Korean Job Discussion Forums

[chickenpie]

Well done. Four more years!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7820164.stm

More US workers lost jobs last year than in any year since World War II, with employers axing 2.6 million posts and 524,000 in December alone.

The US jobless rate rose to 7.2% in December, the highest in 16 years.

[canuckistan]

Surf a few conservative websites and read the ridiculous ways they blame the Dems for it too.

It's like the last 8 years of Bush never, ever existed.

Is that being clued out, in denial, or just plain stupid?

I haven't decided that one yet.

[Kuros]

[mises]

Blame is very hard to assign. Let me try.

Nixon (we're all Keynesian now..)
Greenspan (rates at 1-1.75 for 33 months..)
Who ever lifted leverage rates

And some others.

[chickenpie]

[RJjr]

[chickenpie]

I wonder when any of the republican apologists are going to post on this thread?

[ManintheMiddle]

Canuckistan wrote:

[bucheon bum]

[aka Dave]

Don't ask a moron, to elaborate on why "Dems are half to blame", it's about as useful (and interesting) as talking with a paper bag.

The Republicans controlled all branches of the government until 06, but with their victory that year the Democrats failed to obtain a veto proof majority in the Senate. Thus they were powerless to pass substantial legislation. Blaming them for the financial crisis is like blaming the Titanic on the pastry chef.

Now, Clinton did help deregulate the markets, and that was bad, but the Republicans wanted him to go much further. Further, the Republicans wanted to privatize Social Security. Could you imagine what would have happened had they succeeded? The calamity can't even be contemplated.

They have an ideology with renders them immune to reality, they just repeat the same crap over and over regardless of the empirical results of policy.

For example, in 93 Clinton increased taxes on the rich. *Every* Republican said this would certainly, absolutely certainly cause a recession. Rather, the reverse happened and Clinton left with huge surpluses.

In 01, Republicans said Bush's tax cuts would create enough growth to offset the cost and thus increase the surpluses. The opposite occured. They said our invasion Iraq would be quick, cheap (offset by Iraqi oil), that a democracy there would make peace more likely in Israel, and that we'd be greated as liberators. Again, the opposite occured.

I could go on and on. Katrina. The Interior Dept. Alberto Gonzales. They're a bunch of hacks, criminals, and liars and they deserve nothing but contempt.

I will not engage anyone who still believes in the right-wing ideology in "debate". The debate's over. It's as pointless as debating a Leninist Marxist.

History has had its say, and Republicans, incontestably and decisively, are proved wrong.

If they'd had any sense of decency they'd shut up and let Obama deal with the havoc they've left us.

But they don't.

[pkang0202]

[aka Dave]

I said Clinton was wrong to allow derugulation on wall street, which led to the derivitaves and the lack of transparency in the financial markets. I.e., I criticized a Democrat.

However, F.U. asshat. Your post is *content free*. What substantial argument do you make? None. It's an ad hominem attack on me, without attacking any *actual* Democratic policies, and it doesn't defend any Republican policies.

Just the same old bullshit we've seen these past eight years. There's no policy in your post (6 seperate policy arguments made in mine), so I have no respect your non-argument.

Solutions? Okay biatch. Here we go.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/opinion/12krugman.html?ref=opinion
He just won a nobel prize in economics. You work in a crappy hagwon.

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2009/01/10/why-i-m-in-the-nervous-camp-and-other-recession-thoughts.aspx

Personally, i'd lose the business tax cuts, as per Krugmann, I'd invest massively in green technology, and I'd stop deporting any foreign college graduateswho might teach science/techonology in schools. However, I don't claim to be an expert.

What I'm claiming is, reflexively cutting taxes on the rich will not get us out of this mess, in fact, excessive speculation via derivatives by the rich got us into this mess.

I'm also claiming, you're a fucking moron, because I'm tired of tolerating content free bullshit by right wingers who adduce no empirical evidence whatsofuckingever to their argument.

You want to Pm me to discuss this "personally" do it. I don't think you'd enjoy the results of that conversation, despite your "avatar".

[RJjr]

Although the Republicans have been a lot worse than the Democrats, the Democrats have also pitched in and overspent our money. To the Democrats' credit, they used to have the balls to tax the shit out of us and make us pay for things upfront. The Republicans have borrowed instead and built the Ponzi scheme Peter Schiff talks about in this interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzBPOEj3UD4&feature=related

[mises]

There was essentially ZERO economic growth in the Bush years (FT reports less than 1%/yr using government CPI figures). What we had was a massive expansion of debt in every sector of the economy (public, corp, private). We've lost a decade, and are now looking at two.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28612358/

[Bigfeet]

You want a solution? I know what the solution is but not enough people have the guts to vote for it.

We got into this mess by overspending. The Democrats tax and spend, the Republicans cut tax and spend. Americans have been overspending for at least a decade. Americans are now broke, and they will drive the American government broke trying to maintain their profligate ways.

The solution is to do the reverse of what got us into this mess. We need to raise tax and cut spending. But people don't have the guts to do it. So instead of going poor by our own choice we will go poor by the choice of others.