Quote:
Originally Posted by Gozer
Really? Completely opposite?
USA = USSR?
|
That's not what he was saying. What he said was that the U.S. became a superpower in the wake of the New Deal--suggesting at least circumstantially that the New Deal was one factor in their economic dominance in the middle of the last century.
I'm also puzzled by your statement that the U.S. is "moving left." I sure haven't noticed that living in the U.S. for the last 10 years. The pendulum has swung pretty far to the right since Reagan--Clinton was only elected by building a coalition of moderately conservative independents and traditional democratic voters, and since Bush things have been downright scary around here. Has the outcome of that overall been more global power and more economic prosperity? Hardly. It has however meant the return to the same distribution of wealth that existed in the Gilded Age, an alarming sign for anyone who knows their economic history.
In fact, if anything the "circumstantial evidence" suggest exactly the opposite of what you claim. As I said, you're free to believe in supply-side economics for moral reasons, but your claim that it inherently leads to prosperity and power is just bad history.