Does Anyone Actually Believe This Guy?
By Johnny Roosh
…on the bottom of the screen on CNN in our lobby as I type:
Delay Means “DEEPENING DISASTER”
Guess who?
Pass the Pork Package…
…or else! (Shivers should have just gone down your spine)
27 Responses to “Does Anyone Actually Believe This Guy?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
February 9th, 2009 at 4:56 pm
Hope and Change morphs into fear and anxiety. Politics 101.
February 9th, 2009 at 4:58 pm
John,
While I know it’s a talking point of the right to say the Hoover and Roosevelt made the Depression worse, the facts are simply these.
It wasn’t until 1932 that Hoover actually started increasing spending to try to combat the Depression. By then, it was too late. Unemployment peaked in 1933 – the Fiscal Year Hoover’s spending went into effect. It decreased throughout Roosevelt’s 1st term, and increased in his 2nd, when he slowed spending on job’s programs.
I don’t, for a moment, intend to argue that government spending is a cure for all ills, but the idea is it provides jobs when jobs are badly needed. While I also don’t consider Donald Trump exactly an expert, he said recently we’re not in a recession, but a depression, and I agree with him. This is the worst economy you’ll see in your lifetime (most likely) – and if we do not act, it is going to get worse – that’s not fear talking, but history.
February 9th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
If it’s an (R) then it’s FEAR!!! mongering.
If it’s a (D) then it is acting prudently yet quickly.
I can spot your Liberal Fascism a mile away.
February 9th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
penigma said:
“Donald Trump … he said recently we’re not in a recession, but a depression”
He is also a buyer of golden toilet seats and likes to say “You’re fired!” repeatedly.
“and if we do not act, it is going to get worse – that’s not fear talking, but history”
Yeah. I think that’s a direct quote from FDR. Hehe.
February 9th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Penigma,
First I want to say that I have appreciated your recent comment style. I may still not agree with you, but at least now I’m willing to read your point.
As for the stimulus, I think even people that want to believe in it have a basic sense that it’s not possible to borrow yourself into prosperity. You can achieve an appearance of prosperity, but as the latest collapse demonstrates, appearances can be as solid as a bubble. As to what history proves, I think Megan McArdle makes a brief and excellent point in The Atlantic:
It seems to me that the burden of proof ought naturally to be on the stimulus proponents to satisfy the public that their highly theoretical models are basically sound, especially for the parts of the bill that aren’t tax cuts or transfer payments. Let’s recall that the evidence for this kind of stimulus working in this kind of situation basically rests on a single instance (World War II)–the other two times it was tried (Japan in the 1990s and America in the 1930s) the economy basically rolled along in the doldrums for the rest of the decade.
Proponents say that that’s because there wasn’t enough stimulus, which is possibly true, but not really satisfying, because first, how do we know this package is enough, and second, that leaves us with a belief in the virtues of stimulus that is essentially non-falsifiable. We might as well move macroeconomic policy to the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives.
February 9th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
For reference, Murray Rothbard documents pretty clearly that Hoover’s economic intervention started not in 1932, but a whole week after the initial stock market crash in 1929 with pressure on the fed to reduce interest rates and the supply of money. It followed vast efforts by the Fed, Harding, Wilson, Hoover, and Coolidge to manipulate the U.S. economy to support a faltering, inflationary fiat money regime in Europe throughout the 1920s.
Sorry, Peev, I’ve seen the graphs. FDR was Hoover with another name and vastly better PR, and both of them did a lot to create and sustain the Depression. You want the guy who fixed things? Shot himself in the mouth in his bunker in Berlin in 1945. His war made Roosevelt’s disastrous economic policies moot, as economic calculus changes a bit when the stakes are whether your son/husband/father comes home alive or not, instead of whether you get a bonus this year.
February 9th, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Enough stimulus?
If Japan running up more than 100% of GDP in debt wasn’t enough to recover there’s not enough savings in the world for the US to “stimulate” our economy.
February 9th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Miss Peev:
“By then, it was too late.”
Did he really need to do something, though?
February 9th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
Bike Butthead said: “You want the guy who fixed things? Shot himself in the mouth in his bunker in Berlin in 1945.”
