The_Ish

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:14 PM

famicommander

Friday Nov 7 2008, 04:42 PM

Fuck that.

So, under Obama we've already seen the following:
1. Russia being more aggressive when it comes to weapons
2. The US stock market taking a huge hit
3. The Euro hitting a decade low
4. The loss of many, many American jobs
5. The promise of more government intervention in the gaming industry

And now, forced and unpaid labor. And he won't even take office for another few months.

Change, indeed. It's all part of Comrade Obama's master plan for us all.

None of these are any of his fault.

The_Ish

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:21 PM

Also, I seriously doubt his proposition to have college students do community service will pass.

At most, it's the high schoolers and middle schoolers who are going to be stuck with community service. You guys keep thinking that just because Congress has a democratic majority and that Obama is a democrat means everything they propose will get through without Supreme Court intervention.

famicommander

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:21 PM

All of them are his fault.
1. Putin is being more aggressive now because he feared John McCain. McCain has publicly called him out, and McCain was right in the middle of the Cold War. Construction started up again the second that Obama was announced the winner.

2. The stock market took a huge hit because people are trying to dump off their assets to avoid being taxed to shit. The investors do NOT like Obama's policies, which is pretty evident when five Nobel-prize winning economists endorsed McCain's plan over Obama's.

3. The Euro hit a low because Obama is so adamently anti-free trade. He wants foreign nations to conform exactly to his ideals before he'll trade with them. The EU depends heavily on the US, just as the US depends heavily on the EU.

4. Cisco Systems and General Motors announced massive layoffs in anticipation of Obama taxing them more heavily and fining them for carbon emissions.

5. Obama himself is the one who promised more government intervention in the gaming industry:
"But if the [gaming] industry fails to act[regarding offensive content], then my administration would. And even if the industry does do some responsible self-policing, there’s still a role for the federal government to play. We need to understand the impact of these new media better.” - Barack Obama, via 1up.com

6. The forced community service was his idea.

ALL of it is a direct result of Obama being elected. I'm not implying that he WANTED the stock markets to take a hit or the Euro to drop or Russia to become more aggressive, but they all happened as a direct result of his winning the election.

famicommander

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:24 PM

The_Ish

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:21 PM

Also, I seriously doubt his proposition to have college students do community service will pass.

At most, it's the high schoolers and middle schoolers who are going to be stuck with community service. You guys keep thinking that just because Congress has a democratic majority and that Obama is a democrat means everything they propose will get through without Supreme Court intervention.

1. He already changed his policy after getting shit tons of emails. Now it his policy is to "encourage" community service rather than "require" it. It all came from his website, change.gov

2. We know that it probably wouldn't pass. That wasn't the point. The point is that this man, who isn't even in office yet, thinks he has the authority to institute mandatory, unpaid labor policies. On children, no less.

The_Ish

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:30 PM

2. So? That's the fault of the investor, not Obama's.

3. I have never seen anything that indicates Obama is anti-free-trade in any way.

5. He can rant and fume all he wants, video games won't be censored. Never has, never will be.

6. This isn't much of a problem. Public education is socialism by it's very nature, so community service is a good idea. And it takes one person to go to court over whether or not he should have the right to refuse community service after the age of 18, and it will be shot down.

The_Ish

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:34 PM

famicommander

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:24 PM

The_Ish

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:21 PM

Also, I seriously doubt his proposition to have college students do community service will pass.

At most, it's the high schoolers and middle schoolers who are going to be stuck with community service. You guys keep thinking that just because Congress has a democratic majority and that Obama is a democrat means everything they propose will get through without Supreme Court intervention.

1. He already changed his policy after getting shit tons of emails. Now it his policy is to "encourage" community service rather than "require" it. It all came from his website, change.gov

2. We know that it probably wouldn't pass. That wasn't the point. The point is that this man, who isn't even in office yet, thinks he has the authority to institute mandatory, unpaid labor policies. On children, no less.

So he changes his stance when he realizes that people don't like it? It obviously shows he doesn't think that he has that sort of authority at all. It shows that he understands he's in charge because the people put him in charge.

Unfair, unpaid labor? You make it sound like it's slavery. It's not, it's the kids giving something back to their community. It's something that should be encouraged, if not mandatory.

famicommander

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:39 PM

2. How is it the fault of the investors that they're going to be taxed more and more? How is it their fault that Obama is going to raise the capital gains tax?

3. Here we go:
-Barack Obama called NAFTA a "devastating mistake"
-Obama demands that concerns for the environment be included in all free trade agreements (CAFTA, specifically)
-Obama demands that foreign countries put "labor standards" in place before he will trade with them
-Obama believes that America having more efficient farms than Mexico contributes to illegal immigration.

