Political inexperience aside, for arguments sake, if you were offered the job of president, do you think you could a better job than our current and previous president (Bush II) have and are doing? I realize the scope of the job is far greater than the few issues dominating the headlines now, but it seems like people are sick of politicians ruled by lobbyists and campaign donors and the bi-partisan bickering. From what we've seen in the past 9+ years, it almost seems like the common man not obligated to self interest groups could adequately perform the job with common sense and good advisers. Maybe I'm just fed up with how our divided we are as a people, the inability of our inept leadership to unite us as a nation and the unacceptable direction this country is moving in.
i would do a better job than both on economic issues, not because i am a genius, but because i could appoint the sort of advisers that understand the specific implementations of the smaller government policy i favor. on foreign policy, i would be hard pressed to do better than bush, and i dont feel like obama has really been so terrible. foreign policy is far more complicated than domestic fiscal policy. here are some minor things i would do. definitely not in order of importance. 1. all drugs legal 2. incredibly aggro foreign policy with respect to terrorism and states that sponsor it. 3. less taxes for everyone, by a wide margin 4. abolition of maybe half of the cabinet departments, including energy and agriculture and HUD and others. this means no farm subsidy. 5. investment in infrastructure, interstates, high speed trains, etc 6. no marriage for anyone. civil unions for anyone who wants. 7. privatization of social security 8. no more tax breaks for churches 9. no anti monopoly legislation 10. gays allowed in military 11. no rules enforcing net neutrality 12. copyright laws relaxed severely. people allowed to distribute almost any info freely if not for profit. 13. all barriers to free trade immediately abolished. 14. all anti-discrimination laws repealed. 15. no minimum wage 16. senators calling for investigation of sports rules or steroids or whatever are punched in the face by forrest griffin number 13 and 2 and 4 are the ones that really matter. the rest is lagniappe. of course, i am not old enough to legally be president.
i am not sure i understand your question. perhaps because you are asking it stupidly. the proper way to ask that question is as follows: would you keep the fed, and if so, why? my answer is i do not know.
I apologize if I have offended you. In this thread or anyother. I disagreed with you, but thought it was funny. I also quoted the Constitution, to help you make your deciding.:thumb:
pretty sure you didnt offend him. you just dont make any phucking sense. are you john and this is what happens when you try to speak wo quotes?
John Smith? Alright, apparently it is hard to understand what I ma trying to say I times, I will make an effort to type in complete sentences.
thats cool. i dunno what you mean about disagreeing with me, i took the red way out and had no position. the fed is complicated and i genuinely do not understand what would happen if we didnt have it, or why exactly we need it. i dunno if your quotes meant to you favor or oppose the fed. i dont even know exactly who runs the fed. it is kinda the government, but kinda banks. i really couldnt know less about it. i know most right wingnuts hate it, presumably because it creates inflation. but is inflation really that bad? (dont take that question as an invitation to explain it. i am lazy about this topic and cant be bothered. when i am elected president i will hire someone for this one.)
