Everywhere around the world examples prove it works so much better than the socialist agenda

*wall (instead of second gov in "mexican gov. will pay that gov", sorry)

@Hall of M.
counterexample: Cuba. Not a single child suffers hunger nor malnutrition :)

Our successful capitalistic society is what allowed liberals to start programs like welfare. The current form needs to be abolished as it is taken advantage of and a losing proposition. There nothing wrong with helping the needy it they need to return something. Working for the government on our infrastructure could be a useful start.

"Need I remind you that OUR party freed the slaves?"
And fought against Civil Rights. Parties change.

"we are trying to help poor people through old fashioned capitalism"
Economic principles become outdated. Going by old fashioned models and thinking economic regression will bring good is basically fooling yourself. Now, I'm not saying abandon capitalism. Capitalism is versatile and evolves.

Capitalism can't not evolve under the current system. The regulatory environment is capping it. It needs to be free to evolve. We are much closer to socialism currently. :((

"The current form needs to be abolished as it is taken advantage of and a losing proposition. There nothing wrong with helping the needy it they need to return something."
Very very true. The modern welfare system uses money but doesn't have much return. When it started, it was a fine idea, but it has come to a point where Dems want to use it to manipulate the votes of the people on it by making them dependent on it. The ideal system for helping the poor is providing a clear path where they can help themselves get on their feet financially, help provide for society, and manage to work their way up.

In what sense, ssorenn. Regulations are needed, and as 2008 showed, private "independent" third parties cannot be trusted to be impartial or working for the public interest

Oh, and @ Mandos - political parties evolve a lot over time. The republican party of 150 years ago is vastly different from the one today

Goldy. Dodd Frank is killing is. There will always be people who take advantage of the system. The whole world is starving for growth that will never come. 23 countries with negative interest rate yields. That's not sustainable. Cost cutting by companies is coming to an end. Regulatory environment must change. There will always be peaks and valleys but growth requires free markets.

"Okay, so can we at least agree peterlund acting as the anti-Trump, anti-Putin propaganda machine is pretty annoying?"

TrPrado. I am just trying to convince you not to make the biggest mistake of your life. And as you see from my links and from the discussion in this thread, it is not only I that is part of this so called "anti-Trump propaganda machine". Basically all non-populist politicians of the whole civilised world are saying the same things.

"There will always be peaks and valleys but growth requires free markets."
Again no proof of that. The 30's Stalin purges were *bloody*, but USSR *growed* that decade.

^sorry for my bad conjugation

What does Stalins massacres have to do with anything. Comparing communist economies to capitalist ones is not a fair assessment.

@Hall of Mandos um 150 years ago? This ain't the party of Lincoln. It is the party of voter suppression "All Lives Matter" supporting killer cops, labelling all Mexicans as rapists, dismantling affirmative action, etc. etc. etc. Don't tell me what you believe, tell me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe. The only think left would be to start handing out white hoods at the Convention, frankly.

@HOM, and if you think that examples from the world show that old fashion capitalism is what helps people, you need to travel a lot more. Social democratic states are doing vastly better both in terms of the well being of average people and productivity compared to our vampire squid capitalism that is grinding inexorably to a halt.

@ssorenn
I just gave you an example of a country that grew without free markets. Usually you won't find capitalist countries without free markets to campare, because of... definition

Really, you gave a decade in time. Then what happened after '45. Nothing. We as a country blossomed for 35 years. The Green bCk was king and EVERYONE and their grandma wanted the AMERICAN Dream. Not the Soviet dream.

@ssorenn - what parts of dodd-frank. All I'm aware of is that it ties up more capital that the banks would've just dumped into Treasuries anyway, and drives up the cost of compliance and corporate governance.

I think you're attributing the economic sluggishness that is chiefly due to demographics, globalization and automation and placing that blame on over-regulation.

There's that and the fact that I like the safety valve regulators provide. An unregulated system that has a 1-2% chance to completely implode is no bueno

(and I'd say 25 years. The 70s kinda were awful)

We imploded in '29 and '58 and '73 and 2001. We came back with a vengeance each time. The next one will not be as great of a rebound. Our seniors are struggling because of the fixed income environment. Savers are being crippled and leverage on capital which was our downfall in 08 is being forced again. This is a recipe for disaster.

The '70 were not great unless you were a saver. Bank interest rates topped 17%.

@ssorenn,
I'm not saying that soviet communism is better than your capitalism, all I'm saying is that you have no proof for your "There will always be peaks and valleys but growth requires free markets" assertion, and you still have no proof.

Actually, read up more about 2001. It was the slowest recovery in history.

I just think that so much is different now that you can't place it all on regulation. There are greater forces at work

Interest rates were that high because inflation was high. In real terms, it was still awful for savers

Sustained growth needs free markets. If you can't see it. I'm not doing your homework for you. Age has one of those weird 20/20 visions. If you live through it you should learn from it. Text books are very linear and context is hard to imagine.

Goldy, that depends on how they used their capital.

Goldy, 08 is probably the slowest rebound in history depending on how you perceive it.

@19 trillion in debt and 4.7 trillion on our Feds balance sheet and we can't get a lock of inflation. Hmm. That's not good Swiss and Japenese yield curves are completely negative out 20+ years. Oh my