AEIdeas

The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (12 comments)

  1. Ted Gambogi

    Every time I hear Obama talk about the “failed policies of the past” I think of FDR & Stalin. But what should I expect from the Narcissist in Chief?

  2. MacDaddyWatch

    When was that last time that AFFIRMATIVE ACTION produced the smartest guy in the room?

    These incompetent clowns are simply stuck on stupid. Just look at their failed track record.

  3. John Mcaluney

    Its about time for President Obama to give a major speech on something no one knows but him.

  4. Jon Murphy

    I don’t understand the fascination with the 50’s and 60’s. Conservatives see it as some sort of paradise with wholesome family values and liberals see it as some sort of paradise with shared prosperity. The 50’s and 60’s sucked! Recessions, wars, communist hunts, paranoia, civil unrest, nuclear threats, and the FBI. Other than the culture and my parents, nothing good came out of that time. Why is there this great desire to return there?

    I mean, back in the 50’s and 60’s, many of the necessities we have today, like color TV, a/c, refrigerators, cars, were luxuries of the rich.

    I’d rather be a middle-class guy in 2012 than a middle class guy in 1950.

    1. Ken Royall

      People are nostalgic about certain aspects of the 1950’s, that doesn’t mean they wish to turn back the clock. We were a stronger nation then in many respects, morally, militarily and financially. There was a can-do attitude that drove increased prosperity. The culture wasn’t as filthy as it is now. The 60’s counterculture revolution has been a disaster for this nation in every respect. We are a weaker nation as a result.

      1. Jon Murphy

        Hm, it may be the nostalgia effect, Ken, but why is it there in the first place?

        Maybe it’s just because I didn’t live through it (or because I firmly believe that every day is better than the last), but I just don;t understand the appeal of that time frame.

    2. MacDaddyWatch

      The Big Government policies of the past will never work in the future. In fact, they often worked very poorly in the past.

      We live in a new and very different world that saw the fall of the Iron Curtain, the end of the Cold War, the emergence of globalization, the spread of freedom, free markets and capitalism, the decline of socialist Europe, the birth of the BRICS (including Mexico, Indonesia and S. Korea) and the initial muscle-flexing of 2-3 billion in the new and increasingly wealthy Asian middle-class–all potential consumers to whom we would love to sell stuff.

      Most recently, the broad and deep application of technology has enhanced global productivity and freed everyone to partake in higher value-added activities. It has slowly replaced our Industrial Age that peaked 40-years ago and that has since relentlessly declined as a percent of our and global GDP. Shumpeter’s “creative destruction” at its very best.

      In contrast, Obama and Biden’s Big Government and its top-down, totalitarian, rule by fiat, application of costly and productivity killing regulations, excessive spending, massive debts and the subjugation and suppression of the individual in this new flatter world can only get in the way; witness the moribund 2.2% GDP growth generated during this stealth “recovery.” And just look at the labor unions, the agents of Obama and Biden. They too belong to history and are doomed because they have no answers that will permit them to take full advantage of any of the good thing mentioned in my first paragraph. They are fighting a losing battle, kicking and screaming every inch of the way.

      Obama and Biden stand for nothing more than the maintenance of power and control in the hands of a few–them. Their model belongs to history. They will be increasingly rejected in the present and they have no future.

  5. Edgar9000

    Obama, Romney, Stalin, Trotsky. Yawn. The Obama-Lite policies Romney offers don’t include real reductions in federal spending which is the only thing that really matters. Wake me when someone wants to actually cut federal spending.

    1. richard40

      Romney has stated he will reduce fed spending from todays bloated value of 24% of GDP, to 20% by the end of his first term. That is significant progress. He might not be as conservative as your ideal, but lumpinghim in with Obama and the communists is pretty lame.

      1. edgar9000

        The point of the analogy is that even though Trotsky was for a more democratic and less centralized form of governance than Stalin, they were both communists. Similarly, just as Romney is for a more democratic and less centralized governance than Obama, neither one would reduce the growth of federal spending in real terms. Under Romney’s plans, the federal budget will be 8 percent larger in real terms than it is now. Yes, I am bitter that I cannot vote for candidate who supports a real reduction in federal spending.

  6. boqueronman

    You’re making the train fascination more complicated than it needs to be. The Progressive Dems are train fans because they believe firmly in the European model of government. Europe has more train connections. Therefore, the U.S. needs to get busy and build super-fast, super-duper trains. Of course the fact that it promotes European style Crony Capitalism and rewards costly and inefficient union payoffs are real pluses. It’s actually pretty simple.

  7. Arnold Ziffel

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:

Scholar

Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Open
Refine Content