Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
How are keynesian economic policies supposed to have prevented a depression or helped the economy?
The Choice
- Thread starter DeMartMan
- Start date
Liberty
Libertarian Minded
I must have hit a nerve Dixie.
The truth is, "the problems we are facing are the direct result of Democratic-Republican Party policies, agendas, and legislation.
Dixie, you're no different than DeMartMan. If you could only see how much you sound like him/her.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
You didn't "hit a nerve" and it doesn't bother me in the least, that you want to be an ignorant fucktard, that's entirely your business and right! The problems we're facing currently, are the result of pissant fucktards like you, who stayed at home rather than casting your vote for John McCain. The problems will continue, as long as we have a contingent of fucktards like you, who just don't fucking get it! Perhaps you think that "angers" me in some way, and maybe that's why you insist on doing it? I don't really know, don't really care, to be honest.
You want to talk about how I sound, but do you ever listen to yourself? You sound like a cynical bitter person, who just doesn't give a shit about this country or what happens to it. In your eyes, it deserves whatever it gets, and you couldn't care less. You're happy and content with coming here to pit yourself against BOTH parties, and do your best to undermine them in any way you can, regardless of the fact your 'chosen' political ideology represents less than 2% of the voting population. Like a spoiled little brat who can't have his way, you want to do everything possible to ensure no one else has their way either! So you are a meaningless little gadfly fucktard, who doesn't give two shits about the country or your fellow citizens, you just want to have your way or nothing.
Well, you're going to get NOTHING! You stand ZERO chance of ever seeing anything resembling "libertarian" government, with Marxist Socialists in power. One day, perhaps you'll look back and realize there was a window of opportunity, to influence the GOP into a more 'libertarian' position, and you blew it, you threw them under the bus because you had too much pent-up bitterness to get over it and move forward. But now... you go ahead and get your rocks off thinking a conservative is having his "nerve hit" by you! That's what is most important to you, in your pathetic life! To hell with the country, right?
Good Luck
New member
There was a time I believed democrats were about the little people, about assuring fairness, about helping the poor. I believed it so much I got involved, actively working in campaign offices.
What I learned is the democrats care even less for the little guy than the republicans do. To the democratic party, the little guy is nothing more than a vote for their power. Their policies are not about helping the little guy, they are about trapping the little guy into dependence on the government so we don't dare vote them out of power. They are about hate and class warfare - we're supposed to hate the wealthy because they have more than we do. They are full blown racists: always the first to point out the skin color of a public official, or a crime victim, or the criminal (unless the criminal is of their favored races, then it's ignored.) They are about using any and every excuse to increase their power base. They are absolute hypocrits, decrying racism while promoting government mandated racist policies; using science to promote an excuse to more heavily regulate - and tax - the energy industry but ignoring proven science when it does not fit with their policies. They are about shifting blame all the time: they promote getting poor people into houses, and when that policy results in an economic implosion from overextended credit, they blame "unregulated free market policies of republicans" when the industry that nearly collapsed is the most heavily regulated industry in the world.
What I learned is a party who essentially ignores your problems, "treating" them by favoring their big money buddies is despicable, but at the same time marginally preferable to a party whose only desire is to use your problems to gain power over you. I'd rather be a poor freeman than a well-off slave to government.
What I learned is the democrats care even less for the little guy than the republicans do. To the democratic party, the little guy is nothing more than a vote for their power. Their policies are not about helping the little guy, they are about trapping the little guy into dependence on the government so we don't dare vote them out of power. They are about hate and class warfare - we're supposed to hate the wealthy because they have more than we do. They are full blown racists: always the first to point out the skin color of a public official, or a crime victim, or the criminal (unless the criminal is of their favored races, then it's ignored.) They are about using any and every excuse to increase their power base. They are absolute hypocrits, decrying racism while promoting government mandated racist policies; using science to promote an excuse to more heavily regulate - and tax - the energy industry but ignoring proven science when it does not fit with their policies. They are about shifting blame all the time: they promote getting poor people into houses, and when that policy results in an economic implosion from overextended credit, they blame "unregulated free market policies of republicans" when the industry that nearly collapsed is the most heavily regulated industry in the world.
