|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Mon May 26, 2008 10:12 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| And I concede that being thoughtful isn't necessarily a good trait to have as President. |
?? |
Well what I mean is, it might not be good if a President ponders and sits there, trying to think of the perfect solution. Sometimes you need to be decisive and follow your gut. That's all I meant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 2:24 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
To suggest that Obama is not differentiating his own position on Cuba from George Bush's is indicative of someone "failing to critically evaluate [their] own motives in being so quick to accept that which [they] want to accept about this 'story'."
| Quote: |
TAPPER: Sen. McCain today criticized you for flip-flopping on whether the embargo against Cuba should be lifted and criticized your willingness to sit down with raoul castro as na�ve. Your response?
OBAMA: This is a typical approach of John McCain and that is to distort my record and embrace George Bush's record. The fact is, eight years go John McCain suggested maybe we should lift the embargo and since that time nothing's change. We don't see more freedom for the people of Cuba but John McCain is embracing the same no talk, hard line attitude that has led to no progress and no improved conditions of the Cuban people for 50 years.
Let's be very clear about what I've said. We should look at loosening up remitances and travel restrictions for Cuban Americans so they can travel to the island, be with their families, and send money there as a gesture of good faith as Fidel Castro is transitioning. I also think we should open direct talks with Cubans without any preconditions but with a whole lot of preparation. Unless they release political prisoners, start instituting free press, and other steps to democratize the island, we won't lift the embargo. But we are looking to normalize the situation. That's common sense. That's the new approach to foreign policy that is needed because the last eight years won't work for the next president and John McCain keeps embracing policies that don't work and that is part of what this election will be all about. |
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/05/interview-with.html
I'd say the above comments show a bit more "nuance" than that he just wants to pander to Florida Cubans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 4:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| We'll see if he really is or not. And I concede that being thoughtful isn't necessarily a good trait to have as President. |
I was with you up until that comment.
McCain has been running around sucking up to the conservatives and hugging Bush. In the Pandering Sweepstakes, it looks to me like he has the lead by four or five lengths. One disavowal of a nutcase preacher does not invalidate my point.
It's my understanding that pandering only occurs when a candidate contradicts himself in different venues. Is Obama on record as saying something different about relations with Cuba? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
happeningthang
Joined: 26 Apr 2003
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 5:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
Well, first of all, I mostly know Bobster and Bucheon Bum as pompous asses who moralize and preach from time to time. The latter also pms messages to posters who stalk me here, where together they apparently track positions I have taken years ago, so I hope you would not judge me too harshly by anything I throw their way. 
Secondly, you ought to relax and see the tongue in the cheek where there is one.
I know you see it for what it is. Cheers.
|
Gopher!! You're a playful little scamp! I had no idea.
| Gopher wrote: |
| Finally, apparently you object to the allegation-driven discourse when directed against those whose politics you share. I will keep that in mind the next time you get involved in an allegation-driven exchange from the other side, Happeningthang. |
This is tongue in cheek too, right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| We'll see if he really is or not. And I concede that being thoughtful isn't necessarily a good trait to have as President. |
I was with you up until that comment.
McCain has been running around sucking up to the conservatives and hugging Bush. In the Pandering Sweepstakes, it looks to me like he has the lead by four or five lengths. One disavowal of a nutcase preacher does not invalidate my point.
It's my understanding that pandering only occurs when a candidate contradicts himself in different venues. Is Obama on record as saying something different about relations with Cuba? |
I don't know about Cuba, but I believe Obama's free-trade bashing is pandering. His infamous remark in SF would indicate as much. I would also view pandering as saying you support something even if you know it is the wrong policy (but are not open about that). I think that's the case with Obama's position on ethanol and "alternative" energies. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| ... I believe Obama's free-trade bashing is pandering |
There is significant skepticism in academic and policy economics about conventional trade theories. I, for one, am nearing former free trader status.
I think I support Warren Buffett's idea, from a 1987 WaPo editorial, that an equal balance of trade must be a policy goal. To do this, a certificate of importation must be used to import any good. This certificate would be bought on a market from a firm or individual who had exported. The certificates wouldn't be for specific goods, but for dollar value of goods.
The above would lessen American consumer spending. Less consumer spending would be socially and economically good for the country. It would also increase American production, which would be politically, socially and economically good. I see some problems with it, but I think WB might be on to something.
Maybe what I need is to reread Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage and reinvigorate my ideological blinders. Maybe it is good that the country is heavily in debt, drunk on "bottle service" and so on. Maybe not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
May 27th, 2008 at 3:45 pm[b]
Hey Barack, Iran Doesn�t Want to Talk to You. Now What?[/� by Bill Dupray From the New York Times
Iran�s alleged research into designing nuclear warheads remains a matter of serious concern and needs �substantive explanations�, the U.N. nuclear watchdog said on Monday.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) also said in its latest report on Iran that Tehran had 3,500 uranium enrichment centrifuges working at its Natanz underground nuclear facility, a slightly higher number than earlier this year.
