Greenspan says time is ripe for a 3rd party

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by ZZZzzzzzzz, Feb 27, 2006.

  1. Speaking to a Wall Street gathering Wednesday, the former Federal Reserve chairman decried the "polarization" of American politics and said the ground was ripe for a third party presidential candidate, according to several people who attended the event.

    A member of the audience asked Mr. Greenspan if he would endorse a candidate for president. Mr. Greenspan said he would not, "for now." But he went on to describe the two American parties now as controlled by their extreme wings, even though the voting public is far more centrist, the people who were present said. He described the leadership of the parties as "bimodal," meaning clustered at the extreme ideological ends, whereas the voting public was "monomodal," meaning clustered near the middle.

    Such situations, he said, create an opening for a third-party candidate who appeals to the center. That, he said, could prompt the candidates of the other two parties to move back to the center, for fear of losing.

    (Story is from Wall Street Journal)
  2. I think he is dead wrong, and the results of the last few elections prove it.

    His comments are code words for "we need conservative economic policies and liberal social policies," the policy mix favored by east coast elites that he and his wife Andrea hobnob with. I suspect he would also like more of the old time religion austere budget and tax policy favored by country club republicans like Pete Peterson. In practice, this means republicans take the heat from voters for austerity, and democrats enact spending programs.

    The average red state voter wants to keep as much of what they earn as possible, and have government stop trying to undermine traditional values. Say what you will about Bush, but he understood that.
  3. Unfortunately the average red state voter does prefer to pay zero taxes on zero income while his job is being outsourced to China, Mexico and India rather than paying 20-40% in taxes on 30K-50K union salaries. Ignorant idiots.
  4. domi93


    how old are you?

    outsourcing is Not new to the US, in the 70's and 80's outsourcing was a "major concern" for the left wing in this country. everything was made in latin america from Jeans to needle, was the start of a free zone industry boom in latin america. Millions of jobs left the US..

    Today the outsourcing head to asia instead the south..
    an industrial economy like UK or US dont live by the manufacuting industry.

    there's Nothing new with you'r socialist rhetoric..

    BTW: how you can be a trader and a socialist at the same time?? if you hate capitalism why you make a living in the last lane of capitalism??
  5. Outsourcing is going to happen no matter who is in charge, unless you put a serious clamp on free trade. We have had major outsourcing for several decades, and in the past, it has led to even more, higher paying jobs in the States. We are at full employment again by the way. It is the overall economy that really hurts employment, and outsourcing is actually good for the economy. If the goods and services can be provided cheaper else where, then so be it. If you want to join a union so you are not forced to compete, then you, the worker are hurting the economy in the long run by making products more expensive then they need to be.

  6. It simply is not free trade when the playing field is not the same, i.e. that other countries do not have the costs that American companies have in employee wages and benefits.

    What will happen is what we are already seeing, a destruction of the middle class by corporations eliminating retirement benefits, and likely to be cutting back on health care, and if they had their way the would do away with OSHA and other employee protections. Child labor laws? That would be revoked if the corporations could get away with it. They care not in any way about the working conditions of the jobs they outsource.

    The wealthy corporations don't care of course, they would be very happy to see working conditions in America equal to those of China or long as it increased their profitability, and as long as they had the money to lobby congress to maintain their position of special interest.

  7. That's exactly what I am talking about - putting a serious clamp on free trade. BTW this is not free trade if we're buying from them but they are not buying from us and if you take a look at our trade deficit you'll realize that they are buying nothing from us. The entire free trade idea has pretty much been reduced to an international employment contract based on slave wages, inhuman and unsafe working conditions, child labor, destuction of environment etc. These things were banned in the civilized world decades ago, multinationals simply found countries where they are still allowed.

    In the past it did. In the past they outsourced primarily manufacturing jobs, now they outsource all jobs - engineering, computer, accounting, scientific etc. What's left? I've been hearing promises of higher paying jobs to repalce outsourced jobs since 2000, six years later that has not happened and I am yet to hear a single suggestion as to what industries will those jobs be created in and what are the reasons they will not be immediately outsourced.

    That's kind of true but the incomes are declining, there's got to be a reason why 65% of americans rate the economy as poor. Moreover most of 3 mln new jobs created in the last 5 years (btw ridiculously small number) are due to increased government discretionary and defense spendings which are paid for by money borrowed from the rest of the world. This is simply not sustainable long term.

    The housing bubble certainly helped the employment situation, first by creating a lot of construction jobs and second by providing people with an opportunity to refinance and spend. What jobs are going to be created when the housing bubble bursts or slows down, construction companies stop hiring and start firing. What's going to happen after people will finally have spent every single penny they borrowed against their houses and can refinance no more? Who's gonna be hiring then, american companies are not hiring in this country, they are hiring in Bangalore.

    With this line of thinking would you advocate restoration of slavery or indentured servitude in this country? After all it can't get any cheaper than that, so be it, right? Or where do you draw the line?
  8. I am not a great fan of Michael Savage, but I am with him on this one.

    The outsourcing of our jobs, technology, and culture are gradually eating away at what made America great.

    Now we want to outsource security to an Arab nation?

    Not only that, I heard that clown Drudge last night say that if Hillary were elected, he would move out of the country for fear of higher taxes. He can't live on 40% of the millions he makes?

    That is being patriotic? The corporations who fire good American workers to hire children in India who work in who knows what conditions, then shelter their profits offshore to avoid paying taxes, are good patriotic Americans???

  9. Another uber-conservative Pat Buchanan is a very much against oursourcing/free trade too.

    Yep, that pretty much sums it all up.
  10. Huh? the last few elections don't prove squat. Are you talking about all the 'political capital' that Shrubbie claimed he got from a squeaker?

    No, I think Greenie is absolutely right. Both parties have been hijacked by the extremes. Enough of that crap.


    #10     Feb 27, 2006