• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wal-Mart: Our shoppers are 'running out of money'

Dirty Harry said:
Massive government spending pulled us out of the Great depression.
Click to expand...

you keep saying that as though it were a magic talisman, when all the evidence is against it. mindlessly repeating a just-so argument isn't exactly an effective debate - it's the internet equivelent of the school yard "uh-huh!, nuh-uh!, uh-huh!, nuh-uh!".

Reagan pulled us out of his recession by massive deficit spending and deregulation.
Click to expand...

incorrect. deficit spending hampered him the economy in his later years - as he himself acknowledged. that's why he made his "i'll raise a dollar of taxes for every three you cut" deal with the Democrats.... only to get suckered into going first. Reagan achieved the growth he did by breaking inflation, restoring the dollar, deregulation, and reducing tax rates.

That led to the Savings and Loan crisis and 180 billion bailout. Historical record.
Click to expand...

The S&L crises was not the result of deficit spending - but it is instructive. Because Reagan's response was basically to do nothing.... now, compare that recovery to the one we are currently enjoying and ask yourself which one you think appears to have come from a wiser policy.

Bush's meltdown was closer to a depression. The entire banking and housing sectors were on the verge of total ruin. Had the government done nothing the entire country would have collapsed.
Click to expand...

and the sky would have fallen and aliens would have invaded and the 13th Imam would have rode in and slain us all in the streets, yes, i know, i remember the press releases from the time. It was all crap, mind you - you could maybe make a case for TARP (though altering the mark-to-market rules would have saved the banks the vast majority of their losses and perhaps made it uneccessary); but the Stimulus? :roll: it was nothing more than a grab-bag of democratic goodies, pork they had wanted but not been able to shove through for 20 years.
 
UtahBill said:
If that is all you kknow about it, you must have slept thru the Carter administration....
Click to expand...

Wish I could have slept through it and woke up to find out it was just a terrible nightmare.

Unfortunately, I had to live and suffer through it.
 
Gill said:
Wish I could have slept through it and woke up to find out it was just a terrible nightmare.

Unfortunately, I had to live and suffer through it.
Click to expand...

I was one of those who chose to listen to his ideas, been a conservation nut ever since. Our house in Utah has much lower heating and cooling bills than most smaller/older houses in the area. Passive solar ideas work, it is old tech.
Newer/larger houses just up the hill where the "nicer" homes are being built should be just as energy efficient, but I see multilple AC units in their side yards. The biggest mistake, putting too many windows on the east and west sides...
Common sense is still free....:)
 
UtahBill said:
I was one of those who chose to listen to his ideas, been a conservation nut ever since. Our house in Utah has much lower heating and cooling bills than most smaller/older houses in the area. Passive solar ideas work, it is old tech.
Newer/larger houses just up the hill where the "nicer" homes are being built should be just as energy efficient, but I see multilple AC units in their side yards. The biggest mistake, putting too many windows on the east and west sides...
Common sense is still free....:)
Click to expand...

I agree with most of what you say, except the comment that seems to think multiple A/Cs are a bad idea. In fact, heating and cooling by zones is the most efficient way to heat and cool homes, especially larger or multi-story ones.

But, Carter was still an idiot and the worst president in my lifetime.
 
UtahBill said:
I was one of those who chose to listen to his ideas, been a conservation nut ever since. Our house in Utah has much lower heating and cooling bills than most smaller/older houses in the area. Passive solar ideas work, it is old tech.
Newer/larger houses just up the hill where the "nicer" homes are being built should be just as energy efficient, but I see multilple AC units in their side yards. The biggest mistake, putting too many windows on the east and west sides...
Common sense is still free....:)
Click to expand...


Ok, that's a good thing. And I can agree that with newer tech on things like passive solar being built into new construction, as well as a thriving after market business. However, I remember the Carter years. Unemployment high, Interest rates on purchase of homes in double digits, Odd/Even days to buy gas due to artificial restrictions on price placed by Carter, And a man that also went around the world trumpeting apologies for America, and making friends with the worlds most thuggish dictators, including Yasser Arafat.

People didn't like that at all, and booted his sorry arse out after one term as well, which is exactly what will happen to Obama should he continue to stick it to us.


j-mac
 
Dirty Harry said:
If we had followed Carters policies we would be energy independent right now. Thank Reagan for screwing things up, once again.
Click to expand...

Ironically, Carter's position was based on the conservative principle of personal responsibility.

He got crucified for it by thos ewho support a nanny-state, though.
 
Tucker Case said:
Ironically, Carter's position was based on the conservative principle of personal responsibility.

