, a plan, a canal, panama Last edited by IamAlejo; 04-21-2010 at 03:24 PM.

04-21-2010, 03:38 PM	#90 (permalink)
duga MB quadrant's JM Vincent Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 3,762	I was simply pointing to the unemployment rate as an indicator of how bad things actually got, not how they look now. As much as things are bad right now, I have no doubt it will get better at some point. I mentioned it simply because it is my opinion that our system should not have even allowed for it to get so bad. With 100 years behind the Federal Reserve, economists accurately predicting slumps and recessions, and several recoveries thus far we should have been able to prevent this. However, we can all sit back and beg the Reserve to do something different, but they don't have to listen at all. If it seemed like I was blaming every single problem on the central bank, I wasn't. Sorry if it came off that way. However, since having a central bank is the most basic point of how we run our monetary endeavors, I can say that it has even an indirect hand in the aspects I don't agree with. I just flat out hate the idea of a central bank, and that feeling might be why it seems I am just blaming everything on that. We've tried the little fixes, and surely they have worked in recovery thus far. However, if all it does is get things settled until the next big recession, I think things need to be fixed at the source. __________________ Confusion will be my epitaph...