5. Yes they have. Manhunt 2 much? Madworld is already banned in some countries. Hot coffee? The point is, this is just the federal government poking its nose into even more places it doesn't belong.

6. Yes, it is a problem. Just because a program is already socialistic doesn't give the proprieters of said program the right to implement forced labor policies of any kind. Education should be privatized, but that's a different matter entirely. Again, the point is that we have a man who thinks he has the right to even suggest such policies. This is yet another case of the federal government trying to moderate every aspect of our lives.

The_Ish

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:55 PM

2. It is their fault. It is the their fault for getting themselves into this mess, and for asking for a bailout loan when the shit hits the fan. If they didn't want government intervention, then they should have regulated themselves.
The mortgage crisis was a result of regulation in the first place. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were created by the government. The government pressured banks into giving loans to people that they knew couldn't afford them. The government repeatedly stuck its nose into the market. And punishing everyone who trades stocks for the crimes of the mortgage industry doesn't make sense. Raising taxes in a recession is ALWAYS a bad idea.


3.
- I concede to the first and second point.
- What is wrong with this?
This would drive up the costs of everything we import from India, China, Mexico, and many African countries.
- I don't see what this has to do with free trade.
It could lead to Obama limiting food exports to Mexico in order to jump start their economy and limit illegal immigration. As a result, our farming industry would take a hit and more people in Mexico would go hungry.
5. Manhunt 2 being banned in other countries does not affect us. Hot Coffee was one of the few mistakes the ESRB has ever made. The ESRB isn't a government organization. It's self-regulatory.
Manhunt 2 was censored HERE. Madworld is already being banned in places. And we're talking about FEDERAL regulations. That's going to limit creativity and drive up costs. I know the ESRB is a separate entity, but that doesn't mean the government can't (and won't) provide its own regulation.

6. Actually it does, so long as whatever they are doing gives the laborers a benefit. We're talking about kids and teenagers here, who are being made to do community service, something that will make the place they live better, not 6 year olds working in dank, dark, unsafe factories.
No, we're talking about kids being FORCED to do thinks that WAY or may not benefit them. Being forced to do labor agains their will with no compensation. Forced labor is forced labor. Community service should be reserved for volunteers and people who have commited crimes, not children.

famicommander

Friday Nov 7 2008, 11:43 PM

Encouraged, hell yes. Mandatory? Hell no. No one should be forced to work for no wages just becaus the government said so. These children's parrents are already funding a horrible education system with far too many tax dollars. Now they want it at the expense of child labor? "Giving back to the community" is horse shit. No one should be forced to work against their will.

And no, it doesn't show the he understands the people put him in charge. If that were the case, he wouldn't have tried to institute the program at all. He's just trying to maintain his image, like every other politician.

famicommander

Saturday Nov 8 2008, 12:05 AM

3.
-This would drive up the costs of everything we import from India, China, Mexico, and many African countries.
- It could lead to Obama limiting food exports to Mexico in order to jump start their economy and limit illegal immigration. As a result, our farming industry would take a hit and more people in Mexico would go hungry.

5.Manhunt 2 was censored HERE. Madworld is already being banned in places. And we're talking about FEDERAL regulations. That's going to limit creativity and drive up costs. I know the ESRB is a separate entity, but that doesn't mean the government can't (and won't) provide its own regulation.

6. No, we're talking about kids being FORCED to do thinks that WAY or may not benefit them. Being forced to do labor agains their will with no compensation. Forced labor is forced labor. Community service should be reserved for volunteers and people who have commited crimes, not children.

famicommander

Saturday Nov 8 2008, 12:28 AM

That's ridiculous. Nothing about socialism implies forced labor, and we're not even talking about forced labor as a means of discipline in the first place. We're talking about forced labor for the sake of forced labor. The parents aren't being asked for consent in the matter. The children have done nothing wrong. They may or may not benefit from it, but that's not the point. The point is we have the government telling children they have to work, and then justifying it to their parents by saying that "it's for their own good".

And for the record, I do have a problem with public education in the first place. But that's not something I fault Obama for. I'm faulting Obama for making it even worse than it already is.

The_Ish

Saturday Nov 8 2008, 12:24 AM

3.
-So? If importing everything becomes more expensive across the board, whats the problem? It just means salaries will also rise across the board.
Where would you get such an idea as that? If imported goods become more expensive, then the people selling them have to charge more to make the same profit. Nothing about the situation implies that salaries would increase. Especially for people who don't work in an industry which requires importing (American steel, coal mining, and agriculture for example).
-Agricultural corporations were making a huge profit because of deregulation and irresponsibility before the current economic crisis.
Deregulation is not the problem. Regulation is the problem. There are so many regulatory barriers to entering the industries that competition is artificially decreased by the government, essentially creating monopolies. In a free market supply and demand would take care of high prices.
Millions of Mexicans are already impoverished because these agricultural corporations have unfair advantages in their home nation. Obviously, regulation is not the problem.
It is up to the Mexican government to provide for the Mexican people. The reason these companies are allowed there is because they create much needed jobs.

