TheSKSpecial said:
"Ronald Reagan's legacy was a fascinating mixture: lower inflation and higher deficits; lower taxes and higher levels of government spending; less unemployment and bigger trade deficits; fewer strikes and more government jobs; reduced economic regulation and expanded social regulation; the deepest recession in half a century and the longest peacetime recovery ever.
On the other hand, the budget deficit rose from $74 billion in 1980 to $155 billion in 1988, while the trade deficit rose from $15 billion to $129 billion during the same period. And, contrary to widespread belief, the portion of the population below the poverty line was 13 percent in both years. One more set of numbers: Real national wealth rose from $11.9 trillion in 1980 to $14.2 trillion in 1988."
I wasn't even saying that just to bash Reagan. I was just saying that the results of some of his economic policies spoke for themselves, and those same results are speaking loud and clear today. Be it from arrogance, manipulation, or old-fashioned greed, the free-market deregulated approach helped speed along our economic failure. People who used the banking system as their own little cash cows carry some heavy responsibility here.
Not to mention budgeting that increased our national debt (both wars) while cutting some of our primary revenue (taxes on the wealthy).
Teddy Roosevelt once said,
"No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollar's worth of service rendered, not gambling in stocks, but service rendered. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size, acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective, a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate." ( http://www.tax.org/Museum/1901-1932.htm )
Deregulation allowed greedy fucks who used the market to gain wealth while not contributing anything to society to flourish, and cutting their taxes kept it going.
To quote one Ben Croshaw (who was talking about gamers but fits pretty well here),
"If you give them any kind of freedom their first instinct will be to abuse it. If you give them guns, they will shoot old ladies. If you give them cars they will run over old ladies. If you give them aircraft they will ascend to the highest possible height, and hurl themselves out, onto an old lady." Just switch the gamers with the average CEO/banker/broker, guns/cars/aircraft with deregulation, and old ladies with the general public.
Wow, just wow. I really want to know where you found all this crap. Okay, lets go over the errors that you made with who actually caused what.
1: Reagan Administration:
The Deficits you say were caused by Reagan's economic policy's were caused by the over-spending of the Democratic congress during his later years (Exactly what happened to Bush, but I will explain later). For every dollar he brought in with lower taxes, the democrats spent three. Over-spending and expansion of the government against the constitution has been a staple of the Liberal democratic party ever since FDR's New deal during the great depression. None of the New deal's programs helped the economy, the only thing that got us out of the depression was the need to massively create war materials during WWII. Why do I say this? Simple. The more programs the government has, the less people will turn to the private sector, which can do things much more efficiently, even if it does cost slightly more. Where does the money come from to pay for the private sector version. Lower taxes is the answer. The less you take from something that produces a material or resource, the more you can get from it later without harming it. If you tax the crap out of a rich person, will they continue to be rich later and buy things. No, of course not. If you tax them lightly, they will continue to gain more wealth, and therefore, you gain more income from then when they pay their taxes later. It works the same with all tax brackets. If everyone pays a little bit, then everyone will benefit later with more money.
The point of this paragraph: Big government only "works" until it runs out of money to take from its citizens. Your entire arguement was bashing the free market. If unregulated capitialism is so bad, answer this question: Why did the industrial revolution work? Ignore all the labor problems and other things, just focus on the question: why did the industrial revolution give us the boom of the 20s? And before you ask the all together idiot question of: What about the great depression? It was caused because the Federal Reserve was REGULATED so that they could not increase the money supply, and also that Great Britian was trying to return to the gold standard, and did not have the ability to do so.
2: The "greedy f**ks"
Rich people tend to give money to charities. Unless they are Joe biden(and other liberals), who has given 3000 dollars total over the last 8 or so years. Dick Cheney gives a huge amount of money to charity, like most right wing people. Taxation and Regulations just limit the money supply and don't allow charities to recieve what they need from the Richer people. (charities= the red cross and such)
My motto is stupid people do stupid things because they are stupid. This describes Obama and the Democratic party perfectly. They spend huge amounts of money on things, such as nationalized health care, that are proven NOT TO WORK!!! We have the best health care system IN THE WORLD right now because the government isn't there to decide who lives and dies.
The whole recession we are in now was caused by government bureaucrats who don't know jack about economics making regulations that limit what companies can make. Take the auto industry for example, The SUV was invented to get around government policy so that the companies could MAKE A PROFIT which is the whole point of business. Punishing people because they make money is a horrible and morally wrong thing to do, and it is exactly what high taxes, specifically income tax(which was created to help pay for WWII), are.
My last point is about the media. The entire television media is full of liberals, even fox news. The only place you can get any conservative principals, which were what this country was founded on if you actually read the constitution, is through Talk Radio, which the left can shut down unconstitutionally at any time through the "fairness doctrine".
If you disagree with all this, then you are someone who does not understand their facts. These comments are based entirely off facts, not the bull that comes from Obama. How does this relate to the thread? Anybody who disagrees with Obama and agrees with this is classified by the liberal statist, which includes the mass media, as a right-wing extremist, a word that was created by the left since they don't like the word Terrorist.
Edit: Teddy Roosevelt was wrong when he said that making a fortune was a form of misconduct, it is a freedom granted by natural law which is granted to man by his creator.
.
