Sarah Palin, Keynesian Economics, Suppy-Side Economics and Ronald Reagan

reply to post by Janky Red


Then perhaps what we need is what you would call a "corporatalist". This big government president is an epic failure.

Originally posted by wasco2
Enforcement has been poor by both Democrat and Republican presidents. This is one of the laws people against illegal aliens, like me, mean when we say, "Just ENFORCE existing laws!".

My point exactly. They are the same. They pass laws then they (both sides) enforce them as they see fit. Then they manipulate stats to show the people that they have done good.

One half sings their praise while the other half questions the numbers and foams at the mouth. Come election day they have their say and it starts all over again with the praising and foaming roles switched. Kinda sad really.

reply to post by beezzer



so you think we need a president that talks about curtailing government and then grows government???

You enjoy Reagan's 6 trillion postmortem debt? Do you think???

That is exactly what Ronald Reagan did, both Bush', talk about fiscal restraint and impose the opposite... Obama is different in that he doesn't claim to be a champion of the philosophy.

This economy tanked because regulators did not believe in regulation and rule of law failed due to enforce of law. Refute that Beezzer, tell us how bolstering the policies of last decade will produce better results? Sarah has not explained how she will make failed policies work, you tell me, don't be shy, you are here to debate and contribute substance, correct?

reply to post by Janky Red


This economy is tanking because Bush threw gas on a fire. Obama is just pouring more gas.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Janky Red

 

This economy is tanking because Bush threw gas on a fire.

Not true. As early as 2001 Bush was warning of impending danger from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Any time the Repulicans tried to reign them in the bill was stopped by Democrats:

Originally posted by wasco2

Not true. As early as 2001 Bush was warning of impending danger from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Really? This audio clip from 2002 seems quite the opposite:



Seems to me that he is not only encouraging loans to "families who have bad credit histories", but also selling the ides that those families should over extend themselves so “the low income home buyer can have just as nice a house as anybody else”

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Janky Red

 

Then perhaps what we need is what you would call a "corporatalist". This big government president is an epic failure.

Well, it's refreshing to see a Tea Party person admitting they support the idea of a full-fledged american Corptocracy.

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


I'm willing to admit that Obama is ruining this country. Obama is trying to destroy America. It's the Cloward-Pivin Strategy.
I'm willing to admit that unless we do something and do it soon, America is going to be hurt. Maybe permanently.
I'm willing to admit that we in America need to start thinking outside the box for unconventional solutions. The old tried and true methods aren't working.
I'm willing to admit that there are more socialists and anti-capitalists in government today then there has been in decades.

THAT's what I'm willing to admit to.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by incrediblelousminds

 

I'm willing to admit that Obama is ruining this country. Obama is trying to destroy America. It's the Cloward-Pivin Strategy.
I'm willing to admit that unless we do something and do it soon, America is going to be hurt. Maybe permanently.
I'm willing to admit that we in America need to start thinking outside the box for unconventional solutions. The old tried and true methods aren't working.
I'm willing to admit that there are more socialists and anti-capitalists in government today then there has been in decades.

THAT's what I'm willing to admit to.

Wow. More admissions in ADDITION to your unabashed desire for full-fledged Corptacracy in America. And I agree. We need to take EXTREME measures to remove the POTUS from office because he is an evil dictator, and if we need an even evil-er dictator to take his place, then i say go for it! WE CAN NOT underestimate the evil that Obama may do, so we MUST do it first!


As for your claim there are 'more socialists and anti-capitalists' in government today than ever before, can you provide some kinds fo parameters for that claim, or is it just from your gut??

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


Just a humble opine of mine.

Big government is NOT the solution. It is (as the kids say) an epic fail.

reply to post by Aggie Man


Bush was a politician speaking to a specific audience, WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON MINORITY HOMEOWNERSHIP, in that speech. His audience was lenders, real estate profesionals, community development leaders, etc. I'm sure he meant some of it and some of it was what he thought they wanted to hear. But here is what he was actually doing:

georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov...


I wasn't thrilled with Bush but thought, and still do, he was infinitely better than Al Gore or John Kerry.

Originally posted by wasco2
reply to post by Aggie Man

 

I wasn't thrilled with Bush but thought, and still do, he was infinitely better than Al Gore or John Kerry.

HE orchestrated the worst economic results in the history of America, WTF are you smoking?

Do you recall the

7,000 DOW?

The shedding of hundreds of thousands of jobs a month?

That was due to his mismanagement

You should stop voting, just quit

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by incrediblelousminds

 

Just a humble opine of mine.

Big government is NOT the solution. It is (as the kids say) an epic fail.

I see. So the only possible response to what you define as 'big government' (does that include the military?) is a completely corporate-controlled government that, ironically our nation was founded to combat. Fascinating.

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


No, I don't see corporate-controlled government as the solution. I just don't see growing government as the solution. It isn't an either/or situation. Big government has shown itself to be a failure.
Therefore we need to do something different.
Corporations run to make a profit.
Big government runs to make itself indespensible and to justify itself.

