Progressive Economics = Poverty

[CrusaderFrank]

In case you haven't noticed, there is a 100% economic fail rate in Progressive, re-distributive economics. It has failed everywhere its been tried, it has failed every single time its been tried. It's such an abject failure that even real Communists in China and Vietnam have recognized it as such and have openly embraced Free Markets as a path to prosperity.

I came across the following chart that clearly shows how Progressive (Socialist, Marxist) economics fails even in America. Since the "War on Poverty" (the exit strategy seems to be: we won't stop fighting until every American is in poverty). You can clearly see how destructive Progressive economics is. The only respite was during the Reagan boom and then, we had the misfortune to elect a "Compassionate Conservative" who blew the best chance to turn us away from the destructive path Progressive have put us on.

http://coyoteprime-runningcauseican.../porter-stansberry-corruption-of-america.html

Thoughts? Comments?

 

[LoneLaugher]

The chart proves nothing. This theory of yours would not get a passing grade in a 10th grade economics class.

 

[Truthmatters]

Porter Stansberry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Frank Porter Stansberry, is an American conservative subscription-based investment advisor and the creator of the 2011 online video and infomercial titled "End of America" (77 min).[1] Commercials advertising Stansberry's "End of America" video and website (with narration by radio host Alex Jones) have been featured on an array of U.S. media outlets.

 

[Billy000]

In case you haven't noticed, there is a 100% economic fail rate in Progressive, re-distributive economics. It has failed everywhere its been tried, it has failed ever single time its been tried. It's such an abject failure that even real Communists in China and Vietnam have recognized it as such and have openly embraced Free Markets as a path to prosperity

I came across the following chart that clearly shows how totally Progressive (Socialist, Marxist) economics fails even in America. Since the "War on Poverty" (the exit strategy seems to be: we won't stop fighting until every American is in poverty). You can clearly see how destructive Progressive economics is. The only respite was during the Reagan boom and then, we had the misfortune to elect a "Compassionate Conservative" who blew the best change to turn us away from the destructive path Progressive have put us on.

Running 'Cause I Can't Fly: Porter Stansberry, "The Corruption of America"

Thoughts? Comments?

This graph is no indication of "progessive economics". As you can see, during the Bush years GDP was still in the decline.

But yes, you are right - socialism and communism do not work.

 

[JakeStarkey]

In case you haven't noticed, there is a 100% economic fail rate in Progressive, re-distributive economics. It has failed everywhere its been tried, it has failed every single time its been tried. It's such an abject failure that even real Communists in China and Vietnam have recognized it as such and have openly embraced Free Markets as a path to prosperity.

I came across the following chart that clearly shows how Progressive (Socialist, Marxist) economics fails even in America. Since the "War on Poverty" (the exit strategy seems to be: we won't stop fighting until every American is in poverty). You can clearly see how destructive Progressive economics is. The only respite was during the Reagan boom and then, we had the misfortune to elect a "Compassionate Conservative" who blew the best change to turn us away from the destructive path Progressive have put us on.

Running 'Cause I Can't Fly: Porter Stansberry, "The Corruption of America"

Thoughts? Comments?

Guns and butter from 1970 hurt purchasing power of the middle class. The weaknesses of the Reagan era were repaired during the Clinton era, then the Bushies collapsed the whole system.

You are going to have a hard time convincing liberals and conservatives that you have the slightest idea of what you mean, kiddo.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

4 comments, one stupider than the last, none of whom even looked at the chart or understood if if they did.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Porter Stansberry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Frank Porter Stansberry, is an American conservative subscription-based investment advisor and the creator of the 2011 online video and infomercial titled "End of America" (77 min).[1] Commercials advertising Stansberry's "End of America" video and website (with narration by radio host Alex Jones) have been featured on an array of U.S. media outlets.

The chart. Did you look at the chart?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The chart quite clearly demonstates the opposite of what CrusaderFrank is suggesting. What's new?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

In case you haven't noticed, there is a 100% economic fail rate in Progressive, re-distributive economics. It has failed everywhere its been tried, it has failed every single time its been tried. It's such an abject failure that even real Communists in China and Vietnam have recognized it as such and have openly embraced Free Markets as a path to prosperity.

I came across the following chart that clearly shows how Progressive (Socialist, Marxist) economics fails even in America. Since the "War on Poverty" (the exit strategy seems to be: we won't stop fighting until every American is in poverty). You can clearly see how destructive Progressive economics is. The only respite was during the Reagan boom and then, we had the misfortune to elect a "Compassionate Conservative" who blew the best change to turn us away from the destructive path Progressive have put us on.

Running 'Cause I Can't Fly: Porter Stansberry, "The Corruption of America"

Thoughts? Comments?

Guns and butter from 1970 hurt purchasing power of the middle class. The weaknesses of the Reagan era were repaired during the Clinton era, then the Bushies collapsed the whole system.

You are going to have a hard time convincing liberals and conservatives that you have the slightest idea of what you mean, kiddo.

Reagan Presidency started in 1981, Dear. Did you see what happened during his tenure and as long as we kept a lid on Gubbamint spending that ended when Dubya became President?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The chart quite clearly demonstates the opposite of what CrusaderFrank is suggesting. What's new?

Dumb=mc^2

Do you even know what a chart is?

 

[PredFan]

I didn't look at the chart, but common knowledge says i don't have to. Socialism has never worked.

