Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

Full Version: The Coronavirus
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(05-09-2020, 07:05 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-09-2020, 12:01 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]You grossly misunderstand historical reality. One does not celebrate final victory in a war zone. The German Army had disintegrated in the western parts of Germany because the German Army had nothing worth fighting for. The Americans, British, and Free French were well behaved, and about all that the Germans were going to miss was Nazism. The fear that the Gestapo enforced would never re-appear. So swastika flags, copies of Mein Kampf, portraits of Nazi leaders, and statures of Hitler get trashed.  In contrast Berlin was a war zone into the very early part of May even after Hitler blew his brains out and Josef Goebbels offed himself. German troops continued fighting in part to defend German females from rape. But once Berlin was no longer a war zone, the German Armed Forces could surrender at any place of convenience. 

If in western Germany the Wehrmacht had lost the cause to fight, in eastern Germany the Wehrmacht lost the means by which to fight. Once Berlin was safe for a surrender ceremony that American, British, and French officials could participate could the Soviet Army get the highest-ranking member of the Wehrmacht surrender.  

The formal division of Germany would happen later, although it was already agreed upon. 

........................

So a "tiny" bug (actually a virus) could stop your precious NHL season? It also stopped the 75th anniversary of VE-Day, which could have been a huge celebration. It has also stopped the Final Four in the NCAA, it has stopped the NBA playoffs, it has stopped the start of the 2020 MLB Season, the Triple Crown of racing, the start of the WNBA... it put ends to opera and symphony concert seasons... lots of local spring festivals, and made a travesty of many people's school years. It has put a damper on dating, marriages, and coming-of-age festivals. That is before I mention commerce, the Holy Grail of a capitalist society.

Most significantly in America it has put an end to the lives of over 78,000 lives. I hope that that is no triviality to you. It could have killed more had some state governors not declared emergencies so profound as to cause stay-at-home-orders. Millions of Americans hate what is going on, and I concede that we will probably start doing more of what we enjoy doing as the danger abates or conduct ourselves in fitting ways -- like wearing masks, spraying or wiping things off with disinfectants,  and washing our hands obsessively.  We will adapt or die, and we will innovate to evade a tiny virus. 

Small things can kill.  So it is with small amounts of venom, drugs, chemical reagents, radioactive materials, bacteria, and viruses. Need I continue?

A close relation of the family who served under Patton as an infantryman assigned with the American 3rd Army, a veteran of the Battle of the Bulge who also survived crossing the Rhine River three times (twice over once back) was stationed just outside of Berlin as ordered, as the Russian army went in and finished off the Third Reich as planned.

Many Germans turned tail and fled west so that they could surrender to the Americans or British rather than to the Soviet Army.The Third Reich crumbled quickly west of the Elbe because most German soldiers no longer had much for which to fight. I have seen footage of the American entry into Munich.  People seemed to have the expression "So what?" in a city designated as the "Capital of the Nazi Movement" until Americans started dismantling signs so suggesting. Munich is the city in which Hitler staged his infamous Beer-Hall Putsch in 1923).

Quote:I've never ignored the fact that lives are being lost or ignored the fact that the disease can be really dangerous for some or ignored the fact that there's an active pandemic. You can focus on the deaths and continue to ignore the needs and the rights of the living and continue stressing the amount of death. If the 78,000 could vote do you think the majority of them would vote to take away the weddings and graduation ceremonies of their grandchildren, the lively hoods of their children, grand children and millions of other working American.

Death is inevitable for us all, but there are few things worth dying for. Saving more lives, maybe. American combat deaths are smaller than the Jewish population alone in America, and it is safe to assume what Hitler would have done to American Jews had he had the chance. Taking risks to save lives and those risks sometimes resulting in death to a hero? Heroic death is a tragedy even if it serves a noble purpose. Promoting human dignity? The world is better off without slavery, racist oppression, and all forms of despotism. Heroic death in the elimination of tyranny is still tragic; dying on behalf of oppression is pointless. A German or Japanese soldier of World War II died for nothing. And don't let me get into Commie horrors in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, and North Korea -- or the genocide involved in the enslavement of Africans to toil in the New World. There will be deaths involving construction, transportation, and industrial production. Rebuilding, bypassing and closing, or replacing "Blood Alley" can reduce traffic deaths more than the toll of  deaths that arise from construction deaths. 

