World War 2 ended the Great Depression, not the government. FDR actually made the economy worse during the Great Depression. Clinton’s economy was only so because of the Reagan economy.We had a booming economy under President Clinton and no deficit. I suggest we do what President Clinton did. It worked then, and it will work again. The Clinton tax hike in 1993 spurred this economy to the greatest non-wartime period of prosperity in history.
Only government can end a recession or depression. We saw that proved true under FDR and Clinton. Private industry does not have the resources to end a recession or depression, or create a government surplus. You know it, and I know it.
The entire federal government is at fault here. The market doesn’t see our politicians taking this debt crisis seriously.I believe we are already in another recession and this one is squarely the fault of the President and Democrats.
Peace
Tim
haha I understand that, but I don’t see why that means we should force people to be charitable. The current programs make people dependent on the government and even motivate people to put themselves into a position where they are reliant on the government. I personally give people a lot more credit to be able to manage their lives and finances. These programs are based upon the idea that people will not be charitable unless forced to be and aren’t capable of managing their own finances.Nate, in 1860, small towns would give pensions to widows who worked for years and had no savings. Nowadays, what constitutes a small town? Are there any small towns left in the country? I live in Cape Coral across from Ft. Myers Florida. There is no money, organization or desire here to provide appropriate housing, food and medical care for the needy and the elderly. Medicare and Medicaid, along with Social Security, provide all these things. We also live in an age where, as you pointed out, young people for the most part do not care what happens to the poor, needy and elderly. You were born a hundred years too late, man. We live in the “ME” generation now.
In the time it took you to write that, between 3 and 6 infants were murdered, either pulled apart limb by limb or burned alive by a chemical solution inserted into their mother’s womb.In my church, the Orthodox Christian Church, abortion is not immoral when used to save the life of the mother. It IS a grave sin in all other circumstances. If the government bans all abortion, it denies me and other Orthodox Christians the choice our faith provides us. We have a First Amendment right to freely practice our religion, as does every other religion. I support candidates who try to accomplish what Jesus commanded us to do: Feed the hungry, clothe the naked, care for the elderly, poor and widows, etc. Only the Democrats consistently enact legislation that achieves these commands of Jesus. The primary focus of the Orthodox Christian Church is to : Love God and Love your neighbor as yourself. All of its activities are geared to fulfill these two commandments.
We will leave it for the next election to decide. If the trend from the last election continues democrats will be lucky if they can hold on to any of the branches of power. I really just hope one side or the other cleans up because then something real will actually happen instead of a dead-lock. If the democrats win as you would like we will see if raising taxes on the rich and spending our way out of debt works. If the republicans win, we will see if balancing the budget and enacting spending cuts will pull us out of the depression and if it will result in the elderly and poor dying in the streets.We need a government sponsored Works Program to rebuild our infrastructure. Our electric grid is outdated, bridges are old and falling apart, roads are in disrepair, every major city has slums, dilapidated and condemned buildings, our rail system is outdated. In Europe and Japan they have high-speed railroads. You could live in Cleveland and work in Chicago if we had high speed rails. Our airports are old, many are unsafe and falling apart. During economic times like these, only government can create the needed jobs because only government has the resources to do so. And it’s sound economics. Once people are working and the economy moves into prosperity again, people paying taxes will cause the reduction needed in the debt. I listened to a small business owner a few weeks ago talking on TV. He said, lowering my taxes does not pay my bills; people having the money to buy from me is what pays my bills. There are times when government is too big, and there will be times when it is too small. But in these economic times, leading economists mostly agree that it is proper for government to play a role in jumpstarting the economy by creating jobs. Republicans will never let it happen while they control the house. They would rather see another year of recession and high unemployment with the hope that these will bring Obama down, rather than do anything to create jobs. Their goal is to get Obama, no matter that the rest of us suffer. What do they care? They have their own money and health insurance. But they will be very surprised because the American people are not fools. We are not going to turn our country over to the Tea Partiers or to another George W. Bush. In some Republican controlled states, they are even trying to suppress voter turnout by enacting new regulations such as discontinuing the motor-voter registration. They will stop at nothing to gain power. I call this fascism; it’s the same way Hitler got into power. But I believe in God and in the American people; we will not take it anymore. Period.
I’m sorry but the core of your argument is basically that the government can spend money better than private enterprise. I don’t buy into that. Your argument is basically that we need to take money away from private businesses because they can’t spend it properly, and give it to the government who supposedly can spend it properly. Yes we have to spend money to make money, but the question is who gets to spend it the government or private enterprise?I took care of a wife and 4 kids during the Reagan years. Reagan created nothing but Burger King-type jobs. The wages of the working man declined significantly under Reagan. The rich got richer, we struggled to put food on our tables. That’s Reagan’s legacy for the working man. At the end of his 8 years, the country was in recession; Bush made it even worse. I don’t care what your history teacher told you, Nate. I lived it. During the 70’s, I put in a good 8 hours and made a fair wage. Under Reagan, I worked twice as hard and made less money. That is the same story every time we have a Republican president. Depression under Hoover; recession under Eisenhower, recession under Nixon, recession under Reagan, recession under both Bushes. The only time the economy boomed was under FDR, Truman, Kennedy and Clinton. Carter doesn’t count because he was never really president, haha… just a good old boy from my neck of the woods. Democrats know that in order to make money, you have to spend money. It’s a fundamental tenet of businessmen everywhere. But you have to spend it wisely. Cutting taxes never created any significant amount of jobs.
