BoltProspects Community Forums  

Go Back   BoltProspects Community Forums > Miscellaneous > The Room

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #19541  
Old 10-06-2019, 09:14 AM
dannybolt's Avatar
dannybolt dannybolt is offline
Bingo Bob's Intermission Contest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Pete
Posts: 1,727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
If we’re going to play this game, I’d rather we went back to 2000 and the guy with the most votes had won. 9/11 never happens. The national debt gets paid off sometime next year. Global climate change is on the decline. The international economy is an unstoppable juggernaut and the Great Recession never happened.

And the greatest scandal of the past 19 years was that the POTUS’ that followed were all boring intellectuals with morals and ideals.
And we are all gazillionnaires and we all get our own pony!
__________________
Ondrej Palat fan club member
Reply With Quote
  #19542  
Old 10-06-2019, 09:21 AM
the_narrow_way's Avatar
the_narrow_way the_narrow_way is offline
Cooper's Law
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 4,917
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
If we’re going to play this game, I’d rather we went back to 2000 and the guy with the most votes had won. 9/11 never happens. The national debt gets paid off sometime next year. Global climate change is on the decline. The international economy is an unstoppable juggernaut and the Great Recession never happened. And the greatest scandal of the past 19 years was that the POTUS’ that followed were all boring intellectuals with morals and ideals.
/signed
Reply With Quote
  #19543  
Old 10-06-2019, 09:24 AM
pete's Avatar
pete pete is offline
BP Staff
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,214
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dannybolt View Post
And we are all gazillionnaires and we all get our own pony!
Wrong. Because ponies produce methane, and methane is a gas that contributes to climate change.

Seriously, though, if Gore becomes POTUS it’s highly likely 9/11 never happens, which means the first Dubya recession never happens. And, even if 9/11 had happened, there’s no way in hell the Iraq War happens under Gore’s watch, nor the Dubya tax cuts. It’s a completely different world if the guy who got the most votes in 2000 wins. People forget we were actually running budget surpluses when Clinton left office and that the Clinton Administration was actually more focused on Al Qaeda because of the USS Cole bombing.

Moral of the story: bad shit happens in democracies when the person who gets the most votes doesn’t get to hold power. The shit shows known as Dubya and Trump’s presidencies are the proof.
__________________
S-S-S-S-Stammermeter 2019-2020: 05
Reply With Quote
  #19544  
Old 10-06-2019, 09:31 AM
BurnTHalO's Avatar
BurnTHalO BurnTHalO is offline
Steven Stamkos' One Timer
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Marietta, OH
Posts: 7,144
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphockey View Post
All trump talk aside for a moment, I think that in all this one question I need answered is ... what is Biden do, and how come that issue is not being scrutinized as well?
There must have been a reason why trump was inquiring,
Are you serious?
Reply With Quote
  #19545  
Old 10-06-2019, 09:54 AM
dannybolt's Avatar
dannybolt dannybolt is offline
Bingo Bob's Intermission Contest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Pete
Posts: 1,727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
Wrong. Because ponies produce methane, and methane is a gas that contributes to climate change.

Seriously, though, if Gore becomes POTUS it’s highly likely 9/11 never happens, which means the first Dubya recession never happens. And, even if 9/11 had happened, there’s no way in hell the Iraq War happens under Gore’s watch, nor the Dubya tax cuts. It’s a completely different world if the guy who got the most votes in 2000 wins. People forget we were actually running budget surpluses when Clinton left office and that the Clinton Administration was actually more focused on Al Qaeda because of the USS Cole bombing.
Iraq war most likely not, but I'm not buying the bullshit that 9/11 or a similar attack doesn't happen as Bin Laden had already bombed the WTC once during the Clinton Administration and none of the underlying issues that lead to the bombing had been addressed under the Clinton administration. It wasn't as if 9/11 happened at the end of Bush's first term, it was 8 months into his first. It is highly unlikely that Gore, who didn't run on Al Qaeda as his motivator would have been more likely to keep it from happening. He would have had his administration focused on environmental issues and trying to keep the economy moving (Re: It's the economy, stupid). It would not make political sense for him to deviate too radically from what Clinton did, as he would have been broadly expected to be a third Clinton term, who wasn't exactly a "great society" guy. Further, Gore would have won by a thin margin, and would be unlikely to govern as if the Democrat wish list you indirectly refer to, were a mandate.

