Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail?

[del]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

it's the end times

 

[bripat9643]

They hate Obama more than they love America. It's right there in black and white.

That..and they feel they are entitled to power. All of it.

Clinton was impeached because of that notion.

"Entitled" to it? No. However, gaining power is the only way to roll back socialism and the welfare state. Allowing liberals to gain power is like putting a 5-yeal-old at the controls of a 747.

 

[jillian]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

Yeah, sure. We're all hoping our 401Ks and home values continue to spin downward. It's so much fun losing money.


Sarcasm off.

Back to reality -

God, you're a fucking idiot.

don't let the rightwingnuts on the board let you lose your civility.

you may not want the result. but you aren't the one with the power to change it. and you're not the one benefitting from it.

the right is just, for reasons i can't even begin to fathom, buying into nonsense that has failed this country before and has decided to act as shills for corporatists.

so there ya go.

 

[kwc57]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

I believe very few want to see the world economy fail. Wish everyone could be met in the center and we wouldn't have labels like "reactionary republicans" or "lunatice liberals." But alas, we all perceive situations from different glasses and the only hope is that we strive for objectivity.

The Democrats in Washington ARE willing to meet in the center. A logical compromise would be spending cuts and tax hikes - the latter hurts Republicans, the former, Democrats. But the Republicans refuse to allow tax hikes - period - because they are entirely unwilling to compromise. If they had been at the Constitutional convention, the Constitution would have never been written, because it would have been their way or the highway - which never works in politics.

But it's not a logical compromise. If you have a friend who is an alcoholic, do you thow him a kegger for his birthday? Tax hikes will NOT be used to pay off any debt. It WILL be used to further increase spending. History has repeated itself over and over in this regard. Congress needs to go cold turkey. No more cash to spend and cut the spending you do to live within your means. It is what the general public has to do. It's what the government should be doing too. Republicans are the adults i nthe room who understand this. Democrats are the kids in the room who want two deserts. Tough love requires no compromise. Democrats need to pull up their big boy pants and do the right thing for the country for a change.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I believe very few want to see the world economy fail. Wish everyone could be met in the center and we wouldn't have labels like "reactionary republicans" or "lunatice liberals." But alas, we all perceive situations from different glasses and the only hope is that we strive for objectivity.

The Democrats in Washington ARE willing to meet in the center. A logical compromise would be spending cuts and tax hikes - the latter hurts Republicans, the former, Democrats. But the Republicans refuse to allow tax hikes - period - because they are entirely unwilling to compromise. If they had been at the Constitutional convention, the Constitution would have never been written, because it would have been their way or the highway - which never works in politics.

But it's not a logical compromise. If you have a friend who is an alcoholic, do you thow him a kegger for his birthday?

If you're incapable of understanding government policy and explaining your opinions on it to others, do yo concoct some lame analogy to side-step revealing your ignorance?

Tax hikes will NOT be used to pay off any debt. It WILL be used to further increase spending.

Not if Congress doesn't VOTE to increase spending. Do you understand how our government works at all?

History has repeated itself over and over in this regard.

BY ALL MEANS, PROVIDE SOME EXAMPLES THEN.

 

[Wiseacre]

Do you suppose there were those on the far left who were glad that the economy nose dived at the end of Bush43's presidency cuz it meant a better chance of victory for them? Or some who hoped the surge in Iraq would fail even if it meant more body bags coming home?

Why do you focus so much on the fringe elements on the right and conveniently forget the fringe on the left? Surely you know we've got enough nuts at both ends of the political spectrum, why give them more attention than they deserve? Or is it that you just love throwing bombs at everyone on the right based on the words and actions of a few? And do you think your own words and actions are helping the situation or hurting it?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

1. Who exactly is the reactionary right?
2. What do you mean by want the world economy to fail?

1. The righties who basically want the U.S. to go back to what it was in the 1880's and 1890's. Tea baggers, for instance.
2. I mean supporting policies that will lead quickly to a collapse of the U.S. economy, and hence, the worlds.

Ok, fair enough...

Got examples?

