You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Which Republican Candidate will be best for our economy?
- Thread starter Maverickz
- Start date
Quote from piezoe:
Did you notice how we just ignored your post? That's because we are not interested in facts. We are far more tuned in to the false reality created by the media, and we base or views largely on the media and political campaign rhetoric. We are poor readers, but above average in our ability to grasp a sound bite and store it away for later retrieval. We are exceptionally good at comprehending images and can usually retain them even after just 3 seconds of viewing. That's where our core abilities lie.
You have, without realizing it, stumbled on a political enigma, i.e., the labels "Republican" and "Democrat" don't mean quite what they meant 75 years ago. The idea that Republicans are fiscal conservatives and that Democrats are big spenders likely goes back to the depression era, Roosevelt's "New Deal," and the World War which helped bring us out of the great depression by putting almost everyone to work. The heavy borrowing during the Roosevelt years contrasted with his predecessor, Hoover's, comparatively tight-fisted policies may be the origin of the modern day myth.
In recent years neither party has exercised much fiscal constraint. You are correct, though, that the Democrat administrations have been, on average, better stewards of the Treasury and borrowed less. We see now, however, huge leveraging up by the Federal Government in an effort to rescue the country from its worst recession since the Great Depression. Oddly, in spite of this, the Obama borrowing does not seem all that outsized when laid along side the Reagan borrowing expressed as additional debt taken on as a fraction of GDP. What makes the Obama borrowing look so terrible is that it is occurring at the same time that revenues have been greatly reduced because of the recession.
Reagan was a "supply sider" and it was claimed that if you reduced taxes, revenues would actually grow. That happened in the nominal sense, but because of inflation and simultaneous heavy borrowing, and the borrowed money having been pumped into the economy largely via the defense industry, it is very likely incorrect to attribute revenue growth to reduced tax rates. Many economists today look askance at the "supply side" economics of the Reagan years.
+1
Quote from Maverickz:
Herman Cain wants to get rid of the IRS and just use a sales tax, thus removing all tax burden for companies which would help bring jobs back to the US and would get illegal aliens, drug dealers, and other cash only people to pay their portion of taxes.
Ron Paul wants to help reduce the effects of Unions which would help untie the hands of business innovation and also reduce their overall cost which should help unemployment.
Who do you think would be best for the economy?
Cain might be good but here's something to consider. With 70% of our GDP coming from consumer spending what do you think is going to happen when you jack sales tax? How do you prevent the internet loopholes?
I like a lot of what Ron Paul has to say but unions are about the only thing from stopping Amerika from becoming an even bigger corprotocracy than it already is.
Life is about balance and Wall St. , excuse me GS is a much bigger problem than some union teacher in WI.
Quote from Messi007:
Im not from the US but there's something that I do not understand about the american ingenuity. They Call the Republican Party "the fiscal conservative party" but the fact is that Nixon, Reagan and Bush were the Biggest spender in the US history, in fact, the US became an debt nation under the Reagan years.. In the last 30 years the GOP expand the government role at the same level of Roosevelt or Johnson. The quality of life in the US start the down hill when Nixon default the US when he left the Gold Standard creating an hyperinflationary depresion that last 10 years. They Call them self "the patriot party", but are the ones who sold the US jobs overseas and the party who did the Inmigration Amnisty in 1986. It was an a Republican Administration that Create Al Qaeida and Usama Bin Laden back in the 80's. It was under a republican president that the US constitution has been violated like a hore between 2001 and 2008 for the first time in the US History. Even Timothy McVeigh was a republican wako. I remember how the GOP call Kerry ( a true war hero) a Coward and a Traitor when Bush and Cheney hide behind their powerfull friends and evade the vietnam war. They said that Obama is a socialist, but to me Obama is more capitalistic than Bush and Nixon (not saying that Obama is a Capitalist, but Bush was more a socialist). In 2008 The GOP trash Mitt Romney because he was a mormon, that's even unconstitutional. I guess that the USA don't understand what is socialism and how really dangerous it can be. Im against socialism in all of its form, but thanks to the Republican Party over the last 30 years the US has nothing to envy its Left wing cousins. ... To me, the past of the GOP (before kennedy) is the True american dream, but for the last 30 years I don't see any difference between them and the Democrats.
Sorry for my english, but I don't understand why in america some segment of the society are so naive or hypocrite.
While I don't agree with every one of your points it's refreshing on ET to see someone whom can think critically.
The last thing you need is a Republican President what more does these guys have to do to show you their failed ideology does not work in this country, Reagan, Bush I & Bush II, .....I'm sorry did I miss something that any of these gentleman did right economically?
None, since the markets lead economic recovery. You want the markets to be happy, which by the way gives pension funds better returns and enables them to cover their retirees. Not to mention the 401K's of millions of working Americans. Any republican elected will freak out the markets, austerity is by-word for cash out and run. In that sense, the current president is pretty much unbeatable.
As a rule, the markets want a re-election of incumbents. reagan 84, Clinton 96, Bush 2004: all 3 solid more years of bull markets.
As a rule, the markets want a re-election of incumbents. reagan 84, Clinton 96, Bush 2004: all 3 solid more years of bull markets.
Quote from sobepehopeful:
The last thing you need is a Republican President what more does these guys have to do to show you their failed ideology does not work in this country, Reagan, Bush I & Bush II, .....I'm sorry did I miss something that any of these gentleman did right economically?
You are correct about the Republicans. But what you said applies equally to the Democrats. That is why we are doomed.
Quote from Messi007:
....but for the last 30 years I don't see any difference between [the Republicans] and the Democrats.
I agree 100%. For a long time now when people start arguing about the merits of the "right wing" Republicans versus the "left wing" Democrats, my usual response is: "Left wing or right wing....both wings of the same plane and it's flying us straight into the mountain."
I phrased my initial question as which "Republican" candidate will be best for our economy, not because I think there is inherently more merit in any of the candidates just because of the (R) after their name but because we already know Obama is the worst choice for our economy. Since Obama will be the Democrat on next years Presidential ballot, our only hope can come from the Republican side. If we don't get a good economical candidate from them we are doomed. I really don't think we can financially survive another Obama term.
Quote from Messi007:
Im not from the US but there's something that I do not understand about the american ingenuity. They Call the Republican Party "the fiscal conservative party" but the fact is that Nixon, Reagan and Bush were the Biggest spender in the US history, in fact, the US became an debt nation under the Reagan years..
Actually Obama has outspent them all, nearly combined. U.S. became a credit based society when it went off the gold standard. No problem on the english, just keep the facts straight.