Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Is it over for the GOP?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Is it over for the GOP? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/12/2016 8:13:28 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
Considering the choices, would not the better question be:

Is it over for America?

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/12/2016 8:52:21 PM   
tamaka


Posts: 5079
Status: offline
It's been over since we were sold out to the big corporations.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 2:19:08 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

Trumps are what you're going to get when you try to build a coalition among groups that are too diverse.

The formation of a party's coalitions here are organic I think not formal. It depends on who shows up to vote for your candidate, or doesn't.
I never thought of the GOP as a diverse, big tent party let alone it being too diverse. Maybe you can enlighten me.


Really? Most of the conservatives gravitate towards the GOP. Yes, there are fiscal conservative Democrats, but that's why I said "most" and not "all." If you are working to get elected, it's extremely difficult to do while neither a Democrat nor a Republican, so many people who would more accurately fit under the "tent" of another party, to feel like they have a chance, or their vote isn't being thrown away, they jump under one of the Big Tents. It's really too bad, too. We should probably have at least 4 major parties. There is more than one broad category that helps define parties (and it's not skin color, though that seems to be the only thing you notice).


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 2:26:19 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Considering the choices, would not the better question be:
Is it over for America?


Think of what that would entail. Seriously. How would the Federal Government dissolve? That's the only way for it to be "over" for America.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 5:10:15 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

Trumps are what you're going to get when you try to build a coalition among groups that are too diverse.

The formation of a party's coalitions here are organic I think not formal. It depends on who shows up to vote for your candidate, or doesn't.
I never thought of the GOP as a diverse, big tent party let alone it being too diverse. Maybe you can enlighten me.


Really? Most of the conservatives gravitate towards the GOP. Yes, there are fiscal conservative Democrats, but that's why I said "most" and not "all." If you are working to get elected, it's extremely difficult to do while neither a Democrat nor a Republican, so many people who would more accurately fit under the "tent" of another party, to feel like they have a chance, or their vote isn't being thrown away, they jump under one of the Big Tents. It's really too bad, too. We should probably have at least 4 major parties. There is more than one broad category that helps define parties (and it's not skin color, though that seems to be the only thing you notice).


But there are no conservatives to gravitate. 19 Trillion in debt under conservatives. Aint had a budget since 1997 and all this drunken spending deflected and obscured by the nutsucker continuing resolutions.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 5:37:54 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline


_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 7:22:58 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline
But it's the Democrats who are crashing and burning, Lucy. Didn't you get that memo?
Left leaning media bias in the 'States. Obvs.

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 7:39:05 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

Trumps are what you're going to get when you try to build a coalition among groups that are too diverse.

The formation of a party's coalitions here are organic I think not formal. It depends on who shows up to vote for your candidate, or doesn't.
I never thought of the GOP as a diverse, big tent party let alone it being too diverse. Maybe you can enlighten me.


Really? Most of the conservatives gravitate towards the GOP. Yes, there are fiscal conservative Democrats, but that's why I said "most" and not "all." If you are working to get elected, it's extremely difficult to do while neither a Democrat nor a Republican, so many people who would more accurately fit under the "tent" of another party, to feel like they have a chance, or their vote isn't being thrown away, they jump under one of the Big Tents. It's really too bad, too. We should probably have at least 4 major parties. There is more than one broad category that helps define parties (and it's not skin color, though that seems to be the only thing you notice).


Maybe we don't have four major parties because citizens do not have narrow interests and do not fall neatly into whatever four categories you have in mind.

I did not fabricate the abuse of people of color in the history of America. It is not something I made up. People of color seem to feel their interests are better served by one party rather than the other. It does not have to be that way. When he ran for governor of Texas George W had rather strong support among Latinos, above forty percent. That the GOP does not have such support today is no accident; it is the result of Richard Nixon's calculated "southern strategy" I think. Trump pays lip service to reaching out to Blacks and Latinos but he cynically (or ignorantly) makes those speeches in front of all white suburban rallies.

