Naivety is one of the charming aspects of American (USAnian) culture. With the simplistic arguments and apparently strongly held beliefs behind them that you see here, is it any wonder that no-one here can pick a market turn?
Corporate welfare is the result of two things. Regulatory action or taxes have caused corporations from performing some action as result (A negative re-action, they screwed up) and the gov't is not interested in changing the rules or the law. The gov't wants to motivate an action.
Exactly. One extreme is hardly ever a suitable solution to the other. It's a little like feeling very cold and then lighting yourself on fire to warm up. But good luck trying to explain that to some of the two-dimensional cartoon characters here. They almost uniformly favor the Ayn Rand flamethrower.
But at least we are doing it at 110% efficiency. First time in history the government has ever been so efficient at doing something.
But at least we are doing it at 110% efficiency. First time in history the government has ever been so efficient at doing something. -------------------------------------------- YOU NAILED IT.
If your post wasn't sarcasm, I would have responded with: "I disagree. In 20 years, I see a recession again, except this time caused by high taxes to pay for what the government is doing now." We might not even have to wait that long. If history serves us correctly, the FED's actions should cause havoc on the economy with the rapid inflation we are going to experience in 2012.
It don't agree. I think the basic difference between the two the main schools of political thought in the U.S. is that one group believes that money makes people happy, and the other school believes that you can make people happy through collective action. I would say what you described as "conservative" relates more to a philosophy that usually includes fiscal conservatism as well -- and those kinds of conservatives can be found in both schools of political thought i've described above. What you have described as "liberal" does not fit any of the classical definitions of liberal. Perhaps you meant "radical". When used correctly, the terms "liberal" and "conservative" are not at all incompatible, as a person may be both at the same time. This misuse of the terms "liberal" and "conservative" for various nefarious political purposes has made them both less useful and more nebulous.
Now a casino bailout http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/moheg...eceived-54-million-stimulus/story?id=10889408