The Free Market led to industrial nightmares as depicted in Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle", which had an effect, but not the one Sinclair wanted. He wrote it to foment socialist/communist fervor, instead it led to regulating the industry. It was a net good since REGULATIONS are there to protect and standarize. The problem is not that they exist, the problem is that regulations are either inadequate or poorly enforced. Free, unregulated markets also lead to uncontrolled boom-bust cycles which lead to depressions. The issue is not that regulations exist. THe issue is that regulations are not enforced or inadequate, since they "trust" the markets to self correct and self regulate. That does not happen. It would happen if people were rational actors, but people are by and large NOT rational actors.
If you really believe Keynesian policies save economies, let me remind you that the only thing that ended the Great Depression in the United States was World War 2 and the aftermath that followed. Historians even acknowledge that Franklin D. Roosevelt's economic policies failed in terms of ending the Depression and that the only reason there was a decrease in business failures was because there were less businesses around later in his time in office to fail.
[/quote}
Oh please, tell me which historians. Other than cato institute hacks that start with the conclusion "the new deal failed" and go from there. You know why WW2 finalized the Depression?
Massive, massive state investment and infrastructure. Not free enterprises
I shall not comment on that since I am not as familiar with the particular economic policies of either as I should, but in any case, Bush can be called many things, but not "fiscally conservative" at all. Hell, Clinton left a goddamn surplus, Bush turned it into a deficit by being a warmonger. There is nothing fiscally conservative about being a warmonger.
As for policies that reek of left wing scandal, Obama was the one who gave out, through his attorney general Eric Holder and the BATFE, thousands of rifles, shotguns, and handguns to the drug cartels of your country who already had strong connections with corrupt law enforcement and military personnel that led to them getting heavily armed in the first place. Obama and Holder then tried to cover up the incident, Operation Fast and Furious, by blaming private civilian gun owners in the United States and the "Ma and Pa" gun shops until BATFE whistleblowers revealed the cover up. Bush never allowed the BATFE to send thousands of government-owned rifles, shotguns, and handguns over the Mexican-American border. That was Obama.
Luisfius: That started under Bush. It was horribly badly managed, but the dumb initiative to track down gun usage started under Bush. Shit, it started happening in 2006. So, yeah, the blame falls on both, but it was started under Bush, and it was a goddamn idiotic move. Also one of the issues in there was the idiotic escalation of hostilities herei n Mexico, in a stupid move to "legitimize" Calderón's government.
Also, there was the Solyndra scandal and the other scandals involving the so-called "green energy" companies in which the administration gave out over a billion dollars total in faulty loans in the name of "green energy" resulting in the companies' leaderships giving themselves huge bonuses and then declaring bankruptcy. That was fraud but they got away with it because those executives happen to be big pro-Obama donors. Then there was the Benghazi cover-up scandal.
Luisfius: Solyndra is no scandal. Investing in new tech can go wrong, it went wrong there, it does not discredit the initiative to find alternatives.
Also what the HELL does Benghazi got to do with green energy? And what cover-up? Hell if anything, from what I've read, that also falls on the Republicans even if they have been pushing the meme of Obama letting them die, they refused to increase the budget for "lesser" embassies. You are throwing every single possible argument out there in hopes that they won't be answered to, but damn.
Seriously, what coverup?
Despite all of these scandals, crimes, and economic fallacies; the left wing in the United States re-elected Obama just because they wanted the government to force someone else at gunpoint to pay for their unnecessary abortions, their contraceptives even though condoms are quite cheap, and their cellphones. They acted as if you were against taxpayer subsidies for Planned Parenthood, then you were automatically against all abortions including rape-related and medically necessary ones. Also, they believed in the myth of "free universal" healthcare despite governmental delays and denial in essential medical procedures in other countries like the UK and Canada or the fact that Obamacare adds over 100 new federal bureaucracies to an already overly expensive centralized government or the fact that Obamacare includes an employer-health mandate that was inconsiderate to any smaller business that already provided decent coverage for employees and that was basically designed to involuntarily switch employees to lesser health plans because the fines are cheaper than the upgrade when combined with a downgrade.
Obama was elected because he was a less terrible option than MormonBot Romney, the man with less charisma than John Kerry, hated even by his OWN PARTY.
"Unnecessary abortions", unnecessary according to who? You really think that abortion is used as a "casual" contraceptive? Again, your lack of perspective is staggering. The "cellphones" dig, that is continaution of a PROGRAM STARTED BY REAGAN. "They acted as if you were against taxpayer subsidies for Planned Parenthood, then you were automatically against all abortions including rape-related and medically necessary ones." That is because nine times out of ten, it is an attack on that. Limiting them, adding hurdles, diminishing and defunding clinics, that's the end game. ". Also, they believed in the myth of "free universal" healthcare despite governmental delays and denial in essential medical procedures in other countries like the UK and Canada ". Better to wait for care than to not be given care due to not having a billion dollars. Obviously exagerating, but the waiting times in places with socialized healthcare exist, but there are things called "triage" and "prioritizing urgent care", not "rushing just the ones that can pay".
The United States of America pays far more for medicine per capita than every single other country, and the average care is far worse. Sure, the ultra-high-end of medical care IS the best money can buy, but it is what MONEY CAN BUY.
As for Obamacare, yeah, no one defends that as a good thing. It is a BETTER thing since it expands coverage, but it is basically the Republican healthcare proposal of the 90's. Seriously. It was written by and for insurance industry lobbyists, since the option for socialized/single payer health care was not even on the table.
There never was a true free market in the USA. From the time of its founding there were always things like tariffs, trusts (monopolies) made and supported by the government, and specific goods, and even services which were outlawed by the government on both the local and federal level, things like that never happen in a true Free/Libre market......As for medical care, would you prefer the USA be more like Cuba or Mexico?
_Bruce_: Apparently I need to point out that my tonge was firmly in cheek. Really though this can be applied to many religions.
Darvond: I realize that, but in my inflammatory opinion, I feel that at the current writing, Islam is the most
overt of them, at the moment.
