• 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!

All of a sudden Keynesian economics is OK by conservatives

Seems all of a sudden conservatives are OK now with Keynesian economic policies

After spending the last 8 years blocking every attempt by the Obama administration to invest in infrastructure and stimulating the economy, calling it big government Marxist tyranny, and going against everything America stands for, and something that has been proven repeatedly not to work, etc... all of a sudden Keynesian economic stimulus seems to be all the rage among our conservative friends:

"“We are going to fix our inner cities and rebuild our highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, schools, hospitals,” Trump said. “We’re going to rebuild our infrastructure, which will become, by the way, second to none. And we will put millions of our people to work as we rebuild it.”"
-Donald Trump

Oh, and what was that? Are you saying that Trump is not a real conservative, but some kind of RINO? What about Mr. Rush Limbaugh, who was falling all over himself to praise the new proposed stimulus plan?

"If Trump actually follows through on this trillion dollars to modernize airports, you’re gonna have conservative arguments against it claiming this is not how it works. This is still federal spending, it’s still budget busting, it’s still massively expanding the government. However, there will be tangible results that will result in improved and modernized airports, which will make them more economically booming, which they will then be able to attract more traffic, more landings and takeoffs, which include fees, more cargo being moved back and forth through them. So it’s gonna be an interesting philosophical argument. The idea of conservatism and smaller government, less government.

And then on the other hand, the projects we’re talking about . . . who builds them? I mean the federal government built the interstate highway system. It was a federal government expense. Same thing with those two bridges. They did it in connection with the states, I mean, there was, there was a lot of cooperation on all of these, the Hoover Dam in Nevada, and so forth. And there were other things. And don’t forget, even prior to that, we did the Panama Canal, even prior to the 1930s.

The point is, in the past, with a much smaller economy, and a much lower standard of living, we have been far more productive. We have built many more projects at a much faster rate before all the environmental impact studies were necessary, and all this. And if Trump does this and if there are witnessable, demonstrable results of modernization at airports, you’re gonna be hard-pressed to get people to find a problem with it."
-Rush Limbaugh

This is reminiscent of Glenn Beck, who, in September of 2008, as the chasm of the Great Recession was beginning to yawn before us but right before we knew Obama was going to be the next president, said of stimulus spending:

"“[W]e are in the middle of an all-out financial emergency, and emergencies have a way of really testing people. In normal times, under normal circumstances, if you tune in to me, you know me as somebody who would tell the federal government exactly where to take their bailout plans and shove it right up their you-know-what. But these are anything but normal times. I thought about it an awful lot this weekend, and while it takes me — it takes everything in me to say this, I think the bailout is the right thing do.

“The ‘Real Story’ is: The $700 billion that you’re hearing about now is not only, I believe, necessary, it is also not nearly enough, and all of the weasels in Washington know it.”
-Glenn Beck

Fast forward a few months, with Obama in the whitehouse, and all of a sudden Keynesian stimulus spending was the most evil communist tyrannical proposal ever.

Come on, guys. It's clear that it's not Keynesian stimulus that you have a problem with. It's just that you want YOUR guy to do it. It's not about ideology. It's just about power. You obstruct when you don't have it, and you push it when you do- the welfare and immediate needs of the country be dam-ed. Party before nation, right?
 
Moderator's Warning:
Threads merged.
 
Trump won based on a number of factors: most prominently being that the Dems anointed one of the worst presidential candidates in the past 50 years if not ever. To say that the GOP love Keynesianism when their guy does it is proof of why Trump was elected is a false premise.

That doesn't explain though why Rush Limbaugh is now cheering it on so enthusiastically.
 
It's seen by Trump and his followers as Keynesian policy to save us from the "disaster of the Obama economy". It's just that it's OK when their guy does it. Rush Limbaugh sums up the feeling
best:
"If Trump actually follows through on this trillion dollars to modernize airports, you’re gonna have conservative arguments against it claiming this is not how it works. This is still federal spending, it’s still budget busting, it’s still massively expanding the government. However, there will be tangible results that will result in improved and modernized airports, which will make them more economically booming, which they will then be able to attract more traffic, more landings and takeoffs, which include fees, more cargo being moved back and forth through them."

This is Keynesian policy. Keynes himself couldn't have said it better.

There are usually "tangible results", when you borrow lots of cash and waste it on a bad business proposal.
 
