^This qiao fellow seems like a good poster, worth keeping an eye on for possible rep points awarding.
Government policy is almost always reactive instead of proactive. By the nature of the elective process the first job of elected leaders is to placate the voters of the next election, usually by providing whatever economic stimulus they can. For Republicans it was tax cuts and liberal credit and it worked till it busted. For the newly elected Democratic regime, the only stimulus available is deficit spending to stem the tide of recession (or depression). The 'bust' for infusing this much money into the system is of course inflation, which will get people spending money today against future earnings (raising the government's income from taxes and balancing budgets), which will overtax the credit supply which which will lead government to loosen controls .... and the cycle continues ad infinitum or until the natural resources run out. What "party" the people elect really sort of depends on where they are in the economic cycle. But the crisis is continual because people are never satisfied with the same or less, they always want more; and will elect whomever they think will deliver. Economics 101
Yeah, I guess he deserves rep points for somehow managing to get into a business school. How did you do it qiao?
Right now, there is a battle royal in the Texas Lege over a stupid voter ID bill the Republicans are trying to push through. The reason? An attempt to suppress voter turnout, especially among the poor, minorities, and the elderly. Yes, that is what the GOP has been reduced to... trying to prevent people from voting. There is no evidence that voter fraud exists among illegal immigrants, the supposed target, or anywhere else in numbers worth mentioning. Most discovered voter fraud in Texas is the classic variety that the discriminatory legislation wouldn't affect... voting "dead people" from city precincts, and it doesn't happen much. The result? Even more erosion of support from the groups I mentioned for the GOP. The Republican Party seems hell-bent on self destruction. I'm almost in awe, watching it play out. Almost.
You guys aren't partisan at all. Carter is the worst President of all-time. At this point Obama does not even remotely compare to Carter. I'd say he is more Bush like in terms of cutting taxes, massive increases in defit spending, while dealing with a recession.
Apparently you must..sigh. Lots of people tend to forget that. Fortunately I am able to patrol it looking for derelicts and scofflaws.
Do you have any CREDIBLE links or articles that actually have information on this that can be verified, rather than the random musings of a blowhard?
Not according to historians. They didn't even rank Carter in the bottom 10 and to add insult to injury to our resident Rice graduated twins, the historian who headed the survey was a distinguished professor from Rice. http://www.usnews.com/features/news/history/the-10-worst-presidents.html The worst (before they placed Bush at 36th best)... 10. Zachary Taylor 9. Herbert Hoover Richard Nixon 8. William Harrison 7. Ulysses S. Grant 6. John Tyler 5. Millard Fillmore 4. Franklin Pierce 3. Andrew Johnson 2. Warren G. Harding 1. James Buchanan After ranking Bush, they put him at 6, worse than John Tyler and better than Millard Fillmore.
I, as a reasonable, thinking individual who values evidence and facts, do indeed have credible evidence. http://truthaboutfraud.org/pdf/TruthAboutVoterFraud.pdf This is more evidence than you have ever brought to the table, so I would posit that the "blowhard" is none other than you.
Really? You think Carter is worse than James Buchanan, who's incompetence led the nation into civil war? Either you don't know your history, or you're the extreme partisan here.
bwaaaahahahahahaa "truthaboutfraud.org"? What are you going to do next, post articles from "stopthedrugwar.org"?
BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA What are you going to do next, post your opinion sans any kind of evidence whatsoever? Oh, that's right, that is the only thing you know how to do. BLOWHARD
I stand by what I said. Buchanan was in a definite lose situation. Why should I expect better results if Carter were thrust into the same situation?
You may stand by what you said, but if that is truly your opinion, then you are nothing more than a blind partisan, based on the evidence collected by those guys who study history....you know, historians. Carter did not even make the worst ten, much less the worst in history. WAKE UP!!!