Haha would it not be better to work to change those people’s hearts rather than force them to cough up the money? I don’t know what kind of a tax your thinking of putting on them, but I bet they would give to charity much more than you could tax from them if you changed their heart. Your line of reasoning is also similar to that of those who look at the Church’s past transgressions and conclude the entire Church is bad. If everyone gave their money freely to the government to spend on these programs I wouldn’t have a problem with them controlling the programs. Forcing people to be charitable is what I have a problem with. I don’t see that as being Christ-like at all.Private business can spend money better than the government? Have you looked at the salaries of the leading CEOs and other management people? Nobody, I mean nobody, is worth that much money. I’d rather see the government spend $400 on a toilet seat than see some CEO make 10 million a year for doing basically nothing.
AMEN That’s exactly right! A candidate running for President who holds a pro choice view has absolutely no effect on abortions happening in America. Women freely choose to have abortions and private corporations freely choose to provide them. President Obama could change his mind tomorrow, convert to the Catholic faith and become “pro life” and it would have absolutely no bearing on abortion. Here is what the United States Catholic Bishops published in Faithful Citizenship in 2006:I disagree again. I vote for the candidate who will do what is best for the country as a whole. No person is forced to have an abortion. Just because Lady A has an abortion every time she is pregnant because she is too lazy to use a condom does not justify my voting for a candidate who wants to ban abortion but also end Medicare, end Social Security, end Medicaid, end aid to education, end aid to local governments for police and fire departments, subsidize big oil companies when we know we have to go to renewable energy now, allow GE to make 14 billion in profit and pay not one cent of tax, end universal health care for Americans, etc. Why should the whole country pay for the actions of Lady A? Being Pro-choice is NOT pro-abortion. It means just what it says: the woman makes the decision, not the government or any one religion. My religion permits it in one circumstance; other religions permit it in other circumstances. Why should your religious beliefs be established as the law of the land? This is not what the founding fathers wanted. And how can you be pro-life if you want to end medicaid and medicare? Once the baby is forced to be born then it’s OK to abandon it? Needy young parents have to have Medicaid to get health care for the baby. Needy seniors must have Medicare or they will not receive health care. I know; I work with needy people, young and old. These programs are absolutely VITAL to their existence. Anyone who says he is pro-life but wants to end medicaid and medicare is a liar; he just wants to get someone’s vote.
World War 2 ended the Great Depression, not the government.
No the government ended the Great Depression. Do you think World War II was fought by a privatized for profit malitia? NO! It was fought by the US government via US tax payers. Government spending on WWII boosted the economy and ended the depression. So it was government intervention that ended the depression and not the free market economy. The rest of your claims are just as rediculous.
How about the CEO take a pay cut from 10 million a year to 750 thousand a year and then budget that money to be paid to all the hard working employees proportionally? They are the ones making the company work and the redirection of company funds would result in the form of higher wages and improved benefits. Then the employees can give more to charity without having one person decide what charity to give to? Now that is Christ like and not your convoluted rhetoric.Haha would it not be better to work to change those people’s hearts rather than force them to cough up the money? I don’t know what kind of a tax your thinking of putting on them, but I bet they would give to charity much more than you could tax from them if you changed their heart. Your line of reasoning is also similar to that of those who look at the Church’s past transgressions and conclude the entire Church is bad. If everyone gave their money freely to the government to spend on these programs I wouldn’t have a problem with them controlling the programs. Forcing people to be charitable is what I have a problem with. I don’t see that as being Christ-like at all.
Now I want to know if you’re so poor how were you able to put yourself through 4 years of college?. Tell me were your parents poor or upper middle class or better? Or did big government help you with your college education?Haha! I’m a poor, 22 year old recent Aerospace Engineering graduate who is currently still looking for a job. I currently have about $400 to my name and possessions that could all fit in a car. The car I have is worth under a thousand dollars and is under my parents name. So now that you know where I’m coming from
Children still take care of their parents, I take care of my mother. But what do you mean by “take care of?” Do you mean help them around the house and take them to their doctors appointments? Or do you mean giving up a needed job to which makes ends meet in order for a the children of their aging parents to take care of their aging parent(s) around the clock? Do you mean abolishing Medicare and Social Security and let the kids try and pay their parents astronomical hospital bills while working full time around the clock to take care of them? Is that what you mean? Would you be willing to give up your lucrative aerospace job to care for your mother around the clock and then pay for all her expensis including medical expensis?In terms of helping the elderly. Whatever happened to the kids of parents being responsible for taking care of their them? Instead we now have lost respect for our elders and see them as a hassle. No wonder we are hearing more and more about euthanasia…
The only difference between then and now is that the colonies were poor peasants escaping a system where the poor paid all the taxes and served the rich. It wasn’t the poor rich people who were being taxed into poverty. The very same unjust system the early colonist faced is what the poor and middle class workers face today. Except they face a hidden tax in the form of low wages and benefits which makes it very difficult for them to support their families much less save for retirement or for their childrens college education. During the time of world war II and into the mid 1970’s the wealthy in America were taxed up to 90% of their income yet they still lived like Kings. That money built great infrastructures, produced superior public education system, provided pensions, and union wages. Only the father had to work and could adaquitly support his family, save for his childrens college education and the mother was able to stay home and raise the children while dad earned a good pension. All that the rich have taken away and now you want us to believe they are providing good jobs and are opressed from overtaxation? Give me a break! Your just an inexperienced kid. I suggest you read your bible and Catechism getting to know Jesus.In respect to the idea of big government. Big government is why this country exists today. The colonies were over taxed and over regulated and fought against it. .