What I learned is a party who essentially ignores your problems, "treating" them by favoring their big money buddies is despicable, but at the same time marginally preferable to a party whose only desire is to use your problems to gain power over you. I'd rather be a poor freeman than a well-off slave to government.
Good Luck
New member
So, how are we supposed to influence the GOP in the direction we desire if we don't threaten them with the only thing that really matters: our vote? If we merely voice our objections to the things we see wrong with the republican party, but then blindly elect them into power every chance we get, how will that change their minds?
cawacko
Well-known member
I really like your last paragraph. Now I'm a registered Republican but I'm under no illusion that Republicans are anything but individual politicians trying to gain as much power as they can. Their views just happen to be closer to mine than the Democratic Party's. That may be a cynical viewpoint but it's hard not to be cycnical when dealing with politicians and politics.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Well, in my opinion, the first thing you need to do is some soul searching. Try to come to grips with the understanding that libertarian philosophy is not widespread, it's relatively small, compared to social conservatism. All of this shit you want to see made legal, from pot to gay marriage, all comes with a cultural price, nothing is without consequence. There are very sound and legitimate reasons many people don't want to see these things made legal, and you need to learn to listen, instead of stubbornly insisting you're right and everyone else is wrong. On principles of smaller, limited government, the conservatives and libertarians share much commonality, it's only on social issues, where there seems to be a divide. Stop letting that be the case! Learn that you live in a big giant community, where different people have different opinions, and we have to establish laws and rules we can all live with, not just laws and rules libertarians like. It doesn't mean you have to give up advocating something you believe in, but letting social issues keep you from voting for the only party who has a chance to defeat Socialists, is kind of stupid. Do you think, when these idiots fuck around and let the Taliban take over America, you're going to get legalized pot and gay marriage?
The other thing is, stop being so cynical about the GOP of old, most of us conservatives will readily admit they fucked up, and have not represented core conservative values, that's why we're sending many-a-career-incumbent packing for home before their general election. To be replaced by republicans who won't be RINO's and won't "go along to get along" with the Democrats. You're going to see the emergence of real conservatism, Reaganesque conservatism, and IF they slip back into John McCain mode, you will see a vibrant 3rd party emerge as a result. Now is not the time to go bolting off into nowhere with some libertarian pipe dream, it's time for true CONSERVATIVES who want to see smaller, limited government, to step up to the plate and let your voices be heard. You can't do that if you're sitting on the couch munching cheetos and bitching about how the Republicrats are same as Democrats!
Minister of Truth
Practically Perfect
This reminds me of how Dems originally got the poor vote in urban centers. The machines would literally start fires in appartment complexes, and then the mayor, boss, or someone else would show up waving cash and recruiting everyone to vote for the party that cares. That was late 19th Century, but the tactics prior to that weren't any less deceitful. In a sense, the Dems invented the Reichstag fire and the Germans merely perfected it...
Republicans deserve another chance!
After all, if you fail and fail and fail, isn't it just like Americans to give you another chance. Think of the Chicago Cubs or the Boston Red Sox. It could be there is just a curse on the republicans since Coolidge and Hoover, and this time they may just do well. Americans have short memories. Remember Newt Gingrich, he tried didn't he? Oh, I don't mean marriage. And the real estate bubble, S&L Scandal and bailout under Reagan/Bush, just small potatoes compared to George W. Bush. And let's not mention the Great Depression. Who needs safe food, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Healthcare, child labor laws, secure banks, safe investments, folks, have faith, this time they may actually do OK. Why consider track records when you have their rhetoric? Their word is good, right!
"The magnitude of the fiscal wreckage and the severity of the economic dangers that resulted are too great to permit such an easy verdict. In the larger scheme of democratic fact and economic reality there lies a harsher judgment. In fact, it was the basic assumptions and fiscal architecture of the Reagan Revolution itself which first introduced the folly that now envelops our economic governance.
The Reagan Revolution was radical, imprudent, and arrogant. It defied the settled consensus of professional politicians and economists on its two central assumptions. It mistakenly presumed that a handful of ideologue were right and all the politicians were wrong about what the American people wanted from government." http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45/279.html
After all, if you fail and fail and fail, isn't it just like Americans to give you another chance. Think of the Chicago Cubs or the Boston Red Sox. It could be there is just a curse on the republicans since Coolidge and Hoover, and this time they may just do well. Americans have short memories. Remember Newt Gingrich, he tried didn't he? Oh, I don't mean marriage. And the real estate bubble, S&L Scandal and bailout under Reagan/Bush, just small potatoes compared to George W. Bush. And let's not mention the Great Depression. Who needs safe food, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Healthcare, child labor laws, secure banks, safe investments, folks, have faith, this time they may actually do OK. Why consider track records when you have their rhetoric? Their word is good, right!
"The magnitude of the fiscal wreckage and the severity of the economic dangers that resulted are too great to permit such an easy verdict. In the larger scheme of democratic fact and economic reality there lies a harsher judgment. In fact, it was the basic assumptions and fiscal architecture of the Reagan Revolution itself which first introduced the folly that now envelops our economic governance.
The Reagan Revolution was radical, imprudent, and arrogant. It defied the settled consensus of professional politicians and economists on its two central assumptions. It mistakenly presumed that a handful of ideologue were right and all the politicians were wrong about what the American people wanted from government." http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45/279.html
cawacko
Well-known member
Just curious about your last quote. If Reagan was so wrong in knowing what the people wanted from government how did he get re-elected in a 49 state landslide? It's not like he hid what he was about.
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." Winston Churchill
Reagan was an excellent actor and orator, spending like a drunken sailor or a modern American with credit cards, we had several good years till it collapsed for Bush Sr. People voted for W and he is rated among the worst presidents in history, why is that you think. Politics is at the margins and sometimes idiots won.
cawacko
Well-known member
Bush didn't even win the popular vote. Again Reagan won 49 states in a landslide. Big difference. Were there no liberals around in the '80's or were they all fooled too?
apple0154
MEOW
Greenspan addressing Congress:
REP. HENRY WAXMAN: The question I have for you is, you had an ideology, you had a belief that free, competitive -- and this is your statement -- "I do have an ideology. My judgment is that free, competitive markets are by far the unrivaled way to organize economies. We've tried regulation. None meaningfully worked." That was your quote.
You had the authority to prevent irresponsible lending practices that led to the subprime mortgage crisis. You were advised to do so by many others. And now our whole economy is paying its price.
Do you feel that your ideology pushed you to make decisions that you wish you had not made?
ALAN GREENSPAN: Well, remember that what an ideology is, is a conceptual framework with the way people deal with reality. Everyone has one. You have to -- to exist, you need an ideology. The question is whether it is accurate or not.
And what I'm saying to you is, yes, I found a flaw. I don't know how significant or permanent it is, but I've been very distressed by that fact.
REP. HENRY WAXMAN: You found a flaw in the reality...
ALAN GREENSPAN: Flaw in the model that I perceived is the critical functioning structure that defines how the world works, so to speak.
REP. HENRY WAXMAN: In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology, was not right, it was not working?
ALAN GREENSPAN: That is -- precisely. No, that's precisely the reason I was shocked, because I had been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.
So it strikes me that, if you go back and ask yourself how in the early years anybody could realistically make a judgment as to what was ultimately going to happen to subprime, I think you're asking more than anybody is capable of judging……
And the answer is that we're not smart enough as people. We just cannot see events that far in advance. And unless we can, it's very difficult to look back and say, why didn't we catch something?
JUDY WOODRUFF: So you think that information wasn't available?
ALICE RIVLIN: Well, no, I think it was available. These institutions were not federally regulated banks, mostly. They were mortgage lenders who were regulated by the states, if at all.
But as this housing bubble grew and took off, lenders were making a lot of loans that they shouldn't have made. And borrowers were borrowing when they shouldn't have made them.
And then there was another complication, several more, but these loans were being packaged and sold to somebody else to be backing for mortgage-backed securities.
Now, in the old days, the lender really had to watch out that he wasn't making a bad loan because he might not get repaid. But in this new world, he didn't have to worry about that. He could sell this loan to somebody else and then take the money and make another loan. So we got the incentives wrong there.
(John Cassidy) But, you know, the head of the Federal Reserve is meant to be the most senior regulator in the country. And in this instance, you know, he stands accused of making two major mistakes: one, keeping interest rates low for too long and allowing a housing bubble to occur; and, B, abdicating his responsibility as a regulator.
He didn't really address the first of those things today. He did address the second and said he made a partial mistake in not agreeing to the regulation of credit default swaps. But that was the first time he said anything like that. And it was a semi-mea culpa, I guess you'd call it, but I don't think it went all the way. (Emphasis added.)
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec08/crisishearing_10-23.html
Some people never learn, Midcan. We've seen the result of little or no regulation and some folks just keep on believing the Republican ideology that "the free hand of the market place" will solve all the problems. Even after the world was brought to the brink of financial collapse they still support the Republicans. Logic and common sense has no place in their belief system.
cawacko
Well-known member
We all know every thinking person would vote Democratic right? There's got to be a way to force everyone to think like us!
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Really? So you believe the past four years the Dems have been working for the health of the whole nation?
Note:
1) The Dems are fighting to keep the status quo with our public education system (which is failing) and fighting to remove the voucher program
2) The Dems have presided over the budget since 2007... each year of their reign has been marked by insane deficits.
3) The Dems just forced a health care bill down the throats of Americans despite the majority of Americans opposing the bill... how is that working for the nation as a whole?
4) The Dems have consistently bailed out their union masters, while leaving the private sector out to suffer through the recession all the while PAYING for the union bailouts.
5) The Dems, like the Reps, pushed for loose credit and 'more home owners than ever before' and that (along with bipartisan repeal of Glass Steagall) led to the financial mess we are in today.
6) The Dems are intent on passing a carbon tax and trade scheme that will raise energy costs on everyone (which is a regressive tax) even though such schemes have failed in Europe. how again is that helping the nation as a whole?
7) The Dems have done NOTHING to actually regulate the portions of the financial sector that took the risks that helped to lead us to near ruin.... yet they have been in control of both Houses of Congress since 2007.... almost four years.
The above is not to suggest that Reps are the answer by any means... but simply refutes your 'the Dems are looking out for the nation' bullshit.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
What is truly funny is partisan hacks who continue to try and pretend it was just one party or the other that fucked up.
Liberty
Libertarian Minded
It never ends. They're truly the unreachables.
Liberty
Libertarian Minded
Dixie, your outreach abilities are truly amazing.
I have Ron Paul, and soon I'll have Rand Paul. It's slow, but worth it. What's funny is that people like you find reason to hate these two republicans. Lets talk about your bitterness about these two Republicans. Lets talk about why you hate someone that has never voted to raise your taxes, someone who wants to end the war on drugs, someone who wants to strickly go by the constitution. Something I know you hate. I base trhis on the comments you've made in the past.
apple0154
MEOW
No forcing would be necessary if the correct information was prominently displayed.
While my post clearly shows regulation was missing there are folks who believe the financial sector is overly regulated. Assuming they believe such to be true it's natural for them to draw erroneous conclusions.
When Allan Greenspan, the epitome of laissez-faire capitalism, tells Congress he got it wrong what more needs to be said?