TEACHING AMERICANS TO HATE THEIR COUNTRY: THE PLAYBOOK OF THE LEFT !

Your stink says that you lie. You are afraid.

Why is it everytime I post I think I feel someone's nose up my ass? Who comes behind me? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

cute old guy

...If all family households cut back at the same time...which is basically what these right wingers want the government to do with austerity measures...we'd have another full blown recession.

Thank the Lord we have not listened to them or we'd be where the Brit's are right now! Originally Posted by WTF

I think it's important for people to step back and consider just exactly where the Brits are right now, and how they got there.

The view that they have imposed harsh "austerity" on the economy by way of big spending cuts has been parroted by many bloggers and pundits, and many in the media. (And even by a few well-known economists like Paul Krugman, who should know better.) But if you look a little closer, you'll see that the British (and European, in general) idea of "austerity" is primarily centered around tax hikes.

Check this from Tyler Cowen's Marginal Revolution blog:

http://marginalrevolution.com/margin...ng-update.html

He notes that public spending in the U.K. was 49% of GDP last year, slightly up from the year before, and that it was 36.6% of GDP in 2000. If that's austerity, I'd love to see someone's idea of fiscal profligacy!

The only form of "austerity" the Brits have imposed takes the form of large tax increases, particularly the VAT rate. If you want to damage prospects for economic growth, there's no more crudely effective way to do it than by slamming the middle class with large tax increases.

Austxjr correctly noted that you have a certain amount of leeway when you can borrow in your own currency, especially during periods of economic weakness and slack demand when interest rates are very low. But you do not have unlimited leeway!

Here's another view:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/commen...elves.20023491

The writer hits the nail squarely on the head, and notes that voters have brought this "almighty economic mess" upon themselves. Indeed, and we're doing the same thing in the U.S.

And just as is obviously the case in the U.K., we're not getting much for all that spending.

I hate to say it because it's so cliche, but the defintion of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome. Keynesian economics, or at least the left's bastardized version of it, is the best example of insanity; it never works. The left keeps going back to it like a dog returning to it's own vomit.

Yea like slavery and wpmen's sufferage....shall i go on? Child labor , Civil War? How much more greatness do you want? Originally Posted by WTF

those were blights, but at the time they the were the whole worlds blights

the civil war actually was a sign of our greatness

but you see instead of focusing on some lower rung of America's way and rub our kids noses in it why not teach the greatness of the path we were given by our founders to right wrongs and to ascend to up the steps to a more perfect union...?

they dont, they wish to point out things from a different age and a different time and of a different making than our own and sully America in an effort to discredit that which they cant abide...our constitution and the individualism and success that has provided

those were blights, but at the time they the were the whole worlds blights

the civil war actually was a sign of our greatness

but you see instead of focusing on some lower rung of America's way and rub our kids noses in it why not teach the greatness of the path we were given by our founders to right wrongs and to ascend to up the steps to a more perfect union...?

they dont, they wish to point out things from a different age and a different time and of a different making than our own and sully America in an effort to discredit that which they cant abide...our constitution and the individualism and success that has provided Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

You can selectively point out the weaknesses of any country on Earth and make a case for why they're just no damn good. The left relishes beating up on America; they mistake masochistic self loathing for virtue.

In a leftist's mind, patriotic Americans are considered evil. That's why, when Michelle Obama repeatedly said that she had never once been proud of America, in her entire adult life, the left cheered.

I notice that WTF equates "wpmen's sufferage" with slavery, as if they were both terrible evils. I guess he doesn't know that women's suffrage means women aquiring the right to vote. What a moron.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_suffrage

Austxjr correctly noted that you have a certain amount of leeway when you can borrow in your own currency, especially during periods of economic weakness and slack demand when interest rates are very low. But you do not have unlimited leeway! Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight

Thanks for the props. I haven't studied British austerity or lack thereof too closely as there was enough to study here and get my head around. Thank god you used Great Britain as an example rather than Greece or Spain since their situation much more closely equates to one of our states like CA because neither has control of its currency and thus cannot use monetary policy to soften the economic hit. Greece furthermore has a terrible problem with paying taxes (our problem is with levying taxes) and they do indeed have a spending problem as well (if their people won't pay the taxes their government has levied).

The Brits too had a housing bubble and had grown their economy on gimmicky financial services. I was in London when the first bank there, Northern Rock, suffered a bank run. It has since been bought out by Virgin and the brand retired, but I'd have to disagree that voters here or there have completely brought it on themselves. Ultimately, voters are the ones who are responsible, but some corporations, particularly in the financial sector, through their short sightedness, lobbying, political donations, focus mainly on quarterly profits and poor management of risk have foisted this on us as well. I honestly don't think that the voters could really have been educated enough to fully understand how dangerous our position was and in many ways still is.