The thing is that it should not be the government doing it. Those are economically private goods and the government should not be the one producing them.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. The government contracts the work of public infrastructure maintenance to private companies.
 
It was BO's baby, he demanded the cash, and got it from the leftists in congress. I didn't hear any leftists complaining then. Especially when the left has nothing to show for it. And the left wonder's why they have been losing their butts. LOL

So that doesn't answer the point that governors like Perry used money meant for recovery to fill the deficit gaps created by their tax policies. They didn't just do that with the Stimulus...Conservative governors use the Welfare Block Grant the same way (and have since 1996). That's why they want to change Medicaid to a block grant...that way, Conservatives can use part of that block grant to make the deficits that come from their tax cuts go away.

When it comes down to it, Conservatives are the real welfare queens. Using welfare to plug their deficits that are created by their artificially low tax rate. If the gravy train ended to the red states in terms of block grants and such, you'd see those taxes in those states shoot upwards.
 
Guess you dont like things like power, water, heating, internet....

The enduring illogic .

We need infrastructure ergo all spending on infrastructure is good.
 
The enduring illogic .

We need infrastructure ergo all spending on infrastructure is good.

Nothing of the sort. Stop putting words in peoples mouths.
 
The enduring illogic .

We need infrastructure ergo all spending on infrastructure is good.

There are a few viaducts in Cincinnati that are basically being held together by nothing but good intentions. They have cracked and crumbled to the point that one of them is now sagging with exposed rusty rebar. Pretty much anyone who looks at the thing knows it's just a matter of time before it finally collapses and rains down chunks of concrete and rebar on commuters below. Cincinnati needs new viaducts but all the city and State are willing to pay for are cheap patches contracted out to the lowest bidder.

It's the poster child of what's wrong with this country's infrastructure and the attitudes towards it. It's been allowed to deteriorate to the point that cheap and temporary fixes are no longer an option. Given the state of things today I'd hazard that all infrastructure spending is good and further state that there isn't nearly enough of it.
 
There are a few viaducts in Cincinnati that are basically being held together by nothing but good intentions. They have cracked and crumbled to the point that one of them is now sagging with exposed rusty rebar. Pretty much anyone who looks at the thing knows it's just a matter of time before it finally collapses and rains down chunks of concrete and rebar on commuters below. Cincinnati needs new viaducts but all the city and State are willing to pay for are cheap patches contracted out to the lowest bidder.

It's the poster child of what's wrong with this country's infrastructure and the attitudes towards it. It's been allowed to deteriorate to the point that cheap and temporary fixes are no longer an option. Given the state of things today I'd hazard that all infrastructure spending is good and further state that there isn't nearly enough of it.

Cincinatti has been run by what party since 1984?

*****MIC DROP************
 
It depends on what one means by "There is no question Keynesian economics works". You can either smooth over an cycle bump to prevent a recession or you can spend, when there is no need. Economically speaking the latter is not Keynesian policy. That is why spending now under economic conditions that are okay is not Keynesian.

that's fair enough.

Right now, in todays economy, there is no need for Keynesian economics. We are sub 5% U3 and falling, the economy is growing, etc.

But, there are a good many people who believe that new money creation by the government and increases in government spending is always needed, regardless of the economy. There may be some truth to that, as a nation grows larger, it's government probably should spend more, and as an economy grows larger, it needs more money to facilitate trade. Which economy needs more money, your household, or your state? Obviously, your state. And between your state and a much larger state, wouldn't it only make sense that the larger state spend more money? So as your state (or country) expands, it's going to need to spend more money also - else we risk a shortage of infrastructure and well being of the citizens (which well being of the work force and of the customer base is actually part of infrastructure).
 
Those are all fine things. But they are not public goods in the economic sense. It is wasteful for government to produce them and the society will c.p. not reach its general welfare optimum.

In my county, the county provides water to virtually every home and business. It's reasonably priced and of reasonably good quality. I dunno how that is wasteful. It would be far more wasteful if we had a dozen water companies all running water mains down every street and to every house.
 
"Economic conditions that are okay"?!!! LOL!

Trump got himself elected because he managed to convince people that there was this "disaster of the Obama economy", despite unemployment at below 5% and dropping, wages rising, the DOW in record...

That's true. But republicans had been making that claim for years, I don't think it was that big of a sell for Trump. People like Rush and Hannity preached that Obummercare was going to collapse our economy, and many dittoheads now believe that our economy is terrible because we have Obummercare. They don't pay attention to reality because reality doesn't fit their bias.

