Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (432318)	7/24/2003 9:55:27 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Looks like you are a BIG Liberal: -- fiscal prudence, balanced budgets -- "Always? In recession and depression too?" >>> The Keynesian position (Liberal position) is that Big Government can moderate the flucuations of the business cycle: incurring deficits during economic slowdowns, and running balanced budgets paying down debt during the "up" part of the business cycle. >>> The evidence of history shows that politicians are always looking for the short-term "fix", boosting their reelection prospects, and that deficit spending is endemic... regardless of the business cycle. >>> The True Conservative position (as argued by the Austrian/Chicago school of economics) is that the Fed should only establish a stable monetary base, and NOT attempt to 'manage' the business cycle... which it emphatically CANNOT do without serious side effects. Here, you are supporting the classical Liberal position, and I the True Conservative position. -- low and fair taxes, strong national defense -- "Define "fair taxes"." >>> OK: equitable & low rates (flat would be equitable) applying across the board, without crony capitalism carve-outs, or 'special tax preference items' and other market-distorting loopholes. "And you see no conflict between "low taxes" and "strong national defense"?" >>> Nope. Discipline is always useful (even in defense contracting :) -- Free Markets and trade -- "What about all the AMerican workers who imports put out of work? Or who are put out of work because jobs are exported? What are your proposals in regard to them?" >>> It is conservative, free market principle that the greatest efficiencies - and thus the highest potential growth - are achieved in free markets... vs. 'managed' markets with hide-bound and restrictive national trade barriers. This is because capital flows to where it achieves the highest return and Adam Smith's "invisible hand" assures the most efficient markets, and the highest long-term growth rates. >>> Restricted, 'managed' markets with import & export barriers, in the long run produce lower growth rates. >>> Here, I am taking the Conservative, free market position, and you are taking the position of protectionism and Liberalism. -- small government -- "I assume you oppose welfare then." >>> I oppose wasteful transfer payment systems. Our system of tax loopholes and 'Corporate Welfare' vastly out-costs our individual welfare payments... by about 10 to 1 or more. There is much 'pork' in federal spending... most of it diverted to special interests, and not in the true national interest. -- strong individual rights -- "Which ones? Does "affirmative action" increase or decrease them? Should it be stopped?" >>> All of them (let's start with the list provided by our Founding Fathers, and work from there). >>> Racial preference is racial discrimination. It should be forbidden in all government and private business actions. >>> If we - as a people - wish to aid the down-trodden, help to undo the after-effects of our sad history of slavery and discrimination (and I believe as a people, that is a noble goal, and one that should be national policy), then we should choose actions that will aid in that effort... without prolonging discrimination, or creating new negative side effects. >>> I believe the best way to achieve the goals of achieving racial harmony, equity and fairness... is to: 1). Have strong anti-discrimination laws, promoting equality before the courts, equality of opportunity, etc., and 2). To overcome the after-effects of past slavery and discrimination - in-so-far as areas such as college admissions may be helpful in achieving true equality of opportunity - if preferences in admissions are needed... then they should be based only on TWO factors: intellectual achievement & potential (grades, test scores, etc.), and economic deprivation. Skin color or ethnicity should not be a factor at all. We should be a 'color-blind society', judging people by their achievements and the 'content of their character'. "Sloganeering is easy. Now it's time for concrete." >>> Right. I think I have, and it looks like you are far more 'Liberal' and Big Government statist than me....