Let GM go Bankrupt

Foxfyre wrote:

You'll have to prove to me that the economy wouldn't have tanked worse than it already has to back up your point. And you can't. I would have preferred to take the inevitable medicine without spending more than a trillion dollars of taxpayer money that the government didn't have and not have much of anything to show for it or not even knowing where most of it went.

We had an experiment in letting the economy tank and doing nothing about it; see, Hoover, Herbert. We don't need a replay in order to satisfy your ideology.


Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

You'll have to prove to me that the economy wouldn't have tanked worse than it already has to back up your point. And you can't. I would have preferred to take the inevitable medicine without spending more than a trillion dollars of taxpayer money that the government didn't have and not have much of anything to show for it or not even knowing where most of it went.

We had an experiment in letting the economy tank and doing nothing about it; see, Hoover, Herbert. We don't need a replay in order to satisfy your ideology.


Cycloptichorn

Did you cut your history classes when the Hoover administration was discussed? If you had, you would have learned that it was Hoover's using of slogans like 'too big to fail' (sound familiar?) and attempts to prop up failing financial institutions and banks that exacerbated the inevitable recession and certainly helped drive it into deep depression. And it was FDR's attempt to spend us out of the depression that almost certainly lengthened it and slowed our recovery.

The current administration is trying nothing new here. They are resurrecting those old failed policies of the Hoover and FDR administrations and trotting them out to the gullible as the salvation of the nation. They weren't then. They won't be now.

Ican is the lone but persistent voice there spelling out a fairly competent rationale for why the President should and must be impeached.

You need to join us over on the Conservatism thread CJ. While I think stopping short of treason, Ican is the lone but persistent voice there spelling out a fairly competent rationale for why the President should and must be impeached.

To Cyclop, I'll just say keep on beating that drum no matter how short of the truth it may be. It seems to comfort you so.

You don't really really read the stuff ican posts, do you?

Yes I do. The difference between you and Ican, or between you and me, for that matter is that Ican and I can actually discuss the stuff he posts or that I post and disagree on it and both come away with somewhat different or at least broader perspectives than we had before. And I recognize that a single post is not the sum total of somebody's thoughts on much of anything, and realize a discussion over time can include numerous facets and concepts all of which are necessary to sum up the full context of a person's thoughts on a subject.

Taking insulting shots at Ican or anybody, however, takes so little imagination, intelligence, or creativity, I can't imagine how that broadens anybody's perspective on anything, but I suppose it does serve the purpose to ensure that one's perspectives are not broadened.

I have learned to chalk that kindof thing up to small mindedness, ignorance, and general mean spiritedness and try not to pay much attention to it these days. You've probably not noticed that Ican rarely, if ever, engages in that sort of thing.

...lighting a cigar with a $20 bill.