My Future Lover

Superfreak said:
Clarification... he is more intelligent with regards to economics than those on this board. Intelligence is relevant to the topic being discussed.

I will say on the whole he is more intelligent with regards to economics than I am, but to be clear... that still doesn't mean he will always be right. So if at some future point he and I disagree... don't throw this back in my face and say.... "you said he was smarter than you and thus he must be right" :)
Click to expand...

No I won't. I'm neither a man nor a neocon SF...I understand you are not either with me or against me, and that there is such a thing as a nuanced position. :)
 
Cypress said:
lol

True: that's exactly what I was thinking. Men are loathe to admit they don't know something about a topic, or admit they are wrong. Look at superfreak: 5 years later, and he still can't admit his Iraq war was a mistake. ;)


I'm guilty too. but, like USC says, I often will defer to the experts. I'm not a climate scientist, and I simply defer to the expert consensus opinion. I would never pretend to give an opinion on brain surgery, I'll let the experts do that and I'll defer to them.

You're right: Krugman is smarter and more knowelgeble about economics than anyone on this board...and in particular, in relation to some random poster who pops his head above water and yells that krugman is an idiot.


and I've never considered Krugman to be particularly left wing. He's pretty mainstream, if slightly left of center.
Click to expand...


I think that like almost everyone else in this country, the bush policies have made Krugman appear left wing. I consider him a liberal (and I do not throw that term around) but in no way a leftist.
 
Darla said:
I think that like almost everyone else in this country, the bush policies have made Krugman appear left wing. I consider him a liberal (and I do not throw that term around) but in no way a leftist.
Click to expand...
Bush's policies are not particularly right wing. The only "right-wing" thing Bush has done was tax cuts. Pretty much everything else has been largely inexplicable.
 
Darla said:
No I won't. I'm neither a man nor a neocon SF...I understand you are not either with me or against me, and that there is such a thing as a nuanced position. :)
Click to expand...

You're not a man? Really? I suppose NEXT you'll be telling me you're not white. :shock:
 
Damocles said:
Bush's policies are not particularly right wing. The only "right-wing" thing Bush has done was tax cuts. Pretty much everything else has been largely inexplicable.
Click to expand...


He's done 90% of what the republican party wanted him to do. The fact that these policies were failures, is a failure of republicanism. Not because bush went off the reservation.
 
Cypress said:
He's done 90% of what the republican party wanted him to do. The fact that these policies were failures, is a failure of republicanism. Not because bush went off the reservation.
Click to expand...
I would say it was opposite. The R Party has done 90% of what he wanted to do. That R by his name and him being President seems to have turned them all to shameless hacks. Instead of stopping and saying to themselves, "Would I have voted for this at any other point of my life?" they wound up voting for something to "support the party". Watching it has made many a true conservative not just flinch, but to almost retch.
 
Damocles said:
I would say it was opposite. The R Party has done 90% of what he wanted to do. That R by his name and him being President seems to have turned them all to shameless hacks. Instead of stopping and saying to themselves, "Would I have voted for this at any other point of my life?" they wound up voting for something to "support the party". Watching it has made many a true conservative not just flinch, but to almost retch.
Click to expand...

Krugman has written some great columns about people like you.

You've been completely debunked, sorry.
 
Damocles said:
Bush's policies are not particularly right wing. The only "right-wing" thing Bush has done was tax cuts. Pretty much everything else has been largely inexplicable.
Click to expand...
Inexplicible ? I think not. Perhaps you have not been reading the right books ?
 
Damocles said:
I would say it was opposite. The R Party has done 90% of what he wanted to do. That R by his name and him being President seems to have turned them all to shameless hacks.
Click to expand...


He's part of the repubican agenda. You guys just want to disown him, because the republican agenda was exposed as a fraud ;) :


-Cut taxes, particulary for the rich, corporations, and investors. Check.

-Diverted federal spending away from social programs, and tipped it more towards the military industrial complex, and a muscular, war-like foreign policy. Check.

-Took steps to enact much of the social conservative agenda, on abortion, women's right, contraception. Check.

-Fought tooth an nail against science: Climate science, stem cells, etc.

-Tried to privitize social security. Check.

-Weakend regulatory agencies. Check.

-Put Industry lobbyists in charge of the very agencies that regulate those industries. Check.

-Weakened environmental enforcement. Check.
 
Damocles said:
I would say it was opposite. The R Party has done 90% of what he wanted to do. That R by his name and him being President seems to have turned them all to shameless hacks. Instead of stopping and saying to themselves, "Would I have voted for this at any other point of my life?" they wound up voting for something to "support the party". Watching it has made many a true conservative not just flinch, but to almost retch.
Click to expand...
LOL you just said the same thing Damo.
What is the difference if they are in synch ?
 
uscitizen said:
LOL you just said the same thing Damo.
What is the difference if they are in synch ?
Click to expand...

It is a question of which one is going along with the other.

If Bush says...

" I want to spend like a liberal and could care less about the consequences"

and the Rep led Congress goes along with it... that is far different than if the Reps had proposed a conservative agenda and Bush had gone along with that.
 
uscitizen said:
LOL you just said the same thing Damo.
What is the difference if they are in synch ?
Click to expand...
The difference is, if it was a sane R in there I think we'd be looking at a different thing. As I said, often they voted for things that were vastly different than what they normally would have.

It may have some of the same titles, but the implementation and practice was vastly different than what these people brought to the table in the past.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top