As for the taxes and deficit, the bursting of the tech bubble which also contributed to the recession, as well as the natural business cycle could have lead to a recession, and Democratic policy at the time (post Clinton), would most likely have also lead to payroll and income tax cuts. Like Bush's tax cuts, they likely would have had a sunset provision. Bush's tax cuts were only made permanent later on, with bipartisan support by the way, so I find your rationale for what would have been done under a hypothetical Gore Administration as far as taxes go, to be dubious. As I think 9/11 (or similar event) would have happened either way, it is most likely that the surplus would have gone away, as Democrats are more likely to push for tax increases to fund the resulting war against the Taliban, in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This would also weaken the economy, so its possible the answer would have been to run deficits instead.

What I'm getting at is you take an overly rosy view of what would have happened under a Gore administration.
__________________
Ondrej Palat fan club member
Reply With Quote
  #19546  
Old 10-06-2019, 10:51 AM
pete's Avatar
pete pete is offline
BP Staff
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,214
Default

Fair enough. I can't say with 100% certitude we avoid 9/11 under Gore, except to say that it's well documented that the Bush Administration did not take Al Qaeda seriously as a threat prior to 9/11 to the same degree the Clinton Administration had. The Clintonistas knew from the Trade Center bombing and the USS Cole that bin Laden was a big problem. By all indications, the Bush Administration team was still operating in a Cold War mindset of focusing solely on other nation states. And if 9/11 is avoided, the first Bush recession (now a Gore recession in this fantasy scenario) likely would've been a minor soft landing recession. IMO.

There's no way in hell you can tell me with a straight face that a Gore Administration would've allowed taxes to be cut as deeply as the Bush Administration did (estimated actual decrease in tax revenues of $1.6-$1.8T between 2002 and 2009), or pushed deregulation as aggressively. Just, no way. Democratic policy makers might've done targeted middle class tax cuts. There's ZERO chance, for instance, a Gore Administration does away with the Estate Tax. None.

In either event, as you already agreed, the Iraq War never happens. The Iraq War, financially, cost this country somewhere between $2.4 and $3T depending on whether you believe the CBO or Joseph Stiglitz's estimate. When you combine the cost of that war with the price tag of Bush's tax cuts, that's a $4T price tag. Because of the fiscal inflexibility of Bush boxing himself in due to increased spending and decreased tax revenues and the general inflexibility of Republican orthodoxy regarding tax cuts/deregulation, you got the paralysis that happened in DC in 2008 as the Great Recession was starting to break loose. Even if you don't grant me that a Gore Administration would've been more likely to see the dangers in deregulation and the various banking bubbles caused by them, I think you have to grant me they'd have taken more steps a la what Obama eventually did in 2009 to ameliorate the problem rather than hiding under their desks while the sky was falling like Bush and the McCain campaign did. For whatever else they may have had as flaws, the Clintonistas around Gore knew a hell of a lot more about the economy than the Republican establishment did at that time (albeit, that's a damned low bar to clear).

Now let's take a look at the cash and prizes behind Door #2 that we didn't get when the Supreme Court installed Dubya as POTUS. Let's consider a post 2000 world where Gore uses the surplus to safeguard Social Security for the next two generations and makes combating climate change his number one foreign policy agenda item. In the former case, good Lord, I don't think there's a soul in America who would have a problem with safeguarding Social Security from a moral standpoint alone. Remember, vice versa, the Bush Administration actually floated privatizing Social Security in 2005 after his re-election, which formed part of the foundation of Democrats' "thumping" midterm victory in 2006. In the latter case, remember I'm a GD hardcore Keynesian, so I ask you to consider the effects on economic growth that the conversion of America's energy infrastructure from a carbon-based economy would've conveyed to us. We've ceded huge swaths of market share in green technologies to the Germans, Chinese, etc., that we'd be controlling with an iron fist today as first adopters had Gore been POTUS. Consider just this one fork in the road, for instance: the Bush Administration's slavish devotion to the oil industry not only informed their reckless foreign policy, but it also led them to do idiotic things like refuse to adopt more efficient CAFE standards to try to bring the gasoline consumption of guzzling SUV's like the Ford Explorer to heel. There's a direct line between the stagnation of innovation at US auto makers during the Bush Administration and the auto industry bailout that had to happen in 2009. Does that happen if Gore is POTUS and he's forcing them to innovate their product? I honestly don't think so. Again, we ceded too much market share to foreign companies instead of being first adopters and holding down the lion's share of the market today.

One other thing that we completely lost as a result of the fork in the road in 2000: any semblance of international institutions capable of dealing with global security problems. The Bush Administration, in their desire to make war in Iraq, once and for all gutted the UN because it wouldn't go along with their bogus WMD claims. There's a direct line between Dubya's willingness to cut the UN off at the knees and Trump's willingness to do the same to NATO today. That has led, IMO, to increased instability in the world and the rise of right wing authoritarianism around the globe. We eroded our ability to combat it because of Dubya.