He got crucified for it by thos ewho support a nanny-state, though.
Click to expand...

Wow, that is incredibly revisionist. Possible that he paid lip service to personal responsibility, but as we are finding out now, closet Marxists from that era meant something entirely different with that phrase than what it actually is.

Like so called "Social Justice"


j-mac
 
jimmy carter's "plan" was rejected overwhelmingly by the american people

what good are positions doa?

vote obama, 2012!

remember carter!

seeya at the polls, progressives
 
Dirty Harry said:
Massive government spending pulled us out of the Great depression.
Click to expand...

given modern importance of defeating this myth, I thought it might be instructive to point out that FDR's own Secretary of the Treasury admitted that massive spending in an attempt to get us out of the Depression had been a complete failure:

Henry Morgantheau said:
"We are spending more money than we have ever spent before and it does not work. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started and an enormous debt to boot."


- testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee, May 1939
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
Wow, that is incredibly revisionist. Possible that he paid lip service to personal responsibility, but as we are finding out now, closet Marxists from that era meant something entirely different with that phrase than what it actually is.

Like so called "Social Justice"


j-mac
Click to expand...

speaking of revisionism, which part of carter's position on energy related to social justice in any way?
 
Tucker Case said:
speaking of revisionism, which part of carter's position on energy related to social justice in any way?
Click to expand...

The former president has said that the Carter Center, an Atlanta, Georgia-based organization devoted to global peace and social justice, may be his greatest legacy.

Jimmy Carter wins Nobel Peace Prize - CNN
Click to expand...


Now obviously, I didn't present that Carter's energy proposals were specific to his "social justice" agenda's, that was you making that leap. I only used "social justice" as an example. But, seeing as that he openly is committed to this agenda in all facets of his life's work, I am betting that it had a place in his thought on the subject.

j-mac
 
cpwill said:
The S&L crises was not the result of deficit spending - but it is instructive. Because Reagan's response was basically to do nothing.... now, compare that recovery to the one we are currently enjoying and ask yourself which one you think appears to have come from a wiser policy.

.
Click to expand...

The Reagan/Bush Admin did nothing regarding the S&L crisis?

I do recall the US government set up a large bailout program in response to theS&L crisis
 
cpwill said:
you keep saying that as though it were a magic talisman, when all the evidence is against it. mindlessly repeating a just-so argument isn't exactly an effective debate - it's the internet equivelent of the school yard "uh-huh!, nuh-uh!, uh-huh!, nuh-uh!".



incorrect. deficit spending hampered him the economy in his later years - as he himself acknowledged. that's why he made his "i'll raise a dollar of taxes for every three you cut" deal with the Democrats.... only to get suckered into going first. Reagan achieved the growth he did by breaking inflation, restoring the dollar, deregulation, and reducing tax rates.
Click to expand...

The deficits during the Reagan admin were larger in % of GDP and in dollar amounts then the growth of the US economy in $ terms and % of GDP terms. The vast amounts of government borrowing provided a stimulus to the US economy, that caused the USG debt to GDP to jump by 20 % or so by the end of the Reagan government.

The US economy would not have grown had the US government not run the large deficits. Deregulation or not, the Reagan years of growth was funded by government borrowing
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
The Reagan/Bush Admin did nothing regarding the S&L crisis?

I do recall the US government set up a large bailout program in response to theS&L crisis
Click to expand...

sure they did, they made sure neil didn't go to jail.
 
cpwill said:
: it gets rid of the regressive payroll tax. That's one of the many reasons I would favor it -
Click to expand...

OF course you know, getting rid of payroll taxes would put thousands out of work, and surprise! surprise!, put Obama at risk in 2012. Someday you're really going to surprise me by backing a progressive, non-partisan plan.

ricksfolly
 
j-mac said:
Now obviously, I didn't present that Carter's energy proposals were specific to his "social justice" agenda's, that was you making that leap. I only used "social justice" as an example. But, seeing as that he openly is committed to this agenda in all facets of his life's work, I am betting that it had a place in his thought on the subject.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Ah, so at least you admit that your statement was revisionist.

And seeing as I did limit my statements to his position on energy, your response was useless partisan nonsense.
 
No $hit Sherlock. With Obama in charge of our dwindling resources it's amazing anyone has anything left to spend.
 
Gill said:
I agree with most of what you say, except the comment that seems to think multiple A/Cs are a bad idea. In fact, heating and cooling by zones is the most efficient way to heat and cool homes, especially larger or multi-story ones.

