• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Where is the Center

By the way, Obama inherited an economy in freefall thanks to your boy GWB. I know it hurts to hear that---and I realize your desperate attempts to blame Obama are instinctive, but most see right through this tired tea party charade of yours.

Actually, the root causes of the recession are a bit harder to pin on any individual or party. While Bush added to the debt with the Iraq war, the housing and mortgage situation is pinned to legislation that enforced equal housing opportunity at the expense of traditional measurement of the ability to pay back loans. In this case, the road to hell was paved with good intentions, and there is enough blame to tar both parties and all their leaders.
 


Actually, the root causes of the recession are a bit harder to pin on any individual or party. While Bush added to the debt with the Iraq war, the housing and mortgage situation is pinned to legislation that enforced equal housing opportunity at the expense of traditional measurement of the ability to pay back loans. In this case, the road to hell was paved with good intentions, and there is enough blame to tar both parties and all their leaders.

Well put. I do agree with that.

Of course all because lenders were willing to lend, doesn't mean you have to borrow an amount you'll have trouble paying back. Many of those borrowers are more to blame than anyone.

That mentality is still alive and well in various economic strata. Many households have little to no savings, yet everybody, for example, still gets the latest iphone, cost be damned.

Is it any wonder the country is in such debt? Our reps in DC are a reflection of most Americans: Buy it NOW, worry about paying the bill LATER. How can anyone be surprised that the fed government is run the same way as the average American household?
 
Last edited:
Don't blame that on the President unless you give him the budget to hire them. Corporate America is to blame for the hiring situation, not because of taxes or sales, but because of corporate greed paying CEOs billions of dollars. All the money that should go to hiring is going to them. But meanwhile, conservatives want to shrink the size of government. Most of the job losses are in federal and state jobs, not the for-profit world. This President has been campaigning to use the unemployed to help rebuild our infrastructure, but Congress won't give him the money. Sure the government is running a deficit, because corporations are still refusing to pay their fair share of taxes. On the one hand, they're not hiring, and on the other, they're not paying taxes. That's where the problem is.

The fact is that the economy is in MUCH better shape. Anybody who follows the stock market or corporate profits can tell you that business is MUCH better now than in 2008. A lot of the people who were hurt in the mortgage crisis have been taken care of. Millions of people have refinanced their homes because of historic low interest rates. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae have recovered from near-bankruptcy 6 years ago. The insurance companies, brokerage companies, banks, automobile, and other industries that were on the brink of bankruptcy 6 years ago are healthy and posting record profits.

There is a lot more to the picture than your narrow view. This is why we need someone in radio to provide listeners with the rest of the story, as Paul Harvey once did.

Sorry Charlie, no cigar on that one. As far as a "budget to hire them" this President has added over $1 TRILLION to the national debt PER YEAR that he has been in office, and the economy is NOT is better shape by any measure. The percentage of the population that is employed is at a 35 year low. The stock market is being propped up by artificially low interest rates and printing presses printing money that is backed by nothing as fast they can. A record number of Americans are on public assistance and the requirements to even look for work have been eliminated - by Obama personally. Yep - it is all the fault of those greedy corporations - that's the ticket. You do know what we are "buying back" our bond debt with right? Freshly printed currency backed by nothing except the "good faith" of a government $17 trillion in debt.

As far as shrinking the government, I would ask that you cite one thing the government can do more efficiently than the private sector even with executives making millions. Everything the government has tried is going bankrupt - USPS, Medicare, Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae, Social Security, etc. All of this is due to no competition - look at the VA hospital fiasco. When you are the only option you can do whatever you want. The USPS is going bankrupt, yet UPS and Fedex are enjoying record profits, despite them providing the same service. Yet somehow you think we should grow the government despite record debt and epic failures like Obamacare and the VA. I respectfully disagree.