 

[kwc57]

The Democrats in Washington ARE willing to meet in the center. A logical compromise would be spending cuts and tax hikes - the latter hurts Republicans, the former, Democrats. But the Republicans refuse to allow tax hikes - period - because they are entirely unwilling to compromise. If they had been at the Constitutional convention, the Constitution would have never been written, because it would have been their way or the highway - which never works in politics.

But it's not a logical compromise. If you have a friend who is an alcoholic, do you thow him a kegger for his birthday?

If you're incapable of understanding government policy and explaining your opinions on it to others, do yo concoct some lame analogy to side-step revealing your ignorance?

Tax hikes will NOT be used to pay off any debt. It WILL be used to further increase spending.

Not if Congress doesn't VOTE to increase spending. Do you understand how our government works at all?

History has repeated itself over and over in this regard.

BY ALL MEANS, PROVIDE SOME EXAMPLES THEN.

Hey jackwad, does "share the wealth" or "fair share" ring any bells for you? Obama and his cohorts in congress want to increase taxes in order to continue spending at unprecedented levels and increase redistribution of wealth. They have no intention of reducing anything as entitelment spending is what they do. It's how they buy votes to stay in power. What, have you been off planet recently?

The super committe fails so let’s go on a spending spree | Gregg Easterbrook

RealClearPolitics - Obama's Spending Addiction

Obama, Spending Three Times as Fast as Bush, Blames Bush - By Jim Geraghty - The Campaign Spot - National Review Online

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

1. Who exactly is the reactionary right?
2. What do you mean by want the world economy to fail?

1. The righties who basically want the U.S. to go back to what it was in the 1880's and 1890's.Tea baggers, for instance.
2. I mean supporting policies that will lead quickly to a collapse of the U.S. economy, and hence, the worlds.

Ok, fair enough...

Got examples?

Yes. The teabag attempt to cause the government to default.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

But it's not a logical compromise. If you have a friend who is an alcoholic, do you thow him a kegger for his birthday?

If you're incapable of understanding government policy and explaining your opinions on it to others, do yo concoct some lame analogy to side-step revealing your ignorance?




Not if Congress doesn't VOTE to increase spending. Do you understand how our government works at all?

History has repeated itself over and over in this regard.

BY ALL MEANS, PROVIDE SOME EXAMPLES THEN.

Hey jackwad, does "share the wealth" or "fair share" ring any bells for you? Obama and his cohorts in congress want to increase taxes in order to continue spending at unprecedented levels and increase redistribution of wealth. They have no intention of reducing anything as entitelment spending is what they do. It's how they buy votes to stay in power. What, have you been off planet recently?

The super committe fails so let’s go on a spending spree | Gregg Easterbrook

RealClearPolitics - Obama's Spending Addiction

Obama, Spending Three Times as Fast as Bush, Blames Bush - By Jim Geraghty - The Campaign Spot - National Review Online

Maybe you didn't yet the memo, but the Democrats are willing to make significant cuts in spending in exchange for tax hikes. Republicans on the other hand think they should only get their way and shouldn't have to give up anything.

 

[Amelia]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

Because then it will be cheaper to buy small children to use for our rituals.



What a dweeb.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

1. The righties who basically want the U.S. to go back to what it was in the 1880's and 1890's.Tea baggers, for instance.
2. I mean supporting policies that will lead quickly to a collapse of the U.S. economy, and hence, the worlds.

Ok, fair enough...

Got examples?

Yes. The teabag attempt to cause the government to default.

Well, I don't know what a teabag is, but apparently even in light of the world economy tanking on further news of massive debt burdens held by Europe, etc., your answer is, wait for it... borrowing more money is the way to not tank the world economy.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Ok, fair enough...

Got examples?

Yes. The teabag attempt to cause the government to default.

Well, I don't know what a teabag is, but apparently even in light of the world economy tanking on further news of massive debt burdens held by Europe, etc., your answer is, wait for it... borrowing more money is the way to not tank the world economy.

It is when the alternative is default, fool. You don't think the immediate disappearance of 14 trillion dollars form the world economy might have a negative effect?

 

[Jackson]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

Do you have a link to show that statement is true?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Yes. The teabag attempt to cause the government to default.

Well, I don't know what a teabag is, but apparently even in light of the world economy tanking on further news of massive debt burdens held by Europe, etc., your answer is, wait for it... borrowing more money is the way to not tank the world economy.

