Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: redmenace on November 09, 2006, 05:33:34 am
-
...To Find the Silver Lining
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/08/D8L94GJ80.html
-
Not hard when it's ALL silver lining :p
-
Eh, Gridlock? I don't think congress will get anything done. Especially after Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, etc. have been lombasting Bush and the Republicans, outright insulting them. It is hard to automatically move on, especially when it comes from those that are throughing around the barberous words. They don't seem to understand that Republicans can still make life hell for the democrats as well. All anyone will see for the next two years is a bunch of posturing for 2008.
-
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/09/D8L9I3A81.html
-
Eh, Gridlock? I don't think congress will get anything done. Especially after Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, etc. have been lombasting Bush and the Republicans, outright insulting them. It is hard to automatically move on, especially when it comes from those that are throughing around the barberous words. They don't seem to understand that Republicans can still make life hell for the democrats as well. All anyone will see for the next two years is a bunch of posturing for 2008.
Gridlock is good. Very good. At least for me :D
-
How so?
-
How so?
Because it reduces the chances of the US dragging the UK into another catastrophic foreign policy crisis, means the press can focus on how much a bunch of authoritarian ****wits our own government is, and hopefully reduces the hideously overdone and ineffective 'security' measure enacted upon travellers.
-
Ah ok.
-
It'd been my observation that throughout history, that although Dems tend to be anti-big business, the economy always seem to run better while they are in office. Witness FDR and even Clinton (he had a harder time because Reps controlled congress during large portions of his term). Generally speaking, Reps support lassaiz faire (sp?), where they loosen government restrictions on business and let businessmen run the economy. However, it's been my observation that businessmen are the worst people to have the reigns of the economy.
A businessman's concern is to make money and money now. They have a single focus and are unable to see the big picture that their actions actually will screw themselves in the long run. Government needs to guide them, to steer them in a direction away from blunder. FDR learned this during the depression. At first he tried to get them to cooperate, to make changes on their own initiative. In the end he learned he had to practically point an economic gun to their heads and said "You either roll with the policies or be liquidated" and forced businesses to follow government initiatives. Only then did the economy turn around.
Businessmen are not academics and are no historians. All they see is that Democratic policy means tighter government restrictions. What they don't realize is that these restrictions are usually in place to ensure that revenue is diverted from employers to employees. And employees are your typical consumers. Sine consumers now have more disposable income, they start spending more. This, in turn, creates higher profits, which creates more jobs and more revenue, etc. This was how FDR was able to start turning the economy around during the great depression: by forcing businesses hands, essentially, to force businesses to pay their employees more. The Dems won't be able to do much economically while they only control congress, but put a Democratic president or a progressive Republican at the helm, and a stronger economy is what will result.
-
It entirely depends on the policy they implement. The economy during clinton's tenure only took off when Republicans took over and started to talk about controlling spending.
Keep in mind that the American economy only really took off during FDR because the bloody war and the ramping up production and insane government spending. But keep in mind, gov't created jobs disapear when the money disapears.
-
So does that mean that you'll put people straight next time they start talking about the Clinton Recession (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,37630.msg767774.html#msg767774) then?
-
Never said clinton really did anything persay to hurt the economy. But things started to down turn during the last year of his presidency. But in all honesty, the resulting 'recession' was only because of a correction to the over inflated and underperforming tech center.
Actually, I was pointing out the faulty logic involved in giving blanket credit like that in the thread. And how long did it take you to find that thread.
-
5 seconds. I typed in Clinton Recession and there it was :D
If you're saying that there was no Clinton Recession and that it was just due to the tech sector's effects on the market I'm prepared to leave it at that.
-
For the most part yes and thusly there is not bush recession, except maybe in integrity.
-
Especially after Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, etc. have been lombasting Bush and the Republicans, outright insulting them
And the Republicans haven't been doing this? :wtf:
-
the republicans do it worse. and they never get called on it, its very annoying and immature.
-
Especially after Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, etc. have been lombasting Bush and the Republicans, outright insulting them
And the Republicans haven't been doing this? :wtf:
As I recall, Bush wasn't getting as down right personal as they were getting. Yes there were alot of things said and Bush without a doubt was taking part in it. The point is, no one will be willing to move on from this point.
-
The thing that bothers me, is not that the Democrats have been voted in, when do the terrorists win? I mean that's what I was told.
-
The terrorists won when the PATRIOT act was passed. This is just the victory lap.