As far as everything being "recovered" now you leave out many negatives as well. For every homeowner who refinanced, at least one or more lost their home to foreclosure. Home prices are at 25 year lows and the construction industry may never be the same again. And how were those hurt by the mortgage crisis "taken care of"? By the taxpayers that's who - translation: more national debt. For every bank, insurance company, automaker, and other industries who are now doing well there is one or more who are gone, so all is not rosy as you claim.

The claim that the corporations are "not paying taxes" is the best one though. The US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world, but somehow they still aren't paying enough. There is ample evidence that raising taxes past a certain point is a growth killer. You want them to invest in new employees while at the same time you want to tax them even more - why invest if there is no upside? The money will do you more good in the bank as a reserve for the next financial meltdown, as opposed to subjecting yourself to the extra risk of new employees and technology with little or no upside. And what are the higher taxes you want going to be used for? Helping grow the economy? Nope - just more handouts and entitlements designed to keep the Democrats in office. If you are receiving a government check every month and you know the those racist Republicans are going to try to balance the budget and may cut your free money train, who are you going to vote for? We are approaching the tipping point on the handouts - look where Greece is today and you will see where it will lead us if it is not curtailed and soon.

The $17 trillion debt is the largest issue facing this country. If we balanced the budget tomorrow and paid $10,000,000 a day toward the debt it would take 5,000 YEARS to pay it off, despite it only taking 40 years to get this deep. Yet it is all the fault of those greedy corporations. Nice try, but I am not buying it.
 
Last edited:


I would temper that statement by saying that corporations are expanding and hiring in countries where the tax rate is much lower. The United States has the highest corporate tax rate of any developed nation, plus the fact that those profits are taxed twice via the taxes on owner's income from dividend distributions. Add in the increasingly complex regulatory environment plus uncertainty about energy and compliance costs and many businesses are relocating manufacturing and even corporate headquarters somewhere else... the most recent being the announcement by one of the major drug manufacturers, Phizer.


Your logic is going to fall on deaf ears. All people hear is "CORPORATIONS NOT PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE" and they parrot it without even questioning why we have the highest corporate tax rates in the civilized world. I guess the highest rates just aren't high enough.
 
There isn't an entire movement on the left to put racists in office the way there is on the right with the tea party.

Gottta love how those blacks-are-scary stats are right at your fingertips---even though crime stats involving blacks had NOTHING to do with the conversation. LOL

You can't even help yourself. You're either consciously or subconsciously trying to justify all this racist garbage from the tea party by demonstrating how dangerous and scary black people really are. You're pathetic.

By the way, Obama inherited an economy in freefall thanks to your boy GWB. I know it hurts to hear that---and I realize your desperate attempts to blame Obama are instinctive, but most see right through this tired tea party charade of yours.

You started the "racist" nonsense, not me. You somehow expect people to just accept your name calling, yet when you are shown some justification for some negative views of blacks you can't muster a response other than more name calling.

And the lefts' "it's all Bush's fault" is getting pretty old. At what point - we are now 5 1/2 years into Obamanomics - is the current leader responsible? In your view - never.

Your personal opinion that all tea party people are racist could be considered racist all by itself, so you may not want to cast stones when you yourself are making broad generalizations and calling an entire group racist.
 
Your logic is going to fall on deaf ears. All people hear is "CORPORATIONS NOT PAYING THEIR FAIR SHARE" and they parrot it without even questioning why we have the highest corporate tax rates in the civilized world. I guess the highest rates just aren't high enough.

Except for all the corporate welfare. Close to $100 billion worth a year. Shhhhh.....don't tell anybody.
 
Last edited:
Well put. I do agree with that.

Of course all because lenders were willing to lend, doesn't mean you have to borrow an amount you'll have trouble paying back. Many of those borrowers are more to blame than anyone.

That mentality is still alive and well in various economic strata. Many households have little to no savings, yet everybody, for example, still gets the latest iphone, cost be damned.

Is it any wonder the country is in such debt? Our reps in DC are a reflection of most Americans: Buy it NOW, worry about paying the bill LATER. How can anyone be surprised that the fed government is run the same way as the average American household?