80.000 deaths from COVID-19 now? Some may have been doomed anyway, but so one could say of old people driven into gas chambers in the demonic Third Reich. Obviously the most pointless deaths are the ones called murder... and killing someone 75 years old with terminal cancer is not treated any more leniently than  murdering an infant. 

President Trump may not be a direct murderer, but he certainly has blood on his hands, so to speak.  

Quote:      I've heard the price of a barrel of oil is -$30.00 which means the tax revenue is a minus too. I've also heard that food producers are killing livestock and crop growers are holding off on planting crops and manufactures are holding off on manufacturing goods and so forth.

It's a mixed bag, Food consumption is not in decline. Certain foods are less available if they are elaborate to prepare (many sea-food items) or more difficult to get. Some food-processing plants are in hiatus because of COViD-19 outbreaks. I'm going to give you the [citation needed] warning about planting crops. The problem with the oil industry is that production went up to meet what was then a rising amount of energy use. As production fell and fewer people commute, fewer people buy as much gasoline. 

(Don't argue with me on basic economics. My BA is in economics).

I am predicting that our food will be more expensive because the profit-maximizing behaviors that allowed super-cheap food in the last few years has suddenly become excessively dangerous to people who process the food. The transition from one market paradigm to another is't always perfect for the consumer.  

Quote:I don't know if this is a sign of what's to come as far as liberals/Progressives go but a local news channel recently cleaned house and got rid of a group of political activists who viewed themselves as being immune for some dumb reason. I suppose the fear of being sued enables some to develop as sense of immunity to not being held the same standard as everyone else.

Again, I'm going to give you the [citation needed] warning because (1) I am unfamiliar with the Twin Cities' media as you are, and (2) there is much turnover of television journalists. If the TV journalist has gone off to another city he (no gender assumption, please) may be at the end of a contract. For example, be really good at WCCO-TV (Twin Cities), and WBBM-TV  (Chicago) might be interested.  Some retire and some go off to other things, like academia or politics.   

Participation in partisan politics is generally a violation of terms of a contract, which is where Keith Olbermann got into trouble with MSNBC.
(05-10-2020, 12:19 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]The CDC normally puts forth rather blunt documents saying what to do with a particular health threat.  They have not done so with the virus as the White House wanted a different public relations message to get out.  The CDC has prepped messages, but either they get watered down or cancelled due to administration censorship.

Il Duce ha sempre raggione!

We have a President who ignores expertise yet cannot stand criticism. Somehow I prefer fact-based, knowledge-based leadership that has the ego of the leader as a lower priority than the results. Maybe I exaggerate by comparing Trump to Mussolini, but even baby steps toward despotism are ominous. 


Quote:That is one thing that can be done in the crisis end never again conferences.  Somebody might tell The World Health Organization to ignore the politicians and to do what the CDC usually does, to write blunt, scientific advice on how to respond to a given health threat.  There might be a treaty written that if the WHO wants to investigate a health threat, nobody stops their investigators.

There would be resistance in countries that have dangerous working conditions and environmental degradation  as shortcuts to economic development. That could be almost as bad as efforts of some countries to subvert the monitoring of the proliferation of atomic, biological, and chemical weapons. Such reflects the character of some regimes.  

Another thing to be done might be to make sure each country has good reserves of things like PPE and ventilators or things like ventilators that might be required to counter other sorts of bugs.  They might even create their own reserves for countries with governments without be prepared mentalities, though there is the temptation to let such countries stew in their own juices.

Quote:Anything else that might happen at crisis end?

A new normal for which most Americans are well prepared.
(05-10-2020, 08:31 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]It's a mixed bag, Food consumption is not in decline. Certain foods are less available if they are elaborate to prepare (many sea-food items) or more difficult to get. Some food-processing plants are in hiatus because of COViD-19 outbreaks. I'm going to give you the [citation needed] warning about planting crops. The problem with the oil industry is that production went up to meet what was then a rising amount of energy use. As production fell and fewer people commute, fewer people buy as much gasoline. 

