Why do conservatives in America usually make an economy worse?

[UnlovingGod]

21 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

In a certain sense it did by getting you lots of cheap products in stores at mass scale.

Of course it doesn't solve wealth inequality.

You pointed it out in "legalizing drugs", right now there´s a real lack in political will and not just the politicians, but from normal people. Politicians will just do stuff, that gets them elected next year and try to get certain groups of people to vote for them. There can just be change, when you implement something, see if it works out or doesn´t work out and then implement other things. But we´ve got this mentality, that the economics we´ve got right now are the best out of fear. Any kind of hard set change will fail, so we need to take babysteps. But without any will, there won´t be change. And that´s where I´ve got my biggest problems with LGBTQ, Feminists(Nowadays) and Andrew Tate shit. They just be looking at content, but not structure, or they´ll look at structure and develope a victim mindset and go to Hustler University and maaaaaaaaaybe buy a Bughatti to compensate for their victim mindset they have or fight for shit like, more women as billionaires and buy their products to fight against this Hustler Ideology and then the Hustlers fight back, never taking real action. And it´s just as easy to know some basic politics and economics, so that politicians have a real responsibilty.

Edited August 23, 2023 by UnlovingGod

[UnlovingGod]

18 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

Interesting. I never thought you would say that Reaganomics had any positives. 

Yeah, the increase in the amount of free-trade and globalization of the economic did cause stores to sell products at a significantly cheaper rate. 

However, top economists on from both the left-wing and the center say that Reaganomics failed miserably. The major tax cuts passed by Reagan, Bush, and Trump didn't really do jack squat to boost the economy in any significant way. As you know, the fat cats at the top have been keep way too much of the wealth for themselves. We also know that decades of deregulation of the economy lead to banking crises in the 80s, 2008 financial crisis, and another kind of banking crisis this year. Furthermore, we don't need to go over how the influence of Reaganomics has destroyed labor unions over the past four decades, has continually increased economic inequality, increase in the excessive amount of monopolies, open too many doors to greater amounts of corporate lobbying, and so on and so forth. Milton Friedman and all of those Chicago School economists were big fools. 

The only reason Reagan was perceived by most Americans in the 80s as having done such an amazing job of managing the economy was really because he actually inherited an economy that was already on its way out of the terrible period of stagflation and the early 80s recession. The Federal Reserve, under the leadership of Paul Volcker, during the early 80s was the one who finally saved the country from stagflation and then gradually got it out of the Volcker shock recession afterwards.

I hope that Bidenomics really succeeds in causing the beginning of the end of neoliberalism.

One of the biggest L´s of Reagan and Thatcher economics was the implemantation of Share Holder Value. Of course most CEO are doing their Job way better, than 99 percent could ever do. But what kind of CEOs do we want and make accountable for what? The Share Holder Value Ideology really fucked up the responsibilities CEOs had. Even if there are kindhearted CEOs, they are literally held hostage by Investors.

Edited August 23, 2023 by UnlovingGod