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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (24529)	8/16/2012 4:46:15 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

That may be the meme but the last conservative/Republican we had certainly didn't do less, nor his recent predecessors. He wasn't a fiscal conservative. Don't feel bad. Bush fooled the R's, too. <g> Another reason why the D's get more done is because, when they are in the White House, they usually have Congress, too.

To: Road Walker who wrote (24529)	8/16/2012 7:30:58 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 42652

Your correct that Bush was no champion of limited government, not even close. * OTOH "There was much more growth in government under Bush than under Obama.", is rather questionable to say the least (even more questionable if you adjust for time in office). Obamacare alone is probably at least as big as the combination of programs you list. Not perhaps if you count all of Homeland Security as an addition, but it isn't, its mostly existing functions and organizations that where brought under a new umbrella. Of course the spending involved just with the reorganization and expansion of existing functions, was larger than any current spending under Obamacare, but that is unlikely to be true in the long run, and Obamacare increases government mandates and regulation more than it does spending. * Even the relative supporters of limited government, like Reagan, allowed, and even encouraged government to grow, you would probably have to go back to Coolidge to a president that really restrained government, and in his case the restraint might be exaggerated, he reduced spending, but from levels that had been inflated during WWI. He didn't reduce spending to pre-war levels, not even in real terms. Republicans presidents (at least. post Coolidge) have been more like "ok we'll spend and do more, but not quite as much more" then they are actual supporters of smaller government. Post Reagan is questionable whether they even go that far.