Scratch

zubblewu wrote:

and it's much harder to build something than to tear it down.

I guess Bush liked the easy choice 

zubblewu wrote:

Obama inherited in his position a terrible economy. He saved us from the situation we were headed into. The economy was crumbling when he took office, and it's much harder to build something than to tear it down.

I agree with you on one thing, Bush had a terrible economic plan, and yes, some stuff like the housing market collapse could be traced back to bush, but after 2 or 3 years, we should have been doing somewhat better, not going further into sixteen-trillion dollars of debt.

I expect most of you to blame 5 trillion on the wars that bush reluctantly declared and blame the rest on big business.

zubblewu wrote:

I think I've figured out Romney's secret history! He's a time traveller from after the French Revolution to make things right again! Combine church and state, no taxes for the clergy, low taxes on the wealthy, and everything else on the middle class and poor!  It's much safer now, since we won't use a guillotine on him 

You're funny 

zubblewu wrote:

Claude_Monet wrote:

zubblewu wrote:

I think I've figured out Romney's secret history! He's a time traveller from after the French Revolution to make things right again! Combine church and state, no taxes for the clergy, low taxes on the wealthy, and everything else on the middle class and poor!  It's much safer now, since we won't use a guillotine on him 

You're funny 

Thanks 

Anytime 

zubblewu wrote:

Yay I'm finding uses for history class 

Just need to study more in Science to learn time machines are pretty much impossible.

zubblewu wrote:

As of now. Yay, let's turn this into a debate about theoretical physics, quantum physics, and other dimensions 

Much more peaceful than politics 

Claude_Monet wrote:

I agree with you on one thing, Bush had a terrible economic plan, and yes, some stuff like the housing market collapse could be traced back to bush, but after 2 or 3 years, we should have been doing somewhat better, not going further into sixteen-trillion dollars of debt.

I expect most of you to blame 5 trillion on the wars that bush reluctantly declared and blame the rest on big business.

Economically, unemployment is equal and the stock market seems raised slightly (https://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NYSE:PEG).  What makes this all the more impressive is both the severity, but also that it was housing-market-based, rather than stock-market-based (which tend to rebound rather quickly).


It is true that, under Obama, the debt has increased from $10.6 trillion to $16.2 trillion since Obama took office, a total of $5.6 trillion (subtracted the statistics from the two links below).

Some potential discussion points:
- cost of wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan: $3.2-$4 trillion
- government revenue from taxes has gone down with the economy (not necessarily an excuse, but a reason)
- extension of bush tax cuts and other stimulus packages that certainly helped the economy also contributed to the debt (anyone have the numbers?)

http://nationaldebtbusters.blogspot.com … -2009.html
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

Anyone else think we need to establish a CERN-like program? I would be seriously happy if we got one. Whoevers president, we need something like that. Once we can make cheap antimatter easily, power will no longer be an issue in these debates 

zubblewu wrote:

Anyone else think we need to establish a CERN-like program? I would be seriously happy if we got one. Whoevers president, we need something like that. Once we can make cheap antimatter easily, power will no longer be an issue in these debates 

I really don't see how it's necessary.

What do we need antimatter for?

Sorry, correct hyperlink:
http://www.praemon.org (etc.)

Well we wouldn't have it in such massive quantities! It would be much less, maybe only a few antihydrogen atoms.

But yeah, 1kg of antimatter (2.2 pounds approx.) would create the same amount of energy as dozens of megatons of TNT.

Last edited by zubblewu (2012-10-25 00:23:20)

But not more than we can handle. We can handle billions of antiparticles, I think we can handle a but of antihydrogen. And being a lot is why it would be such an amazing energy source, it just needs more research and development.