Fiscal conservatism is a political ideology. The social fabric is not sustained for long by ideologies; it depends on the personal welfare of individuals. I would think that when most people make a political decision they are calculating (reasonably or emotionally) what is in their best interests. Trump, the chief disgruntler, has garnered a minority group of disgruntled whites. Not prophesying here but I don't see how that will win him the presidency. However, I think he will be a one-off and will not destroy the GOP.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 7:47:33 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
Yep, its the dems....SNORT
There are factions in the trumpanzee basket calling to repeal the 19th amendment because 538 website figured out that if only men voted, trump would win.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-trump-backers-tweet-repealthe19th-1476299001-htmlstory.html

Rudy Ghouliani at a rally announces that canadian healthcare is killing people


Rudy asked, how many of you have ever gone to Canada for health treatment? Do you know what it's like? It's terrible, right? You stand on line and then you die!"
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/10/rudy-giuliani-tells-rallygoers-shove

Edited to add this little gem
http://crooksandliars.com/cltv/2016/10/alex-jones-obama-and-hillary-are

< Message edited by Lucylastic -- 10/13/2016 7:55:49 AM >


_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to WhoreMods)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 9:23:50 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

Trumps are what you're going to get when you try to build a coalition among groups that are too diverse.

The formation of a party's coalitions here are organic I think not formal. It depends on who shows up to vote for your candidate, or doesn't.
I never thought of the GOP as a diverse, big tent party let alone it being too diverse. Maybe you can enlighten me.

Really? Most of the conservatives gravitate towards the GOP. Yes, there are fiscal conservative Democrats, but that's why I said "most" and not "all." If you are working to get elected, it's extremely difficult to do while neither a Democrat nor a Republican, so many people who would more accurately fit under the "tent" of another party, to feel like they have a chance, or their vote isn't being thrown away, they jump under one of the Big Tents. It's really too bad, too. We should probably have at least 4 major parties. There is more than one broad category that helps define parties (and it's not skin color, though that seems to be the only thing you notice).

Maybe we don't have four major parties because citizens do not have narrow interests and do not fall neatly into whatever four categories you have in mind.


You know that's not even close to being the case, Vincent. Gimme a break. We already talk about "wings" of either of the the big two parties. Why? Because their interests are wide enough that they differentiate.

But, here are two possible charts that depict what I'm talking about:



quote:

I did not fabricate the abuse of people of color in the history of America. It is not something I made up.


No one made a claim otherwise, either, Vincent.

quote:

People of color seem to feel their interests are better served by one party rather than the other. It does not have to be that way.


Arguments can be made showing that the black community's support for Democrats is working against their best interests, too. Regardless, they have every right to choose who they vote for, same as you or I. And, they can base it on whatever reasoning they want. I have an acquaintance down in Texas who is very much a Democrat, but tends to vote for Republicans based solely on the candidates' abortion stances (yes, he's a one-issue voter). While I think that's a bit too narrow a focus for anyone (being a one-issue voter), it's still his right to cast his vote as he sees fit.

All that being said, you were the one that labelled the GOP as the party of white people. There are plenty of non-whites that self-identify as Republicans. Why do you discount them? Almost everything comes down to race with you. I don't know why.

quote:

When he ran for governor of Texas George W had rather strong support among Latinos, above forty percent. That the GOP does not have such support today is no accident; it is the result of Richard Nixon's calculated "southern strategy" I think. Trump pays lip service to reaching out to Blacks and Latinos but he cynically (or ignorantly) makes those speeches in front of all white suburban rallies.


Actually, Trump pays lip service to whomever he wants, and it all depends on what he can get out of it. The same is likely true of almost every politician.

quote:

Fiscal conservatism is a political ideology. The social fabric is not sustained for long by ideologies; it depends on the personal welfare of individuals. I would think that when most people make a political decision they are calculating (reasonably or emotionally) what is in their best interests. Trump, the chief disgruntler, has garnered a minority group of disgruntled whites. Not prophesying here but I don't see how that will win him the presidency. However, I think he will be a one-off and will not destroy the GOP.