Likewise, there are many Trump supporters ranting and raving that the court block on his travel ban has suddenly put the entire country in dire risk of terrorist attack, even though there is no evidence of this (and as each day passes their predictions are proven false). To listen to some of these people, you'd think that 9/11 just happened and was committed by people from Syria and Iraq.
 
that's fair enough.

Right now, in todays economy, there is no need for Keynesian economics. We are sub 5% U3 and falling, the economy is growing, etc.

Shhhh. Just don't tell the Trump supporters that. They have been led to believe that we have an Obama economic "disaster", that our unemployment is "really" at 20%, that our crime rate is the highest in the last half century, that hordes of illegal Mexicans and Muslims are pouring across the border and raping and murdering and terrorizing everyone in sight, etc.... basically, for them, the sky is literally falling.
 
After spending the last 8 years blocking every attempt by the Obama administration to invest in infrastructure and stimulating the economy, calling it big government Marxist tyranny, and going everything America stands for, and something that has been proven repeatedly not to work, etc... all of a sudden Keynesian economic stimulus seems to be all the rage among our conservative friends:

"“We are going to fix our inner cities and rebuild our highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, schools, hospitals,” Trump said. “We’re going to rebuild our infrastructure, which will become, by the way, second to none. And we will put millions of our people to work as we rebuild it.”"
-Donald Trump

Oh, and what was that? Are you saying that Trump is not a real conservative, but some kind of RINO? What about Mr. Rush Limbaugh, who was falling all over himself to praise the new proposed stimulus plan?

"If Trump actually follows through on this trillion dollars to modernize airports, you’re gonna have conservative arguments against it claiming this is not how it works. This is still federal spending, it’s still budget busting, it’s still massively expanding the government. However, there will be tangible results that will result in improved and modernized airports, which will make them more economically booming, which they will then be able to attract more traffic, more landings and takeoffs, which include fees, more cargo being moved back and forth through them. So it’s gonna be an interesting philosophical argument. The idea of conservatism and smaller government, less government.

And then on the other hand, the projects we’re talking about . . . who builds them? I mean the federal government built the interstate highway system. It was a federal government expense. Same thing with those two bridges. They did it in connection with the states, I mean, there was, there was a lot of cooperation on all of these, the Hoover Dam in Nevada, and so forth. And there were other things. And don’t forget, even prior to that, we did the Panama Canal, even prior to the 1930s.

The point is, in the past, with a much smaller economy, and a much lower standard of living, we have been far more productive. We have built many more projects at a much faster rate before all the environmental impact studies were necessary, and all this. And if Trump does this and if there are witnessable, demonstrable results of modernization at airports, you’re gonna be hard-pressed to get people to find a problem with it."
-Rush Limbaugh

This is reminiscent of Glenn Beck, who, in September of 2008, as the chasm of the Great Recession was beginning to yawn before us but right before we knew Obama was going to be the next president, said of stimulus spending:

"“[W]e are in the middle of an all-out financial emergency, and emergencies have a way of really testing people. In normal times, under normal circumstances, if you tune in to me, you know me as somebody who would tell the federal government exactly where to take their bailout plans and shove it right up their you-know-what. But these are anything but normal times. I thought about it an awful lot this weekend, and while it takes me — it takes everything in me to say this, I think the bailout is the right thing do.

“The ‘Real Story’ is: The $700 billion that you’re hearing about now is not only, I believe, necessary, it is also not nearly enough, and all of the weasels in Washington know it.”
-Glenn Beck

Fast forward a few months, with Obama in the whitehouse, and all of a sudden Keynesian stimulus spending was the most evil communist tyrannical proposal ever.

Come on, guys. It's clear that it's not Keynesian stimulus that you have a problem with. It's just that you want YOUR guy to do it. It's not about ideology. It's just about power. You obstruct when you don't have it, and you push it when you do- the welfare and immediate needs of the country be dam-ed. Party before politics, right?

Ive never considered needed infrastructure spending as socialist or Keynesian. Section 8 of the constitution states the us government shall establish post offices and roads. I consider maintaining roads ( and of course bridges and the like ) as part of this constitutionally established duty. so not Keynesian at all. that is as long as its needed and not a pork project road to nowhere type of spending.
 