Finally, let me point out the most obvious consequence of 2000 in our politics: Dubya was the anti-intellectual candidate. Dubya's "victory" made anti-intellectualism into a virtue in Republican circles. Being a dumbass suddenly became politically cool, because it was more important to be able to have a beer with your POTUS than to know your POTUS wasn't going to be led around like a child by Dick Cheney into a war that would cost us over 4,000 Americans and over 182,000 non-combatant Iraqi civilians with that previously mentioned $2.4T-$3T price tag. Now look at the erosion of the Republican Party into the bastion of pig-like trollish idiocy and tell me it doesn't directly trace back to 2000 when electing the dim-witted seed of an ex-POTUS in a brazen display of political nepotism was deemed THE thing to do. You got Trumpism because of Dubya. He opened the door to moronic, corrupt dipshittery being the raison d'etre of the Republican political machine.

And that is why, to my dying day, if you ask me what the exact moment was that American got turned sideways, it was 2000. Ironically, white middle America punishing a good man (Gore) because they couldn't punish Clinton for getting a BJ in office set in motion 16 years of events that led to another illegitimate POTUS to take office... who oh by the way paid hush money to porn stars and bragged about grabbing women by their genitals without their consent.

IOW, that escalated quickly.
__________________
S-S-S-S-Stammermeter 2019-2020: 05
Reply With Quote
  #19547  
Old 10-06-2019, 11:00 AM
pete's Avatar
pete pete is offline
BP Staff
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 13,214
Default

Quote:
BREAKING: Attorney representing whistleblower who sounded the alarm on Pres. Trump’s dealings with Ukraine tells @ABC
News he is now representing a second whistleblower who has first-hand knowledge of events.
https://twitter.com/GStephanopoulos/...156289536?s=20

Quote:
Whistleblower’s lawyer says team now representing ‘multiple’ officials
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/s...273482753?s=20

The career civil servants in the government are rising up. And lest any Republican donuts think that's somehow proof of some shadow government cabal, your Hobo Shitlord, Steve Bannon, admitted that "Tha Deep State" is a fictitious concoction designed to get mouthbreathers like DubDub worked up.

Quote:
New James Stewart book will reveal Bannon acknowledging “deep state” is contrived bullshit. New Chris Wylie book will detail how Bannon’s Cambridge Analytica tested “deep state” susceptibility long before Trump campaign. Both on Random House this month.
https://twitter.com/profcarroll/stat...064684032?s=20

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...spiracy-theory
__________________
S-S-S-S-Stammermeter 2019-2020: 05
Reply With Quote
  #19548  
Old 10-06-2019, 11:41 AM
dannybolt's Avatar
dannybolt dannybolt is offline
Bingo Bob's Intermission Contest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Pete
Posts: 1,727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
Fair enough. I can't say with 100% certitude we avoid 9/11 under Gore, except to say that it's well documented that the Bush Administration did not take Al Qaeda seriously as a threat prior to 9/11 to the same degree the Clinton Administration had. The Clintonistas knew from the Trade Center bombing and the USS Cole that bin Laden was a big problem.
and yet they hadn't solved it, but Gore would have in the first 8 months.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
By all indications, the Bush Administration team was still operating in a Cold War mindset of focusing solely on other nation states. And if 9/11 is avoided, the first Bush recession (now a Gore recession in this fantasy scenario) likely would've been a minor soft landing recession. IMO.
Disagree, but we covered that already.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
There's no way in hell you can tell me with a straight face that a Gore Administration would've allowed taxes to be cut as deeply as the Bush Administration did (estimated actual decrease in tax revenues of $1.6-$1.8T between 2002 and 2009), or pushed deregulation as aggressively. Just, no way. Democratic policy makers might've done targeted middle class tax cuts. There's ZERO chance, for instance, a Gore Administration does away with the Estate Tax. None.
Agreed on the estate tax; they also probably would have done a larger stimulus package than the $300 checks that the Bush Administration sent out to everyone (my memory is hazy on how much they did for stimulus, though). This also supports my point that the surplus from the Clinton Administration was a goner regardless because I don't think 9/11 or the early ought recession (see points on dot com bubble, 9/11, and continuing Clinton legacy) was avoidable if only Gore had been elected.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
In either event, as you already agreed, the Iraq War never happens. The Iraq War, financially, cost this country somewhere between $2.4 and $3T depending on whether you believe the CBO or Joseph Stiglitz's estimate. When you combine the cost of that war with the price tag of Bush's tax cuts, that's a $4T price tag.
To be replaced by as much climate funding as Gore could get through. I fully admit that is a far better way to spend funds, but you can't just say that Gore wouldn't spend money in one area and take all the "credit" without considering what he would have done alternatively. He never would have gotten authority from congress to spend to the $3T level though. I'm not sure how much of that is still in our budget, but it definitely would have lead to smaller overall deficit, but those hypo benefits would have likely been ameliorated at least in part in the increased social safety net spending you suggest later in your post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
Even if you don't grant me that a Gore Administration would've been more likely to see the dangers in deregulation and the various banking bubbles caused by them,
I absolutely don't. Policies (and legislative capture) of both sides caused the financial collapse. Gore would have made zero difference, there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
I think you have to grant me they'd have taken more steps a la what Obama eventually did in 2009 to ameliorate the problem rather than hiding under their desks while the sky was falling like Bush and the McCain campaign did.
I dunno, maybe. Now you are like three layers deep in hypothetical modeling, acknowledging no downsides and only modeling best case. I'm highly skeptical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
For whatever else they may have had as flaws, the Clintonistas around Gore knew a hell of a lot more about the economy than the Republican establishment did at that time (albeit, that's a damned low bar to clear).
Again, color me skeptical. Let's not pretend Clinton moved to the middle economically because he was some enlightened genius (and a stable one at that, haha); but because he got over his skiis and the populace put a Republican House majority in as a check. He moved to the middle and worked out some pretty politically savvy, as well as mutually beneficial legislation. Whether Gore had that same ability we will never know. Clinton's self-preservational political abilities and natural charisma had never been evident in Gore, so I find it highly unlikely that he would have been able to pivot to counter Republican action as you imply.