This article illuminates why bank stock prices are low compared to potential value and large investors are staying away as well as the potential risks that are still out there, that we can't see, in the banking sector - http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...-banks/309196/

I truly doubt that many posters on this board wish that we would tank the American economy, but I'm not sure that discussing it or understanding it at all is on the agenda of most posters in this forum. My agenda here is to help me sort it all out by putting it down and I could give a shit about any of the posters and how they react (in fact it is a bit fun when the crazy righties go apeshit) except for the civil and smart ones like CM.

Oh, and I just noticed that the liberal rag, WSJ, and that crazy commie Rupert Murdo ch put out more libtard propaganda again:
Obama spending binge never happened


Of all the falsehoods told about President Barack Obama, the biggest whopper is the one about his reckless spending spree.


That should get a shitstorm going again LOL

You can selectively point out the weaknesses of any country on Earth and make a case for why they're just no damn good. The left relishes beating up on America; they mistake masochistic self loathing for virtue. Originally Posted by joe bloe

No, we prefer to selectively point out your weaknesses and beat up on you JB not to mention make the case why you are just no damn good. I have no idea about your masochism, but just look in the mirror to see self loathing parading as virtue.

It is nice of you to tar all liberals and progressives with the same brush and tell me what I believe and what my views are, but I'd actually prefer to do it myself if you don't mind.

I view my country much as I view my family and friends. I love them unconditionally despite their flaws and mostly for their amazing strengths and goodness as I hope they do me. I frankly acknowledge their weaknesses and try to recognize mine, but I also can't take friends and family or state and country all the time so I like to travel all over the world where it doesn't take long for me to miss them, since absence makes the heart grow fonder, and be ready to return and appreciate them immeasurably once again. I refuse to be like the parents I dealt with in the school system who wouldn't believe that their awful little brats ever did anything wrong and defended everything with blinders on. Most of the kids, even the awful little brats, had great moments and there were wonderful things about all but a few, however, their parents view of them as perfect was completely delusional (the way I think most conservatives view their country).

Well, austtx, I sure glad you provided some sense to the spending issue. It's nice to know that the National Debt did not increase by $6 trillion under Obama. In fact, according to you, it must be dropping as we speak. Obama has shown amazing fiscal restraint.

I wonder where that lie arose that the National Debt has increased by more than 50% under Obama? Oh yeah. It's not a lie. It's the truth, and Obama has shown no interest in halting the coming financial disaster.

My bad. Sorry, austtx. More liberal bilge to excuse Obama's disastrous financial policies, and to cover up his lie of cutting the deficit in half during his first term.

those were blights, but at the time they the were the whole worlds blights Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Uh, not so much. Most of the western world had ended slavery as a widespread institution long before we did and much more peacefully.

Thirty nations gave women the right to vote and run for office before we did including the USSR and Poland.

the civil war actually was a sign of our greatness Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Well, there were some signs and things of greatness that came out of awful tragedy, but generally brother killing brother mostly over the right to own other human beings (yes, yes, I know it was over their way of life and economic system, but that system hinged on owning human beings) is just pretty damn awful and unnecessary.

but you see instead of focusing on some lower rung of America's way and rub our kids noses in it why not teach the greatness of the path we were given by our founders to right wrongs and to ascend to up the steps to a more perfect union...? Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

I think that is taught in a lot of schools, but why not acknowledge the terrible things our forefathers did along with the good ones because after all we are all flawed human beings and have triumphs and regrets. Why would a country composed of human beings be any different and why tell a truly made up version of events to glorify our ancestors as some sort of perfect and transcendent human being that no longer exists?

I mean, the exploration and settling of the West with its massacres of the native Americans and the buffalo was told for generations as a heroic tale of adversity and conquest and almost none of the sordid details of greed, duplicity, genocide and betrayal were ever discussed. That is a good way to teach our kids?

they dont, they wish to point out things from a different age and a different time and of a different making than our own and sully America in an effort to discredit that which they cant abide...our constitution and the individualism and success that has provided Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Have to abide it, it is over and done with, but glorifying it without understanding it would be just like glorifying (or vilifying) China or Russia without understanding them. Almost none of it is black and white at all unless you tell it strictly from the winners perspective and for their glory. You are exactly correct that it was all a different age and a different time and there were different understandings of things just as there will be different understandings of things in the future. One of the most remarkable of things is those people who were able to see things differently in their time and move those understandings forward (like Lincoln in the context of the Civil War). One of the coolest things about studying or teaching history with the good and bad is that it can be seen differently each time it is taught and that teaches children (and adults), if done correctly, how to think critically about these things for themselves (especially if they are taught how to research effectively as well). I think after all that is what we are after, how to teach our kids to think and decide for themselves, isn't it?

