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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (490538)	6/24/2009 7:59:45 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576704

>> FDR was more radical in terms of extending government control over the economy. FDR was radical, no doubt. But I'm not sure he was any worse than Obama. Maybe. FDR caused a lot of problems that we're still living with today (the SS debacle being one of them, and the power he gave the unions is certainly responsible for a significant portion of the woes of the automakers). I think Obama's agenda seems more radical on the surface, but you almost have to see how things play out over a period of decades to really know what the effects have been. Who would have thought LBJ's Medicare would have turned into the disaster it has become in only 50 years? I also think that FDR's programs didn't turn out like he'd planned, and if they had, they might not have been as bad. That's the problem with this stuff -- you get decades of tinkering piled on top of an already borderline social program and it just becomes a mess.