5.
Manhunt 2 was SELF-CENSORED. The US government had nothing to do with it. Manhunt 2 being banned in places? You mean like in Wal-Mart? A private corporation? The government can't provide it's own regulations on mediums. They couldn't do it on newspapers, books and movies, so they can't do it on video games.
Manhunt 2 was censored because companies were afraid to stock it. But federal regulation would make it ILLEGAL to stock games with content deemed morally unacceptable by the government. Obama himself said that the government would step in EVEN IF the industry regulated itself to acceptable standards.[/i]

6.
ALL kids are forced to do labor without compensation. Your point?
The point is that the federal government is making decisions about children without their parents' consent.

The_Ish

Saturday Nov 8 2008, 12:35 AM

Then your problem is with public schooling. Obama isn't making things worse, since mandatory community service doesn't make things worse. He's just doing something that's consistent with what public schooling is. Besides, some of the best school systems all have a form of forced labor and regulations that would be considered invasive and unconstitutional. What's the result? Some of the most educated work forces and powerful economies in the world. Look at Japan. Students are forced to clean up the school, follow strict social rules and in most schools aren't allowed to work outside of school.

famicommander

Saturday Nov 8 2008, 12:35 AM

-Where would you get such an idea as that? If imported goods become more expensive, then the people selling them have to charge more to make the same profit. Nothing about the situation implies that salaries would increase. Especially for people who don't work in an industry which requires importing (American steel, coal mining, and agriculture for example).
-Deregulation is not the problem. Regulation is the problem. There are so many regulatory barriers to entering the industries that competition is artificially decreased by the government, essentially creating monopolies. In a free market supply and demand would take care of high prices.
-It is up to the Mexican government to provide for the Mexican people. The reason these companies are allowed there is because they create much needed jobs.

5.
Manhunt 2 was censored because companies were afraid to stock it. But federal regulation would make it ILLEGAL to stock games with content deemed morally unacceptable by the government. Obama himself said that the government would step in EVEN IF the industry regulated itself to acceptable standards.

6.
The point is that the federal government is making decisions about children without their parents' consent.

famicommander

Saturday Nov 8 2008, 12:38 AM

Obama is further socializing a system that is already too socialistic.

The_Ish

Saturday Nov 8 2008, 12:55 AM

- If they are charging more to make the same profit, then people will pay the same. If they aren't then they are saving more. it will either make people demand higher pay, or it will make the average consumer more frugal, which would be better for everyone.
No, if they are charging more to make the same profit then people will pay more. If the average consumer is more frugal then consumption suffers and the economy does not grow.

- Hardly. This Chicago free-market style thinking is what got the world into this mess, and it's what most analysts and investors are blaming. Corporations do not regulate themselves, and it's because of that we have impoverished people in Mexico and it's why our economy is in the toilet. Deregulation invariably leads to the largest and most powerful corporations making the most profits without taking any responsibility.
Wrong. Deregulation leads to free market competition. The free market dictates that the company which offers the best products at the best prices will prosper and will therefore benefit everyone. The government trying to stifle the growth of large corporations is what keeps smaller corporations from starting up and prospering.

- Then what is the problem with environmental concerns? You've said that Obama was trying to jump-start Mexico's economy by making it harder for corporations to get away with sub-par labor conditions and environmental irresponsibility. It's not the company's obligation to create jobs, and it isn't America's obligation to feed the hungry, so what's wrong with environmental concerns and labor standards?
The problem is that he won't trade with them if they don't fix their own issues. Without our trade commerce they can ill afford to fix things, and without their labor our companies will suffer. It's a lose-lose situation. We're letting the internal issues of other countries damage our own economy.

5.
That's right. Companies. Not the government. I don't see why you're trying to tie self-regulation to federal regulation. Obama can't do anything to the video game companies.
What aren't you understanding? He clearly said that EVEN IF the companies do a responsible job of self-policing, there is a place for the federal government in the private market of the video game industry. Nothing good could possibly come from the government forcing itself into more private business. He would make it illegal for companies to sell games with content that he deems unacceptable. That's censorship, and the regulation he put in place to keep tabs on it would surely drive up development costs. An increase in development costs would mean an increase in game prices.

6.
Then that's not Obama's fault.
How is it not? He's the one who made the decision without the consent of the taxpayers who fund the system or the people whose children will be directly affected.