No, we prefer to selectively point out your weaknesses and beat up on you JB not to mention make the case why you are just no damn good. I have no idea about your masochism, but just look in the mirror to see self loathing parading as virtue.

It is nice of you to tar all liberals and progressives with the same brush and tell me what I believe and what my views are, but I'd actually prefer to do it myself if you don't mind.

I view my country much as I view my family and friends. I love them unconditionally despite their flaws and mostly for their amazing strengths and goodness as I hope they do me. I frankly acknowledge their weaknesses and try to recognize mine, but I also can't take friends and family or state and country all the time so I like to travel all over the world where it doesn't take long for me to miss them, since absence makes the heart grow fonder, and be ready to return and appreciate them immeasurably once again. I refuse to be like the parents I dealt with in the school system who wouldn't believe that their awful little brats ever did anything wrong and defended everything with blinders on. Most of the kids, even the awful little brats, had great moments and there were wonderful things about all but a few, however, their parents view of them as perfect was completely delusional (the way I think most conservatives view their country). Originally Posted by austxjr

No of course most conservatives don't think America is perfect. That's a strawman argument. We conservatives do believe that America has been a force for good in the world. We believe, that more often than not, our actions on the world stage, serve to advance the cause of freedom and lessen human suffering.

We conservatives believe that America is essentially good. Liberals believe the country is essentially bad.

Tocqueville said "America is great because America is good." He didn't say America was great because it was perfect.

Well, austtx, I sure glad you provided some sense to the spending issue.

I wonder where that lie arose that the National Debt has increased by more than 50% under Obama? Oh yeah. It's not a lie. It's the truth, and Obama has shown no interest in halting the coming financial disaster. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Sure, happy to help. Can't take all the credit, it was mostly WSJ (that damn liberal rag), but I guess simpleton's like you have to have somewhere they can go to get some perspective. Of course there are always lies, damn lies and statistics, but it just isn't as simple as you (always) seem to indicate.

So that is what you and your ilk are trying to protect us against, the next "financial disaster"? Somehow I really doubt that. It seems to me that you and your ilk are just using debt and deficit (that Bush set us on course for) as a tool to further other political and ideological agendas, but I might be wrong and your heart and intentions could be pure for all I know (though your economics understandings incomplete and flawed in my estimation).

I know you aren't a big Bush apologist, but you seem to definitely prefer his type of policies to those of Obama, however, isn't that just what Bush gave us, financial disaster (but it didn't come from debt or deficit now did it)? Is your prediction that the next, "financial disaster" will result directly from our deficits and debt? If you are willing, I'll take some of that action if you can put a date on when it will happen. When is this "financial disaster" due to the national debt and our deficits going to happen and take us down? I say while we might have a financial disaster it won't happen before Q4 2014 and even if it does, it won't happen directly because of the national debt and deficit. Name a date by quarter and give an outline of what you think will happen and let's pick a provider and the loser will pay for the winner's date, OK? You got the balls to put it on the line?

It will happen, austtx, despite your patronizing response. How can it not happen?

And no, Bush was a disaster, and as I have said he should be put on trial and spend the rest of life in prison, as should Obama for continuing his stupid economic policies. Obama has been no different in handling the economy that Bush was.

We need a balanced budget NOW! It's that simple. You can cite statistic after statistic, but the fact remains we cannot continue to borrow money and expect to continue with anything resembling a free society.

No, I don't know when it will happen, but it will happen.

No of course most conservatives don't think America is perfect. That's a strawman argument. We conservatives do believe that America has been a force for good in the world. We believe, that more often than not, our actions on the world stage, serve to advance the cause of freedom and lessen human suffering.

We conservatives believe that America is essentially good. Liberals believe the country is essentially bad.

Tocqueville said "America is great because America is good." He didn't say America was great because it was perfect. Originally Posted by joe bloe

Glad you get to tell us what we believe and that your beliefs that "liberals are bad" seem to be infallible in your view. You also seem to believe a lot of nonsensical things like that government is always the problem (not even Reagan really believed that), corporations are people and lowering taxes continually will produce more revenue indefinitely.