(Don't argue with me on basic economics. My BA is in economics).

I am predicting that our food will be more expensive because the profit-maximizing behaviors that allowed super-cheap food in the last few years has suddenly become excessively dangerous to people who process the food. The transition from one market paradigm to another is't always perfect for the consumer.  
I'll argue with you about basic economics. I've been arguing with you about for years. Your BA in economics doesn't squat to me. I've been in business for almost thirty years. What's a substitute teacher/welfare recipient doing with a BA in economics? I assume that you don't know them better than me at this point. So, are the schools opening up next fall or haven't the Democrats made up their minds about that yet? So, are we going to have a MLB season and help Detroit pay it's bills and employ some of its people or haven't the Democrats made up their minds about that either? Yep, the lower the demand the lower the price until you hit 0 and production stops and there's a huge surplus of worthless oil and billions upon billions of losses in profits that government won't ever get its hands on this year and probably next year. You're about 9 trillion short right now. So, who is going to pay for your more expensive food? The Democrats? Do you have enough Democrats left who are willing to anti-up and pay more taxes and pay higher food costs and higher clothes costs and higher education costs and so forth?
(05-11-2020, 12:44 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-10-2020, 08:31 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]It's a mixed bag, Food consumption is not in decline. Certain foods are less available if they are elaborate to prepare (many sea-food items) or more difficult to get. Some food-processing plants are in hiatus because of COViD-19 outbreaks. I'm going to give you the [citation needed] warning about planting crops. The problem with the oil industry is that production went up to meet what was then a rising amount of energy use. As production fell and fewer people commute, fewer people buy as much gasoline. 

(Don't argue with me on basic economics. My BA is in economics).

I am predicting that our food will be more expensive because the profit-maximizing behaviors that allowed super-cheap food in the last few years has suddenly become excessively dangerous to people who process the food. The transition from one market paradigm to another is't always perfect for the consumer.  

I'll argue with you about basic economics. Your BA in economics doesn't squat to me. I've been in business for almost thirty years. So, are the schools opening up next fall or haven't the Democrats made up their  minds about that yet?

That is the story of Man and Virus. There could be an opening of the economy in fits and starts. Open until trouble arises? Or are we more selective. Do we change some of our habits? 

Much is trickier than it used to be. Restaurants can survive as drive-ins, drive-throughs, and drive-ups.  The menu had better be attractive and easy to understand if it is on the Web, which is new to many mom-and-pop entities  

Quote:So, are we going to have a MLB season and help Detroit pay it's  bills and employ some of its people or haven't the Democrats made up their minds about that either?

I'm more likely to watch some minor league baseball in which the entertainment value is reasonably good. Buying a ticket to see a minor league team over its head playing among major league teams is like paying for a Cadillac and ending up with a Yugo.  Heck, I might make the trip to the Twin Cities to see your fairly-new ballpark. I;ve never been to the Twin Cities. No, I have no desire to meet you for any reason.   The Tigers are going to lose lots of 8-2 and 11-4 games next year. I don;t pay A money to see B movies.    

Quote:Yep, the lower the demand the lower the price until you hit 0 and production stops and there's a huge surplus of worthless oil and billions upon billions of losses in profits that government won't ever get its hands on this year and probably next year. You're about 9 trillion short right now. So, who is going to pay for your more expensive food? The Democrats? Do you have enough Democrats left who are willing to anti-up and pay more taxes and pay higher food costs and higher clothes costs and higher education costs and so forth?

The oil companies stop pumping oil (tough luck, oil-field workers, but that is how capitalism works). Firms go bankrupt, and the strongest businesses buy out the assets of the failures at the sorts of vulture sales that we saw in retailing at places like Radio Shack, Mervyn's, and Montgomery Ward. Plenty of commercial real estate is vacant for a long time, and tax revenues plummet. 

