Politics
Out of context: Reply #15126
- Started
- Last post
- 33,770 Responses
- TheBlueOne0
I love the way "theorists" avoid empirical evidence. From the period of time when the US enacted a social spending net until the Republicans started to dismantle it in the 1980's the US enjoyed the highest % of income growth in history. For some reason this doesn't "count" as real, but the whole idea of "cutting taxes on the rich so it trickles down" which hasn't actually worked in the 40 odd years of trying just needs to "be applied one more time, but with more vigor", as stated by the small % of the population that has seen it's income grow during that period.
One sounds like an ideology and one sounds like a practical solution.
We had an unregulated banking system. It drove the globe into worldwide depression. We regulated it and banking became safe and boring with small, respectable profits. Then they deregulated it and surprise! we are on the brink of a global depression.
But more deregulation is apparently the "serious" answer. Again given by the same small % who seem to benefit from it. You know, made by the people who have in the meantime bought all the media outlets and hack politicians phones.
Again, one is an ideology and another is a practical tool of economic governance.
Useful idiots is the perfect term for you sheep.