Alberta can now will join trump as trump stops liberalism. Stock market hits another record today showing agreement with trump. Alberta the most conservative and richest province may now join trumps America to help enrich America even more. Hip Hip Hooray
 
Ive never considered needed infrastructure spending as socialist or Keynesian. Section 8 of the constitution states the us government shall establish post offices and roads. I consider maintaining roads ( and of course bridges and the like ) as part of this constitutionally established duty. so not Keynesian at all. that is as long as its needed and not a pork project road to nowhere type of spending.

Did you try explaining that to the "Freedom Caucus" and the Tea Partiers in congress when they were blocking Obama at every turn when he was standing in front of a crumbling bridge, as the US economy was desperately trying to get back on its feet after the worst recession in its history, begging them to invest in infrastructure jobs?

"“It makes absolutely no sense when there’s so much work to be done and more than a million construction workers unemployed",Obama said, standing in front of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, which has been declared structurally deficient.

Obama said Americans are paying nearly $130 billion a year to use bridges and roads that are out of date and unequipped to serve today’s society.

He said the U.S. could be paying workers to rebuild these roads and compete with other countries transportation systems.

Europe invests twice as much of its overall economy as the U.S. does on transportation infrastructure,Obama said,while China invests four times as much.

“How do we sit back and watch China and Europe build the best bridges and high-speed railroads and gleaming new airports,and we’re doing nothing?” Obama asked.

Seth Kerns,28,of Celina,Ohio,who owns a small construction business with his brother,said other countries’ transportations systems are beyond anything in the U.S.

Standing with his wife,Kristen,27,two children,Ian,4,and Logan,3,and recently unemployed mother,Teressa,57,Kerns said he’s seen the effects the economy has on construction workers.

Last month,the Senate blocked the entire $447 billion American Jobs Act and a $35 billion measure that would fund salaries for teachers and first responders. The infrastructure measure will be the second part of the jobs bill put up for vote."
President Obama pushing Congress to rebuild roads,bridges | Scripps Howard Foundation Wire

That too didn't pass. Too much big government. Tyranny, you know. The free market takes care of everything. Well, at least until Trump was in power. Now, of course, finally, a real leader is in charge who will invest in our economy and jobs and infrastructure and make America Great Again! Amiright?
 
Canada stock going up because of trump and the pipeline. Big news today Americas stock hits record high again which is agreeing with trump and his new America and stopping liberaiism
 
Alberta can now will join trump as trump stops liberalism. Stock market hits another record today showing agreement with trump. Alberta the most conservative and richest province may now join trumps America to help enrich America even more. Hip Hip Hooray

What in the world...?

Top wealthiest Canadian provinces by GDP:
•Prince Edward Island – C$36,740. ...
•Nova Scotia – C$39,025. ...
•New Brunswick – C$42,606. ...
•Quebec – C$43,349. ...
•Manitoba – C$44,654. ...
•British Columbia – C$47,579. ...
•Ontario – C$48,971. ...
•Newfoundland and Labrador – C$65,556.

Oh, I'm sorry. Don't let me get in the way of your "alternative facts".
 
This is why the above poster has no credibility posting. It leaves out or covers up data that proves something. Alberta IS the richest province. based on their respective GDP per capita levels.
New Brunswick – C$42,606. ...
Quebec – C$43,349. ...
Manitoba – C$44,654. ...
British Columbia – C$47,579. ...
Ontario – C$48,971. ...
Newfoundland and Labrador – C$65,556. ...
Saskatchewan – C$70,654. ...
Alberta – C$78,154. Alberta is a province in the western section of Canada.
More items...
 
Canada stock going up because of trump and the pipeline. Big news today Americas stock hits record high again which is agreeing with trump and his new America and stopping liberaiism

So what did the stock market hitting record highs under Obama mean?
 
After spending the last 8 years blocking every attempt by the Obama administration to invest in infrastructure and stimulating the economy, calling it big government Marxist tyranny, and going everything America stands for, and something that has been proven repeatedly not to work, etc... all of a sudden Keynesian economic stimulus seems to be all the rage among our conservative friends:

"“We are going to fix our inner cities and rebuild our highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, schools, hospitals,” Trump said. “We’re going to rebuild
----------------------
snip

You seem to be uniformed that the Rebellion hijacked the Republican Party from the conservatives.
 
You seem to be uniformed that the Rebellion hijacked the Republican Party from the conservatives.

