9 replies to this topic

[Ives]

Well, if you read the title, that sums up my unfortunate thoughts on what the next presidential election will result in. While everyones either screaming about obama or clinton, whos winning, whos ahead by x delegates, the end result doesn't change.

In 2008, by a landslide, the democrats will win. This is well established. What will happen then will be unfortunate, however. I believe people are gonna be too open and enthusiastic about the small s socialist policy changes and as a result economic freedom will dwindle based on flawed keynesian economic thought and the tainted name of neoconservatism (which is socialism in itself in some respects) being represented as conservativism and thus resulting in a lack of old school conservatism that could actually dictate the race.

Now, as for my comparison to the new deal: While it is true that the keynesian ideas for response to recession/depression might work faster than old school capitalism, as such what it really does is seem to break the economy even more, while fixing a few spots here and there. Ultimately, in my opinion, the new deal was an improper response. It was not the gold standard OR capitalism that failed. Rather, it was the progressive movements insistence on stupid laws combined with deprioritizing use of the federal reserve assuming the new york bank crashing was going to be a local recession for only a few months.

[Melchoire]

Wow so many big words, bravo I'm not really that familliar with US politics and economics so I'm not sure about it =P

[Waser Lave]

Well, if you read the title, that sums up my unfortunate thoughts on what the next presidential election will result in. While everyones either screaming about obama or clinton, whos winning, whos ahead by x delegates, the end result doesn't change.

In 2008, by a landslide, the democrats will win. This is well established. What will happen then will be unfortunate, however. I believe people are gonna be too open and enthusiastic about the small s socialist policy changes and as a result economic freedom will dwindle based on flawed keynesian economic thought and the tainted name of neoconservatism (which is socialism in itself in some respects) being represented as conservativism and thus resulting in a lack of old school conservatism that could actually dictate the race.

Now, as for my comparison to the new deal: While it is true that the keynesian ideas for response to recession/depression might work faster than old school capitalism, as such what it really does is seem to break the economy even more, while fixing a few spots here and there. Ultimately, in my opinion, the new deal was an improper response. It was not the gold standard OR capitalism that failed. Rather, it was the progressive movements insistence on stupid laws combined with deprioritizing use of the federal reserve assuming the new york bank crashing was going to be a local recession for only a few months.

Don't knock it until you've tried it. The simple fact is that millions of people have been left at risk under the current system, perhaps it's time to give a chance to a slightly different one. (We've actually had record low unemployment rates under what you'd probably call a 'flawed' social democratic government)

Edited by Laser Wave, 15 February 2008 - 10:57 AM.

[Hydrogen]

Don't knock it until you've tried it. The simple fact is that millions of people have been left at risk under the current system, perhaps it's time to give a chance to a slightly different one. (We've actually had record low unemployment rates under what you'd probably call a 'flawed' social democratic government)

Anything may be better than what we have right now . Whoever you support in the presidential election, I think we can all agree that this country needs some serious help.

[Tetiel]

If McCain wins (and he will) against Clinton it had been polled that he WOULD win so I wouldn't say landslide yet. Could change at any time but I'd hope McCain would win as essentially he is a democrat anyways but just a very centrist one if you look at his previous voting records. Anyways you are right. Keynesian economics did not bring us out of the depression and I'm disappointed whenever someone claimed FDR and his social programs helped it. It helped the people temporarily but did not solve the problem but instead it was the war and our consistent large exports. I'd prefer we go back to "grass roots" in our economics at least with medical care.

[Hydrogen]

If McCain wins (and he will) against Clinton it had been polled that he WOULD win so I wouldn't say landslide yet. Could change at any time but I'd hope McCain would win as essentially he is a democrat anyways but just a very centrist one if you look at his previous voting records. Anyways you are right. Keynesian economics did not bring us out of the depression and I'm disappointed whenever someone claimed FDR and his social programs helped it. It helped the people temporarily but did not solve the problem but instead it was the war and our consistent large exports. I'd prefer we go back to "grass roots" in our economics at least with medical care.

http://www.thesemina...n-out-of-rails/

And If I may quote Randall Munroe of xkcd,

I want, for once, someone I can vote for not because I dislike the other candidate, but because I’m proud of mine. Obama is the real thing.

[Amagius]

If McCain wins (and he will) against Clinton it had been polled that he WOULD win so I wouldn't say landslide yet. Could change at any time but I'd hope McCain would win as essentially he is a democrat anyways but just a very centrist one if you look at his previous voting records. Anyways you are right. Keynesian economics did not bring us out of the depression and I'm disappointed whenever someone claimed FDR and his social programs helped it. It helped the people temporarily but did not solve the problem but instead it was the war and our consistent large exports. I'd prefer we go back to "grass roots" in our economics at least with medical care.

The majority of the Democratic party realizes that Clinton will polarize the Republican party isn't the steady beat of the war drum; in terms of game theory, it's coming clear that Obama will be needed as the candidate to secure the victory.

To the first point, the economy will never be like the Titanic, built to survive the most torpid of storms and possibly icebergs--no, any economic policy will essentially be patched on fabric taken off another hole.

[redlion]

I'd venture to say that you're right about Keynesian theory; you can't apply it to every day recessions. We've had, what, three since bush came into office? Well, two and the current scare, if I remember correctly. It doesn't solve problems to spend money on government securities. Having 9.2 trillion dollars of debt doesn't improve your credit much either.

[sonic]

In 2008, by a landslide, the democrats will win.

wait wait wait....... Johnny boy has a big chance. Republicans will be forced to vote for him, and all the racist/sexist democrats/dixiecrats will vote for him not only because they hate blacks and women, but because Johnny represents a Republican that is moderate enough not to screw up the country for the middle class.

[Ives]

Don't knock it until you've tried it. The simple fact is that millions of people have been left at risk under the current system, perhaps it's time to give a chance to a slightly different one. (We've actually had record low unemployment rates under what you'd probably call a 'flawed' social democratic government)

But what would be the point if there are better alternatives? I think the reason the example you provide is where its at is because partly economic policy but mostly morals and traditions over the years. I hate to stereotype in any given way whether you view it positively or negatively, but Europeans tend to be more polite and have a sense of community in a much bigger picture, and/or have a sort of grim view (London is a good example.) The US, on the other hand, is very split up to hell and back, and politeness is only something scene in the South, provided you aren't a queer or black or jewish, or some mix of all three. It's really something where a social democratic system wouldnt work like it may work in Sweden.

wait wait wait....... Johnny boy has a big chance. Republicans will be forced to vote for him, and all the racist/sexist democrats/dixiecrats will vote for him not only because they hate blacks and women, but because Johnny represents a Republican that is moderate enough not to screw up the country for the middle class.

I disagree. McCain is perceived as old, the other two canidates are seen as "change" or whatever. Like Bob "Viagra" Dole, he has a chance in hell.

On any note the Onion appears right: the idgit vote will determine most of it, and the biggest issue for voters will be bullshit.