Akosiwa

Some of you all act arrogant about african americans and slavery. It's troublesome too me. Michael Moore's whole point was that the wealth from the US came from slaves working unjustly. The US was built on the backs of slaves and that is where the US's wealth came from.

You all dismissed the graph as if it holds no weight at all? Roosevelt was the first to use Gov. intervention. The recession vs. expansion rate before Roosevelt was about half and half. After Roosevelt we had unheard of success for a long time. It is pretty obvious to me what is going on and isn't it funny how every time there is an economic crisis the people turn to the democrats(the former socialist party)? Just mere coincidence I think not.

Okay, so now that Obama(The antithesis to you objectivists) will more than likely become the 44th President what do you think will happen the next 4 years? Predict whether the economy plummets, or recovers, what happens in the war in Irag, Obama's approval rating, Healthcare etc. Think of it as a fun little game. If I'm alive in 4 years I'll make sure to bring this topic back up...

MAE_Lesson_14__29__AS_AD___Business_Cycle__ppp.ppt Slide 21 is the chart. It is from Macroeconomics. "Recessions" and "Expansions" are part of the business cycle.

Marty Mcfly the numbers don't lie...

No I don't believe it is immoral to give things to your child. I just know that all wealthy people aren't the most productive like most of you claim on this forum(And yes there is evidence of this). People don't hate the rich they just know that the rich will be alright(Paris Hilton, Kim Kardashian etc.) while others have to struggle and work two jobs even just to make ends meat. This economy's debt has to be paid off someway. We can already see how tax cuts work out by just looking at the Bush administration.

Nice try, Kendall but I have an article of my own from someone who was actually alive during that time....

You guys are sharp. Y'all didn't address all of my points but that is what I expected. It's nice to get a different point of view every once in awhile, but I personally don't think things are as simple as Rand made them out to be. I didn't attend to debate this topic however as I posted this in the Financial Crisis thread. I have read Capitalism the Unknown Ideal btw, I even have the book right here beside me. You don't believe me? Ask me what page any particular essay starts on. Also I must add that the wealthiest aren't always the "most productive" as I hear Rand say over and over again. Most of them were just hooked up and some were born into it. I don't see anything wrong with taxing more from the wealthy because they can afford it. McCain has 3+ houses for goodness sake while others who aren't so lucky(Didn't get hookups or weren't born into it) have to worry about keeping there "one" house. Plus President Bush is wealthy and he isn't that smart.

First of all I'm not an Objectivist at all, I've been observing these boards for quite a while though and while I think some of you mean well(and some of what you say is interesting) I think you are overlooking a few things. This record breaking day is clearly proof that the government is needed in the economy. What is happening now is a deep, wrenching financial crisis unlike anything we've seen since the 1930s. It's contributing to a broad slowdown of the American economy. The pain is spreading across the world. It's ugly. But the history of capitalism is filled with credit crises, panics, financial meltdowns and recessions. Y'alls advocation for deregulation just doesn't seem right to me. Without some (limited) government oversight over business practices, what's to stop a business from demanding a 60 hour work week and denying overtime compensation? How can we make sure that lenders don't take advantage of home buyers again? Child labor? Stock market manipulation by large financial institutions in order to effectively "steal" investor profits by the continuous use of naked short-selling and the elimination of the "up-tick" rule (and the SEC continues to ignore this). Government has a part to play (and must play) in our lives and as it gets more and more complicated and difficult to oversee the insitutions that essentially control our mutual welfare, its glaringly apparent that we need to expand government in some areas in order to protect our economy and the future welfare of every American but we can certainly make sufficient strides in cutting back other areas that contribute little or no benefit to the majority of Americans ([un]Patriot Act, etc.]. I'm not saying their should be an end to capitalism. We just can't accept the downswings that used to be routine for Western countries in the 19th century, when we saw much less intervention by the government. Can you imagine the political fallout from 20 percent unemployment or 5 percent growth rates?