And, our free-spending this millennium is sustainable? Fiscal conservatism is sustainable. But, we have to actually have it before we can lose it. Depending on your ideological viewpoint, we either have a tax revenue problem (assuming spending levels are acceptable where they are), or we have a spending problem (assuming revenue levels are high enough).



_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 10:23:49 AM   
Awareness


Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Yep, its the dems....SNORT
There are factions in the trumpanzee basket calling to repeal the 19th amendment because 538 website figured out that if only men voted, trump would win.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-trailguide-updates-trump-backers-tweet-repealthe19th-1476299001-htmlstory.html
Those people are officially taking the piss. It's only the gullible SJW's of the left who take it seriously.

_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 10:54:25 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
did you see me snort?
I called them factions of the basket, i am not taking them seriously.
Nice try

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 11:03:08 AM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

You know that's not even close to being the case, Vincent. Gimme a break. We already talk about "wings" of either of the the big two parties. Why? Because their interests are wide enough that they differentiate.

I think your categories are idealistic and academic, DS. This is the stuff of political philosophers and is only remotely related to the political agency of real people in real life. The more influential determiner of political choice is tribal (social) self-identity. That is why political parties pander to association and create emotional memes to draw people into their tribe. People are often irrationally drawn to one political tribe to the exclusion of another. Us against them. Trump is much more skilled at the game than is Hillary.

quote:

All that being said, you were the one that labelled the GOP as the party of white people. There are plenty of non-whites that self-identify as Republicans. Why do you discount them? Almost everything comes down to race with you. I don't know why.

I think it is self-evident the case, DS. The polls tell us so. Views of Trump and Clinton rallies tell us so.

quote:

And, our free-spending this millennium is sustainable? Fiscal conservatism is sustainable. But, we have to actually have it before we can lose it. Depending on your ideological viewpoint, we either have a tax revenue problem (assuming spending levels are acceptable where they are), or we have a spending problem (assuming revenue levels are high enough).

Fiscal conservatism might be sustainable if money flow within the Federal Government were a closed system, but you do not account for money creation from the Federal Reserve, nor do you account for international trade imbalances, nor for the money that goes into the sink holes of the stock casinos. Also, I have read that growing populations require growing markets and growing money supply; not sure that fiscal conservatism could sustain growth in population and in markets.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/13/2016 6:05:19 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
"Also, I have read that growing populations require growing markets and growing money supply; not sure that fiscal conservatism could sustain growth in population and in markets. "

A greater population automatically creates a larger market. The money supply of course has to increase, but only in direct proportion to the increased population. If it does not grow the money becomes worth more and prices go down and foreign trade is affected adversely for net exporters or those with fairly neutral trade balances. If the money supply rises faster than the population then it becomes devalued, which is bad for net importers.

If people do not stop overreproducing it isn't going to matter anyway. That is becoming a significant factor in the equation and I am not quite sure how to apply it. I know it is not good but the exact outcome is not known. Wait until the Earth has like 25 billion and call me in hell because that is where I'll be. Let me know how precious life is then.

T^T

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/14/2016 5:02:33 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline


_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/14/2016 12:23:36 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

A greater population automatically creates a larger market. The money supply of course has to increase, but only in direct proportion to the increased population. If it does not grow the money becomes worth more and prices go down and foreign trade is affected adversely for net exporters or those with fairly neutral trade balances. If the money supply rises faster than the population then it becomes devalued, which is bad for net importers.

I see here that your concern is for merchants and not a wit for the people who must live under one particular economic regime or another. That is explicitly the problem I see with political/economic ideologies and why I object to classifying people or systems into tidy boxes.

quote:

If people do not stop overreproducing it isn't going to matter anyway. That is becoming a significant factor in the equation and I am not quite sure how to apply it.

