How has the GOP fixed the economy?

Satya

Satya

C'est la vie
Retired Staff
MBTI
INXP
"It's the economy stupid."

That was the rallying cry of the Tea Party when they brought about a swing in independent voters and gave the GOP control of the House and a tighter minority in the Senate during the mid term election and control of state legislatures all across the land.

Now as I watch unemployment hovering around 9% and the uncompromising GOP standing firm against raising the debt ceiling and pushing the country towards potential default and economic catastrophe, I have to wonder how they have fixed the economy so far. How exactly has attacking the unions and laying off thousands of government employees benefited the economy to date? How has the hardline position against raising taxes during a historical period of low taxes, benefited job creation? Where are the results? The GOP has succeeded in keeping taxes low and pushing the Democrats to make spending cuts. Where are the benefits?
 
Calvin Coolidge's administration did an excellent job of fixing the economy, mostly by refusing to get too involved. Unfortunately he was followed by Woodrow Wilson's protege Herbert Hoover whose meddling wrecked it horribly. Recent republicans however have not done very well in large part because they were not willing to cut military spending or agricultural subsidies.
 
The only GOP plan I've heard of being put forward and seriously backed by at least a few people is Ryan's Budget plan. But this plan is a blatant privatization of Medicare by turning into a voucher program where eligible persons will receive a coupon from the federal government so that they can go into the private market and buy insurance.

Wait, it gets better. one of the GOP's biggest platform is to repeal "Obamacare". The only way Ryan's Medicare plan would successfully work is if "Obamacare", or at least part of it, stays on the books. Namely, the clause about not being denied based on pre-existing conditions as well as how everyone has to be covered.

If "Obamacare" is repealed, you go back to the day where you can be denied based on preexisting conditions, or for any other reason, such as age. Throw in Ryan's Medicare budget plan and you have a ton of old people with no coverage. Classy.

Unfortunately, the free market does not fix everything. Obama's budget plan is supposed to cut as much as Ryan's within like 10 years or something.

We need to restructure or tax structure and cut military funding, as well as agricultural subsidies on corn. The over subsidization of corn has allowed it to be in almost everything that we eat and more, causing us to be overweight.
 
The GOP wastes too much time pushing the social conservative agenda for one, instead of actually "fixing the economy". Their motto has been "restoring american values" which I hear on the news daily (without the large religious right-wing they wouldn't have nearly as much support). Other than that they spend most of their precious time cutting everything from space exploration to education yet you don't see them cutting military funding. They fight to lower taxes for the rich when they clearly have more than enough compared to the average individual in this economy. I understand hard work is important, but this is becoming a caste system in which the poor have an incredibly hard time climbing. People made the terrible mistake of blaming the Obama administration for the economic crisis, yet they fail to realize that this has been carried from the Bush era and that many predicted this was coming.
 
Don't fool yourselves, even Obama wasn't that great for the economy. The "Left" in America leans much too far to the "Right" to ever allow us the same social welfare most other modern countries in the world get to enjoy without the ranting and raving the GOP like to put on about the economy whenever these issues come up.

Whenever a candidate does come up for an office that demonstrates the more global perspective on issues, the media shuns them and the public ignores them. If you doubt this, ask yourself how many people you know would have voted for Kucinich during the primaries.
 
Politics and the way many people play politics stinks.

Benjamin Franklin once said, "I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer."

Until the other party gets a grip on reality, there will be those to at least slow their constantly throwing money at something that is not working already.....just to get their votes. Politics stinks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VH
Raccoon Love said:
The GOP wastes too much time pushing the social conservative agenda for one, instead of actually "fixing the economy". Their motto has been "restoring american values" which I hear on the news daily (without the large religious right-wing they wouldn't have nearly as much support). Other than that they spend most of their precious time cutting everything from space exploration to education yet you don't see them cutting military funding. They fight to lower taxes for the rich when they clearly have more than enough compared to the average individual in this economy. I understand hard work is important, but this is becoming a caste system in which the poor have an incredibly hard time climbing. People made the terrible mistake of blaming the Obama administration for the economic crisis, yet they fail to realize that this has been carried from the Bush era and that many predicted this was coming.
Click to expand...

You do know that the same could be said for the left, they spend far to much time dealing with social issue and not enough time on economic ones.

Let's not go around pointing fingers, the Democrats haven't been restoring us a utopia now have they, let's also not forget that the U.S. isn't the only country on the planet that going through a debt crisis. Let's not forget that the U.S. economy isn't run by politicians either, it's the consumers and producers.
 
Governments only have a limited set of tools to affect their economies.

Let's review the real reasons for our economic issues. In 2000, tech stocks finally crashed as investors began to realize that earning potential was not nearly as much as projected. This caused a worldwide slump that took a while to recover. Over the next 8 years, the housing market began to boom. In 2008, this boom caught up with banks. Normally, when people took on a mortgage but couldn't repay it, banks simply forclosed and re-sold the house for a slight profit. However, with so many houses on the market, the value of houses began to drop, and when people forclosed the banks were left with a house that was no longer worth the value of the loan. This caused banks to lose a lot of money. To put this into perspective, the average loss was $100,000 and more than a million homes were forclosed. This caused $100,000 times one million = $100,000,000,000 aka 100 TRILLION dollars that suddenly vanished and banks were left holding the bag. The problem with this was the fact that there were so many mutual funds and investments tied to the profits of banks (once considered an unfailing investment) which caused a chain reaction of financial losses in the form of devalued stocks. With them went the value of the US Dollar. This causes a two-fold issue. Internally, our economy took a hit from the hundreds of trillions of dollars evaporating, but externally it also took a hit from our dollar being weaker to international markets. For example, if the value of the dollar dropped by half, then everything on the international market would cost double, even though the values hadn't actually changed. One of the most important commodities on the international market is oil. International oil prices have increased because so much more of the world has begun to develop a middle class, but because the dollar has weakened the percieved value has increased even more.

In other words, this is a mess that can't be fixed by any government. The best any government can do is make the process easier or more difficult. In my opinion, both the Democrats and the Republicans have been doing little more than using this crisis as an excuse to pass agenda based legislation, and not actually helping.
 
just me said:
Politics and the way many people play politics stinks.

Benjamin Franklin once said, "I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer."

Until the other party gets a grip on reality, there will be those to at least slow their constantly throwing money at something that is not working already.....just to get their votes. Politics stinks.
Click to expand...

This was all well and good back when people couldn't even agree on whether or not to become a country or to have a single currency for that matter. These were the days people had to build their own houses, cultivate their own lands... and generally worry about how not to die from one day to the next. We can also start talking about slave ownership and child labor wile we're at it if you like.

It irks me when people start spewing historical references that clearly apply to a certain era and have no real meaning in modern society. As long as time moves forward, nothing is stagnant; even mountains change their shape and form over the years. It's ludicrous to think that things as volatile as politics, economies, and societies will stay the absolute same from one century, or even decade, to the next.

Being a Conservative back when the country was founded on change and progress was a good thing - it actually meant you supported change and progress. Funny how 100 years or so can completely change the meaning of a word though.
 
Lerxst said:
This was all well and good back when people couldn't even agree on whether or not to become a country or to have a single currency for that matter. These were the days people had to build their own houses, cultivate their own lands... and generally worry about how not to die from one day to the next. We can also start talking about slave ownership and child labor wile we're at it if you like.

It irks me when people start spewing historical references that clearly apply to a certain era and have no real meaning in modern society. As long as time moves forward, nothing is stagnant; even mountains change their shape and form over the years. It's ludicrous to think that things as volatile as politics, economies, and societies will stay the absolute same from one century, or even decade, to the next.
Click to expand...
Yes, and I'm sure that what he said is completely false in our modern, enlightened world, these two charts and the starting date of this thing probably have no causal connection, I bet it's just a coincidence.
Being a Conservative back when the country was founded on change and progress was a good thing - it actually meant you supported change and progress. Funny how 100 years or so can completely change the meaning of a word though.
Click to expand...
Yeah, just like liberalism, progressivism, and left-wing used to denote non-intervention: talk about 180-turn!
 
Lerxst said:
This was all well and good back when people couldn't even agree on whether or not to become a country or to have a single currency for that matter. These were the days people had to build their own houses, cultivate their own lands... and generally worry about how not to die from one day to the next. We can also start talking about slave ownership and child labor wile we're at it if you like.

It irks me when people start spewing historical references that clearly apply to a certain era and have no real meaning in modern society. As long as time moves forward, nothing is stagnant; even mountains change their shape and form over the years. It's ludicrous to think that things as volatile as politics, economies, and societies will stay the absolute same from one century, or even decade, to the next.

Being a Conservative back when the country was founded on change and progress was a good thing - it actually meant you supported change and progress. Funny how 100 years or so can completely change the meaning of a word though.
Click to expand...

It amazes me how something so simply understood can irk someone. Certain people would not even put forth the energy to build a house nowadays. People stay single for benefits, yet live together. One gets food stamps while the other works. People actually go out of their way to take advantage of government programs to help the poor, and there are some better off not working than flipping burgers for minimum wage. Use Federal funds to build housing projects, only to have to tear them down and rebuild them because nobody cares enough to try and take care of them. Give a man a fish and he eats for a day; teach him to fish, he eats the rest of his life. Why fish if someone is going to give me fish? A place to stay? Food stamps? Indigent care at the hospital?

