Socialism is Good

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You know when the single greatest period of production in the history of this country was?

1941-1946

Now, was there MORE or LESS socialism during those years?

And when that period ended, did we not go back to a more-or-less Capitalist state?

Now, here we are embroiled in two wars, with an economic emergency, and you people complain about 2 car companies getting bailed out?

How come I didn't hear you all complaining about those decades of farm subsidies?

Oh, yeah, it's that "independent" spirit of the American Farmers, right in the "Heartland" of America. Apparently also known as "Socialists".

Farm subsidies should be stopped immediately.

 

[Emma]

Add to that the fact that folks don't think with their pocket books when their own health, or the health of a family member is on the line.

Just a bit off topic...

After my daughter's surgery to repair a ruptured patellar tendon, the hospital called me for a (ridiculous) 'customer satisfaction survey'. They asked if I felt I got my money's worth, was I satisfied that I chose to have the surgery, and would I do so again.

I told them how stupid their survey was, considering our other option was her not being able to walk.

Idiots.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

You're right. It is probably better to melt down the whole of our economy than save some bits and pieces!

That way, we can go into a full tilt failure, have unemployment hit 1932 type numbers (20%, 25%, 30%) and then you Conservatives can swoop in and save the day! Give CEOs anything they want. Outsource the rest of the service and manufacturing sectors so there will no longer be that pesky middle class. Unfetter Capitalism so Charles Dickens can roll over in his grave! Are there no workhouses? Is the treadmill still in operation?

Unfettered Capitalism. License to steal.

The economy wouldn't have melted down. It would have been bad for a year, maybe two. But we would have gotten through it much quicker than we're doing now.

But I find it strange that you asked why somebody else was rewarding failure, but yet that's exactly what the bailout, stimulus package, cash for clunkers, etc... are. And you obviously support bailing out failed businesses, so I ask why are you for encouraging failure by rewarding it and prolonging our downturn with bailouts and all the other nonsense?

The workers, those depending on a paycheck were not responsible for the companies failing. Those in the executive suite who made the disastrous decisions are the ones responsible.

Why should I be quick to shutter the shops and factories where the great American middle class earns a living when all it really takes is tossing some incompetent CEO earning 400x what the workers earn out on his well fed ear!

It wasn't the fault of the people who made horse carriages that automobiles came along, but should they have been given a bailout since that was how they made their living? No. They simply moved into different fields which were viable. Companies that rely on the government to subsidize them are not beneficial to the economy, they're drags on the economy. Those companies needed to fail so that the people working there and the other resources could be moved into more viable lines of work that can stand on their own in the market.

 

[REVxERIK]

You know when the single greatest period of production in the history of this country was?

1941-1946

Now, was there MORE or LESS socialism during those years?

And when that period ended, did we not go back to a more-or-less Capitalist state?

Now, here we are embroiled in two wars, with an economic emergency, and you people complain about 2 car companies getting bailed out?

How come I didn't hear you all complaining about those decades of farm subsidies?

Oh, yeah, it's that "independent" spirit of the American Farmers, right in the "Heartland" of America. Apparently also known as "Socialists".

Farm subsidies should be stopped immediately.

indeed man. they are ridiculous

 

[Vast LWC]

The economy wouldn't have melted down. It would have been bad for a year, maybe two. But we would have gotten through it much quicker than we're doing now.

But I find it strange that you asked why somebody else was rewarding failure, but yet that's exactly what the bailout, stimulus package, cash for clunkers, etc... are. And you obviously support bailing out failed businesses, so I ask why are you for encouraging failure by rewarding it and prolonging our downturn with bailouts and all the other nonsense?

That's utter speculation.

What we do know for a fact is that the Economy, by every single indicator, is recovering quite nicely NOW.

And if we were to make a direct comparison to a set of similar circumstances, the recovery is movingn along much faster than Reagan's recovery after Carter's disaster.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

If they don't lower costs without the backing of the government then they're probably going out of business. They'll have to lower the costs. They won't be able to charge people an arm and a leg for medical care because, as you have pointed out yourself, there are some people who simply can't pay it. It's the same problem facing higher education today. Without the backing of the government these colleges couldn't charge as much as they do because people simply wouldn't be able to pay it and they'd have to lower costs to remain open.

Actually, they just couldn't offer the service. Much of the cost of a treatment is fixed by trying to recover the costs of building a safe machine/drug/etc and trying to recover the cost of training/research/support so you can offer that service.

Without taxpayer funding or insurance company support, most hospitals would just wither up and die. Ditto higher education. Once a hospital or university closes, it just doesn't come back.

The point you're missing is that it isn't the health care provider that's forcing the costs so high in nearly every instance. Its the actual cost of providing the service in a medically sound way.