I have heard it said that poverty and starvation in the world's populace are not matters of underproduction but rather the result of constrained distribution, political and corporate corruption, and economic greed. Tons of food are discarded all along the distribution chains and out the back doors of super markets because they do not have "shelf appeal." And of course an amount is destroyed or farmers are paid to avoid planting in order to maintain a price floor.

Your number of 25 billion is a huge exaggeration I think.

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/14/2016 2:16:38 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:

You know that's not even close to being the case, Vincent. Gimme a break. We already talk about "wings" of either of the the big two parties. Why? Because their interests are wide enough that they differentiate.

I think your categories are idealistic and academic, DS. This is the stuff of political philosophers and is only remotely related to the political agency of real people in real life. The more influential determiner of political choice is tribal (social) self-identity. That is why political parties pander to association and create emotional memes to draw people into their tribe. People are often irrationally drawn to one political tribe to the exclusion of another. Us against them. Trump is much more skilled at the game than is Hillary.


Do you read the 'Dilbert' comic strip? The creator of the strip, Scott Adams, believes Trump is going to win "in a landslide," because he's a "Master Persuader."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kydKTVLmP58

quote:

quote:

All that being said, you were the one that labelled the GOP as the party of white people. There are plenty of non-whites that self-identify as Republicans. Why do you discount them? Almost everything comes down to race with you. I don't know why.

I think it is self-evident the case, DS. The polls tell us so. Views of Trump and Clinton rallies tell us so.


You're going to keep going on without acknowledging there are non-white people who support the GOP?

quote:

quote:

And, our free-spending this millennium is sustainable? Fiscal conservatism is sustainable. But, we have to actually have it before we can lose it. Depending on your ideological viewpoint, we either have a tax revenue problem (assuming spending levels are acceptable where they are), or we have a spending problem (assuming revenue levels are high enough).

Fiscal conservatism might be sustainable if money flow within the Federal Government were a closed system, but you do not account for money creation from the Federal Reserve, nor do you account for international trade imbalances, nor for the money that goes into the sink holes of the stock casinos. Also, I have read that growing populations require growing markets and growing money supply; not sure that fiscal conservatism could sustain growth in population and in markets.


How would it not be sustainable?!? The Fed is one of the worst ills bestowed on this Country by our Government. The Fed is complicit (not necessarily even intentionally) almost every single one of our recessions. The very organization that was supposed to give us a smoother economy is actually part of the reason it's been a roller coaster. We don't need The Fed to increase the money supply.

Why do we have trade imbalances? Perhaps that's because we have consumption imbalances? Nah, that couldn't be it!

Since 1913, our money supply has grown to the point where the value of our current dollar is but a small fraction of the value of the 1913 dollar. Obviously, Markets need to grow to meet the increasing demand of an increasing population. That just makes sense.

The US Constitution gave the authority of coining and regulating our money to the Federal Government. The Federal Government delegated that authority to The Fed. There are arguments for and against the Federal Government having the authority to do that, but that's not the important part. What I think is the important part is that The Fed is largely uncontrolled, unchecked, and unsupervised by the Federal Government. I do believe that the Federal Government has been remiss in their duties to the American People in this respect.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to vincentML)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/15/2016 9:29:00 AM   
Awareness


Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Do you read the 'Dilbert' comic strip? The creator of the strip, Scott Adams, believes Trump is going to win "in a landslide," because he's a "Master Persuader."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kydKTVLmP58
That was near the start of the year. Adams recently wrote that he believes Robert Cialdini is now working for the Clinton campaign as the "octopus" line from one of Trump's alleged victims is too good to have been an accident.

_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/15/2016 10:13:03 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline
FR:
A radio series on next month's clusterfuck by the comedian Rich Hall is being trailered with the line: "Will America elect its first female President, or its last President, ever?"

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Is it over for the GOP? - 10/15/2016 1:57:05 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Do you read the 'Dilbert' comic strip? The creator of the strip, Scott Adams, believes Trump is going to win "in a landslide," because he's a "Master Persuader."

