Mrs. Comrade Clinton has spoken.... businesses don't create jobs... must be the govt

[Matt1970]

People demanded stuff they didn't even know existed?

yes

Sigh. "I want something, have no clue what it is till I see it, but I know I want it."

 

[Vic]

Hilarous. Another spin-meister already tried that *VERY* example.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35653246&postcount=81

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Gate_Bridge#Conception

Finance
The Golden Gate Bridge and Highway District, authorized by an act of the California Legislature, was incorporated in 1928 as the official entity to design, construct, and finance the Golden Gate Bridge.[13] However, after the Wall Street Crash of 1929, the District was unable to raise the construction funds, so it lobbied for a $30 million bond measure. The bonds were approved in November 1930,[16] by votes in the counties affected by the bridge.[27] The construction budget at the time of approval was $27 million. However, the District was unable to sell the bonds until 1932, when Amadeo Giannini, the founder of San Francisco–based Bank of America, agreed on behalf of his bank to buy the entire issue in order to help the local economy.

Construction
Construction began on January 5, 1933.[9] The project cost more than $35 million,[28] completing ahead of schedule and under budget.[29] The Golden Gate Bridge construction project was carried out by the McClintic-Marshall Construction Co., a subsidiary of Bethlehem Steel Corporation founded by Howard H. McClintic and Charles D. Marshall, both of Lehigh University.

And I bet all those investors who didn't have the balls to pick up that offering are still kicking themselves (even in the grave).

Seriously, do you understand economics at all?

 

[ElFenix]

Nothing. As dphantom points out, World War II intervened.

Sigh. "I want something, have no clue what it is till I see it, but I know I want it."

no you boob, you don't know you want it otherwise you'd have come up with it and made the shitload of money. filling an untapped and previously unknown demand is why steve decided to make an iphone - the iphone didn't create the demand. as was said when it was introduced, it's the first phone you'd actually want to pay beaucoup dollars for. and that marketing dork was right. none of the other smartphone designs properly tapped the demand for a tricorder or palmtop computer or whatever these "phones" are. they were like drilling a well in kilgore and missing the east texas oil field. but steve dropped that thing 3,200 feet under daisy bradford's backyard and now look at phones:

 

[werepossum]

no you boob, you don't know you want it otherwise you'd have come up with it and made the shitload of money. filling an untapped and previously unknown demand is why steve decided to make an iphone - the iphone didn't create the demand. as was said when it was introduced, it's the first phone you'd actually want to pay beaucoup dollars for. and that marketing dork was right. none of the other smartphone designs properly tapped the demand for a tricorder or palmtop computer or whatever these "phones" are. they were like drilling a well in kilgore and missing the east texas oil field. but steve dropped that thing 3,200 feet under daisy bradford's backyard and now look at phones:

lol You're funny.

It was all demand!

But - no one knew they wanted a smart phone.

It was all secret demand!

 

[Matt1970]

no you boob, you don't know you want it otherwise you'd have come up with it and made the shitload of money. filling an untapped and previously unknown demand is why steve decided to make an iphone - the iphone didn't create the demand. as was said when it was introduced, it's the first phone you'd actually want to pay beaucoup dollars for. and that marketing dork was right. none of the other smartphone designs properly tapped the demand for a tricorder or palmtop computer or whatever these "phones" are. they were like drilling a well in kilgore and missing the east texas oil field. but steve dropped that thing 3,200 feet under daisy bradford's backyard and now look at phones:

If people didn't want it/know about it then you ..............wait for it.............. you created that demand. You can call it whatever you want, if Steve didn't invent the i-phone, that demand wouldn't be there and therefore those jobs wouldn't be there. You are comparing drilling for oil with the demand for the I-phone? Boobs don't come much bigger than you. You guys are just making excuses for more anti-business rhetoric form your second coming of the messiah in the form of Hillary.

 

[Zaap]

And I bet all those investors who didn't have the balls to pick up that offering are still kicking themselves (even in the grave).

Seriously, do you understand economics at all?

Shut up. You're way too dumb to even have a shred of a clue why no one was selling many bonds (or much of anything else non-essential) in 1932. (Or even why issuing bonds vs. the magic funding you think governments always cough out of thin air is relevant in the first place.) You'd be talking about ultra rich private citizens only- the very people you spend your life envying and blaming for everything.

You know nothing about nothing Vic, and prove it every time you spout.

