Off Topic > Off Topic
Obama, the attention whore
FlyGuy45:
--- Quote from: Duckmeister on May 11, 2009, 08:10:59 PM ---Yes, the straw man you set up is wrong. However, my viewpoint on laissez faire is a lot more complex than the "standard" that you guys are really arguing against. That's why.
--- End quote ---
I would love to see your degree in economics. Really, I would.
--- Quote from: Duckmeister on May 11, 2009, 06:46:40 PM ---
And in reality, FDR's ends sucked, didn't provide the result he (and Keynes) promised, and actually made the recession worse and dragged it out for longer than if he had just let capitalism work itself out.
--- End quote ---
This is the most awesome thing I have ever red. If this was true, then the majority of the people would love "Rugged Individualism" and true capitalism.
HIGH TARIFFS!
FU WAR TORN EUROPE!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1932
Oh wait, looks like they did not.
Shrum:
--- Quote from: xXMenenXx on May 11, 2009, 08:12:51 PM ---Theres this Wonderful New Invention called a Shaver!
--- End quote ---
"Barack Obama wears glasses. Osama bin Laden doesn't wear glasses."
"He takes them of when he transforms."
"That doesn't make any sense! He wouldn't be able to see!"
Duckmeister:
--- Quote from: FlyGuy45 on May 11, 2009, 08:15:58 PM ---I would love to see your degree in economics. Really, I would.
--- End quote ---
You yourself said:
--- Quote from: FlyGuy45 on May 11, 2009, 07:20:25 PM ---I am no economist, so I am just speculating.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: FlyGuy45 on May 11, 2009, 08:15:58 PM ---This is the most awesome thing I have ever red. If this was true, then the majority of the people would love "Rugged Individualism" and true capitalism.
HIGH TARIFFS!
FU WAR TORN EUROPE!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1932
Oh wait, looks like they did not.
--- End quote ---
So you're saying that whatever the people say is right? So you're saying that you forget that FDR did a masterful job of hiding up his economic screw-ups to the point where Keynesian economics are still embraced today despite their repeated failures? So you're saying that true capitalism automatically equals lack of charity and high taxes?
LTvic:
Your first post, was hard to understand.
FlyGuy45:
--- Quote from: Duckmeister on May 11, 2009, 08:20:16 PM ---You yourself said:
So you're saying that whatever the people say is right? So you're saying that you forget that FDR did a masterful job of hiding up his economic screw-ups to the point where Keynesian economics are still embraced today despite their repeated failures? So you're saying that true capitalism automatically equals lack of charity and high taxes?
--- End quote ---
The people are right when a majority of them are sick watching everyone loose their lives from hunger and Self Delete, and loosing all their money in closing banks. DEMOCRACY HELLO!
FDR is not considered a good president because he did everything perfectly, he was a good president because he advanced change in a time when people really needed help. Lending a hand to a dieing person is so much better than watching them die while doing nothing.
If you read anything, you will notice how I repeat again and again about how things change and how regulation and tariffs change. Look at the Reciprocal Trade Agreement, the Hawley-Smoot Tariff, Fordney-McCumber Tariff, and the NAFTA. See how different these are and their response to trade.
It is pretty safe to say that people were angry with L-F. Look at the rise of labor unions, the rise of the socialist party, the Gospel of Wealth, and THE PROGRESSIVE MOVEMENT. Rich people will not give you money, and they should be the ones who trickle the money down to you.
High taxes and Capitalism have nothing to do with each other, since L-F CANNOT have any regulation. Keynesian economics is not a part of L-F, its own economic theory used with L-F. And if Capitalism -> Trickle Down Economics, all you will get is a new library, which is what the Gospel of Wealth was. And each president uses his own theory, look at Supply Side Economics, or Reagenomics.
I am no economist, but I know history, and what I am showing you is all lookupable on wiki. You cite nothing.