Humanity has adjusted to all sorts of things in different scenarios. The Iron Curtain closed many old and once-desirable markets and suppliers off to capitalist firms even across the infamous internal border in Germany.  I have some optimism about certain things. We are still social creatures (we have pet dogs because the human family has much the same structure as a wolf pack, and dogs are basically wolves that have learned that children are not meat) and will not become isolated hermits forever. We still believe in consumerism as a reward for our efforts. We still believe in technological progress as a way to do things better and with richer results. We will innovate our way into doing much that we did before COVID-19 and get away with doing that again. Who knows? We may learn to use helmets that allow us protection from the virus yet allow us to eat in sit-down restaurants and attend concerts and theater events. We may end up with a safe and effective vaccine that gives COVID-19 no further chance to infect and kill. We will have places to go because we will be able to do things there. As it is I have no reason to go to Chicago, Detroit, Milwaukee, or Indianapolis, the four closest cities to me that have 500 thousand or more people. 

And, yes, we are political actors. I expect Donald Trump to go down to defeat and take a large number of his spineless and corrupt enablers down with him.
(05-11-2020, 12:44 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Do you have enough Democrats left who are willing to anti-up and pay more taxes and pay higher food costs and higher clothes costs and higher education costs and so forth?

The time America was Great was the time of tax and spend liberalism. We have since moved conservative way past the point of diminishing return. Yes, I think it is time to go back to what worked. We don’t have much choice, as the virus is tugging us in that direction. Denying that the problem exists, refusing to solve it, goes no where save death.

This is not to say we won’t go past the point of diminishing return again in the opposite direction. The next unravelling will come in its time. The desire to do what is best for the common good will wane.

But right now is the time of change, the time of commitment to the country. Some are sensing it. Others are marching to their doom.
(05-10-2020, 09:13 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]There is vast difference between essential services and ones that aren't. Sorry, but nail salons and gyms are luxuries, not necessities … but it's the economy, isn't it?  Rolleyes 

I can't speak to nail salons, but I get my exercise at a ballroom dance studio.  Since it has been closed, I've gained 5 pounds, with no signs of stopping.  Closing that dance studio is increasing my risk of death more than leaving it open would be.  I imagine gyms work the same way for some people.

Limiting Covid-19 may save lives, but limiting the damage to the economy saves both lives and livelihoods.
(05-11-2020, 06:55 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 12:44 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Do you have enough Democrats left who are willing to anti-up and pay more taxes and pay higher food costs and higher clothes costs and higher education costs and so forth?

The time America was Great was the time of tax and spend liberalism.

We defeated the Soviet Union in the middle of the Reagan/Clinton economy.  If Reagan is "tax and spend liberalism" to you, I'm happy to go back to the Reagan years.
(05-11-2020, 09:50 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-10-2020, 09:13 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]There is vast difference between essential services and ones that aren't. Sorry, but nail salons and gyms are luxuries, not necessities … but it's the economy, isn't it?  Rolleyes 

I can't speak to nail salons, but I get my exercise at a ballroom dance studio.  Since it has been closed, I've gained 5 pounds, with no signs of stopping.  Closing that dance studio is increasing my risk of death more than leaving it open would be.  I imagine gyms work the same way for some people.

Limiting Covid-19 may save lives, but limiting the damage to the economy saves both lives and livelihoods.

Actually, you have it exactly backwards.  Every country that has managed to master this pandemic has concentrated on the disease first and foremost.  Show me two countries less alike politically than Australia and New Zealand, then note how similar their approach and results have been.  Look at Denmark and most of the other Scandinavian countries (Sweden being the outlier).  They have used similar approaches. In the case of the more socialist countries, they've even managed to do most of this with minimal change to business-as-usual.

Focusing on people first reduces anxiety, and high anxiety makes reentry into the economy a scary proposition.  If people think they're being treated like cannon fodder, they will act accordingly.
(05-11-2020, 09:52 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 06:55 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 12:44 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Do you have enough Democrats left who are willing to anti-up and pay more taxes and pay higher food costs and higher clothes costs and higher education costs and so forth?

The time America was Great was the time of tax and spend liberalism.

We defeated the Soviet Union in the middle of the Reagan/Clinton economy.  If Reagan is "tax and spend liberalism" to you, I'm happy to go back to the Reagan years.