Ever notice how those socialist countries don't have a middle class? They use the middle class in thier class warfare rhetoric to get socialism to power then it's the few elite party members that are filthy rich and everyone else is impovershed.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I didn't look at the chart, but common knowledge says i don't have to. Socialism has never worked.

Ever notice how those socialist countries don't have a middle class? They use the middle class in thier class warfare rhetoric to get socialism to power then it's the few elite party members that are filthy rich and everyone else is impovershed.

Which ones are you talking about?

 

[Toro]

In case you haven't noticed, there is a 100% economic fail rate in Progressive, re-distributive economics. It has failed everywhere its been tried, it has failed every single time its been tried. It's such an abject failure that even real Communists in China and Vietnam have recognized it as such and have openly embraced Free Markets as a path to prosperity.

I came across the following chart that clearly shows how Progressive (Socialist, Marxist) economics fails even in America. Since the "War on Poverty" (the exit strategy seems to be: we won't stop fighting until every American is in poverty). You can clearly see how destructive Progressive economics is. The only respite was during the Reagan boom and then, we had the misfortune to elect a "Compassionate Conservative" who blew the best chance to turn us away from the destructive path Progressive have put us on.

Running 'Cause I Can't Fly: Porter Stansberry, "The Corruption of America"

Thoughts? Comments?

I skimmed it but it doesn't appear to be very substantive. I doubt many people would believe we are no better off than we were in 1980.

The methodology assumes it has a better calculation of purchasing power by using commodities as a barometer for "real" value of currencies. That, of course, is ridiculous, because if you study commodities you know that commodity markets go through long booms and busts. Commodities as a group barely earn any real return over many decades. However, they can have 10-20 year structural bull and bear markets. It also makes the assumption of no changes in fundamental supply and demand, which you'd have to isolate from the monetary affects. That's silly. China sucks up something like half of the world's iron ore, up about 10x from a decade ago. Chinese oil consumption has risen from 4 million barrels a day to 8 million in a decade. Of course, that has an enormous affect on the price of oil. So its hard to take seriously.

Also, they makes some very dubious statements. For example, the authors say

Consider, for example, annual sales of automobiles. Auto sales peaked in 1985 (11 million) and have been declining at a fairly steady rate since 1999. In 2009, Americans bought just 5.4 million passenger cars.

But that excludes leases and light truck sales. If you include both, there were 14.6 million sales and leases, which is the same as 1990 but down from 20 million a few years earlier, the decline occurring because of the deepest economic downturn in 80 years. This isn't permanent. It is cyclical.

http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_01_17.html

So the methodology is bad and its best to dismiss it.

 

[merrill]

If it weren't for Socialism corporate america would be without their tax dollar moochin subsidies and pork barrel projects.

Locally developers would be without tax abatements,rax rebates,secret sales tax, Tax Increment Financing,tax payer funded water lines for new housing projects

Mom and Pops are the only business ventures subjected to the Free Market application.

 

[ladyliberal]

- The "study" seems to adjust for inflation in a way that is both nonstandard and nearly entirely unspecified.

- As TM's link notes, the author of this study has been convicted of fraud for deliberately distributing false information on the internet.

- Real per-capita GDP is rising, not falling: International Monetary Fund, September 2011 World Economic Outlook - Google Public Data Explorer

- Even if real per-capita GDP were falling, no evidence is introduced to link this to the "war on poverty". Correlation does not imply causation.

 

[kyzr]

Instead of that chart, I can provide a few factoids that prove the same conclusion:
1. 14,000 US factories have been moved overseas and the US has lost 3,000,000 manufacturing jobs since 19xx.
2. US manufacturing has gone from 28% of the US economy to 12%
3. Jeff Immelt wants the US manufacturing sector to be at least 20% as he moves GE jobs to China
GE moving X-ray business to China. What message is sent to U.S.? – Cafferty File - CNN.com Blogs

The key to GDP is "creating wealth", and not just buying foreign goods, and foreign oil, in foreign cars. etc.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes dismiss it because it accurately describes American economic realty in 2011 that's freddo smart
Porter accurately called the collapse of Fannie Freddie and gm so again let's ignore him

 

[LoneLaugher]

Instead of that chart, I can provide a few factoids that prove the same conclusion:1. 14,000 US factories have been moved overseas and the US has lost 3,000,000 manufacturing jobs since 19xx.
2. US manufacturing has gone from 28% of the US economy to 12%
3. Jeff Immelt wants the US manufacturing sector to be at least 20% as he moves GE jobs to China
GE moving X-ray business to China. What message is sent to U.S.? – Cafferty File - CNN.com Blogs

The key to GDP is "creating wealth", and not just buying foreign goods, and foreign oil, in foreign cars. etc.

What conclusion?

 

[Valox]

What do expect from party that passes a trillion dollar stimulus that consists of paltry tax cuts and massive welfare benefits.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that our money should go towards investment, such as infrastructure, education, and health. Instead, progressives rather rely on tax cuts and handouts.

They are fucking idiots in the first degree.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What do expect from party that passes a trillion dollar stimulus that consists of paltry tax cuts and massive welfare benefits.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that our money should go towards investment, such as infrastructure, education, and health. Instead, progressives rather rely on tax cuts and handouts.

They are fucking idiots in the first degree.

And they said it failed because it was too small