|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 6, 2010 8:41:31 GMT -8
Make a case if you can. He is pretty close to right on. I have been offering facts. I was tired of typing with my arthritic right index finger at that point. The deficit grew tremendously under bush. The cost of health care went up tremendously under bush. Inflation was worse under bush than Obama. The IRS was well funded and told to collect assertively under bush. You cannot argue against what you previously supported. You cannot argue what has not yet happened. Give me a break. Arthritic right index finger? What % disability have you applied for?  Seriously, you are stating things that really but a tangent to the issue. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Oct 6, 2010 8:47:46 GMT -8
Lt. Col. Charles R. Codman: You know General, sometimes the men don't know when you're acting. Patton: It's not important for them to know. It's only important for me to know. Herein lies a problem. I don't think Joe knows. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 8, 2010 5:54:36 GMT -8
Lt. Col. Charles R. Codman: You know General, sometimes the men don't know when you're acting. Patton: It's not important for them to know. It's only important for me to know. Herein lies a problem. I don't think Joe knows. You mean we are not going to have any public executions of the greedy sons of bitches after the common people have taken over? Revolution is revolution. People have to die in a revolution. Look at all the people who lost their heads because they played the wrong political card before or during the French Revolution. Even though she never said it, "Let them eat cake." was a severely punishable offense. Now, we have the Republicans telling the dispossessed and pennyless that all they have to do is go out and get a job. That, when no jobs are to be found. |
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Oct 8, 2010 7:23:46 GMT -8
The question is "How can you claim to be compassionate when you support policies that kill jobs or slow the recovery?". I'm sure both left and right thinks the "other guy's" policies are responsible for those conditions and feel their preferred policies are the better ones in a Bentham-esque calculus of doing the most good for the most people. Since there are disagreements on the conclusions we make, that is why we vote. See you at the polls (or mail box as it were) |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 8, 2010 9:07:54 GMT -8
I am all for creating jobs. If I were president, everybody would have a job even if they had to work as ORCs
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Oct 12, 2010 9:49:42 GMT -8
I would like to address a statement made here about government spending bringing us out of the depression.
The depression was made worse and made to last much much longer than it otherwise would have been, by liberal government policies. WWII brought more government spending and created private sector jobs and brought the economy to life. That is true. But it only worked because the owners of capital and the workers of this country worked against their own self interest in the spirit of nationalism. People do not work against their own self interest in normal times. Direct Government spending will not ever bring us out of a recession faster unless there is a reason for folks to work against their own self interest. We don't have one. The government efforts so far have stifled the recovery. Government efforts should be confined to inducing job creation by making the rewards for such better than they would otherwise be. Demand will follow because the folks will: 1. have jobs. 2. have more faith in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 13, 2010 7:10:24 GMT -8
I would like to address a statement made here about government spending bringing us out of the depression. The depression was made worse and made to last much much longer than it otherwise would have been, by liberal government policies. WWII brought more government spending and created private sector jobs and brought the economy to life. That is true. But it only worked because the owners of capital and the workers of this country worked against their own self interest in the spirit of nationalism. People do not work against their own self interest in normal times. Direct Government spending will not ever bring us out of a recession faster unless there is a reason for folks to work against their own self interest. We don't have one. The government efforts so far have stifled the recovery. Government efforts should be confined to inducing job creation by making the rewards for such better than they would otherwise be. Demand will follow because the folks will: 1. have jobs. 2. have more faith in the future. Total Nonsense and mumbling gibberish! The simple fact of the matter is that in a service sector economy (And that is what we are.) government spending is net additive to the economy. Money added at the top filters all the way down to the bottom saving many many jobs. Unfortuately, so far, our efforts have been directed towards saving jobs. We have saved quite a few, but are still losing. Relying upon free enterprize to restore jobs is a foolish idea. Job destruction would increase dramatically. We have too choices. Either become strongly Socialist/Communist (with all jobs created by the government), or create our own Economic Co-Prosperity Sphere in North America and lock countries like China out of our market. |
|
|
|
Post by The Great Aztec Joe on Oct 13, 2010 7:14:33 GMT -8
I like the second idea so well that I propose that we withdraw our troops from the rest of the world and tell China that their economic co properity sphere will be the Moslem world. We have enough oil in Alaska and the Gulf to serve our needs for the next 100 years. We do not need Arab Oil. Meanwhile, the Chinks can deal with Radical Islam in any way they see necessary. Not our problem any more. Not to worry. No need for American boys and girls to die over there anymore.