BTW, it is 'de Tocqueville' and he was a classical liberal himself. The country has changed quite a bit since then so it is possible he would not have seen it in the 20th century quite the way he did in the 19th. He was particularly prescient in this:

"Tocqueville warned that modern democracy may be adept at inventing new forms of tyranny, because radical equality could lead to the materialism of an expanding bourgeoisie and to the selfishness of individualism. In such conditions we lose interest in the future of our descendents...and meekly allow ourselves to be led in ignorance by a despotic force all the more powerful because it does not resemble one. Tocqueville worried that if despotism were to take root in a modern democracy, it would be a much more dangerous version than the oppression under the Roman emperors or tyrants of the past who could only exert a pernicious influence on a small group of people at a time. In contrast, a despotism under a democracy could see "a multitude of men," uniformly alike, equal, "constantly circling for petty pleasures," unaware of fellow citizens, and subject to the will of a powerful state which exerted an "immense protective power". Tocqueville compared a potentially despotic democratic government to a protective parent who wants to keep its citizens (children) as "perpetual children," and which doesn't break men's wills but rather guides it, and presides over people in the same way as a shepherd looking after a "flock of timid animals."

His "depotic democratic government" is a bit of an oxymoron, but it would seem that we have some of the characteristics of that present today. I'm not overly concerned, but there is a slight possibility that it could continue further down that road in future with awful results, but I think it is unlikely in the churn of our society and politics since that is exactly what a lot of people on both sides are focusing on and talking about today. Thus I would say that a free and democratic society will deal that that threat as it has done with the others before it. See, I do think America is great LOL

It will happen, austtx, despite your patronizing response. How can it not happen?

And no, Bush was a disaster, and as I have said he should be put on trial and spend the rest of life in prison, as should Obama for continuing his stupid economic policies. Obama has been no different in handling the economy that Bush was.

We need a balanced budget NOW! It's that simple. You can cite statistic after statistic, but the fact remains we cannot continue to borrow money and expect to continue with anything resembling a free society.

No, I don't know when it will happen, but it will happen. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

"Trends that can not continue will not continue." Herbert Stein

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Stein

It will happen, austtx, despite your patronizing response. How can it not happen?

And no, Bush was a disaster, and as I have said he should be put on trial and spend the rest of life in prison, as should Obama for continuing his stupid economic policies. Obama has been no different in handling the economy that Bush was.

We need a balanced budget NOW! It's that simple. You can cite statistic after statistic, but the fact remains we cannot continue to borrow money and expect to continue with anything resembling a free society.

No, I don't know when it will happen, but it will happen. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

COG for President! How can I help but patronize you (besides it's fun to get you to react without calling you names) when you just state things without support or attribution?

Why do we need a balanced budget? You never state why, it is "just 'cause COG says so". Would always balancing the budget enhance our long term economic stability, viability and growth and if so why? Your house and business do to some extent and in fact if they can run surpluses it is ideal, but they are currency users, not currency issuers. There is a difference and it is significant.

The nation has never had a balanced budget, except for very short periods followed by bad recessions or depressions, and pretty much always had a national debt and run deficits. The lesson from history is that there is an acceptable level of national debt and deficits that are sustainable, but that when we exceed those, we need to take steps to get those under control, but not necessarily eliminated. Reasonable people can discuss what that level of national debt and deficits should be and why, but Japan's lesson (and Italy's too for that matter) from the last generation would indicate that we are well within the safe zone as long as our policies are rational and considered.

If we eliminate our debt and deficits as the chart below illustrates we will either drastically reduce the private sector's savings and that will result in recession or depression by drastically reducing aggregate demand unless the private sector spends on pace to keep the aggregate demand level or up. Net net, we need to be very careful on reducing deficits if we don't want to induce another recession.

The chart below demonstrates a critical economic concept of fiat monetary systems: Government deficits (the grey line) are essentially the mirror image of private sector savings (the dark black line). When the private sector tries to save money aggressively (as happened during the crisis) the government deficit will inevitably explode (as happened). Periods associated with small government deficits (such as the late '90s) are generally associated with extreme private sector leveraging. One critical key to understanding the macro economy, and forecasting growth, is to think about which sectors are increasing and decreasing their savings.

This image has been resized. Click this bar to view the full image. The original image is sized %1%2.

Thus, my prescription of doing everything we can, both Republicans and Democrats to foster employment, GDP growth and the prosperity of the middle class and blue collar workers. That and that alone IMHO, will reduce our deficits and national debt safely.