For the Anti-spenders:

[Yanksfan396]

I do not think it is a good idea to bail out private companies. That should not be the role of the government. If they are out of money taxpayers should not have to bail them out. They should file bankruptcy and restructure. If they are still not profitable then why would we keep giving them tax payer money?

I also think we should lower the corporate tax rate. We are still the second highest on the planet.

Okay, so your answer for regenerating the economy is to not fund it, and to cut corporate tax? Interesting...

[jaybird_1981]

Tiger... haven't called anyone a moron, just an undefined, nameless group.


I'm surprised all of the nay-sayers are quiet. As Mike would say, "The silence is very telling."

I am sure the silence was mostly because people didn't want to waste their time with you.

[Yanksfan396]

Capitalism...should be allowed to correct the situation naturally.

So you would do nothing? How effective.
Also, there's no such thing as a temporary fix, as the effects of any "solution" to a recession take about 3 years to show. I heard this from the pill-popping president you portrayed.

Is there anyone (Daniel, you come to mind) who can provide a good, well thought out answer that isn't the opposite of the current?

[Yanksfan396]

there is silence becuase

1. we were given multiple things not to say
2. people gave good answers and they were shot down, thus showing that there was no need to post.

as for the moron comment, if I were to post that i think they shouldn't bail out the auto industry, I would therefore be a moron, using your criteria.

No, I just want an answer saying what one would DO. All I've seen in this forum is the proverbial stubborn answer: "Well, what I wouldn't do is..."

Don't get me wrong, I hate the spending. It truly makes me nervous, but I don't see any other way (hence the thread).

By the way, it would be "criterion."

[Chuck-17]

So you would do nothing? How effective.
Also, there's no such thing as a temporary fix, as the effects of any "solution" to a recession take about 3 years to show. I heard this from the pill-popping president you portrayed.

Is there anyone (Daniel, you come to mind) who can provide a good, well thought out answer that isn't the opposite of the current?

So what is your solution? Continue to throw money at a failing company? Have tax payers spend billions of dollars to keep a private company afloat? Great long term solution. We can keep giving money to companies that are not making money. I can't see anything wrong with that.

[Yanksfan396]

I am sure the silence was mostly because people didn't want to waste their time with you.

You just did, while at the same time proving you don't have an answer. I can guarantee you Daniel and Mike have good solutions, as their posts traditionally have the most... what's the word? Oh yeah, "substance."

[jaybird_1981]

Well here is my answer:

How about just letting the economy run its course.

[OnePimpTiger]

So you would do nothing? How effective.
Also, there's no such thing as a temporary fix, as the effects of any "solution" to a recession take about 3 years to show. I heard this from the pill-popping president you portrayed.

Is there anyone (Daniel, you come to mind) who can provide a good, well thought out answer that isn't the opposite of the current?

There is such thing as a temporary fix actually, something that gives a quick boost to the economy, but does nothing to address the long-term issues and ensure continued growth...a simple concept really.

And I would do plenty of things. I said let Capitalism run it's course...we would have to return to Capitalism for that to happen. The system we have now isn't Capitalism, especially considering the actions President Obama and his administration have taken and plan to take in the future.

I would recall the bailouts, let the failing companies declare bankruptcy. I would especially let the auto industry declare bankruptcy and restructure, as that's the only way they will ever be successful. I would cut coporate taxes and provide other tax breaks and incentives for corporations to invest. I would pursue more and better free trade agreements. But first and foremost, I would reduce the excess liquidity in the economy, which is one of the main reasons the value of the dollar is and has been tanking.

Once those actions were taken, I would be honest and tell the American people that a situation this dire isn't going to be fixed tomorrow or next month or even next year. Recovery can begin, but it will take time for things to return to normal. And then I would turn my attention to overhauling the welfare system and other wasteful social programs.

Does that meet your criterion for an acceptable answer?

[OnePimpTiger]

No, I just want an answer saying what one would DO. All I've seen in this forum is the proverbial stubborn answer: "Well, what I wouldn't do is..."

Don't get me wrong, I hate the spending. It truly makes me nervous, but I don't see any other way (hence the thread).

By the way, it would be "criterion."

You keep saying this, but cutting government spending is doing something. It's not a matter of sitting there doing nothing, the spending is already taking place, cutting it would require action.

And you're quick to insult everyone else about not providing an answer, yet you've provided no "substance" yourself...take the beam out of your own eye before you point out the speck in another's.

[ensbergcollector]

No, I just want an answer saying what one would DO. All I've seen in this forum is the proverbial stubborn answer: "Well, what I wouldn't do is..."

Don't get me wrong, I hate the spending. It truly makes me nervous, but I don't see any other way (hence the thread).

By the way, it would be "criterion."

thanks for the english lesson...does it make you feel better to attempt to talk down to people?