It is pretty apparent that Trump has created an inside/outside group that attracts a certain demographic. We against the establishment. That is the essence of populism, isn't it? Obama did the same with "yes, we can."It is all smoke and mirrors, branding, image making, association, etc. The advertising industry did not spend all that sponsor money for nought. It is advertising when a product is being sold; it is propaganda, or the engineering of consent when a war or an ideology is being sold.

Democratic society is actually only a loose aggregate of constituent groups...To influence the public, the engineer of consent works with and through group leaders and opinion moulders on every level.

quote:

You're going to keep going on without acknowledging there are non-white people who support the GOP?

I will acknowledge it but they are an insignificant quantity and purposefully so due to election strategies employed by the GOP. Will you continue to believe it is not so?

quote:

How would it not be sustainable?!? The Fed is one of the worst ills bestowed on this Country by our Government. The Fed is complicit (not necessarily even intentionally) almost every single one of our recessions. The very organization that was supposed to give us a smoother economy is actually part of the reason it's been a roller coaster. We don't need The Fed to increase the money supply.


On this we agree, but let's not forget there were boom/bust cycles before 1913. JP Morgan and his merry men devised a scheme to make the Federal Government the "lender of last resort."

We will need growth in the money supply to accommodate a growing population and a growing economy. Otherwise, money will become "relatively" scarce and inflationary, won’t it? But, when the Fed lowers interest rates to zero and prints money (qualitative easing) to support banks and corporations, labor and retirees get into trouble.

The Fed dropped the discount rate precipitously in the last half of 2007 before the recession and has held them at near zero ever since. The flood of money has kept the economy from falling into a deep recession perhaps but much of it has been sucked up into nonproductive wealth (stock prices) Again, jmo. People who have a mortgage above the water line have been able to refinance but people wishing to retire are deprived of a source of bond and CD income unless they take on greater risk, which is a problem if you are past your working years.

quote:

[Why do we have trade imbalances? Perhaps that's because we have consumption imbalances? Nah, that couldn't be it!]


A contrary opinion about trade imbalances:

How can the world’s most prosperous economy also be its most sputtering? It can’t, and it isn’t. What the measure of balance of trade fails to take into account is that every export, and every import, is exchanged for something with an exact dollar value: dollars!

That sounds facile, but it isn’t. A large trade deficit means that that nation’s citizens are so wealthy that they can afford to purchase what other nations have to offer. In that respect, it isn’t necessarily desirable nor even fair to compare exports to imports, let alone to consider them to be two sides of the same coin. Besides, as large as American imports are, the United States still exports more than any country, except China. The world wants what we’re selling. And vice-versa. This is something to be commended, not criticized. A trade deficit merely means that as much of our homemade stuff that other countries want, we want even more of theirs.


SOURCE

quote:

Since 1913, our money supply has grown to the point where the value of our current dollar is but a small fraction of the value of the 1913 dollar.


But don't you ignore that growth in the price of goods and services has kept pace? Can you not buy a suit or a house with the same percentage of income today as then?

quote:

What I think is the important part is that The Fed is largely uncontrolled, unchecked, and unsupervised by the Federal Government. I do believe that the Federal Government has been remiss in their duties to the American People in this respect.


Here we have a conundrum. There was no central bank in 1907 when a great bank panic occurred. (This lead to the banker meeting on Jekyll Island in 1913) Liquidity dried up due to actions of banks involved in a stock scheme. So, now we have a central bank of academicians, technicians and bankers who manipulate the money supply. A centralized money supply is a top down device. Granted it is not a centralized economy but neither is the money supply subject to market forces. The bankers and academicians may not be accountable. But, I would not wish to trust the politicians in Congress. I have no answer on this.

Again, disagreeing with your original point, political and economic ideologies may look good on paper but they only turn into clusterfucks in real life.






_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Is it over for the GOP? Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.108