But, Carter was still an idiot and the worst president in my lifetime.
Click to expand...

umm, Bush?
I agree that Carter was overall a disaster, but he did get one thing right. It takes a hard right conservative to not give him credit for that.
Our Utah house has a basement that never needs cooling, a main floor of 1850. sq ft. that doesn't need much cooling, and a loft (half the size of the main floor) that does need cooling during the hotter parts of the summer, so the single AC unit is installed in a storage room in the loft, and ducted only to the loft, and the cool air winds its way down an open stairway.
It is smaller than the contractor said we needed for upstairs, not to mention we didnt' install the main unit he wanted to install for the rest of the house. If some future owner wants the main AC installed,, the gas furnace in the basement is alreay prewired and preplumbed to accept it, the outside unit is not installed. The gas furnace is only ducted to the basement and main floor. Heat rises.....up the stairs..
When we aren't using the basement, all the registers are shut except to the 2 bathrooms.
Our utility bills reflect our efforts to conserve....
now if we can just get the cable TV, internet, and telephone usage down....
 
ricksfolly said:
OF course you know, getting rid of payroll taxes would put thousands out of work, and surprise! surprise!, put Obama at risk in 2012.
Click to expand...

let me see if i have this straight. you are claiming that reducing the cost of hiring someone, will cause businesses to fire people.... because you believe..... that businesses hate to make money?

Someday you're really going to surprise me by backing a progressive, non-partisan plan.

ricksfolly
Click to expand...

what, you mean one that helps poor people? check out my social security fix thread - which i demonstrated would make our working poor financially independent upon retirement even under the worst of economic conditions and individual decisions. all self-identified liberals voted against it (except for one) and when i asked why they wouldn't be in favor of a plan that was of such obvious benefit to the poor, one such voter (haymarket) told me "that's not our fight".
 
UtahBill said:
now if we can just get the cable TV, internet, and telephone usage down....
Click to expand...

that's what everybody's saying

and that's the problem

energy, baby!

we need it, the world needs it---critically

so why, mr president, all this "investment" in only all green butterfly wings

i mean, if you're gonna "invest," president slasher, then for goodness sake "invest"

any and all sources of energy

they're great JOBS, mr president

many of them are real PROFESSIONS

y'know, productive, secure, with room for advancement, bennies, health care...

know the man

mr president actually PREFERS eight dollar gas

else why appoint CHU

to, y'know, ENERGY

it's laughable

mr president told the sf chron his AMBITION was to BANKRUPT coal/electrical

it is what it is, it is the record

ie, know the man

seeya at the polls, pals
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
The Reagan/Bush Admin did nothing regarding the S&L crisis?

I do recall the US government set up a large bailout program in response to theS&L crisis
Click to expand...

I am properly chastised - you are of course correct, to say they did nothing is inaccurate as they did, indeed, bailout the S&L's. I was focused on the Keyensian Boost-Aggregate-Demand-Through-Wild-Spending response model, and mispoke(typed).
 
today:

A new Marist College poll shows that 36% of New Yorkers under the age of 30 are planning to leave New York within the next five years - and more than a quarter of all adults are planning to bolt the Empire State.

The New York City suburbs, with their high property values and taxes, are leading the exodus, the poll found.

Of those preparing to leave, 62% cite economic reasons like cost of living, taxes - and a lack of jobs.
Click to expand...

New Yorkers under 30 plan to flee city, says new poll; cite high taxes, few jobs as reasons

party on, progressives

build a wall
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
The US economy would not have grown had the US government not run the large deficits.
Click to expand...

really. The US didn't grow in the 90's? in the 20's? in the 50's?

ex1.bmp


Deregulation or not, the Reagan years of growth was funded by government borrowing
Click to expand...

:lol: yeah, I'm sure that the largest tax cuts in US history had nothing whatsoever to do with it :) instead it was deficit spending that spiked when revenues fell - because revenue fell - and then fell as we recovered and the economy grew.

we grew inspite of the spending, not because of it. you just plain don't increase productivity by taking capital from your efficient sectors and putting it in your inefficient ones.
 
Catawba said:
I think our efforts will be better spent developing alternatives to burning finite fossil fuels.
Click to expand...

That will take decades...at least....
Transportation fuels will be the hardest nut to crack....
 
UtahBill said:
That will take decades...at least....
Transportation fuels will be the hardest nut to crack....
Click to expand...

ANWR will not make a significant difference and just encourages further dependence. I agree with McCain on the risk/benefit analysis of drilling in ANWR.

I'm not for drilling in the Grand Cayon either! :sun
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom