Founder Of Reaganomics Says That “Without A Revolution, Americans Are History”

[Jim Jones]

[quote=davelj][quote=Jim Jones]
Brian,

You still did not take ownership of your statement. Would you support policies which may lead to your children to inherit a lower standard of living and possibly poverty based on our current standards of living? Yes or no would suffice.[/quote]

I know it’s rude, but I’m going to butt in here. Could you provide a specific example of such a policy, past or present? It’s a little ambiguous as you’ve worded the question. I don’t have kids and will not have them, but I am curious as to what policies, exactly, you’re getting at.[/quote]

Rather than quote a policy I will post Brian’s original comment.

[quote=Brian]

Not if you look at all humans equally.

From a world humanitarian perspective, as long as more people are being lifted out of poverty than fall into poverty, then the system is working.

If 10 million Americans fall into poverty, but 100 million Chinese gain education and a “middle-class” life, it’s a net positive gain for humanity.

Actually, if Americans can no longer afford “Carlsbad-like” neighborhoods and everything in San Diego deteriorates to “El Cajon-like” and people have to move to apartments, it still won’t be the end of the world.[/quote]

He stated that he would support economic and tax policies which would in fact lead to the decline in relative wealth and quality of living for 10 million American’s. To me this is crazy our government is in power to preserve our nations wealth, not “spread the wealth around” IMHO.

[Reality]

Don’t we have the natural resources to produce everything here that we need except maybe oil? Put huge tariffs on everything else and let’s start making stuff here again. We’re on a path to oblivion if we don’t. How can a country survive if it doesn’t produce tangible products?

Tell the rest of the world to pound sand.

[Reality]

Don’t we have the natural resources to produce everything here that we need except maybe oil? Put huge tariffs on everything else and let’s start making stuff here again. We’re on a path to oblivion if we don’t. How can a country survive if it doesn’t produce tangible products?

Tell the rest of the world to pound sand.

[Reality]

Don’t we have the natural resources to produce everything here that we need except maybe oil? Put huge tariffs on everything else and let’s start making stuff here again. We’re on a path to oblivion if we don’t. How can a country survive if it doesn’t produce tangible products?

Tell the rest of the world to pound sand.

[Reality]

Don’t we have the natural resources to produce everything here that we need except maybe oil? Put huge tariffs on everything else and let’s start making stuff here again. We’re on a path to oblivion if we don’t. How can a country survive if it doesn’t produce tangible products?

Tell the rest of the world to pound sand.

[Reality]

Don’t we have the natural resources to produce everything here that we need except maybe oil? Put huge tariffs on everything else and let’s start making stuff here again. We’re on a path to oblivion if we don’t. How can a country survive if it doesn’t produce tangible products?

Tell the rest of the world to pound sand.

[davelj]

[quote=JohnAlt91941]Don’t we have the natural resources to produce everything here that we need except maybe oil? Put huge tariffs on everything else and let’s start making stuff here again. We’re on a path to oblivion if we don’t. How can a country survive if it doesn’t produce tangible products?

Tell the rest of the world to pound sand.[/quote]

Actually, we produce a shitpile of tangible products here. In fact, we very clearly we have a huge manufacturing base in the U.S. in terms of total output, on both absolute and relative bases. The double-edged sword of productivity, however, means that we don’t need as many people to produce that output as much of the rest of the world.

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/international-economy/53995-state-us-manufacturing.html

As I like to say, “Where are my robots!?”

[davelj]

[quote=JohnAlt91941]Don’t we have the natural resources to produce everything here that we need except maybe oil? Put huge tariffs on everything else and let’s start making stuff here again. We’re on a path to oblivion if we don’t. How can a country survive if it doesn’t produce tangible products?

Tell the rest of the world to pound sand.[/quote]

Actually, we produce a shitpile of tangible products here. In fact, we very clearly we have a huge manufacturing base in the U.S. in terms of total output, on both absolute and relative bases. The double-edged sword of productivity, however, means that we don’t need as many people to produce that output as much of the rest of the world.

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/international-economy/53995-state-us-manufacturing.html

As I like to say, “Where are my robots!?”

[davelj]

[quote=JohnAlt91941]Don’t we have the natural resources to produce everything here that we need except maybe oil? Put huge tariffs on everything else and let’s start making stuff here again. We’re on a path to oblivion if we don’t. How can a country survive if it doesn’t produce tangible products?

Tell the rest of the world to pound sand.[/quote]

Actually, we produce a shitpile of tangible products here. In fact, we very clearly we have a huge manufacturing base in the U.S. in terms of total output, on both absolute and relative bases. The double-edged sword of productivity, however, means that we don’t need as many people to produce that output as much of the rest of the world.

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/international-economy/53995-state-us-manufacturing.html

As I like to say, “Where are my robots!?”

[davelj]

[quote=JohnAlt91941]Don’t we have the natural resources to produce everything here that we need except maybe oil? Put huge tariffs on everything else and let’s start making stuff here again. We’re on a path to oblivion if we don’t. How can a country survive if it doesn’t produce tangible products?

Tell the rest of the world to pound sand.[/quote]

Actually, we produce a shitpile of tangible products here. In fact, we very clearly we have a huge manufacturing base in the U.S. in terms of total output, on both absolute and relative bases. The double-edged sword of productivity, however, means that we don’t need as many people to produce that output as much of the rest of the world.

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/international-economy/53995-state-us-manufacturing.html

As I like to say, “Where are my robots!?”

[davelj]

[quote=JohnAlt91941]Don’t we have the natural resources to produce everything here that we need except maybe oil? Put huge tariffs on everything else and let’s start making stuff here again. We’re on a path to oblivion if we don’t. How can a country survive if it doesn’t produce tangible products?

Tell the rest of the world to pound sand.[/quote]

Actually, we produce a shitpile of tangible products here. In fact, we very clearly we have a huge manufacturing base in the U.S. in terms of total output, on both absolute and relative bases. The double-edged sword of productivity, however, means that we don’t need as many people to produce that output as much of the rest of the world.

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/international-economy/53995-state-us-manufacturing.html

As I like to say, “Where are my robots!?”

[davelj]

[quote=Jim Jones]

He stated that he would support economic and tax policies which would in fact lead to the decline in relative wealth and quality of living for 10 million American’s. To me this is crazy our government is in power to preserve our nations wealth, not “spread the wealth around” IMHO.[/quote]

OK, I’m just trying to figure out what specifically those policies would be. I do not think our government is in power “to preserve our nation’s wealth.” I’m pretty sure it’s in power principally to preserve our purported freedoms (obviously it’s debatable as to how well it’s doing in that regard), with all the various and sundry things that implies, which theoretically should serve to preserve our nation’s wealth. Although I think much of the rest of the world would agree with you that it’s clear that Americans want to preserve their wealth – everyone else be damned – and not “spread it around.” Which, as you’re surely aware, is one of the big problems that the Rest of the World has with the U.S. Me… I don’t have kids so I have the luxury of not really worrying about it. I could really give a shit how it all turns out, although I do have a soft spot for the underdog, so I would like to see folks in the emerging countries continue to dig their way out of poverty… even if that means some pain here in the U.S. I love living in the U.S. but let’s face it – we’re a pretty soft, spoiled, provincial, money-grubbing bunch. We probably deserve the pain that’s coming.

[davelj]

[quote=Jim Jones]

He stated that he would support economic and tax policies which would in fact lead to the decline in relative wealth and quality of living for 10 million American’s. To me this is crazy our government is in power to preserve our nations wealth, not “spread the wealth around” IMHO.[/quote]

OK, I’m just trying to figure out what specifically those policies would be. I do not think our government is in power “to preserve our nation’s wealth.” I’m pretty sure it’s in power principally to preserve our purported freedoms (obviously it’s debatable as to how well it’s doing in that regard), with all the various and sundry things that implies, which theoretically should serve to preserve our nation’s wealth. Although I think much of the rest of the world would agree with you that it’s clear that Americans want to preserve their wealth – everyone else be damned – and not “spread it around.” Which, as you’re surely aware, is one of the big problems that the Rest of the World has with the U.S. Me… I don’t have kids so I have the luxury of not really worrying about it. I could really give a shit how it all turns out, although I do have a soft spot for the underdog, so I would like to see folks in the emerging countries continue to dig their way out of poverty… even if that means some pain here in the U.S. I love living in the U.S. but let’s face it – we’re a pretty soft, spoiled, provincial, money-grubbing bunch. We probably deserve the pain that’s coming.

[davelj]

[quote=Jim Jones]

He stated that he would support economic and tax policies which would in fact lead to the decline in relative wealth and quality of living for 10 million American’s. To me this is crazy our government is in power to preserve our nations wealth, not “spread the wealth around” IMHO.[/quote]

OK, I’m just trying to figure out what specifically those policies would be. I do not think our government is in power “to preserve our nation’s wealth.” I’m pretty sure it’s in power principally to preserve our purported freedoms (obviously it’s debatable as to how well it’s doing in that regard), with all the various and sundry things that implies, which theoretically should serve to preserve our nation’s wealth. Although I think much of the rest of the world would agree with you that it’s clear that Americans want to preserve their wealth – everyone else be damned – and not “spread it around.” Which, as you’re surely aware, is one of the big problems that the Rest of the World has with the U.S. Me… I don’t have kids so I have the luxury of not really worrying about it. I could really give a shit how it all turns out, although I do have a soft spot for the underdog, so I would like to see folks in the emerging countries continue to dig their way out of poverty… even if that means some pain here in the U.S. I love living in the U.S. but let’s face it – we’re a pretty soft, spoiled, provincial, money-grubbing bunch. We probably deserve the pain that’s coming.

[davelj]

[quote=Jim Jones]

He stated that he would support economic and tax policies which would in fact lead to the decline in relative wealth and quality of living for 10 million American’s. To me this is crazy our government is in power to preserve our nations wealth, not “spread the wealth around” IMHO.[/quote]

OK, I’m just trying to figure out what specifically those policies would be. I do not think our government is in power “to preserve our nation’s wealth.” I’m pretty sure it’s in power principally to preserve our purported freedoms (obviously it’s debatable as to how well it’s doing in that regard), with all the various and sundry things that implies, which theoretically should serve to preserve our nation’s wealth. Although I think much of the rest of the world would agree with you that it’s clear that Americans want to preserve their wealth – everyone else be damned – and not “spread it around.” Which, as you’re surely aware, is one of the big problems that the Rest of the World has with the U.S. Me… I don’t have kids so I have the luxury of not really worrying about it. I could really give a shit how it all turns out, although I do have a soft spot for the underdog, so I would like to see folks in the emerging countries continue to dig their way out of poverty… even if that means some pain here in the U.S. I love living in the U.S. but let’s face it – we’re a pretty soft, spoiled, provincial, money-grubbing bunch. We probably deserve the pain that’s coming.

[Author]

Posts