Yes, things are much different today: things have degenerated and digressed into a maelstrom. I can get your vote if I keep feeding you. Franklin also wrote, " Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
 
just me said:
It amazes me how something so simply understood can irk someone. Certain people would not even put forth the energy to build a house nowadays. People stay single for benefits, yet live together. One gets food stamps while the other works. People actually go out of their way to take advantage of government programs to help the poor, and there are some better off not working than flipping burgers for minimum wage. Use Federal funds to build housing projects, only to have to tear them down and rebuild them because nobody cares enough to try and take care of them. Give a man a fish and he eats for a day; teach him to fish, he eats the rest of his life. Why fish if someone is going to give me fish? A place to stay? Food stamps? Indigent care at the hospital?

Yes, things are much different today: things have degenerated and digressed into a maelstrom. I can get your vote if I keep feeding you. Franklin also wrote, " Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Click to expand...

Why?

You're sitting here obsessing about a symptom and ignoring the cause. Why are people better off not working for minimum wage?

This isn't Colonial America we're dealing with anymore.
 
Really though, nothing else should have been expected from the Republican party. They have their roots in that pile of mercantilist fuddelduddies called the Whig party, and the policies actually implemented by them haven't changed much. Since sometime around Hoover, though, Republicans have generally talked the freedom talk, despite stumbling an awful lot while trying to walk the walk, even on good days!

Case in point: Reagan
Points in case:

  • Set up the fair/free trade dichotomy (BIG red flag), imposed many import quotas, implemented 100% tariffs on several electronic products from Japan etc.
  • Increased taxes for regular persons, initially through increased Social Security taxes and bracket creep, later by "revenue enhancements"
  • Increased federal spending by 53%
  • Turned your nineteen eighty's dollar into 73 nineteen eighty-eight cents
  • Didn't end the draft, despite saying that it rested on the assumption that "your kids belong to the state", and pointing out that "The Nazis thought it was a great idea." etc.
FDR's New Deal was nothing more than a continuation of Hoover's policies, and I doubt it would be controversial to identify Bush II as one of the more interventionist-laden presidents in modern times. In fact, looking at federal gov't spending per capita, it has steadily risen since the end of WWII with the exception of the Clinton years. Maybe Bill should become the new poster boy for fans of small government?

The renowned Bush tax cuts were a bluff, too. Actually, all tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts are. Really, what's the difference between a scenario where gov't finances all its consumption with taxes and one where it's partially financed by either monetary inflation or borrowing? It still makes the same amount of resources unavailable for the private sector, just through different means: either by increasing prices through inflation so that people's real wealth decreases despite the nominal one being stable (as opposed to good ol' honest taxation, where both fall), or by crowding out private investment through public borrowing. Looking at taxes instead of spending when assessing size of gov't is simply wrongheaded, and moving around some numbers while not changing the allocation of real resources won't do squat to stimulate an economy.
 
Barnabas said:
You do know that the same could be said for the left, they spend far to much time dealing with social issue and not enough time on economic ones.

Let's not go around pointing fingers, the Democrats haven't been restoring us a utopia now have they, let's also not forget that the U.S. isn't the only country on the planet that going through a debt crisis. Let's not forget that the U.S. economy isn't run by politicians either, it's the consumers and producers.
Click to expand...

I understand that, I speak only for the people who are in power right now which is the right-wing. The right-wing which has blocked every piece of legislation the Obama administration has planned. Now I'm not a big fan of Obama either, but I simply can't blame him fully as he was pretty much given a country in debt crisis. And lets not forget that a house + senate that hold opposite majorities = no progress. Everything gets vetoed or put on filibusterer.
 
The GOP's plan to fix the economy is to stop the socialist Democrats from destroying it; because as we all know, if we just let the free market do its thing, everything will work out just fine.

In the same way that our current 'financial crisis' is working out just fine.
 
^
Don't blame the market bro, the crash was caused by malinvestments brought about by Greenspan and the ridiculously low interest rates his Fed set in the first half of the last decade and prolonged by stimulus, both from Bush II and Obama. Not that the GOP would change any of this, of course.

(Okay, I'll stop yapping now)
 
VH said:
Personally, I lose a massive amount of respect for anyone who subscribes to political party views. It's nothing but a bunch of empty agenda that accomplishes nothing of value..............
Click to expand...

The GOP really is committed to radically reducing the role of government in society. The Dems really are committed to providing social services like healthcare, and financial security to the infirm and aged. A quick look at recent history proves this.
 
StudebakerHawk said:
The GOP really is committed to radically reducing the role of government in society. The Dems really are committed to providing social services like healthcare, and financial security to the infirm and aged. A quick look at recent history proves this.
Click to expand...
Yes, but do you ever get the sense that these agendas are focused on as means to divert our attention from something else?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top