Reagan was borrow and spend.  This is supposed to be antithetical to conservatives, but apparently it's OK if it's your guys doing it.  With the sole exception of GHWB, every Republican since has followed suit.  Then they wailed at the profligacy of the Democrat's when they were in charge.

And btw, the Soviets defeated themselves, to the greatest extent. They never had a functioning economy that could compete, and Gorbachev knew it.
(05-11-2020, 10:20 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Actually, you have it exactly backwards.  Every country that has managed to master this pandemic has concentrated on the disease first and foremost.  Show me two countries less alike politically than Australia and New Zealand, then note how similar their approach and results have been.

Australia and New Zealand are virtually identical when compared to, say, China and South Korea.

You're retreating to partisan gibberish.
(05-11-2020, 10:24 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 09:52 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 06:55 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 12:44 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Do you have enough Democrats left who are willing to anti-up and pay more taxes and pay higher food costs and higher clothes costs and higher education costs and so forth?

The time America was Great was the time of tax and spend liberalism.

We defeated the Soviet Union in the middle of the Reagan/Clinton economy.  If Reagan is "tax and spend liberalism" to you, I'm happy to go back to the Reagan years.

Reagan was borrow and spend.  This is supposed to be antithetical to conservatives, but apparently it's OK if it's your guys doing it.  With the sole exception GHWB, every Republican since has followed suit.

And GHWB is the sole Republican who caused more recessions than he fixed.  Unlike Democrats, Republicans are able to realize when their policies are destructive, and to change them.  Austerity was one of the policies that was destructive and had to be abandoned.
The economy is screwed no matter what.  If we allow many more people to die, including many skilled health care workers, it will be even more difficult to rebuild the economy, besides being morally reprehensible.

I know about economic hardship.  I lost my job in 2009.  I never really recovered from those times.
(05-11-2020, 11:20 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 10:20 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Actually, you have it exactly backwards.  Every country that has managed to master this pandemic has concentrated on the disease first and foremost.  Show me two countries less alike politically than Australia and New Zealand, then note how similar their approach and results have been.

Australia and New Zealand are virtually identical when compared to, say, China and South Korea.

You're retreating to partisan gibberish.

If it will make you happy: both are democratic, but the ruling factions are opposites.  Nonetheless, they followed similar playbooks to get solid results.  Look it up.
(05-11-2020, 06:55 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 12:44 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Do you have enough Democrats left who are willing to anti-up and pay more taxes and pay higher food costs and higher clothes costs and higher education costs and so forth?

The time America was Great was the time of tax and spend liberalism.  We have since moved conservative way past the point of diminishing return.  Yes, I think it is time to go back to what worked.  We don’t have much choice, as the virus is tugging us in that direction.  Denying that the problem exists, refusing to solve it, goes no where save death.

This is not to say we won’t go past the point of diminishing return again in the opposite direction.  The next unravelling will come in its time.  The desire to do what is best for the common good will wane.

But right now is the time of change, the time of commitment to the country.  Some are sensing it.  Others are marching to their doom.
(05-11-2020, 11:22 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 10:24 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Reagan was borrow and spend.  This is supposed to be antithetical to conservatives, but apparently it's OK if it's your guys doing it.  With the sole exception GHWB, every Republican since has followed suit.

And GHWB is the sole Republican who caused more recessions than he fixed.  Unlike Democrats, Republicans are able to realize when their policies are destructive, and to change them.  Austerity was one of the policies that was destructive and had to be abandoned.

Are you serious? Reagan ran his game plan successfully, but let's not pretend it didn't impact GHWB. And his son GWB did the same, but hit a wall while still in office. Pumping money into the economy in good times is a recipe for disaster. We're about to see how much of a disaster Trump has created by handing money to his friends and punishing everyone else. His off-the-charts tax cut is still out there, creating havoc. The rich and large corporations aren't needing any help. It's everyone else.
(05-11-2020, 11:28 AM)gabrielle Wrote: [ -> ]The economy is screwed no matter what.  If we allow many more people to die, including many skilled health care workers, it will be even more difficult to rebuild the economy, besides being morally reprehensible.