The agency said it had not been given access to Iranian nuclear-related sites that it asked to see in April.
Wait a minute. The IAEA talked to Iran and asked them to let them see the sites and Iran . . . refused? But I thought talking was the stuff of Hope and Change. It must be because President Obama hasn�t actually sat down for a chat with old Mahmoud yet.
But even if Obama were the president, we�d still have a fly in the ointment. Apparently the Iranians don�t want to talk to the United Nations. Barack never told us what would happen if our enemies didn�t want to talk to us. I thought Iran, Cuba, and Venezuela were just waiting for us to talk to them, but because George Bush refused, they were sitting home pouting and waiting for The Talker to be elected in November.
The IAEA has been pressing Tehran for answers after Western intelligence alleged that Iran had covertly studied how to design atomic bombs. Iran has dismissed the intelligence as baseless, forged or irrelevant.
�Substantive explanations are required from Iran to support its statements on the alleged studies and on other information with a possible military dimension,� the agency said in its report.
�We have not got substantive answers and we could have gotten those earlier,� a senior U.N. official said. �It�s up to Iran (now).�
Now what Senator Obama?
http://patriotroom.com/?p=389 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| ... I believe Obama's free-trade bashing is pandering |
There is significant skepticism in academic and policy economics about conventional trade theories. I, for one, am nearing former free trader status.
I think I support Warren Buffett's idea, from a 1987 WaPo editorial, that an equal balance of trade must be a policy goal. To do this, a certificate of importation must be used to import any good. This certificate would be bought on a market from a firm or individual who had exported. The certificates wouldn't be for specific goods, but for dollar value of goods.
The above would lessen American consumer spending. Less consumer spending would be socially and economically good for the country. It would also increase American production, which would be politically, socially and economically good. I see some problems with it, but I think WB might be on to something.
Maybe what I need is to reread Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage and reinvigorate my ideological blinders. Maybe it is good that the country is heavily in debt, drunk on "bottle service" and so on. Maybe not. |
The only examples of true free-trade are Singapore and Hong Kong. They seem to be flourishing.
Also, according to economic theory, a large country as the united states actually prospers more from a certain level of trade barrier; free trade is not the optimal option. That of course is assuming other countries don't have barriers themselves (which they in fact do).
The USA isn't in its present state due to free trade. I'd say it was due to loose credit and fiscal policy of the past decade or so. And why would less consumer spending be good? Just curious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| happeningthang wrote: |
| This is tongue in cheek too, right? |
Very well. I stand corrected. 
And for the record, it appears to me that the Clintons have become desperate. And they and their supporters in the press are beginning to hurl all the mud they can sling, praying that something, somewhere sticks and turns this race around at the eleventh hour. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2008 8:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
The only examples of true free-trade are Singapore and Hong Kong. They seem to be flourishing.
Also, according to economic theory, a large country as the united states actually prospers more from a certain level of trade barrier; free trade is not the optimal option. That of course is assuming other countries don't have barriers themselves (which they in fact do).
The USA isn't in its present state due to free trade. I'd say it was due to loose credit and fiscal policy of the past decade or so. And why would less consumer spending be good? Just curious. |
Singapore and Hong Kong are unique cases. Singapore has as official policy free trade but uses other means to protect certain industries. For one example, the primary distributers of consumer electronics are state-owned and sell imported goods to mass-market outlets as prices higher than domestic made goods (Creative MP3 players, for example).
Singapore is not flourishing now, at all. Their Q4 2007 was a negative 4.8%, off a whopping 7.4 percent from government projections. Inflation is an acute issue.
Hong Kong has a very special place in the world. They are now the financial capital of China. They don't need trade. They have Chinese money.
I think the US needs more savings and less consumption. In my opinion, the horribly excess levels of expected consumption on the middle classes have polluted elements of Western culture in recent years. That is my very subjective opinion.
But the credit based consumption was financed by a loose monetary policy. No disagreement. The trade deficit is a very acute problem, however, and bringing sanity to this would go a long way to stabilizing the economy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2008 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| bucheon bum wrote: |
The only examples of true free-trade are Singapore and Hong Kong. They seem to be flourishing.
Also, according to economic theory, a large country as the united states actually prospers more from a certain level of trade barrier; free trade is not the optimal option. That of course is assuming other countries don't have barriers themselves (which they in fact do).
The USA isn't in its present state due to free trade. I'd say it was due to loose credit and fiscal policy of the past decade or so. And why would less consumer spending be good? Just curious. |
Singapore and Hong Kong are unique cases. Singapore has as official policy free trade but uses other means to protect certain industries. For one example, the primary distributers of consumer electronics are state-owned and sell imported goods to mass-market outlets as prices higher than domestic made goods (Creative MP3 players, for example).
