Nancy Pelosi: Unemployment creates jobs

[Minor Axis]

:24::24::24:

Now that was funny

You just proved your ignorance

Because regulations are set in stone

It is pretty much unheard of to get them reversed

I was given the bullshit line many times with regulators when negotiating that if things do not work out they can always rescind the rules or regs. Never seen it done yet. Instead they just expand their power

I'm ignerent? I'm gonna run home and tell my Mommy you're mean! Now that I got that out of my system, you did not bother to address the reason for the regulations. For fun, just name one onerous regulation that serves no purpose, come on, I'm trying to be less ignerent..

 

[Alien Allen]

What kind of bull shit question is that?

Are you saying lower interest rates is equivalent to a tax cut?

No need to answer

You are a died in the wool liberal democrat that worships at the alter of Clinton and Obama

 

[Accountable]

Why don't you just call it a difference of opinion instead of latent name calling? I realize this whole forum thing with the disagreements can be frustrating, but ya got to hold it together man.

I'm taking this advice in this thread. I crossed a line; I shouldn't have taken the bait. I'm not saying I won't cross it again, mind.

 

[retro]

Where I live in California, we pay $0.22/kWH for electricity... compare that to places in Texas where that cost is $0.04/kWH... that alone is driving dairies out of the area... and this is the largest dairy producing area in the entire world. We've driven farms nearly out of business because of EPA regulations preventing us from getting water to one of the richest agricultural areas in the entire world... because of a non-indigenous species of fish, which are still dying at the same rates as they were before they turned our pumps off. EPA regulations around here are ridiculously harmful to businesses and citizens alike. AB32, which is our own version of Cap and Tax... err, Trade would impose sanctions and more stringent energy standards on businesses throughout the state. Fortunately that law has been suspended for the time being.

The list goes on and on and on... I've merely scratched the surface of the ridiculous regulations and problems driving businesses out of this state.

 

[Meirionnydd]

In Britain, when Thatcher gave tax breaks to businesses in the 80s, unemployment continued to rise to an all-time high. I didn't improve it in the slightest, it just transfered more of the wealth upwards.

Of course, each situation was different, there were other factors at play during Thatcher's reign, such as the killing of the manufacturing and coal sectors.

That's an experience that is shared by many other Western countries. During the 1980's, a policy of economic liberalism proved to be very popular amongst many governments in the west. Promoting economic de-regulation and cutting taxes for business, amongst many other pro-business policies, it was argued that economic liberalism would reduce unemployment, poverty and be good for long term growth.

While good for economic growth, unemployment skyrocketed in certain regions (traditionally in lower-socioeconomic areas, higher income locales remained virtually untouched), poverty increased sharply and widened the gap between rich and poor. Ironically, during this period, a massive redistribution of wealth occurred, money that would traditionally be in the hands of the working and middle class, started to flow to the more wealthy individuals in society.

This kind of trend has been extended by many right and left wing parties over the years. I find it laughable when people turn to center-left parties such as the Democratic party, and deride them for being 'liberal' or 'socialist', but when in reality, compared to their counterparts 30 or 40 years ago, they would be considered as a centrist or a center-right party.

 

[Tim]

That's an experience that is shared by many other Western countries. During the 1980's, a policy of economic liberalism proved to be very popular amongst many governments in the west. Promoting economic de-regulation and cutting taxes for business, amongst many other pro-business policies, it was argued that economic liberalism would reduce unemployment, poverty and be good for long term growth.

While good for economic growth, unemployment skyrocketed in certain regions (traditionally in lower-socioeconomic areas, higher income locales remained virtually untouched), poverty increased sharply and widened the gap between rich and poor. Ironically, during this period, a massive redistribution of wealth occurred, money that would traditionally be in the hands of the working and middle class, started to flow to the more wealthy individuals in society.

This kind of trend has been extended by many right and left wing parties over the years. I find it laughable when people turn to center-left parties such as the Democratic party, and deride them for being 'liberal' or 'socialist', but when in reality, compared to their counterparts 30 or 40 years ago, they would be considered as a centrist or a center-right party.