I know about economic hardship.  I lost my job in 2009.  I never really recovered from those times.
I view COVID19 as being here to stay no matter what. So, what's the point of continuing to destroy portions of the economy and making matters worse for more people at this point? I'm sorry to hear that you didn't recover from 2009. I know a thing or two about economic hardship too. Life sucks due to all the financial restrictions and uncertainties and added stress that are placed on those experiencing it at the time. You should be able to relate to what I'm saying and the positions that I've been taking much better than Dave. Dave seems to live in an Ivory Tower and the only threat to Dave seems to be COVID19 finding a way in at this point. Why are liquor stores more important than salons? I understand there is an added tax value to keeping liquor stores open and the liquor industry manufacturing booze these days. Other than that, I don't understand why they're viewed as more essential to life than a salon. So, what do you think, do you think that's bullshit or what?
(05-11-2020, 11:54 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 11:22 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 10:24 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Reagan was borrow and spend.  This is supposed to be antithetical to conservatives, but apparently it's OK if it's your guys doing it.  With the sole exception GHWB, every Republican since has followed suit.

And GHWB is the sole Republican who caused more recessions than he fixed.  Unlike Democrats, Republicans are able to realize when their policies are destructive, and to change them.  Austerity was one of the policies that was destructive and had to be abandoned.

Are you serious?  Reagan ran his game plan successfully, but let's not pretend it didn't impact GHWB. And his son GWB did the same, but hit a wall while still in office. Pumping money into the economy in good times is a recipe for disaster.  We're about to see how much of a disaster Trump has created by handing money to his friends and punishing everyone else.  His off-the-charts tax cut is still out there, creating havoc.  The rich and large corporations aren't needing any help. It's everyone else.
The Democrats have been pumping money into the economy, the global economy and the global institutions on a full time basis ever since FDR took office and the Democratic party voted to change the rules and skewed the courts to make it possible for them to do it long term. FDR did a good job keeping the radical factions within the Democratic party in line/ under control with his record use of the veto which kept America together during the years of the Great Depression.

Like I've mentioned, FDR doubled down on the change that Hoover was forced to make during the early years of the Great Depression. I'm sure that you are familiar with the Hoover Dam. We had a major economic problem during the 70's (post LBJ/Vietnam era) that needed to be addressed/fixed. A big government problem that couldn't be fixed the old Democratic way because the old Democratic way of doing business and years of tossing billions upon billions at all kinds of people problems was starting to cause problems. So, how many years will it be before big government believers admit that the government is broke and the era of big government being looked to solve our problems has to end?
(05-11-2020, 11:54 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 11:22 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 10:24 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Reagan was borrow and spend.  This is supposed to be antithetical to conservatives, but apparently it's OK if it's your guys doing it.  With the sole exception GHWB, every Republican since has followed suit.

And GHWB is the sole Republican who caused more recessions than he fixed.  Unlike Democrats, Republicans are able to realize when their policies are destructive, and to change them.  Austerity was one of the policies that was destructive and had to be abandoned.

Are you serious?  Reagan ran his game plan successfully, but let's not pretend it didn't impact GHWB. And his son GWB did the same, but hit a wall while still in office. Pumping money into the economy in good times is a recipe for disaster.  We're about to see how much of a disaster Trump has created by handing money to his friends and punishing everyone else.  His off-the-charts tax cut is still out there, creating havoc.  The rich and large corporations aren't needing any help. It's everyone else.
I'd say his "Read My Lips, No New Taxes" comment hurt him quite a bit after he buckled/caved to liberal demands for more taxation and signed the bill that increased them.
From my perspective, the time America was great was also the tax and spend liberal time, the time the Democrats pushed benefits and labor unions to put more in the hands of the workers, less in the hands of the elites. Now, the rest of the world’s factories are not going to get bombed out again. The jobs sent abroad in the conservative era (with the aid of both parties) are not going to come back. But productivity has gone steadily up. The difference is the Democratic favoring of the people, the Republican favoring of the racists and elites.

