Is there anything tax cuts CAN'T fix?

[vlad321]

mrstickball said:

vlad321 said:

What is hilarious is that you seem to think that US's dominance is because of Capitalism. Luckily, I however do know how to respond to you if you actually believe that to dispel any illusions you might have.

During WWII every major industry was destroyed except for the US. Literally, everyone else was bombed out and destroyed and the US was left untouched. Obviously that is great for business if you are the only supplier in the world. This is what led to what you jsut called "its golden age." Remeber how factory workers in car companies could have amazing quality of life? That's because they were the ONLY workers inthe world for several decades while the rest of the world competed. Notice how everything started going downhill super fast when the other countries got their shit together? Then around the 80s is when the broken philosophy of the US caught up with it and you had staglflation. How did the US get out of that? $13 trillion to date (started with nearly 3 trillion under Reagan). If you give most nations $13 trillion, they too would be on top.

Basically the US succeeded DESPITE Capitalism, not BECAUSE of it. They succeeded out of sheer dumb luck of having an ocean between them and the Nazis. Now that its luck has run out, it is only running on empty fumes and debt.

Edit: This should have been implicit when I mentoined WWII but I jsut want to make sure you realize that there was a huge talent drain DURING WWII, again to sheer dumb luck.

Your history is impaired my friend.

It wasn't a matter of industries being destroyed during WW2 which caused US to be the dominant manufacturer in the world - Bretton Woods was responsible for that, which gave the US a massive advantage  in trade since the agreement regulated the exchange rate which was favorable - essentially what China does now. You bring up car manufacturers, which is interesting as they are still (in America) paid extremely well - their quality of life is still very good. The only issue with it today is that they have competition from non-union companies which can produce a better car that is cheaper in most respects.

Stagflation didn't occur in the 1980s under Reagan. It occured in the 1970's under Carter (and the seeds were sown under Nixon as well). Reagan fixed stagflation. Look it up - http://economics.about.com/od/useconomichistory/a/stagflation.htm .

You argue that $13 trllion in debt made us great. If that is the case, then you should turn your eyes to every European country which have spent vastly, VASTLY more money per capita than we have. US debt per person is $45,000 per person. In the UK it is more than three times that amount. Germany, Finland, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, Denmark and so on are all much higher as well. By your logic then, all of the argued European countries are in a far worse position, as they've spent sums of money far in excess of the United States. For example, Norway's public debt is ten times higher per capita than Americas.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that debt is a very bad thing - thus why I deride the European system. They have taken on amounts of debt that border on insanity.

The US isn't running on empty fumes and debt. If you believe so, then I highly suggest moving away from here. America has the potential to be great, the question is if we utilize our resources and our people to be great. Due to excessive regulations and restrictions, that is a difficult proposition, but I believe that given our unique blend of society and resources, we could do many things that others cannot if we are allowed to.

The only impairment in history I have is that I thought Carter was also in the early 80s, causing the staglfation. Everything else stands.

You cherry-pick and deflect matters in a very artful and tactful manner though. I love how you just dismiss a very simple economic fact like the one wehre every industrialized nation was completely in ruins by the end of WWII, except for the US which was literally untouched. Then you try to play it off to a, relatively, minor fact for the times. Yes, being dominant currency is important, but it pales in comparison to being the only supplier of  many goods. I also did not bring up car manufacturers, I rbought up the workers who worked on the assembly lines in factories, which ended up getting kicked out once other nations began to be competative again and US businesses realized they needed to pay them less and lay them off to remain profitable.

I also need to point out that Reagan's deregulation is not what fixed stagflation, is was the ridiculous amount of money he spent on constructing bombs. As I mentioned earlier, there is no difference between making bombs and building roads or waging an army. What deregulation did was cause a nuclear meltdown over in Japan a few months ago, which I am sure you have heard of, among many other atrocities from businesses.

As it stands if you look at the best living and worst living (within reason, obviously we don't count Ghana and Haiti, etc.) you will notice that the countries with the lower living conditions have less debt as % of GDP, meanwhile the ones with the best living conditions are the ones that have the obscene amounts of debt. This trend is almost without fail. Basically, well being is directly linked to the amount debt a country has and the US has a lot of it.