I could say a lot more about higher ed and the parallels. About how tuition costs are pretty much dictated by infrastructure and program costs and how when money dries up schools cut programs. Making them cheaper isn't an option 99% of the time. That's why Captialism isn't a cure all. Essential services have a cost to even be able to offer them. They can't go "cheaper", they usually can only "go away."

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Socialism... the ideology embraced by slackers and pinheads everywhere!

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Farm subsidies should be stopped immediately.

In other words "We should be totally dependent on food from other nations."

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

What we do know for a fact is that the Economy, by every single indicator, is recovering quite nicely NOW.

Wow, denial isn't just a river in Egypt any more huh?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The economy wouldn't have melted down. It would have been bad for a year, maybe two. But we would have gotten through it much quicker than we're doing now.

But I find it strange that you asked why somebody else was rewarding failure, but yet that's exactly what the bailout, stimulus package, cash for clunkers, etc... are. And you obviously support bailing out failed businesses, so I ask why are you for encouraging failure by rewarding it and prolonging our downturn with bailouts and all the other nonsense?

That's utter speculation.

What we do know for a fact is that the Economy, by every single indicator, is recovering quite nicely NOW.

And if we were to make a direct comparison to a set of similar circumstances, the recovery is movingn along much faster than Reagan's recovery after Carter's disaster.

Yes, our 16.3% unemployment is a good sign for the economy. The fact is that the economy is not improving, because the fundamentals of the economy have only gotten worse since this crisis hit. More inflation, more debt, businesses as a drain on the economy, etc... This recession isn't over. If they've succeeded in reflating the bubble, and that's a big "if," then we're simply going to see a bigger bust down the road.

 

[Vast LWC]

You know when the single greatest period of production in the history of this country was?

1941-1946

Now, was there MORE or LESS socialism during those years?

And when that period ended, did we not go back to a more-or-less Capitalist state?

Now, here we are embroiled in two wars, with an economic emergency, and you people complain about 2 car companies getting bailed out?

How come I didn't hear you all complaining about those decades of farm subsidies?

Oh, yeah, it's that "independent" spirit of the American Farmers, right in the "Heartland" of America. Apparently also known as "Socialists".

Farm subsidies should be stopped immediately.

indeed man. they are ridiculous

They are at the moment, and yes, they should be stopped, but the original point of farm subsidies was to keep the infrastructure of farming going in case of national emergency, war, etc. The same concept definitely applies here.

Let's say we let all American auto manufacturingn go the way of the Dodo, and then China starts invading it's neighbors.

What industrial base will we have as a nation to support that war?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Farm subsidies should be stopped immediately.

indeed man. they are ridiculous

They are at the moment, and yes, they should be stopped, but the original point of farm subsidies was to keep the infrastructure of farming going in case of national emergency, war, etc. The same concept definitely applies here.

Let's say we let all American auto manufacturingn go the way of the Dodo, and then China starts invading it's neighbors.

What industrial base will we have as a nation to support that war?

Why would we be supporting this war? Sounds like China's neighbors should be supporting their war if China invades.

 

[Vast LWC]

What we do know for a fact is that the Economy, by every single indicator, is recovering quite nicely NOW.

Wow, denial isn't just a river in Egypt any more huh?

Yeah... why not ask the economists? They're all saying how the economy is chugging along nicely considering the circumstances.

But hey, I guess the opinion of some random poster like yourself is much better informed than those lousy old economists in their ivory towers, right?

The Stock Market has rebounded, Housing Markets are rebounding, durable good sales are rebounding.

Unemployment, which is the final thing to go in any recovery, has already started slowing it's growth.

The Reagan Recovery took 2 1/2 years to get going. Unemployment peaked at 10.4% in 1983.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

What we do know for a fact is that the Economy, by every single indicator, is recovering quite nicely NOW.

Wow, denial isn't just a river in Egypt any more huh?

Yeah... why not ask the economists? They're all saying how the economy is chugging along nicely considering the circumstances.

But hey, I guess the opinion of some random poster like yourself is much better informed than those lousy old economists in their ivory towers, right?

The Stock Market has rebounded, Housing Markets are rebounding, durable good sales are rebounding.

Unemployment, which is the final thing to go in any recovery, has already started slowing it's growth.

The Reagan Recovery took 2 1/2 years to get going. Unemployment peaked at 10.4% in 1983.

Uhhh not all economists agree that we're in an actual recovery by a longshot.