What you are describing is the two Santa Clauses developed by Wanniski and Laffer

Ronald Reagan was the first national Republican politician to suggest that he could cut taxes on rich people and businesses, that those tax cuts would cause them to take their surplus money and build factories or import large quantities of cheap stuff from low-labor countries, and that the more stuff there was supplying the economy the faster it would grow. George Herbert Walker Bush – like most Republicans of the time – was horrified. Ronald Reagan was suggesting "Voodoo Economics," said Bush in the primary campaign, and Wanniski's supply-side and Laffer's tax-cut theories would throw the nation into such deep debt that we'd ultimately crash into another Republican Great Depression.

You can read about the whole thing here... <Click me>

It's why I despise the Republican party. That and their plan to destroy the middle class. They actually believe that the power should be held by the people at the top and not be in the hands of the people.

 

[edgray]

That's an experience that is shared by many other Western countries. During the 1980's, a policy of economic liberalism proved to be very popular amongst many governments in the west. Promoting economic de-regulation and cutting taxes for business, amongst many other pro-business policies, it was argued that economic liberalism would reduce unemployment, poverty and be good for long term growth.

While good for economic growth, unemployment skyrocketed in certain regions (traditionally in lower-socioeconomic areas, higher income locales remained virtually untouched), poverty increased sharply and widened the gap between rich and poor. Ironically, during this period, a massive redistribution of wealth occurred, money that would traditionally be in the hands of the working and middle class, started to flow to the more wealthy individuals in society.

This kind of trend has been extended by many right and left wing parties over the years. I find it laughable when people turn to center-left parties such as the Democratic party, and deride them for being 'liberal' or 'socialist', but when in reality, compared to their counterparts 30 or 40 years ago, they would be considered as a centrist or a center-right party.

That's exactly what happened in Britain. Our recent labour party over saw the second biggest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich since Thatcher in the 80s... hardly "liberal"...

It would make me question the logic of tax breaks for businesses, past experience tells me it's not the answer. But then again, raising benefits isn't the answer either, because Thatcher tried that too, and unemployment continued to rise.

 

[Minor Axis]

I find it laughable when people turn to center-left parties such as the Democratic party, and deride them for being 'liberal' or 'socialist', but when in reality, compared to their counterparts 30 or 40 years ago, they would be considered as a centrist or a center-right party.

We know who they are at least in this forum.

And I've said it before... but it seems appropriate, Ronald Reagan, the guy they (Republicans/conservatives) hold up as their hero, today would be drummed out of the Republican Party as too liberal. The Republican's and Democrats worked together in the 60's and respected each other. So where the hell are these shifting-to-the-right conservative ideas coming from?

And anyone who retorts that Democrats are more liberal today then they were in the 60's is sadly misinformed.

 

[Accountable]

Is working together really the thing we want to prioritize here? Shouldn't we rather push to get some of them working in the right direction first, then concentrate on cooperation?

 

[Minor Axis]

Is working together really the thing we want to prioritize here? Shouldn't we rather push to get some of them working in the right direction first, then concentrate on cooperation?

They go hand in hand along with compromise. Right now the opposition party in Congress only wants to stonewall to completely stop the other parties agenda. Obama has several issues in alignment with the Republican ideal but last I heard they oppose even those at this point in time for the sake of partisan politics. I view it as impeachable gross negligence on behalf of the Republican party.

 

[Francis]

Is working together really the thing we want to prioritize here? Shouldn't we rather push to get some of them working in the right direction first, then concentrate on cooperation?

Are you suggesting disfunctional government ?

We have had that going on in Canada for 4 years now and it has got us very little. I would rather see functional government than disfunctional government as it tends to show people that no matter how you may disagree on topics you can always find a way to find resolutions.. It is amazing what the power of positive thinking can do even in the mass population..

 

[Alien Allen]

They go hand in hand along with compromise. Right now the opposition party in Congress only wants to stonewall to completely stop the other parties agenda. Obama has several issues in alignment with the Republican ideal but last I heard they oppose even those at this point in time for the sake of partisan politics. I view it as impeachable gross negligence on behalf of the Republican party.

neither party wants to compromise

you are delusional if you think the democrats were not playing the same game when they were the opposition party

 

[Accountable]

They go hand in hand along with compromise. Right now the opposition party in Congress only wants to stonewall to completely stop the other parties agenda. Obama has several issues in alignment with the Republican ideal but last I heard they oppose even those at this point in time for the sake of partisan politics. I view it as impeachable gross negligence on behalf of the Republican party.

Are you suggesting disfunctional government ?

We have had that going on in Canada for 4 years now and it has got us very little. I would rather see functional government than disfunctional government as it tends to show people that no matter how you may disagree on topics you can always find a way to find resolutions.. It is amazing what the power of positive thinking can do even in the mass population..

The goals of the current Democrat majority are at odds with the Constitution and the Founding Fathers' ideals!
The goals of the current Republican minority are at odds with the Constitution and the Founding Fathers' ideals!

Is it truly more important that they cooperate?!?

 

[Minor Axis]

neither party wants to compromise

you are delusional if you think the democrats were not playing the same game when they were the opposition party

The Dems have never been as nasty as the Reps and I'm going all the way back toe Newt.

 

[Francis]

The goals of the current Democrat majority are at odds with the Constitution and the Founding Fathers' ideals!
The goals of the current Republican minority are at odds with the Constitution and the Founding Fathers' ideals!

Is it truly more important that they cooperate?!?

Is it truly important that cooperate.. I guess that depends on your point of view. To me it is because it sets the precedent of leading by example..

Isn't what you claim above probable cause for treason ? if it is as you say ..

 

[retro]

The Dems have never been as nasty as the Reps and I'm going all the way back toe Newt.

:24:

and you wonder why I say that you're a Democrat. The Dems and GOP have been equally as bad, to think otherwise is to be completely blind and naive.

 

[Accountable]

Is it truly important that cooperate.. I guess that depends on your point of view. To me it is because it sets the precedent of leading by example..

Isn't what you claim above probable cause for treason ? if it is as you say ..

I can't believe it. You believe it is more important that they cooperate in destroying the country rather than having gridlock and accomplishing nothing.

:willy_nilly:

 

[Alien Allen]

I can't believe it. You believe it is more important that they cooperate in destroying the country rather than having gridlock and accomplishing nothing.

:willy_nilly:

I am all for gridlock

We could have closed down all lawmaking for the last 30 years and we would be far better off. Nothing would change except the expansion of govt. Where there is no sign of any positive gains in their spending

 

[Francis]

I can't believe it. You believe it is more important that they cooperate in destroying the country rather than having gridlock and accomplishing nothing.

:willy_nilly:

Is that all you see is the negative side. Why are these people not going to jail if that's the case then ?

You failed to answer the treason question ?

Because gridlock has done exactly that to my country.. It has accomplished FA in 4 years and put what was a vibrant economy on the past the verge of a recession and a budget and debt past what people thought we would never be back at..

That recession has stirred up sentiments of seperation that could once again tear this country apart..

What has doing nothing accomplishes for you ?

Do you're students pass your class by not cooperating with you ? Do they not seek help when required ?

Are you really trying to tell me you are so negative as to believe that working together to resolve the issues of your country is not a positive thing ? WOW....

All I am saying is that with some cooperation, things can improve much faster for the benefit of all.. If people see positive reactions, it domino's into the market place.. The more negative things are the more people are reluctant to do things as they fear the uncertainty..

 

[Accountable]

Is that all you see is the negative side. Why are these people not going to jail if that's the case then ?

You failed to answer the treason question ?

This doesn't fit the definition of treason.

Because gridlock has done exactly that to my country.. It has accomplished FA in 4 years and put what was a vibrant economy on the past the verge of a recession and a budget and debt past what people thought we would never be back at..

That recession has stirred up sentiments of seperation that could once again tear this country apart..

What has doing nothing accomplishes for you ?

It slows our "progress" toward the quagmire of socialism the left seems hellbent to dive into. It slows the de facto empire the right is intent on enlarging. It slows the leeching of individual liberty that is the hallmark of this country.

A booming economy is useless without liberty.

Do you're students pass your class by not cooperating with you ? Do they not seek help when required ?

Huh? I don't see the connection.

Are you really trying to tell me you are so negative as to believe that working together to resolve the issues of your country is not a positive thing ? WOW....

All I am saying is that with some cooperation, things can improve much faster for the benefit of all.. If people see positive reactions, it domino's into the market place.. The more negative things are the more people are reluctant to do things as they fear the uncertainty..

Neither side of the controlling political party is interested in facing the biggest issue, only in their own agendas. I'm not interested in them resolving their agendas.
Before things can improve, we have to agree on what "improve" means. Ceding liberty to the nanny state so they can decide all and provide all is not improvement!
What good is cooperating in the destruction of the nation??