You’re binary when it comes to understanding how an economy works. When you encourage innovation, risk taking, and a positive work ethic, good things follow. Encourage government hand outs as a substitute, you get larger and larger government to sustain it. Sadly, your cohort only understands that concept when the money runs out.
In your world “encouraging innovation” is a euphemism for slashing taxes for the richest.
Pity there’s no actual evidence to suggest it brings anything other than disaster.
“Encouraging government hand outs” is a euphemism for “screw the poor”.
“When the money runs out” is a tremendous right-wing cliche.
Pity for you that it’s most applicable in countries like the US and the UK which have most embraced neo-liberalism, while Germany, France, Holland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway are on a far more sure footing as regards their economies.
Encouraging business led to the greatest expansion in western economies in history from 1980 to 1999, including most of the countries you mentioned. Government, and central banks in particular which are a branch of government, destroyed western economies by interfering in free markets.
You obviously are incapable of understanding this or don’t want to. I would encourage you to study Mises, the greatest economist of the 20th century. Not his followers, like Hayek and Friedman, go to the original source to learn how unfettered economies work.
Again, “encouraging business” in your world is a euphemism - a euphemism for slashing taxes for the richest.
The Bush tax cuts in the US were an example of the economic disaster that happens when you destroy the tax base.
The US’s Congressional Research Service found no correlation at all between tax cuts and economic growth.
The results of the analysis suggest that changes over the past 65 years in the top marginal tax rate and the top capital gains tax rate do not appear correlated with economic growth. The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment, and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution. As measured by IRS data, the share of income accruing to the top 0.1% of U.S. families increased from 4.2% in 1945 to 12.3% by 2007 before falling to 9.2% due to the 2007-2009 recession. At the same time, the average tax rate paid by the top 0.1% fell from over 50% in 1945 to about 25% in 2009. Tax policy could have a relation to how the economic pie is sliced—lower top tax rates may be associated with greater income disparities.
All of those you name there were crackpots and I’ve read enough shite written by their followers to know that.
Maybe your weren’t around in the 80s and 90s, but they were pretty good times. All brought about by a business friendly environment (including Bill Clinton who I voted for twice, so much for your binary bullshit). The only path to a prosperous and democratic society is capitalism, study the history of western civilization.
No, that would be North Korea, your spiritual soul mates.
I have been to Venevuela, have numerous work colleagues from Venezuela, a few great friends from Venevuela. You want to debate Venezuela and your hero Chavez (and your posts are there, lauding him, but I couldn’t be arsed looking).
So. Trump hangs pictures of fake Time magazine covers with him on the front at his golf resorts. Time has asked him to take them down.
Huckabee Sanders goes on a rant abut “fake news”, and then promotes a propagandist shill whose journalism has about as much credibility as @anon7035031’s “understanding” of economics.
It’s the Senate’s bill, not Trumps’s Bill.
Health Care is a nightmare in the US, it’s what Europe is facing shortly. Younger people aren’t buying insurance, and will even pay a penalty to avoid it. Meanwhile, most working people have no choice but to pay higher premiums.
I have come round to the idea that the whole Trump thing is a massive social experiment foisted on the US and the wider world and serving as a distraction from something else. But, by whom?
