U.S. Economy impact if President fired?

Discussion in 'Economics' started by NoMoreOptions, Feb 3, 2004.

  1. If a Democratic candicate such as Kerry wins the White House, can we say Bush is fired by the voters? I say yes because the constitution allows Bush for another 4 year IF he had done a good job. The tricky part is that when a U.S. president is fired, how will the shape of the U.S. economy be affected?
  2. Why do you ask so many questions?
  3. Here is the scoop. Kerry is a Democrat and as such is a "republican with conscience". The house and Senate are both GOP controlled and they are worried about Jackson's breast showing during the superbawl.
    So nothing will change the whole US Gov will still be in the claws of the big multi's and the military and industrial complex hence small business men, middle class, working people will suck the hind tit forever. Welcome to Fuckism ala USA!
    Better get that Daytrading system up quickly before I max out all my cards and my wife looses that job.
    Good dreams folks.
  4. pspr


    Grasshopper, don't worry about the semantics. They matter not.

  5. Well....at least if the Dems gain power AND you lose your
    job, they will help pay for your slacker ass :D

    If you keep your job...bend over... because here it comes.
    Someone has to support the slackers, and its called
    the middle class.

    Thank you Dems! NOT!


  6. and rather myopic notion of tax hikes are always caused by the democrats. Remember Reagan? He loved to raise taxes..He almost nuked the Russians and killed off a large percentage of the US too.
    Having these insane spending for Iraq and other imperialistic grand visions (i.e.nightmares) will cause tax hikes and it won't matter who is in the whitehouse.
    ...and by the way slackers are nothing compared with the gangsters who steal billions ala haliburton enron etc etc.
    I always say the guy who is a small millionaire should be a democrat and not a republican cause the republicans somehow will shake his hands and campaign contributions time and he will be missing his rolex and a few fingers too.

  7. Hmmmm..... I seem to remember Trader Vic using Reagan
    as an example in his book of how cutting taxes caused
    a huge boom in the economy. Unfortunately, then Reagan
    spent it all and MORE.

    The Rebs are spend happy.... and the Dems are socialist
    class warfare assholes who will just take everything I earn
    and give it away.

    Its a lose lose situation.



  8. Yep, I have just posted a reference to venerable (since this famous economist is dead recently) J.K. Galbraith's book "Money : whence it came, where it went"

    where he says:

    "To see economic policy as a problem of choice between rival ideologies is the greatest error of our time."(p368)

  9. See also
    "Fair elections? Not for U.S. companies By Michael Collins, CBS.MarketWatch.com"

    The Economics of Innocent Fraud
    by John Kenneth Galbraith (Author)

    Kenneth Galbraith has been at the center of the American economy since before the First World War. In this his new book, he offers a distillation of these years in both the public and the private sectors, the academy and the government, and explains where we are and how we got there. Galbraith argues that inherent in our economic system is a continuing divergence between reality and "conventional wisdom," or as he puts it self-serving belief and contrived nonsense, or "fraud." He contends that we observe the current state of the nation in a cloud of myth, believing that stockholders and owners run our corporate world. In reality, it is the management of giant corporations that controls not only the private sector, but also the public sector, too, from politicians, to the Federal Reserve Bank, to the Pentagon.
    In a work filled with provocative ideas that come from his years as an astute observer, Galbraith looks at today's economy and America's military actions in Iraq and sees that the gap between myth and reality has never been wider.


    Milton Friedman, who is a Republican Economist, is saying the same thing:

    "You know, people have the image, have the idea, that somehow "we the people" are speaking through the government. That is nonsense."

    Here's his interview at federal reserve of Mineapolis


    Friedman: One unsolved economic problem of the day is how to get rid of the Federal Reserve. The most unresolved problem of the day is precisely the problem that concerned the founders of this nation: how to limit the scope and power of government. Tyranny, restrictions on human freedom, come primarily from governmental institutions that we ourselves set up.

    Abraham Lincoln talked about a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Today, we have a government of the people, by the bureaucrats, for the bureaucrats, including in the bureaucrats the elected members of Congress because that has become a bureaucracy too.

    And so undoubtedly the most urgent problem today is how to find some mechanism for restructuring our political system so as to limit the extent to which it can control our individual lives. You know, people have the image, have the idea, that somehow "we the people" are speaking through the government. That is nonsense.
  10. Another level-headed liberal. Where do they grow you guys?
    #10     Feb 6, 2004