Your next couple paragraphs are again, two-three layers deep in your best case scenarios, so I'm just going to give you a blanket: Based on my knowledge of Democrats as professional self dick shooters, penchant for taxing and spending (rightly or wrongly), and my working knowledge of how politics, taxes and economies are intertwined: I'm highly dubious of models that take an overly rosy view of Keynsian economics in expansionary economies, political assumptions that go more than 2 years out, especially if they don't consider opposition reaction and strategy, and especially geo-political factors, and don't include a natural business cycle in their calculus.

There's a couple dozen handfuls of points to make on how easy you make it seem to shift off of a carbon based economy (It really fucking isn't), but I don't feel like subjecting anyone to the multi-page effort it would take. Suffice to say: Why don't we just skip on over to Mars with Willy Wonka while we are at it? It's just that simple, right? C'mon dude, you're doing flips now you are so far over your skiis.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
Finally, let me point out the most obvious consequence of 2000 in our politics: Dubya was the anti-intellectual candidate. Dubya's "victory" made anti-intellectualism into a virtue in Republican circles.
This is probably your best and most salient point. And one which I agree with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
You got Trumpism because of Dubya.
And there you go putting it all one one side without acknowledging the damage your own party did by ignoring the factors that lead to the 2008 collapse, which were driven by both parties (Bank deregulation, Glass-Steagal repeal, unintended consequences of both should be owned by both parties as both were bipartisan under the Clinton administration, predating Bush). Further, to assume the banking lobby had little influence in the Democratic party and any resultant legislation is to stretch believability to the realms of the most incredible science fiction. You make it sound like if only we had elected Gore, all of our problems would be solved. To sum: LOL, nope.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
IOW, that escalated quickly.
Yup.
__________________
Ondrej Palat fan club member

Last edited by dannybolt; 10-06-2019 at 12:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19549  
Old 10-06-2019, 12:05 PM
RSchmitz's Avatar
RSchmitz RSchmitz is offline
Steven Stamkos' One Timer
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 8,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
If we’re going to play this game, I’d rather we went back to 2000 and the guy with the most votes had won. 9/11 never happens. The national debt gets paid off sometime next year. Global climate change is on the decline. The international economy is an unstoppable juggernaut and the Great Recession never happened.

And the greatest scandal of the past 19 years was that the POTUS’ that followed were all boring intellectuals with morals and ideals.
True, that's not the two options I gave though
__________________
If no government system will guarantee a utopia, then our best choice is to look for the least exploitive one
Reply With Quote
  #19550  
Old 10-06-2019, 12:07 PM
Donnie D's Avatar
Donnie D Donnie D is offline
Steven Stamkos' One Timer
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Sarasota
Posts: 8,768
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dannybolt View Post
Probably should throw some links in there, guys, if you are making definitive statements on what has/has not been investigated and what has/not been found as a result.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-...en-and-ukraine

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...or/3785620002/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...den-in-ukraine

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/09/23/pol...w.cnn.com%252F

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/10/06/pol...www.cnn.com%2F
__________________
The irony of targeting the son of a White House occupant for making money in foreign markets seems to escape the Trump family.

Last edited by Donnie D; 10-06-2019 at 12:29 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2005-2008, BoltProspects.com. All Rights Reserved.