DDL on 19/9/2012 at 15:36
"Countries" and "people with credit cards" are not analagous, but if you want to use that analogy anyway, it's like taking out a second credit card so you can get a car to get to work to earn money to pay off the credit cards. Without that second credit card you're in less debt, yes, but utterly screwed on the debt you DO have, because you can't get to work.
scarykitties on 19/9/2012 at 16:23
Quote Posted by DDL
"Countries" and "people with credit cards" are not analagous, but if you want to use that analogy anyway, it's like taking out a second credit card so you can get a car to get to work to earn money to pay off the credit cards.
Without that second credit card you're in less debt, yes, but utterly screwed on the debt you DO have, because you can't get to work.
I follow what you're saying, but most of Obama's spending isn't directly towards getting people back to work or improving the economy. Things like Obamacare slow the recovery, if not because of direct market forces than simply because the uncertainty of what will come of it reduces investment. It's debatable whether one can spend their way out of a recession, anyway. Trying to use regulation and top-level economy-repairing policies (
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx) is what caused the Depression to go on so long under FDR.
That's where one of the greatest rifts between the right and left is at the moment. The left believes that a government can use regulation, special spending bills, and other top-down policies to fix most anything. The right believes that those top-down policies are what slow the fixes for most things. I'm personally more Libertarian--not in with all the BS Bible-thumping of the Republicans, but down for Free Market solutions to economic problems.
CCCToad on 19/9/2012 at 18:24
Quote Posted by scarykitties
I haven't liked Romney since I first saw him in the Republican debates. "Rom Bot" is a great term for him--he's stiff, up-tight, elitist, and just overall unlikable. Obama, on the other hand, has a great smile, superb personal charm, and is the guy you just WANT to vote for.
You made one crucial mistake. Referring to Romney as "him" implies that he is a human, when he is in fact an android.
CCCToad on 19/9/2012 at 18:26
Quote Posted by scarykitties
That's where one of the greatest rifts between the right and left is at the moment. The left believes that a government can use regulation, special spending bills, and other top-down policies to fix most anything. The right believes that those top-down policies are what slow the fixes for most things. I'm personally more Libertarian--not in with all the BS Bible-thumping of the Republicans, but down for Free Market solutions to economic problems.
I'm not quite sure how a rift even exists in that area. Romney's solution to problems are regulation, spending, and top-down government policies to fix things.
Of course....he proposes all that while claiming that his policies are somehow in line with Reaganite preaching.
scarykitties on 19/9/2012 at 18:44
Quote Posted by CCCToad
I'm not quite sure how a rift even exists in that area. Romney's solution to problems are regulation, spending, and top-down government policies to fix things.
Of course....he proposes all that while claiming that his policies are somehow in line with Reaganite preaching.
Yeah, they haven't really given a whole lot of detail on what they plan to do, which is unfortunate. How viable is Ryan's economic plan to reduce the deficit? I've heard some say it's great and some say it won't work.
CCCToad on 19/9/2012 at 18:57
I'm no expert in that area.
However, the people I know who actually know about fiscal policy tell me that the Ryan plan is pretty much bullshit. It won't work and anyone with any experience in government knows it
june gloom on 19/9/2012 at 19:21
Quote Posted by heywood
Your reading comprehension sucks
LarryG on 19/9/2012 at 19:34
Quote Posted by scarykitties
... while it is likely an oversimplification to call those people all lazy freeloaders who contribute nothing, I would have no problem believing that at least that number of people rely heavily on government-sponsored assistance of some kind.
You are aware that the (
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-federal-bailout-that-saved-mitt-romney-20120829) US government bailed out Bain Capitol at a net cost of over $10 million dollars to US Taxpayers. To me that makes Romney one of those lazy freeloaders who contribute nothing. He was a corporate raider who raped and pillaged failing corporations, not for the sake of the employees, not for the sake of the original entrepreneurs, not for the good of the nation, but for his own personal profits. And when he failed at that, he got the US government to bail him and his cronies out. The problem is, that when you are poor and need a hand up, he's against it, but when you are rich and need a hand out he's all for it. Um ...
Muzman on 19/9/2012 at 20:02
Quote Posted by scarykitties
I follow what you're saying, but most of Obama's spending isn't directly towards getting people back to work or improving the economy. Things like Obamacare slow the recovery, if not because of direct market forces than simply because the uncertainty of what will come of it reduces investment. It's debatable whether one can spend their way out of a recession, anyway. Trying to use regulation and top-level economy-repairing policies (
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx) is what caused the Depression to go on so long under FDR.
Hang on. How does Obamacare significantly affect investment outside of health sector stuff?
And secondly that article is quite specific about the policies in question doing the damage, not "regulation and top-level economy-repairing policies". One of them is arguably de-regulatory by today's standards as it turned a blind eye to trusts and collusion.
LarryG on 19/9/2012 at 21:04
Quote Posted by scarykitties
I follow what you're saying, but most of Obama's spending isn't directly towards getting people back to work or improving the economy. Things like Obamacare slow the recovery, if not because of direct market forces than simply because the uncertainty of what will come of it reduces investment. It's debatable whether one can spend their way out of a recession, anyway. Trying to use regulation and top-level economy-repairing policies (
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx) is what caused the Depression to go on so long under FDR.
That's where one of the greatest rifts between the right and left is at the moment. The left believes that a government can use regulation, special spending bills, and other top-down policies to fix most anything. The right believes that those top-down policies are what slow the fixes for most things. I'm personally more Libertarian--not in with all the BS Bible-thumping of the Republicans, but down for Free Market solutions to economic problems.
There always ample room for revisionist history and academic debate, but the vast majority of current economists agree that (
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2008/10/22/why-the-right-should-leave-fdr-alone.html) Franklin D. Roosevelt and his policies led the country out of the Great Depression. I personally have not found any arguments to the contrary convincing at all.