Again, from my perspective, each Republican from “It’s the economy stupid”, to the Great Recession of Bush 43, to Trump’s coronavirus collapse has… collapsed. It takes a more responsible pay off the debt Democratic administration to undo the damage done by the voodoo economics.

And the problem with the 70s was getting the economy used to getting off the gold standard. This was as much Nixon’s fault as anyone. It took years of discipline and stagflation to fix it. And naturally, Reagan stole the credit, and immediately started voodoo to wreck it again.

Now the Republican leaning posters here don’t look at the obvious, Republican failures. Repeatedly. They find ways to look at things backwards, to blame the Democrats. Fantasy. Lies. Good times become bad, and bad good. Policies fail due to the opposition resisting them not because they are bad policies. By screaming their fantasies loud enough they think they can repeat the same mistakes indefinitely.

Now I anticipate the Republicans are going to repeat their fantasies again. If I have my perspective, others will have theirs, and we can go back and forth indefinitely.

If it ever is going to end, people have to look at the facts. We had a boom time in the progressive era. We had a bunch of collapses towards the end of Republican terms in the White House in the conservative eras. You have to keep coming back to that. Voodoo economics stink. It is past time to move beyond that.
(05-11-2020, 02:18 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 11:54 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 11:22 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-11-2020, 10:24 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]Reagan was borrow and spend.  This is supposed to be antithetical to conservatives, but apparently it's OK if it's your guys doing it.  With the sole exception GHWB, every Republican since has followed suit.

And GHWB is the sole Republican who caused more recessions than he fixed.  Unlike Democrats, Republicans are able to realize when their policies are destructive, and to change them.  Austerity was one of the policies that was destructive and had to be abandoned.

Are you serious?  Reagan ran his game plan successfully, but let's not pretend it didn't impact GHWB. And his son GWB did the same, but hit a wall while still in office. Pumping money into the economy in good times is a recipe for disaster.  We're about to see how much of a disaster Trump has created by handing money to his friends and punishing everyone else.  His off-the-charts tax cut is still out there, creating havoc.  The rich and large corporations aren't needing any help. It's everyone else.
The Democrats have been pumping money into the economy, the global economy and the global institutions on a full time basis ever since FDR took office and the Democratic party voted to change the rules and skewed the courts to make it possible for them to do it long term. FDR did a good job keeping the radical factions within the Democratic party in line/ under control with his record use of the veto which kept America together during the years of the Great Depression.

Like I've mentioned, FDR doubled down on the change that Hoover was forced to make during the early years of the Great Depression. I'm sure that you are familiar with the Hoover Dam. We had a major economic problem during the 70's (post LBJ/Vietnam era) that needed to be addressed/fixed. A big government problem that couldn't be fixed the old Democratic way because the old Democratic way of doing business and years of tossing billions upon billions at all kinds of people problems was starting to cause problems. So, how many years will it be before big government believers admit that the government is broke and the era of big government being looked to solve our problems has to end?

There was a recession in 1980, and it cost Carter. So did his endless crisis with Iran. That crisis also caused the second great gas shortage/gas price hikes (the first caused the recession of 1973-75), and that more than anything else was responsible for huge inflation and the resulting recession. But Carter was something of a would-be Republican, a centrist Democrat. He did NOT use the old Democratic way, which his primary opponent Ted Kennedy wanted to use, but was more concerned about keeping taxes and the deficit low. He could not handle the recession, therefore, and it cost him and the Democrats. We have not had a real Democrat elected president since LBJ. And he sabotaged his own presidency.

Americans are easily fooled. Reagan was a charming actor, a great communicator and an effective, macho-sounding candidate. He was a very clever sloganeer. When he said "government is the problem," he fooled a lot of people. Who likes the government? It's an easy target. When he asked the people if they were better off now than they were 4 years ago, many had to say no. It's tough to beat the innate ability of a candidate as shown by a 22-6 horoscope score. But a great candidate does not equal a great president, as we see again now on full display.

Reagan only fixed the economy for the wealthy. The Saudis buoyed him up with lower gas prices. Otherwise, his trickle-down economics didn't work any better than Carter's waffling. How many years will it take before trickle-down believers admit that neo-liberalism is a sham, has never worked, and never will?