|
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Oct 13, 2010 13:13:58 GMT -8
>>>...the Chinks...<<<
tsk
|
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 17, 2010 8:15:36 GMT -8
I would like to address a statement made here about government spending bringing us out of the depression. The depression was made worse and made to last much much longer than it otherwise would have been, by liberal government policies. WWII brought more government spending and created private sector jobs and brought the economy to life. That is true. But it only worked because the owners of capital and the workers of this country worked against their own self interest in the spirit of nationalism. People do not work against their own self interest in normal times. Direct Government spending will not ever bring us out of a recession faster unless there is a reason for folks to work against their own self interest. We don't have one. The government efforts so far have stifled the recovery. Government efforts should be confined to inducing job creation by making the rewards for such better than they would otherwise be. Demand will follow because the folks will: 1. have jobs. 2. have more faith in the future. Yeah, business during World War II worked selflessly to help America in a time of need. That is why they had to pass laws curtailing excess profits.  Government spending puts money into circulation and stimulates the economy. It is in businesses self interest to accept the funds and create jobs with it. Why would they not, money is money projects are projects. Why else would you think that all of those idiot Republican representatives and Senators were dissing the stimulus in Washington and bragging about it at home? Businesses have the money to create jobs and, in fact, they have borrowed heavily because it is profitable to do so. And yet they are not producing jobs, acting in their own self interest. Government must step in, because your heroes will not do it. Hoover tried just leaving it alone and it did not work. Your argument does not stand on it own. |
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Oct 17, 2010 13:02:33 GMT -8
I would like to address a statement made here about government spending bringing us out of the depression. The depression was made worse and made to last much much longer than it otherwise would have been, by liberal government policies. WWII brought more government spending and created private sector jobs and brought the economy to life. That is true. But it only worked because the owners of capital and the workers of this country worked against their own self interest in the spirit of nationalism. People do not work against their own self interest in normal times. Direct Government spending will not ever bring us out of a recession faster unless there is a reason for folks to work against their own self interest. We don't have one. The government efforts so far have stifled the recovery. Government efforts should be confined to inducing job creation by making the rewards for such better than they would otherwise be. Demand will follow because the folks will: 1. have jobs. 2. have more faith in the future. Yeah, business during World War II worked selflessly to help America in a time of need. That is why they had to pass laws curtailing excess profits. Government spending puts money into circulation and stimulates the economy. It is in businesses self interest to accept the funds and create jobs with it. Why would they not, money is money projects are projects. Why else would you think that all of those idiot Republican representatives and Senators were dissing the stimulus in Washington and bragging about it at home? Businesses have the money to create jobs and, in fact, they have borrowed heavily because it is profitable to do so. And yet they are not producing jobs, acting in their own self interest. Government must step in, because your heroes will not do it. Hoover tried just leaving it alone and it did not work. Your argument does not stand on it own. Hoover did nothing? Hoover was a fug-up, but not for doing nothing. It's amazing how history gets re-written. The scale of federal action in Hoover’s response to the stock market crash was unprecedented in U. S. history. This prompted historian Robert Sobel’s assertion that “no peacetime president since Jefferson had done more to expand the powers of the presidency than Hoover had in that one year.” It drew attacks by those who felt it gave the government too large of a role. Ultimately these efforts did not prevent the country from sliding into the Great Depression, although they represent a significant departure from the laissez faire attitudes of previous presidents and in many ways laid the groundwork for Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal policies.www.presidentialtimeline.org/html/exhibits.php?id=1 |
|
|
|
Post by waztec on Oct 18, 2010 17:16:28 GMT -8
Yeah, business during World War II worked selflessly to help America in a time of need. That is why they had to pass laws curtailing excess profits. Government spending puts money into circulation and stimulates the economy. It is in businesses self interest to accept the funds and create jobs with it. Why would they not, money is money projects are projects. Why else would you think that all of those idiot Republican representatives and Senators were dissing the stimulus in Washington and bragging about it at home? Businesses have the money to create jobs and, in fact, they have borrowed heavily because it is profitable to do so. And yet they are not producing jobs, acting in their own self interest. Government must step in, because your heroes will not do it. Hoover tried just leaving it alone and it did not work. Your argument does not stand on it own. Hoover did nothing? Hoover was a fug-up, but not for doing nothing. It's amazing how history gets re-written. The scale of federal action in Hoover’s response to the stock market crash was unprecedented in U. S. history. This prompted historian Robert Sobel’s assertion that “no peacetime president since Jefferson had done more to expand the powers of the presidency than Hoover had in that one year.” It drew attacks by those who felt it gave the government too large of a role. Ultimately these efforts did not prevent the country from sliding into the Great Depression, although they represent a significant departure from the laissez faire attitudes of previous presidents and in many ways laid the groundwork for Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal policies.www.presidentialtimeline.org/html/exhibits.php?id=1I did a little reading and you are correct in that he did try to remedy the situation, yet he deferred to congress and refused to forcefully lead. The fact that he was ineffective when compared to Roosevelt is probably why he was seen as do nothing. Thanks for the info. It was interesting to read about what Hoover did. My parents were old enough to remember him and thought him a fool. However, it was the government spending that got us out of the depression. |
|
