We Are Witnessing The Effects Of Neo-Conservative Economics

[fellowtraveller]

Again, you flail away at scarecrows and take your eye off the geograbhic ball. Attack the region I advocate for, CENTER-LEFT PROGRESSIVE SCANDINAVIA AND THE POLITICAL LEADERS THERE.

Oblivious, flailing, blind right-wing morons/maniacs.

You want me to attack Scandinavia?

Warmonger.......

[Joesixpack5]

Collapse is a good thing compared to permanent suck:

Higher GDP per capita allows the average American to spend about $9,700 more on consumption every year than the average European. So Yanks have by far more cars, TVs, computers and other modern goods. "Most Americans have a standard of living which the majority of Europeans will never come anywhere near," the Swedish study says.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/fe...ml?id=110005242

Even American and Canadian garbage is worth more.

The US has quaduple the poverty rates, a lower life expectancy, a much higher homicide rate, the highest incarceration rate on earth, a much higher infant mortality rate, much more personal bankruptcies (due to medical expenses), epic homelessness, vast foreclosures, greater foreign held debt, lower education results/standards and many other manifestations of an inferior socio-economic result.

And all to serve the military & corporate elite.

Shame.

[Joesixpack5]

http://www.rd.com/your-america-inspiring-p...ticle45734.html

http://www.vexen.co.uk/countries/scandinavia.html

http://www.progressive-economics.ca/2007/0...in-scandinavia/

http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/

Some people judge their socio-economics solely based on GDP whollop, without recognizing that in the US the increases in wealth have been mainly for the top 10% of wealth earners under Bush economics.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn41...27/ai_n18635811

In the 1.5 years since that was written, it's gotten even worse.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut?pid=24486

Under Bush, the corporate & military elites greatly benefit. The poor and middle class are smashed. The Neo-Cons believed faithfully in their extreme theory, but still fail to observe empirical reality. They have wrecked the economy for everyone poor and middle class.

Edited September 16, 2008 by Joesixpack5

[Joesixpack5]

You want me to attack Scandinavia?

Warmonger.......

I don't argue for the extremist radical socialist Chavez, I argue for him to move to center-left Scandinavian sanity. Norway could teach him about nationalizing HALF the oil industry but no more. Each Norwegian has an $80,000 account, and semi-socialism hasn't wrecked their economy. Same basic positive/stable effect for the Danes, the Swedes and the Finns (who outranked the US WRT economic competitiveness rankings most of the last several years - while providing welfare state basics) as well as the Dutch, the Germans, the Swiss, the French, etc.

I'd also never argue for the Bush-Brained extremists either, if I happened to be on the right. Like I said before, the moderate center-right Scandinavian conservatives are much more sane, pragmatic, and would do far less damage than the right-wing extremists.

Joe Clark vs. Bush, Rove, Cheney, Limbaugh and Rumsfeld. The rational choice is clear - a moderate, not an extremist.

[Topaz]

I listened to Catherine Fitts last night and she worked for Bush sr. and she said that IF AIG which is a conduit between Wall St. and Main St. goes down, we could really be in for some major problems but alot of the effect won't be felt it next spring/ summer. Her website is www.solari.com and she has a 9-series about the US housing and ecomony, which she talks about missing money from the US government in the trillions and no one knows were it is.

[Argus]

Some people judge their socio-economics solely based on GDP whollop, without recognizing that in the US the increases in wealth have been mainly for the top 10% of wealth earners under Bush economics.

There are a lot of ways to measure wealth. But it's pretty telling that the almost half of the "poor" in the US own their own homes, and that the average living space for the "poor" in the US is 20% higher than the average living space for Europeans as a whole. And as I've observed myself, and as the article restates, the "poor" in the US and in Canada, generally have cars, stereos, big TVs and stereos, air conditioning, cell phones, and money for beer and cigarettes.

[fellowtraveller]

I don't argue for the extremist radical socialist Chavez, I argue for him to move to center-left Scandinavian sanity. Norway could teach him about nationalizing HALF the oil industry but no more. Each Norwegian has an $80,000 account, and semi-socialism hasn't wrecked their economy. Same basic positive/stable effect for the Danes, the Swedes and the Finns (who outranked the US WRT economic competitiveness rankings most of the last several years - while providing welfare state basics) as well as the Dutch, the Germans, the Swiss, the French, etc.

I'd also never argue for the Bush-Brained extremists either, if I happened to be on the right. Like I said before, the moderate center-right Scandinavian conservatives are much more sane, pragmatic, and would do far less damage than the right-wing extremists.

Joe Clark vs. Bush, Rove, Cheney, Limbaugh and Rumsfeld. The rational choice is clear - a moderate, not an extremist.

Joe Clark vs what? What am I choosing here? Are some of those people running for something somewhere in your alternate universe?

Have you ever thought of putting down that bong for a few moments?