Quote:
Originally Posted by peter12
Sure enough, fiscal conservatism is not too popular these days and it was the Republicans who started this spending mess. No arguments. But I think it is fair to say that historically and philosophically, the Democrats have been very big spenders and supporters of special fiscal interests.
|
Historically? I guess I'd strongly disagree. Historically and philosophically the difference between the Democrats and Republicans has been less than a hair's breadth when it comes to pork. To believe otherwise is--no offense--naive partisanship.
Pork in the U.S. is a byproduct of lax legislative rules about what can be considered germane enough to put in a bill. Tighten the rules, you do away with pork. Which also means--and this is important--it has nothing to do with the President. Unless the President wants to cripple the government to stop "pork spending" by vetoing everything that comes across his desk until it stops (And I can just imagine the uproar around here if that's what Obama were doing) then it's a legislative matter that can only be solved by Congress.
The President doesn't make laws--and especially doesn't make the rules that govern Congress. Blaming Obama for pork spending in Congress is like blaming Ken King for mixing up the lines during a Flames' game.
As for Azure hitching his wagon to Paul Krugman--I'm gratified to see that. Krugman is probably right, of course. He's a Nobel-Prize winner and knows his stuff. But Azure failed to mention the central reason why Krugman thinks the bailout will fail: it's too small.
To paraphrase Milton Friedman, I guess we really are all Keynesians now.