CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:25
Arguments:11
Total Votes:26
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
  (11)

Debate Creator

waaykuul(325) pic



What is the best economic policy?

Bailout? Buyout?

In light of the current financial/economic crisis, what should be done? Implement McCain or Obama's proposals? Allow Treasury coercion of banks? Change tax laws?

Add New Argument
4 points

First of all, you've done well by including those links in the debate description. Concerning the economic plans of the candidates, Obama's policy is the best because it will result in the most prosperity throughout America.

The last eight years have been a natural experiment of the trickle down effect. As convincing as it sounds, it doesn't work. In the same breath, I must declare that I believe in the invisible hand of the market and the capitalist creed.

Capitalism is an energy. It is the human energy of millions and millions of people bound together by an idea. However, the energy of capitalism must be harnessed. Unbridled capitalism (aka uncontrolled power) breeds corruption and, ultimately, destruction.

Obama's economic plan i a better economic policy because it is an honest crack at harnessing the jewel of freedom. There is a saying that I once heard: the world is like a game of poker, as the rounds pass the money consolidates in fewer and fewers hands. Those without chips must borrow to stay in the game. Once the losers can't borrow anymore, the game is over.

4 points

No pure ideology has ever worked for the majority of the people in any society. Capitalism needs to be tempered with the spirit of mutual responsibility, just as collectivism (whether you call it socialism, communism, or another name) needs to be moderated to include incentives for individual achievement. Trickle-down economics have never worked - this is at least the third 'Gilded Age' our country has experienced, and each time it has meant misery for many more than it benefited - and neither has 'from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." They tend to end in depressions, as this one seems to be doing, which are followed by reforms that only last as long as our collective memory.

If there's any single change that would probably do most to make our society more equitable again, it would be to strip corporations of their status as 'persons' under the law and limit their powers the way they were limited until the Civil War. Corporations are not only encouraged, but required, to behave in a way that is fundamentally sociopathic as well as short-sighted.

Side: Economic policy
Inkwell(328) Disputed
2 points

The last eight years have been nothing special in terms of trickle down. That was Reagan's baby and it gave us the boom nineties. Bush has done little economically. And when he tried to act on the forces that brought us the current problems, in response to Greenspan's warnings, he was prevented from taking action. It is amazing to me that we all see video of one Dem after another, literally saying there was nothing wrong with Fannie or Freddie and defending Raines, and no great backlash has arisen similar to the whining about executive compensation.

Capitalism is not an energy, it is an economic theory. It's advantage is that it unleashes the energy of which you speak and it promotes growth. What is simplistically called trickle down is the only system that has actually worked. When has Monarchy ever lessened the concentration of wealth, or more importantly, raised the standard of life for the least advantaged. Communism? Just look at Soviet Union, Cuba or China before the introduction of western capitalism. Socialism as practiced in Europe is not what so many think. Europe may have less monetary differential but it has greater standard of life differential. The so called poor or disadvantaged in the US under our economic system have a greater standard of living than in any socialist European country. That is the part of the story that Obama would never tell you. Like all Democrats he will lie to you and tell you that poverty is an illness that he can cure. Lie, lie ,lie. When Congress tried to help the poor by making banks give them loans they could not afford, look what has happened. Why do you think Obamas version of the same social engineering will have better results?

harnessing the jewel of Freedom? WTF does that mean? Were you watching the Jewel of the Nile when you wrote this flowery nonsense? Or are you trying to be like Thomas Jefferson, writing pretty words about things you don't believe?

Why do people think this stuff is all or nothing? Right or wrong? This is not like flipping a switch and turning on the economy. No one will make one decision and fix things immediately. This is an infinitely complicated system and like an ocean liner turns slowly. All of this silliness about laissez faire capitalism or pure capitalism or unfettered free markets is nonsense. They have never existed. The pendulum never rests in the middle, it moves infinitely from one side to the other. The market in a vacuum doesn't need regulation, but as I have said elsewhere, human beings cannot live in a vacuum so as long as human nature is present, checks and balances will be necessary. But just because the pendulum has moved too far to one side is no reason to change to an economic system which has never succeeded and to give up being Americans in ways other than what the passport says. The US is far from an unregulated capitalist state. We are nearly as socialist as we are capitalist. Socialism is all around us. So many posters here pretend our economy is unregulated and this is our problem. Our economy is more regulated by far than any economy on earth today or in the past. Our corporations are more taxed than all but Japan. All of this breast beating over under taxing corporations and lack of regulations is mind boggling!

What is best? It depends. Are you trying to save America or finish her off once and for all? Preserve American identity and tradition or turn us into something unrecognizable as the US. The best policy depends on your goals.

Side: Economic policy
3 points

OH dear...thank you for the invitation. But I think I am out manned and going to be out numbered here. You'all are so bright and knowledgable.

I am not a mathematician or a financial adviser, nor do I play the stock. I am just your regular person, who is fed up...

I am, like Joe the plumber, up to my knees in crap and debt and living under my means, since 911. I see a collation between the two and have my own ideas as to why that happened. I am still looking for that plane that hit the Pentagon...but that is another story...

If John McCain said, "it is raining out side." I would run out side and look for my self. I find him totally unbelievable right down to the fact that he and Cindi have gotten assistance to to live...he has 12 houses...if it was...it was like the great bail out that just happened. Cindi has more money than G_d and he has more money then Jesus.

And he {JOHN McCain} isn't my friend. So, when he says..." my friends," I know he is not speaking to me. I haven't ever received so much as a birthday or Christmas CARD FROM HIM and I don't celebrate the later....

That giant knot on the side of his face scares the holy crap out of me. Coz, I can't see Sarah Palin running the country any more than I could.

So, I guess I am with most of the Jones Generation and hoping that Obama "IS" about change.

Things are not going to change over night. It is like dieting...it will have to be a long steady change. But the American people seem ready and willing. I know I am.

I hope I don't find out 4 years from now that I was sleeping with the enemy. Politics make strange bedfellows.

Southern smiles and world peace,

Sharon

~The Baby Boomer Queen~

Side: policy of hope and change
Inkwell(328) Disputed
1 point

One need never apologize or be embarrassed by what they don't know or haven't experienced as long as they know they don't know or haven't experienced. Until we die, we can always learn or experience something new.

As I have told others, you SHOULD be in the stock market as it is the one place anyone can get ahead and as today (whether today means today or tomorrow or next week or next month) is a wonderful buying opportunity. It is easy to get in the market for as little as $25 per month paying fees to no one. I keep repeating this because it is something I believe passionately in

That commercial moment aside, I am willing to opine that the odds are much better that McCain lives to save us from the inexperience of Palin than the odds that some assassin or illness or stroke of blind luck saves us from the inexperience of Obama. As for who is the liar? McCain is an honorable person with a long record of serving his country. Obama is like Clinton, someone who when they come to a fork in the road invariably chooses lies and deception and turns away from the truth. When McCain was told that his good friend Keating was being criminally investigated he cut all ties. He has open said it was the worst mistake of his career. Time after time when the same types show in Obama's life he lies, denies, characterizes and obfuscates. When caught in lies he resorts to Clintonian sophistry. Please tell me these lies you believe McCain has told. If you have seen McCain do anything as deceitful and despicable as going to SF and insulting middle America and then going to middle America and saying how much he cared about them, please let me know.

By the way, just like McCain isn't your friend, is anyone here, specifically Waykuul, your dear? Has he received valentine cards from you? Or shouldn't we take your reference as literally as you have taken McCains? Rhetorical question, just to point out that you knew damn well what and why the use of the introductory phrase "My friends"meant .

Side: Economic policy
2 points

For the record, I haven't received any valentine cards. You all are welcome to send me some if you want, though. :P

Side: Economic policy
3 points

The best economic policy is JOBS CREATION. I'm sure that the structure of our financial institutions need some re-tuning in the way of better regulations that are more strictly enforced, but no amount of fine-tuning will amount to long term improvements without some kind of massive Jobs Creation program.

The real problem (as I see it) is that wealth distribution has gotten way out of balance - with the very top of our societal pyramid controlling a disproportional percentage of available capital.

If we don't find a workable solution that puts more capital into the hands of the middle and lower class, the pyramid will collapse. And creating meaningful jobs that contribute to the overall well-being of our society is a solution that will work to infuse capital into our system.

And as soon as President Obama calls on me for advice, I will share the sage wisdom of my deep insight for the betterment of all mankind ;-)

Side: Economic policy
1 point

Capitalism with safe guards of course. I don't really see how Obama is offering that. so far, he wants wealth redistribution and heavy taxing on corporations and business owners.

those are NOT safeguards, those are socialists doctrines.

anyone with a brain knows that the corporations pass the tax onto the consumer, and if you limit that, you might as well have the government control price. when you do that, it limits innovation and slows down any progression in the commercial and technological field. when that shit happens, why even have capitalism? the whole point is for progression.

safe guards ensures that corporations continue to make money and that CEOs themselves can't pull shit like take the money and run. safe guards are meant to protect the corporation itself, which protects the people.

Side: Capitalism with Safe Guards
1 point

Loudacris is right. What we've been experiencing is trickle down economics, where the top few are entrusted with tax breaks, and a lack of oversite, and loopholes, in the hopes that they will use these to lower prices on products, and higher more workers, which would help the economy. As we saw with Reagan, so it is with Bush. Corporations do not use extra income to lower prices or higher more people. They use it to line the pockets of CEO's. The only thing that encourages corporations to higher workers is more demand for a product. The only thing that lowers prices is competition. Not tax cuts. That's a completely false doctrine pawned off on the masses becuase it sounds good and keeps big campaign donors and special interests happy.

The idea that trickle down economics is to blame for the great economy during the 90's is ridiculous. That was an internet bubble. Reagan's policies lead to a widening of the gap between rich and poor, just as Bush's policies have. The "free market" does not fix itself, because it is not free. Govenment picks and chooses who does and does not get to merge (see how long it took satelite radio to merge, see how quickly ATT was allowed to swallow Cingular) based strictly on the influence huge companies have over those in power. Special interests in D.C. work to strangle out small competitors, push favorable tax and merger laws, the while looking for more ways to offer less services for more money. This is the nature of a corporation, and USMC Liberal is right, that the nature of corporations being treated as their own entity, and allowed to function with little oversite, and no blame when things go bad, is a huge part of the problem.

The specifics of the two articles linked at the beginning of this debate have been discussed very well on both sides, Loudacris on one, and Inkwell on the other. More important I think than what's mentioned in the two articles is McCain's link to Special Interest groups. He currently has 139 people acting in an advisory capacity withing his campaign who are directly working for special interests groups, many also advised Bush 2. Obama is not free from special interests, but they seem to have far less influence on his proposed policies, and there are certainly far fewer of them.

Some argue for special interests. I disagree, and think they have no place in politics. More times than not, on every side whether it's green peace or the NRA, they have a specific agenda good for them only. Often instead of politicians deciding what would be best for, and what the majority they represent actually want, they often simply craft a message that sounds good, even though the policies may suck. Also there's the "pork" and "add ons" to legislature that is often specific to a donating corporation, or special interest group. It's highjacking the system and should be done away with.

Side: Capitalism with Safe Guards
1 point

What we've been experiencing is trickle down economics, where the top few are entrusted with tax breaks, and a lack of oversite, and loopholes, in the hopes that they will use these to lower prices on products, and higher more workers, which would help the economy.

Trickle down economics is not a policy of free markets but of socialist doctrines.

Top down economics is the base of socialist doctrines.

Trickle down economics is really an invitation for more government intervention.

Therefore, it is actually advocated by the interventionists and socialists

The interventionists and socialists believe that if everyone is taxed and is forced into giving large amounts of money, the government will trickle or sprinkle the middle class and the poor with money.

If applied to power, the notion of more government to regulate and micromanage our lives, power will trickle down as well.

Yet, historically, government's power and money doesn't trickle down. Government uses money and power and pours it into more bureaucracy and gives it to the elites such as the President, Congress, Fed and so forth. This doesn't help anyone but elites in government and business.

That was an internet bubble.

Correct. All booms inspired by government expansion of credit always spur bubbles. That is what a bubble is.

"Yet such a boom, artificially engineered by monetary and credit expansion, cannot last forever. It must come to an end sooner or later. For paper money and bank deposits are not a proper substitute for nonexisting capital goods.

Economic theory has demonstrated in an irrefutable way that a prosperity created by an expansionist monetary and credit policy is illusory and must end in a slump, an economic crisis. It has happened again and again in the past, and it will happen in the future, too." ---Ludwig von Mises

Govenment picks and chooses who does and does not get to merge (see how long it took satelite radio to merge

This is correct.

Side: Capitalism with Safe Guards