It is when the alternative is default, fool. You don't think the immediate disappearance of 14 trillion dollars form the world economy might have a negative effect?

We were never in danger of default, fool... receipts were more than enough to cover debt service. I know that was the Obama mantra, but it was a lie, and anyone with an ounce of economic literacy knew it.

And, are you arguing that taking on debt to make debt payments is wise economic policy?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

Do you have a link to show that statement is true?

His answer seems to be that crashing the world economy could only be avoided by sinking ourselves even further into debt.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why does the reactionary right want the world economy to fail? Seriously, why?

Do you have a link to show that statement is true?

His answer seems to be that crashing the world economy could only be avoided by sinking ourselves even further into debt.

It's the official position of this administration!
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHFEcyUNBjg]Biden: We Have To Spend Money To Keep From Going Bankrupt - YouTube[/ame]

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Well, I don't know what a teabag is, but apparently even in light of the world economy tanking on further news of massive debt burdens held by Europe, etc., your answer is, wait for it... borrowing more money is the way to not tank the world economy.

It is when the alternative is default, fool. You don't think the immediate disappearance of 14 trillion dollars form the world economy might have a negative effect?

We were never in danger of default, fool... receipts were more than enough to cover debt service.

Great, we'll just eliminate the military, social security, roads, and everything else, who needs them?

I know that was the Obama mantra, but it was a lie, and anyone with an ounce of economic literacy knew it.

You don't understand how the market works. The market will cause a nation to default if it THINKS it might default. Do you not get this?


CAN YOU FIND ME ONE PERSON WHO WAS PLANNING ON BUYING MORE TREASURIES IF THE U.S. FAILED TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING? For fucking crying out loud, please tell me you understand that in order for our debt obligations to not plummet in value - THERE ACTUALLY HAS TO BE PEOPLE WILLING TO BUY THEM? Do you at least get THAT simple fact about the market?

And, are you arguing that taking on debt to make debt payments is wise economic policy?

It's better than having to pay 20+% interest on our current debt, don't you think?

 

[naturegirl]

It is when the alternative is default, fool. You don't think the immediate disappearance of 14 trillion dollars form the world economy might have a negative effect?

We were never in danger of default, fool... receipts were more than enough to cover debt service.

Great, we'll just eliminate the military, social security, roads, and everything else, who needs them?

I know that was the Obama mantra, but it was a lie, and anyone with an ounce of economic literacy knew it.

You don't understand how the market works. The market will cause a nation to default if it THINKS it might default. Do you not get this?


CAN YOU FIND ME ONE PERSON WHO WAS PLANNING ON BUYING MORE TREASURIES IF THE U.S. FAILED TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING? For fucking crying out loud, please tell me you understand that in order for our debt obligations to not plummet in value - THERE ACTUALLY HAS TO BE PEOPLE WILLING TO BUY THEM? Do you at least get THAT simple fact about the market?

And, are you arguing that taking on debt to make debt payments is wise economic policy?

It's better than having to pay 20+% interest on our current debt, don't you think?

Well you see, no one wants to buy them while the current administration stays in power. A bad situation has been made much worse by bad decisions and executive orders. Get a grip.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

We were never in danger of default, fool... receipts were more than enough to cover debt service.

Great, we'll just eliminate the military, social security, roads, and everything else, who needs them?




You don't understand how the market works. The market will cause a nation to default if it THINKS it might default. Do you not get this?


CAN YOU FIND ME ONE PERSON WHO WAS PLANNING ON BUYING MORE TREASURIES IF THE U.S. FAILED TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING? For fucking crying out loud, please tell me you understand that in order for our debt obligations to not plummet in value - THERE ACTUALLY HAS TO BE PEOPLE WILLING TO BUY THEM? Do you at least get THAT simple fact about the market?

And, are you arguing that taking on debt to make debt payments is wise economic policy?

It's better than having to pay 20+% interest on our current debt, don't you think?

Well you see, no one wants to buy them while the current administration stays in power. A bad situation has been made much worse by bad decisions and executive orders. Get a grip.

That's not even true! Treasury prices are almost the highest they've ever been, because plenty of folks want to buy them. You have no fucking clue what you're talking about, do you? How transparently full of bullshit you are.