|
Two subjects to steer clear of when socializing, Politics and Religion, here we have both lol.
Put aside the religious aspect of the conversation for a moment, lets look at what Beck has been saying with regards to historic value of his information.
He is correct, but he is just another political hack to me. He bashes the programs of Obama's spending while not voicing in any real concentration the Bush policies and how they turned a surplus into a deficit.
Lets go even further. Lets, for a moment, stick with fiscal policy and its historic data to review against.
If you look at the great depression, no seriously educated economist is in disagreement that spending was off the charts in the 20's offset by a booming economy. The crash happens in 29 (different bubble, i.e. in the last 15 years it was property, or housing to be specific, in the 20's it was similiar, only not housing, but investment pools in industry), monatary policy was one of several direct factors to precipitate the crash.
Now, lets look at the long stretch of almost 100 years of fiscal and monatary policy with collusion from both the Federal Reserve and the Federal government. If you look at post 29, the economy did not, in fact, grow with the social policies instituted by FDR. As a matter of fact, the economy began to grow when industries began to supply for Lend Lease and, subsequently, into WW2.
The United States ran up its highest debt/deficit in its history in during WW2. What was the factor that allowed this nation to bring that debt down? It was the fact that the rest of the civilized world was decimated by war. Cities were in ashes on a global scale, the US was the largest exported in the world, exporting some 78% of its products for a 19 year period following the war. This was known as the "GOLDEN AGE" of America.
If you look at the year 1964 you will see the US economy export numbers drop significantly as rebuilt nations put their industrial bases back together in full force.
If you apply this to the modern day, or crash of 08, you will see, there is no significant increase in exports from the US. Put this in context to look at the nations current manufacturing, or industrial base, and it becomes abundantly clear that PROTECTIONISM will be needed to bring the US out of its current fiscal situation in conjuction with TARRIF policies on imports that force industrial or manufacturing based jobs back to the United States.
Right now, the policies that are being applied to the severity of the situation aren't even band aids, all they are doing is what was done in the mid 30's, forcing the problem down the road so to speak to be dealt with at a later date. That cannot last very long.
How does this relate to Beck? He is correct in his assesment of the situation fiscally here in America and is one of only a handful of individuals with a platform to say it to the American people. I am a christian, and as such, also find his moral stance correct, but I would not use that as a stance to say what is wrong with America, only that it is, in fact, a nation that was founded by christians, therefore, it is correct to see the laws that were and are inacted founded on those principals early on the nations history.
Peter Schiff is another one who was and still is warning of the impending disaster monatarily that is heading our way if we fail to utilize some PROTECTIONISM for our labor force.
Do I agree with everything Beck says? No.
But, it is worth noting that to date, not one social program has been able to hold its own fiscally. I don't necessarily blame the programs as I do the way they are administered.
Social Security was doomed from its inception, you cannot predict population numbers.
I utilize this program as an example. For those of us 50 and younger, we are going to have to support those that are 51 and older, and there are more of them than us. Thats a recipe for financial disaster.
The same can be said on many programs in this nation.
But, there are programs that have both short term and long term worth to the nation as a whole.
I don't agree with how they are run, but I do agree with the original principals that founded Medicaid/Medicare. We must ensure, to some extent, the health of our population.
I don't be believe in nationalized health care only in the potential for abuse, its already rampant in the above mentioned programs and will only get worse on a national scale IMHO.
Some social programs are absolutely necessary, but, as Beck has rightfully pointed out, a majority of them have failed due to unforeseen circumstances or just plain instituting them for votes.
_________________
Lord Stanley's Cup is what its all about.
Mr. Pegula, your destiny awaits you sir.
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
