"Also, try reading a bit about Keynesian economics."
Ive read Keynes, and he would argue that cutting taxes at the expense of defecit spending is not beneficial. And yes I agree that spending in WWII helped fix the US economoy. but remember that War f*cks the economies of those invaded. Also, one could argue that the New Deal didnt go far enough in fiscal consumption to jolt us out of depression. When we beefed up spendign in WWII we created enough jobs and enough materials to sustain the economy.
A little socialism never hurt anyone. And this isn't socialism since we didn't nationalize the banks. This is what they did in England. It'd probably be less costly and more efficient if we had just nationalized the banks.
And I beleive its very likely that the government would have gone into a possible depression had the gov't not intervened. I dont liek the bailout as is... its a shame we had to do it. But the cost of not acting wouldve been worse.
"Racist humor, really cool and funny man!" well at least thats what I would be saying if it was 1908 and yer sense of humor was a bit more evolved beyond thinking that having a talking (possibly blind) pianist / hamburger spokesman splice shakespeare with racial epithets was funny.
Two more things and then I'll buzz off. Governments must spend to get out a nation out of depression/recession, its how we did it in WWII (with even more debt) and its what is needed now, you learn this in every macroeconomics course. Secondly, this current crisis was caused by 20+ years of poor economic policy starting with Reagan's tax-cuts and increased military spending, along with cuts to government regulation which the Democratic congress went along with.
Here's the site that the link in the profile refers back to: http://www.boingboing.net/2008/11/25/bailout-costs-more-t.html
On that site comments point out soem descrepencies in the info.
Hear is a site that tries to explain where this ridiculous 4 trillion+ figure comes from: http://www.infowars.net/articles/october2008/151008Bailout_figures.htm
For soem reason they included the expanded FDIC insurance which is ridiculous because that money is only spent when an institution fails.
Wheres the logic flaw? There are multiple routes to Pudding. If you answer "no" to eating meat, it directs you to "eat meat," which then opens the path to "have pudding," if one chooses to do so.
JFly87's recent comments: