Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 16:54:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Gilbert Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
It is a pity his successor, George W., got distracted from his "Compassionate
Conservatism", and took us down the path of massive budget? deficits and a
costly and unnecessary war in Iraq. I do not have to tell you the consequences
of the war and the budgets deficits at the Federal, Corporate and Individual
levels.? This has been?described as 'Disaster Capitalism'. The stock market
lost more capitalization in the last few weeks than after September,11, 2001.
>
Mario responds:
>
Gilbert, this is embarrassing from someone who supposedly follows current
events, even if your comments had anything to do with the title of this post.
Almost everything you are proposing was tried under Jimmy Carter. Perhaps you
came here after the economic mess he created that Reagan had to clean up.
>
a) "Unnecessary war", hanh? I didn't realize you were a Saddam and Al Qaeda
supporter. Was it unnecessary from the point of view of the Iraqis, especially
the 80% who are Kurds and Shia, who are now firmly on the path to freedom and
democracy, peace and prosperity, unless, perhaps, Obama gets elected.
>
b) Did you even know that the deficit DECREASED from 3.5% of GDP in 2001 to
1.9% of GDP in 2006, and is projected to increase to about 4% in the near
future? How does this gibe with your comical assertions?
>
c) I hate to inform you of this, but what happened in the stock market last
week had nothing to do with the liberation of Iraq.
>
d) Actually it was the "Compassionate Conservative" part of Bush 43 that caused
the deficits to increase because he would not veto wasteful federal spending
mostly on social programs. If he had not cut tax rates the deficits would have
been even higher.
>
Gilbert wrote:
>
The present Nanny Governments across the world should announce as a matter of
policy "No bail-out" or government contracts to any corporation where the
president and CEO make more than a million dollars in annual compensation. For
a minimum those being bailed out now should cease?receiving over a million
dollar in salary. This should be easy now as government is a stock holder of
these financial institutions.
>
Mario responds:
>
I had to look twice to see that this was not written by Mervyn:-))
>
Karl Marx must be smiling in his mausoleum at your Marxian notion of capping
executive salaries, based on a total ignorance of how the capitalist system of
government on which you made your money works. Even India does not cap
executive salaries any more after seeing it add to the brain drain before
Manmohan Singh began to influence policy.
>
Perhaps they should have capped your income when you were in practice to some %
of $1 million based on the size of your practice relative to the big
corporations you are seeking to punish.
>
Perhaps if you read the news a little more carefully you would know that only
Fannie Mae, Freddy Mac, AIG, and some major banks have been "bailed out" with
financial instruments that will all be sold or repaid within the next 2 - 3
years, with a high probability of a profit to the taxpayers who are
underwriting these investments.
>
You would also know that the financial mess was entirely due to a Nanny
Government that was forcing the banking system to lower credit standards for
low income Americans to encourage home ownership.
>
Gilbert wrote:
>
And we should have adopted the health-care reform of Hillary Clinton.
>
Mario responds:
>
Yeah, right. The Canadians who have "free" health care can come to the US when
they are placed on a waiting list for anything more serious than a cold. Where
are Americans going to go?
>
Perhaps you have forgotten that Hillary-care was laughed out of town by every
serious observer, and caused the Democrats to lose both houses of Congress
after 40 years.
>
Gilbert wrote:
>
I have a difficult time accepting the Conservative Economic message that it is
ok to reduce taxes and increases the debt; which we pass on to the next
generation.
>
Mario responds:
>
You are obviously getting your information from the far left wing or Democrat
talking points.
>
Perhaps you would find it easier to accept if you knew that taxes were not
reduced, only tax rates. Taxes actually skyrocketed to record levels after the
income tax and capital gains rate cuts.
>
You would be far more credible if you knew that it was the kind of
non-defense federal spending that you are proposing here that caused the higher
deficits, not taxes, which had skyrocketed as the economy turned around from
the Clinton recession and grew, as I mentioned earlier.
>
Gilbert wrote:
>
Here is from a recent McCain's speech, "The hour is late; our troubles are
getting worse; our enemies watch. We have to act immediately. We have to change
direction now."
>
Mario responds:
>
Unfortunately for whatever point you were trying to make, you made the opposite
one by quoting John McCain, whose policy is to roll back the wasteful federal
spending of the last eight years and increase our participation in Iraq and
Afghanistan, i.e. roll back the Nanny State that we are dangerously close to
becoming and win the war on terrorism decisively. This is just the opposite of
what you want.
>
If you believe a word you have written in this post, McCain is your worst
nightmare, and you are going to LOVE the Marxist triumvirate of Obama, Pelosi
and Reid.
>
However, if you oppose abortion on demand and gay marriage, and if you want
Supreme Court judges like Scalia, Roberts and Alito, then Obama is your worst
nightmare.
>
I wonder whom you will vote for:-))
>
But, before you vote, do yourself a favor, if for no other reason to stop
embarrassing comments about reduced taxes, check out the difference between tax
rates and tax revenues and, on health care, ask yourself why so many Canadians
have to come south for medical treatment.
>
Oh, one more thing, check what the kinds of policies you are proposing have
done for Michigan. If you love what Jennifer Granholm has done for,...er, to,
Michigan's economy you will love what Obama-Pelosi-Reid have in mind for the
rest of the country because their policies are identical.
>