Singapore is not flourishing now, at all. Their Q4 2007 was a negative 4.8%, off a whopping 7.4 percent from government projections. Inflation is an acute issue.
Hong Kong has a very special place in the world. They are now the financial capital of China. They don't need trade. They have Chinese money.
I think the US needs more savings and less consumption. In my opinion, the horribly excess levels of expected consumption on the middle classes have polluted elements of Western culture in recent years. That is my very subjective opinion.
But the credit based consumption was financed by a loose monetary policy. No disagreement. The trade deficit is a very acute problem, however, and bringing sanity to this would go a long way to stabilizing the economy. |
My only qualm with what you write about is pointing out Singapore's hurting economy right now When I used the term flourishing, I meant long-term. Singapore's per-capita GDP is equal or above many EU countries. It has made huge strides in the past few decades.
But thank you for providing info on the state's role in the economy, quite informative. I will also concede that both HKG and Singapore are special cases. Nevertheless, economics and history seem to indicate that the more economically open a country is, the easier it is to prosper. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 4:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Privateer wrote: |
| Americans seem to have a different visceral reaction and I wonder why that is. |
Which Americans, Privateer?
People outside America, especially in the Commonwealth, have long essentialized us and missed the obvious partisan differences that appear, for example, in the "red" and "blue" states, not to mention the sociocultural variations and differences deep under the surface that an even more nuanced and sensitive analysis might recognize.
And what about Michael Moore, Keith Olbermann, and Rev. J. Wright's "visceral reactions," not to mention all the Americans to whom they appeal? People like you do not see Americans as they are, then. You merely see the easy abstractions and stereotypes that you have constructed for your own purposes -- and if postmodernists are correct, and in Canada's case, they almost certainly are, you have constructed these easy abstractions and stereotypes to define yourselves.
In any case, Ya-ta Boy points this out when he cites the 2000 election, where approximately half the American electorate had "the visceral reaction" you would approve of. But I think Ya-ta Boy's "W. Bush lost the popular vote" overstates the 50,999, 897: 50,456,002 outcome. This election was literally too close to call. And, in any case, W. Bush won five more electoral college votes than Gore and the United States Supreme Court affirmed his victory. So like it or not, and many Americans certainly do not, Privateer, W. Bush won the election and is in office constitutionally/legally. |
I see you have a problem with my making generalisations about Americans but you have no problem stereotyping me as yet-another-kneejerk-anti-American. If it makes you happier I will qualify my statement that "Americans seem to have a different visceral reaction" to "A larger proportion of Americans seem to have a different visceral reaction (to mine) than is the case in other countries".
Really I find this continual need to preface every generalisation we make with a disclaimer or qualifier to avoid the inevitable retort "Not all Ys are Zs...You can't possibly say all Ys are Zs" a bit wet, a bit inhibiting, but I'm willing to modify my statement anyway.
And also I'm not so much trying to approve or disapprove of American tastes - that would be arrogant - as understand. It's as if there was a country where a food that just about everyone else regards as disgusting is popular. Not everyone within the country likes it, and not everyone outside the country dislikes it, but it's a lot more popular there than elsewhere. That makes me curious: what is there to like about this repugnant seeming dish, called Republicanism? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MissSeoul
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere in America
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 12:21 am Post subject: Re: WHAT'S OBAMA GOT THAT THE OTHERS DON'T HAVE? |
|
|
| bookemdanno wrote: |
What's Obama Got That the Others Don't Have?
|
He is a great orator, he is like John F Kennedy + Martin Luther King. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bookemdanno
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
MissSeoul observed:
| Quote: |
| He is a great orator, he is like John F Kennedy + Martin Luther King. |
Well, I wouldn't be so quick to put him in such exalted company. He's a fine speaker, certainly, and has moments of eloquence. I'll give you that. JFK had great speech writers like Sorenson and Schlesinger, who wrote most of his famous speeches. King came from the oratorical tradition of the Black Baptist South, the Christian Leadership Conference. His speeches had a rhythm and cadence I have yet to hear in Obama, though the latter indeed has potential. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jkelly80
Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Location: you boys like mexico?
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bookemdanno wrote: |
MissSeoul observed:
| Quote: |
| He is a great orator, he is like John F Kennedy + Martin Luther King. |
Well, I wouldn't be so quick to put him in such exalted company. He's a fine speaker, certainly, and has moments of eloquence. I'll give you that. JFK had great speech writers like Sorenson and Schlesinger, who wrote most of his famous speeches. King came from the oratorical tradition of the Black Baptist South, the Christian Leadership Conference. His speeches had a rhythm and cadence I have yet to hear in Obama, though the latter indeed has potential. |
Obama has a 26 year old speechwriter from Taxachusetts. Pretty damn impressive, even if it is basically elegant fluff. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