Ludwig von Mises Institute - Homepage

 

[Vast LWC]

Yes, our 16.3% unemployment is a good sign for the economy. The fact is that the economy is not improving, because the fundamentals of the economy have only gotten worse since this crisis hit. More inflation, more debt, businesses as a drain on the economy, etc... This recession isn't over. If they've succeeded in reflating the bubble, and that's a big "if," then we're simply going to see a bigger bust down the road.

In November of 2007, when this recession officially started, Unemployment was at 4.5%.

It was at 8.9% in February when Obama took office.

Unemployment is currently at 9.6%.

Google - public data

Which means that almost all this unemployment happened under the Bush administration.

You can try to use any form of distorted figures you want, and claim that they're the "true" unemployment rate, but then of course you would have to apply those same figures to every other presidency, with the end results being exactly the same.

 

[Vast LWC]

indeed man. they are ridiculous

They are at the moment, and yes, they should be stopped, but the original point of farm subsidies was to keep the infrastructure of farming going in case of national emergency, war, etc. The same concept definitely applies here.

Let's say we let all American auto manufacturingn go the way of the Dodo, and then China starts invading it's neighbors.

What industrial base will we have as a nation to support that war?

Why would we be supporting this war? Sounds like China's neighbors should be supporting their war if China invades.

China's neighbors are our allies. We would be right in the thick of it.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Yes, our 16.3% unemployment is a good sign for the economy. The fact is that the economy is not improving, because the fundamentals of the economy have only gotten worse since this crisis hit. More inflation, more debt, businesses as a drain on the economy, etc... This recession isn't over. If they've succeeded in reflating the bubble, and that's a big "if," then we're simply going to see a bigger bust down the road.

In November of 2007, when this recession officially started, Unemployment was at 4.5%.

It was at 8.9% in February when Obama took office.

Unemployment is currently at 9.6%.

Google - public data

Which means that almost all this unemployment happened under the Bush administration.

You can try to use any form of distorted figures you want, and claim that they're the "true" unemployment rate, but then of course you would have to apply those same figures to every other presidency, with the end results being exactly the same.

The way they computed unemployment during the Great Depression was to also count those who have simply given up searching for a job and those who are looking for a job but have taken on a temporary low paying job in the meantime. If we add those two categories to today's unemployment numbers we come up with 16.8%. Which means that we're much closer to the Great Depression's unemployment numbers than the government would like to admit.

 

[Vast LWC]

Wow, denial isn't just a river in Egypt any more huh?

Yeah... why not ask the economists? They're all saying how the economy is chugging along nicely considering the circumstances.

But hey, I guess the opinion of some random poster like yourself is much better informed than those lousy old economists in their ivory towers, right?

The Stock Market has rebounded, Housing Markets are rebounding, durable good sales are rebounding.

Unemployment, which is the final thing to go in any recovery, has already started slowing it's growth.

The Reagan Recovery took 2 1/2 years to get going. Unemployment peaked at 10.4% in 1983.

Uhhh not all economists agree that we're in an actual recovery by a longshot.

Ludwig von Mises Institute - Homepage

Yeah, there's always going to be a nay-sayer or two somewhere...

Let's say the vast majority of the major economists are saying the recovery is going well.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

They are at the moment, and yes, they should be stopped, but the original point of farm subsidies was to keep the infrastructure of farming going in case of national emergency, war, etc. The same concept definitely applies here.

Let's say we let all American auto manufacturingn go the way of the Dodo, and then China starts invading it's neighbors.

What industrial base will we have as a nation to support that war?

Why would we be supporting this war? Sounds like China's neighbors should be supporting their war if China invades.

China's neighbors are our allies. We would be right in the thick of it.

We would be fools to be right in the thick of it. Our government wants China to continue to buy our debt, opposing them in such a way would lead to them refusing to buy any more of our debt. Our government would be shooting itself in the foot. We need China to be able to fund the wars we're in now, they're not going to fund a war against them.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Yeah... why not ask the economists? They're all saying how the economy is chugging along nicely considering the circumstances.

But hey, I guess the opinion of some random poster like yourself is much better informed than those lousy old economists in their ivory towers, right?

The Stock Market has rebounded, Housing Markets are rebounding, durable good sales are rebounding.

Unemployment, which is the final thing to go in any recovery, has already started slowing it's growth.

The Reagan Recovery took 2 1/2 years to get going. Unemployment peaked at 10.4% in 1983.

Uhhh not all economists agree that we're in an actual recovery by a longshot.

Ludwig von Mises Institute - Homepage

Yeah, there's always going to be a nay-sayer or two somewhere...

Let's say the vast majority of the major economists are saying the recovery is going well.

To put it another way, the "major" economists who failed to see this downturn coming believe we're in a real recovery whereas those economists who did see this downturn coming do not see us as being in a real recovery.