I think you may be right. By conservatives, I assume you mean the likes of Paul Ryan and the Koch brothers. They were using the primitive fears, paranoias, ignorance, and misinformation of uneducated whites to whip them into a frenzy of fear and hatred with the nonstop campaigns of fear, confusion, and misinformation from places like Fox News. Like a stupid angry bull, they had them charging blindly into the swords of the toreadors, fighting against all their own self interests, from Obamacare to infrastructure investment. But they beat and abused that poor old bull so much, they spooked it. It could only take so much. It finally jumped the fence and they were the first to be gored by it. Now it's like the running of the bulls at Pamplona, and they can't run fast enough.

It was their own fault. Teaches them not to spook the stupid angry bull so much next time.
 
I think you may be right. By conservatives, I assume you mean the likes of Paul Ryan and the Koch brothers. They were using the primitive fears, paranoias, ignorance, and misinformation of uneducated whites to whip them into a frenzy of fear and hatred with the nonstop campaigns of fear, confusion, and misinformation from places like Fox News. Like a stupid angry bull, they had them charging blindly into the swords of the toreadors, fighting against all their own self interests, from Obamacare to infrastructure investment. But they beat and abused that poor old bull so much, they spooked it. It could only take so much. It finally jumped the fence and they were the first to be gored by it. Now it's like the running of the bulls at Pamplona, and they can't run fast enough.

It was their own fault. Teaches them not to spook the stupid angry bull so much next time.

I dont buy the argument that Conservatives molded the people into the stupid masses. The people are generally stupid to start with, because of bad education and bad parenting. Conservatives messed up by lying to the people, and not attempting to do their work, as they propagandized their excuses for their failure to perform. For extra credit they capitulated to liberalism on language/mind controls and their war against white men.

The people eventually got to "ENOUGH!"

We tend to be stupid, but not THAT stupid.
 
Last edited:
I dont buy the argument that Conservatives molded the people into the stupid masses. ...
We tend to be stupid, but not THAT stupid.

I don't know about that. The Kochs were trying to spook the ignorant masses to advance certain personal agendas. It backfired on them.

Regarding the Koch brothers' involvement in creating the Tea Party astroturf:
"A few weeks after the Lincoln Center gala, the advocacy wing of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation—an organization that David Koch started, in 2004—held a different kind of gathering....Five hundred people attended the summit, which served, in part, as a training session for Tea Party activists in Texas. An advertisement cast the event as a populist uprising against vested corporate power. “Today, the voices of average Americans are being drowned out by lobbyists and special interests,” it said. “But you can do something about it.” The pitch made no mention of its corporate sponsors. The White House has expressed frustration that such sponsors have largely eluded public notice. David Axelrod, Obama’s senior adviser, said, “What they don’t say is that, in part, this is a grassroots citizens’ movement brought to you by a bunch of oil billionaires.”

...Americans for Prosperity has worked closely with the Tea Party since the movement’s inception. In the weeks before the first Tax Day protests, in April, 2009, Americans for Prosperity hosted a Web site offering supporters “Tea Party Talking Points.” The Arizona branch urged people to send tea bags to Obama; the Missouri branch urged members to sign up for “Taxpayer Tea Party Registration” and provided directions to nine protests. The group continues to stoke the rebellion. The North Carolina branch recently launched a “Tea Party Finder” Web site, advertised as “a hub for all the Tea Parties in North Carolina.”

The anti-government fervor infusing the 2010 elections represents a political triumph for the Kochs. By giving money to “educate,” fund, and organize Tea Party protesters, they have helped turn their private agenda into a mass movement. Bruce Bartlett, a conservative economist and a historian, who once worked at the National Center for Policy Analysis, a Dallas-based think tank that the Kochs fund, said, “The problem with the whole libertarian movement is that it’s been all chiefs and no Indians. There haven’t been any actual people, like voters, who give a crap about it. So the problem for the Kochs has been trying to create a movement.” With the emergence of the Tea Party, he said, “everyone suddenly sees that for the first time there are Indians out there—people who can provide real ideological power.” The Kochs, he said, are “trying to shape and control and channel the populist uprising into their own policies.”
The Koch Brothers? Covert Operations - The New Yorker

Like I said, the Koch brothers were just exploiting uneducated white people's fears, prejudices, ignorance, misinformation, and paranoias to advance some personal agendas. But they spooked the poor stupid angry bull so much it end up jumping the fence and goring them with this election.
 
Back
Top Bottom