Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok, thanks for the clarification. I can understand how people are frustrated by the recession. However, the roots of that event seem pretty obvious. What I am struggling with is that the whole financial inferno had to do with rampant deregulation to the point where industries were writing their own legislation under Bush. So, when that Ponzi scheme played out, all of a sudden people are blaming the government spending. We literally had to bail out the world, because our financial sector poisoned it.
And most economic theory suggests the public sector must spend with the private sector is on life support, so blaming the paramedic for spending money on life support seems ill-placed.
Well, we disagree on almost every point here. I believe the economic recession ties back to Clinton days and the everyone deserves a house theory, whether they qualified or not. In addition, "most economic theory" does NOT suggest the gov't should spend its way out of a recession. One economic theory believes that - the same one that FDR used, helping to extend and deepen the Great Depression.
At some point the people had to stand up and say "enough is enough" with the fiscal irresponsibility of Congress. The left didn't do it, they just spent as much as they could, as fast as they could, from the time Nancy Pelosi became Speaker. Usually it takes a lot of piling on to reach that final straw that breaks the camel's back.
And they would have continued to spend indiscriminately if not stopped at this last election.
No, you have me wrong. I don't want to bash the Tea Party.
Rather, I want to know, if they are to gain any credibility among moderate Americans, why they can be adamant about tax cuts in the midst of a recession, but were nowhere to be seen when the conservative approach to governance was exploding the deficit. Where does the justification come from, or is it old school partisan ranting under the guise of false piety?
This is important to me, because a bunch of Tea Party candidates are now in congress, and I want to learn if they can really govern, or are simply anti-tax ideologues.
It seems you tend to make the same mistake as many confusing the Tea Party with the GOP at large. The Tea Party has been calling for spending cuts. Do you forget that the Democrats controlled Congres for the last 2 yrs. of GW Bush's 2nd term? GOP made a huge mistake by breaking its "contract with America". The Tea Party isn't about to forgive and forget if that happens again.
Time will tell if the Tea Party candidates can be effective. There really need to be more to make an impact because they are a minority among the RINO and old boy business as usual GOPers.
It seems you tend to make the same mistake as many confusing the Tea Party with the GOP at large. The Tea Party has been calling for spending cuts. Do you forget that the Democrats controlled Congres for the last 2 yrs. of GW Bush's 2nd term? GOP made a huge mistake by breaking its "contract with America". The Tea Party isn't about to forgive and forget if that happens again.
Time will tell if the Tea Party candidates can be effective. There really need to be more to make an impact because they are a minority among the RINO and old boy business as usual GOPers.
It is interesting, however, to see just how much they have impacted the GOP and their platform though.
The Tea Party supports cutting spending and lowering taxes on many different levels and in many different areas, even defense. How is that not clear capacity for rational thought?
Here is the problem. We have been undertaxed since 1980 based on the infrastructure we enjoy, and the promises we will almost certainly expect to be fulfilled. Our parents gave so that our lives would be better than theirs, and for the most part they have been. This generation of aging Americans (I am assuming most Tea Partiers are 40-70 years old-I'm 46), act as if they would like to defund all most of the educational, social, and infrastructural acheivements of the 20th century. And the because of the coming demographic challenge of caring for legions of aging boomers, our children may need to pay tax rates at nearly twice our current rates.
The effect of boomers on the next generation is not pretty, and imminent.
I don't see the patriotism and clear thinking of aging boomers who do not want to pay a fair share in taxes to clear the leger before they enter the great beyond. Our children will be staggering under the weight of simultaneously caring for us and paying off our debts, while trying to maintain our standard of living in a highly competitive world. Most TP types I read seem to want to do everything they can to avoid investing in their country, yet I sincerely doubt they will turn away medicare or medicaid when they eventually need it. It is the consummate attitude of entitlement. That is the reputation of the boomers anyway, but I would love to see some genuine generosity as we approach the end of our working years.
If the goal is genuine fiscal responsibility, I am very gung ho, and glad to be a partner. But the cut taxes and deregulate our way to surplus strikes me as delusional. It has not worked. Solvency will be tough, and it needs to come through a judicious balance of tax hikes on the boomers, spending cuts, targeted educational and infrastructural investments, and proactive investment to seize the 21st century economic lead and bridge the generational divide. So that our children are not destroyed by our selfishness.
Well, we disagree on almost every point here. I believe the economic recession ties back to Clinton days and the everyone deserves a house theory, whether they qualified or not. In addition, "most economic theory" does NOT suggest the gov't should spend its way out of a recession. One economic theory believes that - the same one that FDR used, helping to extend and deepen the Great Depression.
Neo-CONS hate FDR because he was the first modern president to reign in the robber barrons on Wall Street.
While FDR and his New Deal that moved the country out of the Hoover Depression remain as popular as ever, Republicans have always opposed Social Security and other FDR/New Deal programs.
Republicans hate FDR because he was so successful that he proves everything they have to say is complete crap.
Germany's workers have higher productivity, shorter hours and greater quality of life. How did we get it so wrong?
How did Germany become such a great place to work in the first place? The Allies did it. This whole European model came, to some extent, from the New Deal. Our real history and tradition is what we created in Europe. Occupying Germany after WWII, the 1945 European constitutions, the UN Charter of Human Rights all came from Eleanor Roosevelt and the New Dealers. All of it got worked into the constitutions of Europe and helped shape their social democracies. It came from us. The papal encyclicals on labor, it came from the Americans. "Were You Born on the Wrong Continent?": America's misguided culture of overwork - Nonfiction - Salon.com
Neo-CONS hate FDR because he was the first modern president to reign in the robber barrons on Wall Street.
While FDR and his New Deal that moved the country out of the Hoover Depression remain as popular as ever, Republicans have always opposed Social Security and other FDR/New Deal programs.
Republicans hate FDR because he was so successful that he proves everything they have to say is complete crap.
Germany's workers have higher productivity, shorter hours and greater quality of life. How did we get it so wrong?
How did Germany become such a great place to work in the first place? The Allies did it. This whole European model came, to some extent, from the New Deal. Our real history and tradition is what we created in Europe. Occupying Germany after WWII, the 1945 European constitutions, the UN Charter of Human Rights all came from Eleanor Roosevelt and the New Dealers. All of it got worked into the constitutions of Europe and helped shape their social democracies. It came from us. The papal encyclicals on labor, it came from the Americans. "Were You Born on the Wrong Continent?": America's misguided culture of overwork - Nonfiction - Salon.com
How did Germany manage to move past this recession and actually grow their economy? They dumped Keynesian economics, something Britian is learning the hard way right now, and employed a few key economic factors. Firstly, they positioned themselves well in the EU, they undervalued their currency, making their exports cheaper. Thus, it is their strong export market that has led them into prosperity.
As for the US...if you want to know what gov't intervention into the market looks like, look to Britian. They have nationalize banks, healthcare, and absolutely dumped money into the economy, all to no avail.
The U.K. has been in Keynes overdrive for the past 18 months. The budget deficit is already more than 12 percent of gross domestic product, on a par with Greece. And while the Greeks are cutting spending, the British deficit is widening. Figures for January showed another fiscal blowout. At the same time, interest rates have been slashed to 0.5 percent. And the pound has slumped in value, which is supposed to boost demand for British goods, and help close the trade gap.
Just about everything possible has been done to encourage consumption. The results have been miserable.
How did Germany manage to move past this recession and actually grow their economy? They dumped Keynesian economics, something Britian is learning the hard way right now, and employed a few key economic factors. Firstly, they positioned themselves well in the EU, they undervalued their currency, making their exports cheaper. Thus, it is their strong export market that has led them into prosperity.
As for the US...if you want to know what gov't intervention into the market looks like, look to Britian. They have nationalize banks, healthcare, and absolutely dumped money into the economy, all to no avail.
What are you talking about? Germany doesn't have its own currency. Also, the german government has used Keynesian economics in the last 2 years to help the economy to recover and it seems to work.
But back to topic: Ron Paul who started the Tea Party movement in 2007 did not support the war in Iraq. However, I understand what the OP is talking about. How many of the Tea Party candidates and its voters were against the wars in the first place?
What are you talking about? Germany doesn't have its own currency. Also, the german government has used Keynesian economics in the last 2 years to help the economy to recover and it seems to work.
But back to topic: Ron Paul who started the Tea Party movement in 2007 did not support the war in Iraq. However, I understand what the OP is talking about. How many of the Tea Party candidates and its voters were against the wars in the first place?
The combination of devaluing the euro (which they affected by how they strategically positioned themselves in the EU - as I stated before) and going away from Keynesian economics has helped Germany perform better. On the other hand, Britian has embraced this economic principle and has had devastating effects. As I stated before and linked to, Germany has not used Keynesian economics in the last few years. It doesn't work and my hope is that our country can move away from this same path that the Dems seem intent upon.
Neo-CONS hate FDR because he was the first modern president to reign in the robber barrons on Wall Street.
While FDR and his New Deal that moved the country out of the Hoover Depression remain as popular as ever, Republicans have always opposed Social Security and other FDR/New Deal programs.
Republicans hate FDR because he was so successful that he proves everything they have to say is complete crap.
FDR took over in 1932. We stayed in a depression until 1945. The longest economic downturn in history.
And Social Security moved us out of depression? LOLs. Taking money fom people that work and goving it to people that don't helps? Why did Obama lower the Social Security tax then? If New Deal programs helped us when FDR was president and FDR was such an economic guru, then why is Obama not increasing the S.S. program instead of starving it of money.
That is what FDR fans call success.
Last edited by OhioIstheBest; 01-17-2011 at 03:07 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