Apparently Bike Butthead puts “too darn many European Jews” on his list of problems that needed fixing.
February 9th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Something that is not mentioned much in the context of WW2 spending ending the Great Depression is that it also put thirteen million Americans into uniform and out of the job pool.
February 9th, 2009 at 6:17 pm
That was an idiotic comment even coming from you, Angry Clown.
Want to look up the word ‘context’ in the dictionary — Here, I’ll help:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/context
February 9th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Terry said: “Something that is not mentioned much in the context of WW2 spending ending the Great Depression is that it also put thirteen million Americans into uniform and out of the job pool.”
Hey I think you should give Bush a little credit. He started as many wars as he could and kept ’em going to the end of his presidency. None of that premature economy-killing “victories” for W., no siree!
February 9th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Say AssClown?
How’r you and jr. coming with that offspring skeet plan….he a bit too heavy to get into the air? Yeah, that’s the problem with letting those stem cells run their course; pretty soon they’re full of Big Mac’s.
Well, there’s always the “sporting clays” model, lets ya get the little sucker on the run…..shhhhk-clink…BLAM!
February 9th, 2009 at 7:11 pm
Clown, at least Bush did surrender like Pelosi, Reid, and the poodle they’ve got in he White House urged him to.
You’re really getting low on ammo, aren’t you? Perhaps it’s time for another “He’s the president, get used to it you loser wingnuts” comment?
February 9th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
None of that premature economy-killing “victories” for W., no siree!
Oh boy. It sure will be interesting watching President ACORN prosecute the war in Afghanistan. Funny, he won’t have much to do in Iraq, now. All that security and stability is proof of failed policy!
February 9th, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Basic question: How do we spend our way out of debt?
February 9th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
We save or create 4 million jobs! Somehow.
February 9th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
Here’s a takedown of Krugman’s “The stimulus is too small!” malarkey: http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/02/06/the-passionate-politics-of-paul-krugmans-apolitical-economics/
Wilkinson explains how Krugman, winner of the Nobel Prize in economics, can be so wrong about, er, economics. Best lines:
February 9th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Wow, that’s the best takedown Angryclown has read since your hero Hitler took down Stalingrad. Since Dewey took down Truman. Since the French took down Henry V!
February 9th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
Since Clownie took down that order for two lattes and a double decaf mocha!
February 9th, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Since Kermie took down his liederhosen to take it from Shiftee.
There’s a new sheriff in town, grapenuts, and his name is Barack Hussein Obama!
February 9th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Night Writer,
You mention the 1930’s depression, WWII, and Japan.
I believe that Sweden in the 1990’s is also considered an example of what has and has not worked in similar events.
February 9th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
Didn’t Krugman’s ancestors come from Germany?
February 9th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
Nice response to Wilkinson’s critique of Krugman, AC. Oh wait. It was all snark as usual. You really don’t do well at ‘understanding and presenting logical arguments’ do you? You voted for Obama, right? All-hat-no-cattle Obama? On the strength of his selling Grit door to door and the fact that he majored in foreign policy at Columbia?
February 10th, 2009 at 7:57 am
You really don’t do well at ‘understanding and presenting logical arguments’ do you?
To be fair, he doesn’t really try any of those.
February 10th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
I think a quick review of historic boom and bust cycles ( not only the stock market crash of 1929, but the earlier Gilded Age era crisis that led to the Panic of 1893, etc.) would support Obama’s assessment. I see so many commentaries on FDR and the history of the 1930s, but little on what seems to me to be equally or perhaps more pertinent in comparison, the events leading up to that period. The similarities are pretty striking, once again proving the truth of the phrase that those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Add to the Sweden in the 90’s reference, Argentina, late 90’s into the new millenium.
February 11th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Apparently the concept of “context” once again evades AngryClown. For those apparently unclear on the concept of fifth grade reading level, the thing that was fixed was the Depression.
And if you want somebody who wants a new Holocaust, let’s talk about a President who is willing to meet with Holocaust deniers, no questions asked and no preconditions, despite decades of terrorism. Shall we?