I’m considerably older than 30…I actually lived through the Reagan years, and witnessed his war-mongering, environmental abuses, right-wing social policy, voodoo economics and other idiocy and abuses on the daily news for 8 years. Thankfully his Alzheimer’s-fueled madness was tempered by a solidly Democratic congress. With a Republican congress, he would have been a Dubya.
I grew up in an area that deindustrialized, by moving all the jobs overseas or to the Southern US. It sure as hell wasn’t because of Reagan. I’ll give you a hint, it starts with a U and has five letters.
Dear Chris, let me put your writing in proper context:
Ecocide was a term coined to describe Soviet environmental practices. The AK-47 and it’s variants could stop being produced today and they would still be the most numerous gun for the next 50 years. You can also trace the decline of the Soviet Union to the decline of the Sears catalog, because their central planners and economists really did use that when planning their economy.
[quote=“Okami”]Dear Chris, let me put your writing in proper context:
Ecocide was a term coined to describe Soviet environmental practices. The AK-47 and it’s variants could stop being produced today and they would still be the most numerous gun for the next 50 years. You can also trace the decline of the Soviet Union to the decline of the Sears catalog, because their central planners and economists really did use that when planning their economy.[/quote]
Uhhhh… I also wasn’t too keen about the Soviets either. Disliking Reagan doesn’t automatically mean liking the Soviets.
Take that STRAWMAN!!!
You support capitalism or you support socialism. You can not support both without causing cognitive dissonance. I mean you can live in the fairytale land that says Reagan was a bad bad man, but he did it with the Democrats. He literally reshaped America and laid down the foundation for a 20+ year economic revival. Who amongst us today can say they really fought the evil empire? He stood up, named names and listed their sins, when the liberals amongst us pleaded to allow them to stay like a parasite in the bowels of humanity. He clearly saw the rot from within that eventually destroys all freedom crushing societies where men dare not speak their conscience for fear of death and torture. I think you and Namahottie deny or forget how bad Carter and the American economy were before Reagan came.
No matter how bad you think of Reagan, he even did it with class and humor. Have we had a more quotable and funny president within the last 50 years?
Yes, by a country mile.
You are presenting a false dichotomy. There has never been a purely capitalist or purely socialist economy, so it doesn’t make any sense that one can only support one or the other. Even the Soviets allowed markets for some goods at some local/regional levels. Likewise, the US intervenes in its own markets with a slew of regulations, price controls, subsidies, industry-specific tax breaks, etc. Basically every country has a mixed economy, with the US favoring free markets more so than other nations.
Ridiculous. You all know that the CIA controls American politics. The Jamaicans, Russians and disperate Eastern Europeans control the rest. You really think this puppet Obama is going to make a difference? Pathetic. No use even talking about it.
What is it with strawman arguments tonight?
I said a person supports one or the other, I did not say that there is a pure system of either.
Take that STRAWMAN!!!
You support capitalism or you support socialism. You can not support both without causing cognitive dissonance.[/quote]
Ah, binary thinking strikes again.
I oppose laissez-faire capitalism; I also oppose total government ownership of business (socialism).
I believe in regulated capitalism.
Let me translate for you since you seem to lack the words to accurately describe your beliefs.
Translation: I believe in mercantilism where govt chooses the winners and losers in business through govt laws, regulations, fees, licensing, and in the majority of cases gunpoint the world over. I do not believe that the average person is able to make financial decisions without the input from his betters directing his financial decisions.
That’s why we have the largest expense on cheap shoes at a dept store in the US being import tariffs, but hey, we’re just trying to help the poor. :roflmao: 
:ohreally: :loco:
Great, now you made me go all Smily on you. 
Let me translate for you since you seem to lack the words to accurately describe your beliefs.
Translation: I believe in mercantilism where govt chooses the winners and losers in business through govt laws, regulations, fees, licensing, and in the majority of cases gunpoint the world over. I do not believe that the average person is able to make financial decisions without the input from his betters directing his financial decisions.
That’s why we have the largest expense on cheap shoes at a dept store in the US being import tariffs, but hey, we’re just trying to help the poor. :roflmao: :ohreally: :loco:
Great, now you made me go all Smily on you. [/quote]
Talk about strawmen! 
I would caution you not to put words in others’ mouths, because you’ll invariably get it wrong, as you did in this case and above.
G’night.
Is he a puppet? Read and learn.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on … _Relations
Now the problem you have Chris is you don’t follow the order of consequences. Once govt gets involved in regulating something you often get a very different outcome than what you originally expected/intended. Often times when people are screaming that the govt should get involved into something, they should really be saying that the govt should never have been involved in the first place.
-The milk scandal in China was probably due to Chinese price controls.
-The Clean air act was never meant to be used to rein in CO2.
-The community reinvestment act was never meant to cause a credit crunch.
-The Endangered species act leads to those protected species often getting killed. If one bird is standing between you and the control of your property, well it only takes a BB gun or a 22.
-The minimum wage was never meant to put people out of a job nor disenfranchise minorities, hence why negro newspapers at the time were very much against it. Black unemployment rates were often lower than white’s before than and only raised in tandem with the continuing increase of the minimum wage.
-Nancy Pelosi putting in tax breaks for her husband’s investments
-Charles Rangel claiming a whopping four rent-controlled apartments as his primary residence.
-Do you really want Republicans picking winners and losers?
Don’t be so hard on yourself. There are actually more choices, but the other 2 almost always end in a flaming mess.
Capitalism-Market(i.e average Joe/Jane consumer) decides winners and losers
Socialism-Govt decides what people may and may not buy and how much of it
Mercantilism-Business and trade groups using govt means to acquire an advantage versus straight competition. This is like the elephant in the room and is strictly prohibited from being spoken in liberal circles. Show me a liberal who argues against mercantilism and I’ll show you a closet conservative.
Fascism-Govt dictated control of the economy for military ends