Quote:
Originally Posted by eleanoraquitaine
This is a valid point. However, the weakness of failing to do anything about Saddam's regime would certainly have affected the price of oil as well, ...
|
I agree. It's hard to quantify what might have happened had we done nothing about Saddam. We can only realistically look at what has happened due to Bush's choices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eleanoraquitaine
Bush has favored tax cuts and pro-business policies which counter the cost of the Iraq war. And, money spent in Iraq is an investment that will clearly pay off in beneficial trade agreements and opening up a large, new, democratic market for us.
|
First, I don't see the large, new, democratic market opening up. I think it is dangerous to imagine that we really understand the middle east. It has proven itself time and time again to defy western logic. The investment is not guaranteed, by any means.
I think it is almost impossible to counter the cost of the Iraq war using tax cuts. They are a complicated part of this equation. I would say they are a net-negative in the context of this thread for these reasons:
1. If they are meant to induce us to buy more, chances are we are buying imported goods, which means we are giving our money to other countries and getting less for it.
2. The tax cuts don't address the debt in any meaningful way.
3. Tax cuts in the face of a massive debt don't prove that our market will improve when compared to other strong markets. IOW the perception of our market's strength doesn't change within the context of the global economy, therefore they do nothing but pacify our population.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eleanoraquitaine
The best way to improve our economy is by helping the middle class and restoring the American dream by drastically reducing entitlements, taxes, and federal, non-defense spending.
|
You'll get no argument from me there.