Most Americans maybe, but that is actually a main reason the Tea Party even exists. Out of control government spending is going to wipe us out, but because the balancing of the budget must include some cuts to entitlements, they are "racist".
 
That's the wingnut way! Fingers in ears: "la la la la la".

Let's call it what it is: You tea party types hate the President because he's a black guy. You pretend it's all these bogus made up reasons, but that's really what it comes down to and everybody knows it. You operate without conscience and it's disgusting. Thank God your ilk is slowly disappearing by attrition.

I knew that was coming - it is all because he is black. I just "made up" Obamacare and $7 TRILLION in new debt. Very predictable.
 
As far as a "budget to hire them" this President has added over $1 TRILLION to the national debt PER YEAR that he has been in office,

Take out your copy of the Constitution. The President doesn't have the power of the budget. That belongs to Congress. Newt Gingrich takes the credit for Clinton's surpluses, so this Congress need to accept the blame for the debt. If the debt is the biggest issue, it's up to the Congress to do its part. Instead, they shut the government down, costing even more money. The founding fathers created this government with THREE equal branches. You can't blame only one for all the problems. That's what's wrong with talk radio, and why listeners are deserting the format.

The rest of your post ignores all the record corporate profits, the record CEO salaries, the stock market records, and even the growth of some sectors of private industry, such as technology. It even ignores the growth in radio sales, although that growth is tempered by talk radio. It's important that the public airwaves provide the REAL story of what's going on. Just focusing on the negatives isn't resonating with the majority of the population, and you can check out the ratings for proof. If your station reflects your views, you're not properly serving the public interest with the whole story. It's pretty obvious that if talk radio continues on its current path, it will be gone in five years. Meanwhile, the United States will remain strong and free, regardless of all the negatives you can come up with.
 
For the national debt, yes. Well maybe not the judicial, but there is plenty of blame for spending. You're way off base with the evil corporations nonsense, though.

Never said they're evil. I gave them as evidence of a strong economy.

The problem with the judicial now is we have conservative judges who want to legislate from the bench. All three branches are to blame for this situation.

What it has to do with is providing balance to news & talk, which is missing. Not because of regulation, not because it's popular or profitable, but because the people who work in talk radio believe they're right. At some point, the radio CEOs are going to do the self-regulating here, because it's the one part of their company that's not growing. When personal ideology stands in the way of radio profits, you'll see change. And I think we're just about there now.
 
Last edited:
Take out your copy of the Constitution. The President doesn't have the power of the budget. That belongs to Congress. Newt Gingrich takes the credit for Clinton's surpluses, so this Congress need to accept the blame for the debt. If the debt is the biggest issue, it's up to the Congress to do its part. Instead, they shut the government down, costing even more money. The founding fathers created this government with THREE equal branches. You can't blame only one for all the problems. That's what's wrong with talk radio, and why listeners are deserting the format.

The rest of your post ignores all the record corporate profits, the record CEO salaries, the stock market records, and even the growth of some sectors of private industry, such as technology. It even ignores the growth in radio sales, although that growth is tempered by talk radio. It's important that the public airwaves provide the REAL story of what's going on. Just focusing on the negatives isn't resonating with the majority of the population, and you can check out the ratings for proof. If your station reflects your views, you're not properly serving the public interest with the whole story. It's pretty obvious that if talk radio continues on its current path, it will be gone in five years. Meanwhile, the United States will remain strong and free, regardless of all the negatives you can come up with.

Great points, but you're trying to reason with a hyper-partisan practitioner of selective outrage.
 
The problem with the judicial now is we have conservative judges who want to legislate from the bench.

Oh, good lord. This is so wrong I don't even know where to begin.

What it has to do with is providing balance to news & talk, which is missing.

The balance is everywhere else. Or as one host used to say "I am the balance". If you're getting your information from one source, you're going to get unbalanced info. Radio is no less balanced than TV, newspapers or the Internet. This idea that somehow talk radio is damaging the country is ridiculous.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom