Watermark agrees: Liberals are bad at governing

some people are so thickheaded. Unless conservatism took a huge U turn from Reagan to Bush 1, Bush 2 was no conservative. To continue stating otherwise....well it's just plain retarded.
 
Your premise is flawed. Losing fiscal responsibility and building an economy on credit bubbles caused the economic failure. Had Bush actually been conservative I may agree with you, but instead he increased government programs, increased spending, increased debt, followed none of the principles of fiscal responsibility, and the rest of the Rs followed him into territory they should never have gone to. Clinton was more of a conservative than Bush ever thought to be.

Damo, WHERE did the bubble come from?

From "creative" banking fiction. Ways to avoid regulation that were allowed because of deregulation. People were paid billions to find out ways to "self-regulate" due to conservatism, and added nothing to the economy. That was the only reason conservatism ever brought any "progress" - because they built an economy of fiction, a house of cards.

Conservatives have often talked about how Europe was lagging behind in productivity, when, in actuality, the only part of the American economy that was responsible for us pulling ahead of the Europeans was our finance section, which only was "productive" because our deregulation allowed them to build "productivity" out of thin air. Now the shit hits the fan, and hopefully we throw you douchebags out the window, fix the mess you caused, and then put regulation back in place. If Obama has enough backbone, that is.
 
hmm I know of no way of proving that without exposing identity info.
My IQ when tested is still on file I am sure.

Also in all truthfulness I doubt that I would still be able to qualify.
I am just not as sharp as I used to be in the mental area.
I skipped 5th grade on merit, how many people do you know who has done that?

But I apperciate your offer.
 
Damo, WHERE did the bubble come from?

From "creative" banking fiction. Ways to avoid regulation that were allowed because of deregulation. People were paid billions to find out ways to "self-regulate" due to conservatism, and added nothing to the economy. That was the only reason conservatism ever brought any "progress" - because they built an economy of fiction, a house of cards.

Conservatives have often talked about how Europe was lagging behind in productivity, when, in actuality, the only part of the American economy that was responsible for us pulling ahead of the Europeans was our finance section, which only was "productive" because our deregulation allowed them to build "productivity" out of thin air. Now the shit hits the fan, and hopefully we throw you douchebags out the window, fix the mess you caused, and then put regulation back in place. If Obama has enough backbone, that is.

where did the wealth and prosperity in america come from before regulation?
 
Damo, WHERE did the bubble come from?

From "creative" banking fiction. Ways to avoid regulation that were allowed because of deregulation. People were paid billions to find out ways to "self-regulate" due to conservatism, and added nothing to the economy. That was the only reason conservatism ever brought any "progress" - because they built an economy of fiction, a house of cards.

Conservatives have often talked about how Europe was lagging behind in productivity, when, in actuality, the only part of the American economy that was responsible for us pulling ahead of the Europeans was our finance section, which only was "productive" because our deregulation allowed them to build "productivity" out of thin air. Now the shit hits the fan, and hopefully we throw you douchebags out the window, fix the mess you caused, and then put regulation back in place. If Obama has enough backbone, that is.
This is inane. For much of the time as the bubble built all we heard about was what a "great economy" Clinton gave us. While Bush didn't do much to fix the issue, it certainly wasn't "conservative" fault. (Nor liberalism for that matter.)

This bubble has been building since before the 70s. In recent history twice it expanded and in certain areas burst, once with Tech, again in 2001, and both times we were able to patch and expand it more. This time the whole shebang hit the fan, and the response? Bailouts, and patches on the same system. Who started the bailouts and stimulus? I'll give you a hint, it wasn't Obama. The only way Bush was "conservative" on that is that he didn't quite spend as much doing exactly the same thing Obama is doing.

Bush was no conservative, and too many Rs were too much of Party people rather than principled people and followed him on a path that led us to where we are now. Bush was like Grant, he pretty much let things happen and haphazardly directed people in what seemed a random manner while people close to him brought his Presidency down around him because he "trusted" them. When he actually directed and did something, it was almost unerringly to spend more money on a stupid program like the Pill Bill, or to build a larger government entity like the DHS.

Regulations may help to patch the issue and make the patch stronger, but the bubble will still be the bubble and sometime it will again burst. It's seriously myopic to pretend that this is some sort of "conservative" thing. This has been decades in the making, and the real perversity of it is that when the economy hums again after our own lost decade, the idiots will vote for people that will STILL overspend even during times of "plenty" and continue the drift until the US is insolvent.

It took both parties decades to screw the economy up as bad as it is. And instead of fixing things, we plan on heating it up again and playing another round of hot potato with it, hoping it's the other party that is left holding it when it hits the fan next time, and hoping that it isn't too damaged afterward to be unable to patch it and start over.
 
Back
Top