A Great Victory for President Obama!

[bf2]

Since when have socialists worried about finding the money for their grand schemes? It's all other people's tax folks - let's spend it all. Let's also spend the money we don't have and will never have. Then let's print more money. Let's not worry about consequences. I'll get my votes alright.

Then when the country defaults on its debts and goes bankrupt and has a Weimar-style hyperinflation (which it will), I'll come back with a sombre face, and say banal cliches like 'we have to learn from mistakes' and 'we took our eyes off the ball'. That will get me a few more votes.

[hutch--]

Let US history be the teacher, when the great depression hit in 1929 the US President Herbert Hoover was confident the market would correct itself, it didn't. They cut back government spending and heightened the depression, by the time ordinary Americans were on the bread line looking for a cup of soup, Hoover was thrown out and FDR was elected. He survived an assassination attempt in Florida then went on to save the US from the depression. Guess what he did ????

He SPENT his way of out the depression, gave Americans jobs again and reconstructed the US economy so that by WW2 it was the most powerful economy in the world.

The best way to bring the US to its knees like Bush did is to destroy the economy again, cut backs, people starving in the streets, no health cover, living off the charity of Communists and Arabs (Chavez and Dubai) and hand control of the world to China.

Do you speak Mandarin ?

[bf2]

All depressions and all wars are caused by socialistic economic policies, not small c conservative policies. This has nothing to do with party politics. Republicans today are just as big proponents of big governments, wasteful spending and foreign wars as are the Democrats. They are just as removed from small c conservative fisal policies as Democrats are - there is no difference.

This is true in all Western countries. If you are a small c conservative in the UK, then you must stay well away from the Conservative Party.

Small c conservative fiscal policy is what is essentially known as the Austrian School of Economics, as explained by people like Hayek and von Mises. Funnily enouogh, they used to call their politics 'Liberalism' - which is what it really is, until socialists and communists liked the term too much and hijacked it.

Now let's see what we can learn from history.

The Great Depression was caused by protectionism and tarriff barriers put up by the US - none of which is part of a small c conservative fiscal policy. In retaliation, the erstwhile trading partners of the US put up their own trade barriers and formed new alliances - which soon became polictical alliances, exacerbating the overall climate.

Meanwhile Germany is in deep sh1t because they had decided to pay for the WW1 by issuing bonds (sounds familiar?) and printing money (sounds familiar?) - yet nothing seems to work. People's living standards are falling rapidly, just like the mark against the dollar. In the meantime, people who are holding gold or dollar and not the mark are doing very well (foreign financiers and Jewish people in particular) - causing a lot of resentment in the general population. Ordinary people on the street are selling their furniture to buy bread, and more resentment builds up when the Jewish people holding the gold (hence a lot of buying power) buy them all up. The Jewish people were also blamed for the depression itself because they owned or managed the world's banks (by the way before anyone accuses me of anti-semitism, I am only giving you the history, I am telling you how one thing led to another - nothing else - these are not my opinion. You don't have to believe me - read it up).

So protectionism, a collusion with global banking, reckless borrowing and money printing - what do we get? A world war.

That's what history teaches us.

[bf2]

Another thing - for anyone who thinks more spending is the answer to cure all recession.

That's what Japan has been trying to do for 20 years - pointless building projects, gold-plated social security schemes, a huge buearocracy.

Hasn't done them much good so far.

[Bill Cravener]

Since when have socialists worried about finding the money for their grand schemes? It's all other people's tax folks - let's spend it all. Let's also spend the money we don't have and will never have. Then let's print more money. Let's not worry about consequences. I'll get my votes alright.

Then when the country defaults on its debts and goes bankrupt and has a Weimar-style hyperinflation (which it will), I'll come back with a sombre face, and say banal cliches like 'we have to learn from mistakes' and 'we took our eyes off the ball'. That will get me a few more votes.

That's nonsense!

The only additional taxation to individuals will be a penalty tax for those who choose not to buy health insurance. Most people (with a brain) who follow politics know that the law will result in more than 30 million additional Americans getting health insurance and by expanding insurance coverage the law will also increase economic activity. All those newly insured folks will demand more medical care than when they were uninsured and while it takes many years to train a family physician or nurse practitioner it doesn't take much time to train the assistants and technicians plus all the related support staff who can fill much of this need. These are precisely the sort of medium skilled jobs our economy here in the US desperately need.

Yes this new health care plan will extend the Medicare tax on the wealthiest Americans of those with incomes above $250,000 per year. And I say what is wrong with those who are benefiting the most from the American system pay their fare share for what this great country has enabled them to achieve?

The "free rider penalty" of $2000 to $3000 (per employee) on medium and large businesses that fail to provide workers with affordable coverage will force those workers to get subsidized insurance via the new insurance exchanges. This penalty will indeed impose a new financial burden on businesses that do not pay their fair share of health insurance costs but the overall impact is likely to be very small. Only 2.6 percent of businesses will pay this assessment and the revenue raised will amount to 1.4 percent of existing spending on health insurance in the U.S. and only 0.1 percent of wages.

Of course the long-term goal of the Affordable Care Act is to reduce spending on health care overall. And the best projections suggest that it will. Although the law will boost spending initially, the effect is likely to be modest.


It is obvious that you know nothing of what you speak and your other two nonsensical posts deserve no rebuttal period! 

[bf2]

It is obvious that you know nothing of what you speak and your other two nonsensical posts deserve no rebuttal period!

I know and understand more about the causes of and build up to WW2 than you'll know in the rest of your life.

[hutch--]

 

Where do you get this claptrap from ?

> All depressions and all wars are caused by socialistic economic policies, not small c conservative policies.

ww1 occurred before Communism. existed. Old world Europe empire mobilisation after the assassination in Yugoslavia.

ww2 was triggered by Hitler invading Poland, Hitler was a deviant version of Fascism, he was strongly anti-communist.

The US entered ww2 after Japan attacked Pearl Harbour, Japan was a militarised feudal society, by no means communist.

The Malayan war was started by communist guirillas trying to overthrow the government, they failed.

The Korean war was started by the communist north trying to take over the whole country, result was a stalemate.

The Vietnam was was started by the US trying to prop up a corrupt government, they failed.

Iraq 1 was started by Saddam when he invaded Kuwait, Saddam was no communist.

Yugoslavia breakup was started by Croatian atrocities in Gospic, nothing to do with socialism but much to do with revivalist ww2 style fascism.

Iraq 2 was started by the US with the invasion of Iraq. Work out yourself who won that one, the answer was no-one except perhaps the Chinese strategists who designed asymetrical warfare.

To be blunt there has not been a war in the 20th/21st century that was a result of socialism.

The great depression was started by there not being enough asset in the stock market to cover the scale of speculation that occurred for a year or so before it.

When you refer to "small c conservative policies" you are talking about a private definition. It sounds something like the crap that came out of Ayn Rand.

[bf2]

WW2 was trigered by Hitler invading Poland - everyone knows that. What caused WW2? What was on the build-up? Not Poland.

By the way, did you know that your beloved Soviets also attacked and occupied Poland, at about the same time when Hitler did so? Did you know that Hitler was so anti-communist that he and Stalin had no problem occupying Poland at the same time carving it up nicely like good pals do, and they even had a non-aggression pact, and that things only soured when Hitler stupidly attacked the USSR?

[bf2]

Anyway, I'll refrain from posting in political threads in future. It only sours the atmosphere. I have made up my mind, just as have you. There is no point in discussing politics.

[bf2]

One last thing (against my best judgement).

When socialist policies just become too much, ordinary people seek refuge in fascism. Fascism rises always as a response to unfettered socialism. It always rises when common people lose faith in governments and national institution, and think that only fascism can save them from complete meltdown and the betrayal of the political class.

What ordinary people don't realise is that fascism is just as much about government control as socialism is, but then it's already too late.

If you want to get rid of fascism, get rid of the cause first.

[oex]

Do you speak Mandarin ?

I speak Mandarin, well 一点点  :lol:.... Seriously though while people vote for one side or the other what they dont get is that the system formed with sides because they are required.... Every system, every side has it's pros and cons, when one screws up you choose to *change* to another because it will correct many of the mistakes the other system has made.... Even communism appreciates that there must be change, they change the leadership every 10 years or something....

The point is always to look at the issues and not the bs politics.... Unfortunately you are always forced to pick a side, not vote on the actual individual issues but instead on the sum of all fears

[hutch--]

 

I wonder where you get these universalisms from ? I was tempted to think it was Alice In Wonderland but it was at least entertaining. Fascisim does not derive from communism because for among many other reasons, communism has never been practiced and those countries that have tried it never got there. The old Russia post 1917 was an authoritarian state and a theoretical egalitarian state but hardly communist. China post 1948 was an extension of traditional Chinese culture driven from the provinces but even after the Cultural Revolution it never succeeded in being communist.

Fascism is a combine of government power and corporate economics bypassing citizens to control a society. The term you would look for in the US was coined by Dwight Eisenhower, "The Military / Industrial Complex".

RE: Socialism, if you have an army paid for by government, you have socialism, if you have a city hall you are a socialist, if you pay your taxes to an internal revenue you are a socialist and in fact unless you live in isolation from the rest of the world, you are a socialist.

The problem is you are trying to create universal statements from the language of the American political spectrum which is extremely narrow in world terms, "liberal" has different meanings in different countries, here in OZ "Liberal" means a political conservative and its opposite is Labor, a distinction that is closer to British politics than American. What most of the western world has is a corporate / government arse kissing competition fueled by corporate funding of political parties who in turn massage society to line the pockets of the same corporations. THEY are the enemy of free western democracies, not the socialists.

[Bill Cravener]

One last thing (against my best judgement).

bf2,

I am puzzled by your original post as to what it has to do with the screwed up health care system we Americans have here presently. We have to do something because too many people here in what is one of the greatest industrialized countries in the world have no health care. Our health care cost greatly exceeds those of all other industrialized countries and yet for example we have one of the highest newborn death rates, higher than in 40 other industrialized nations. People die everyday here in the US because of lack of health care. Because of the ridiculous health care costs many Americans do not practice preventative care. Something most be done and what President Obama has created is if nothing else a good beginning.

By the way, I must ask, are you an American??


Edit: Damn spell checkers.

[Bill Cravener]

I wonder where you get these universalisms from ? I was tempted to think it was Alice In Wonderland but it was at least entertaining.

 

I agree!

[Bill Cravener]

Well the US election is less then four days away and it’s looking almost certain that President Obama will serve a second term as I have predicted all along. This means Obamacare is here to stay and to me that is a very good thing and perhaps the first step towards the US to one day have a true universal health care system.

Here are the latest Electoral College forecasts.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

http://core.talkingpointsmemo.com/election/scoreboard

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/romney-vs-obama-electoral-map