Captain Obvious
Member
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2009
- Messages
- 218
- Reaction score
- 68
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Nonsense, Obama is a socialist and so are his supporters.Short answer: No. He is investing in Capitalism.
Numbers show the U.S. is drifting ever closer to the socialist systems popular within the European Union. In 1999, government spending made up 34.3 percent of gross domestic product, or GDP, the broadest barometer used to measure the health of the economy. That number is projected to grow to nearly 40 percent by next year.
Government spending within the majority of European Union nations averages 47.1 percent of the GDP, meaning the U.S. is roughly seven points behind -- closer than ever before.
But whether that equates to socialism here depends on whom you ask.
Nonsense, Obama is a socialist and so are his supporters.
The article's rationale is ridiculous. I can see why you did not quote it in the op
No, Fox News, that does not equate to socialism.
What the hell does socialism even mean in this context?
It's called adhering to Keynesian Economic (Fiscal) Policy.
You do not know what you are talking about.
John Maynard Keynes was a socialist, as were his policies which are still wreaking havoc on the world today.
John Maynard Keynes was a socialist, as were his policies which are still wreaking havoc on the world today.
Every dollar of government spending is a dollar stolen from the pocket of a productive citizen. When consumption and investment spending go down, taxes and spending should both be cut.Right, it's been proven that when both consumer and investment spending goes down, the best thing to do is stop government spending :roll:
Please be specific.Out of curiosity, what was causing all the havoc during that time immediately prior to Mr Keynes writing his theses? You know, the era commonly remembered as the worst economic period in history.
Well anyone who makes use of capital is technically a capitalist, but that has nothing to do with the fact that Lord Keynes was indeed a socialist.Or a Capitalist
But it apparently does not matter anymore as individuals wish to no longer understand theories, and concepts, instead they just want to label the author as something that appears unpleasant to the majority of ignorant Americans.
Every dollar of government spending is a dollar stolen from the pocket of a productive citizen. When consumption and investment spending go down, taxes and spending should both be cut.
The only spending government should ever engage in is for the basic service necessities it is expected to, and not one cent more.
The federal government runs your fire department?Sounds like a plan. Let's stop allowing the government to "steal" our money. Let's see how long high-ways, the military, and fire departments stay up and running based on the donations of citizens; I'll give you a hint.. Americans are not ready to spend their money on such things, as it has to be given to them as it is declared in this fantasy called a social contract.
In my opinion, not much, but per the Constitution there are a number of duties the federal government has. These are listed to exhaustion in the Constitution itself.Oh here it is. Government should no longer tax, but be expected to provide basic services?
Now tell me. What exactly are these basic service necessities.
I'm sorry, are you trying to blame the housing bubble on something other than the massive government intervention in the economy that caused it? :shock:Last landmark de-regulation idea that passed through congress, and signed by a President caused the housing market to tumble, and thus, this recession. In my humble opinion, the survival of a capitalist system is a bare necessity.
2. Independent commentary and OpEd pieces are not allowed in *BN*.
Deregulation did not cause the economic problems.Depends on what kind of socialism you are talking about. Bush promoted socialism in the United States through neo-liberalization, and his methodologies catered to corporate socialism: bailouts, deregulation, increasing of free trade. I won't blame Bush for all the economic problems, but he was one President in a string of several who sent the United States down a deregulatory path.
This doesn't even make sense. The porkulus package you support is exactly what will cause inflation and what will cause a depression.In order to patch the economy, further infusions of money are needed. The economy would head toward a depression anyway without a stimulus package, and people would be paying even more as inflation increases.
You say Americans now have to pay their bills, yet all this "stimulus" garbage did was push a trillion dollars more debt onto future generationsSo although the average joe is having to shoulder the cost of the stimulus package, it is actually a small amount compared to the decades of deficit-based spending that has caused the current situation.
In short, Americans now have to pay their bills.
FDR ushered in Socialism.
LMFAO.Short answer: No. He is investing in Capitalism.