There is a solution somewhere. Barring total anarchy and a rebuilding of our country, we need to limit government control and return it to the people.

I'm looking for solutions. Not defending failed government policies.

Originally posted by beezzer
we need to limit government control and return it to the people.

Government is merely an extension of the people. Your dichotomy is nonsensical.

I'm looking for solutions. Not defending failed government policies.

So we can agree that we should radically cut 'big government' military spending? And medicare/medicade?

reply to post by incrediblelousminds


Government USED to be an extension of the people. No longer. They (politicians) exist to justify their continued existance.

As fo cutting spending? Hell yes. Cut military, get out of the middle east, cut entitlement programs, that'd be a great start!

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by incrediblelousminds

 

Government USED to be an extension of the people. No longer. They (politicians) exist to justify their continued existance.

As fo cutting spending? Hell yes. Cut military, get out of the middle east, cut entitlement programs, that'd be a great start!

Reform MediCare, MediCaid and Social Security.
---------------------------
Repeal ObamaCare. It's unconstitutional anyway. Why wait for the Supreme Court to say so?
---------------------------
Stop giving coc aine to monkeys. - stimulus fiasco -
Stop spending millions of dollars on signs along the side of the road telling us our
stimulus dollars are at work.

Originally posted by Janky Red
[HE orchestrated the worst economic results in the history of America, WTF are you smoking?

How can you even see where you are going with those commie-red tinted glasses on? You're not even looking at my links are you?

The bottom line is the 2008 financial meltdown was caused by ill concieved Democrat originated social engineering law and policy coercing privately owned banks into making lending decisions they all knew were going to have disastrous results. Your demi-god Barry O was right in the middle of this criminal enterprise. Anytime Republicans tried, as Bush did starting in 2001, to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the Democrats indigantly shut them down. Dems and the MSM are still trying to put the crisis on Bush using the "repeat a lie often enough and loud enough and it becomes true". Unfortunately for them there are records which detail the whole mess and the Democrats policies which led to it.

In deference to your apparently limited intellect here's a kind of comic book version embedded so you don't even have to follow the link:




Edit:

Obviously the producer of the video underestimated the number of truly stupid and gullible voters (you among them I'm assuming) there are in the US today who bought the Liar in Chief's silly and false "hopey changey" gibberish.

Originally posted by wasco2

Originally posted by Janky Red
[HE orchestrated the worst economic results in the history of America, WTF are you smoking?

How can you even see where you are going with those commie-red tinted glasses on? You're not even looking at my links are you?

The bottom line is the 2008 financial meltdown was caused by ill concieved Democrat originated social engineering law and policy coercing privately owned banks into making lending decisions they all knew were going to have disastrous results.


In deference to your apparently limited intellect here's a kind of comic book version embedded so you don't even have to follow the link:

Commie I make my money from capitialism thanks alot, maybe the corporate tattoos you sport have finally poisoned your blood?

I worked in the lending industry and you mam/sir are shilling very hard for the elites I see.

I suppose in your land a hungry person is justified in butchering a person due to a local statute regarding pan handling?

Sen. Phil Gramm (R, Texas),
Rep. Jim Leach (R, Iowa), and Rep.
Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R, Virginia)

co-sponsors of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act which initiated the legal structure to loan and insure the
same companies loans under the same roof, in the name of free enterpise of course This "risk" was bundled rated AAA and then traded, the validity of the loans were comprised of bad faith in lending which is the act of many individuals, Mr. personal resposibility, you do believe in being responsible for your individual actions don't you? Somehow you decide, in this case, that personal responsibilty does not count, your arguement has the character of Obama, the elites and all the corporatist in the world... The people who defaulted on their poor choices have taken responsibilty, each bankruptcy is the cost for the consumers poor judgement, I suppose you
can only apportion blame for the people who are not the bosses, typical conservative really.

So why don't you learn and arm yourself with real knowledge???

en.wikipedia.org...–Leach–Bliley_Act

Your "logic" is like blaming a police shooting on the oath of duty or the invention of gunpowder, it is pretty sad, not very Texas, that's pretty weak.

Originally posted by spinalremain
I do not believe in supply side economics.
It was just a theory when Reagan put it into practice and it has been shown to not work time and time again.

When the wealthiest individuals are receiving tax breaks and there are no guidelines or mandates for them to invest that money back into the country, they don't. Workers are hired abroad and they have shown they do not use the monies for what the economic plan calls for.

When you give the rich a tax break, they're going to buy another home. They're not going to give their employees better benefits. This is pure fantasy and I am actually confused as to why so many people believe in Supply Side economics.

In theory it sounds wonderful, yes, but we all know that reality is a different scenario. This type of economic plan is only as effective as the morals of the individuals receiving the tax breaks. If those individuals are selfish, the plan does nothing.

I'm not an economist either obviously, and I don't have any of my own ideas how to create jobs. I don't like the sound of Keynesian economics either though.

edit on 27-5-2011 by spinalremain because: (no reason given)

In all the years I have worked,I have never been employed by a poor man.Trickle down economics works,so long as the government keeps its grubby paws out of the business.