 

[Vic]

Shut up. You're way too dumb to even have a shred of a clue why no one was selling many bonds (or much of anything else non-essential) in 1932. (Or even why issuing bonds vs. the magic funding you think governments always cough out of thin air is relevant in the first place.) You'd be talking about ultra rich private citizens only- the very people you spend your life envying and blaming for everything.

You know nothing about nothing Vic, and prove it every time you spout.

Wow.. tourrettes much?

And I think most everyone is familiar with why bonds (among many other things) did not sell well in the early 1930s. And as I already inferred, at least Giannini was smart enough to know a bargain when saw one.
And look, he was ultra rich and I'm not envying or blaming him for anything.

Seriously, you're a one rant pony.

 

[Vic]

If people didn't want it/know about it then you ..............wait for it.............. you created that demand. You can call it whatever you want, if Steve didn't invent the i-phone, that demand wouldn't be there and therefore those jobs wouldn't be there. You are comparing drilling for oil with the demand for the I-phone? Boobs don't come much bigger than you. You guys are just making excuses for more anti-business rhetoric form your second coming of the messiah in the form of Hillary.

I'm strongly pro business and I believe that ElFenix is as well. Meanwhile, Hillary's track record is pro business.

And seriously, isn't it a little early for you ditto heading idiots to start the Messiah rhetoric? I'm no fan of Hillary, but I'll take her before Warren any day, and Nitt doesn't have a chance.. again.

 

[werepossum]

I'm strongly pro business and I believe that ElFenix is as well. Meanwhile, Hillary's track record is pro business.

And seriously, isn't it a little early for you ditto heading idiots to start the Messiah rhetoric? I'm no fan of Hillary, but I'll take her before Warren any day, and Nitt doesn't have a chance.. again.

Unless the business is selling pant suits, Hillary's track record is not particularly pro business. Better than Warren, sure - although I seem to remember Warren turning out a pretty sensible bill discussed on this forum. Banking reform maybe? Don't remember, just remember being surprised at something so sensible coming from Fauxcahontas.

http://votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/55463/hillary-clinton#.VFFWXlnNGfk
47% lifetime score from US Chamber of Commerce,

Business and Consumers
2008 United States Chamber of Commerce - Lifetime Score 46%
2008 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 67%
2007-2008 American Council of Engineering Companies - Positions 38%
2007-2008 American Forest and Paper Association - Forest Products Advocacy Score 100%
2007-2008 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 25%
2007-2008 Associated General Contractors of America - Positions 60%
2007-2008 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 50
2007-2008 National Restaurant Association - Positions on Restaurant Advocacy 42
2007-2008 National Small Business Association - Positions 0%
2007-2008 National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association - Positions 75%
2007 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 7%
2007 The National Lumber and Building Material Dealers Association - Positions 33%
2007 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 25%
2006 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 27%
2006 National Association of Government Contractors - Positions 100%
2006 National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association - Positions 71%
2006 State PIRGs Working Together - Positions 91%
2006 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 67%
2006 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 91%
2005-2006 American Forest and Paper Association - Positions 42%
2005-2006 Associated General Contractors of America - Positions 50%
2005-2006 International Warehouse Logistics Association - Positions 33%
2005-2006 National Association of Manufacturers - Positions 16%
2005-2006 National Electrical Contractors Association - Positions 33%
2005-2006 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 12%
2005-2006 National Restaurant Association - Positions 25%
2005-2006 National Retail Federation - Positions 0%
2005-2006 National Small Business Association - Positions 37%
2005-2006 Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors-National Association - Positions 20%
2005-2006 Public Citizen's Congress Watch - Positions on Population Stabilization 92%
2005 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 11%
2005 International Sleep Products Association - Positions 0%
2005 Maryland Business for Responsive Government - Positions 19%
2005 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 20%
2005 Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council - Positions 9%
2005 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 35%
2004 National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association - Positions 58%
2004 Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council - Positions 21%
2004 State PIRGs Working Together - Positions 95%
2004 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 50%
2004 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 95%
2003-2004 American Forest and Paper Association - Positions 41%
2003-2004 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 30%
2003-2004 Associated General Contractors of America - Positions 57%
2003-2004 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 13%
2003-2004 National Association for the Self-Employed - Positions 0%
2003-2004 National Association of Manufacturers - Positions 32%
2003-2004 National Electrical Contractors Association - Positions 42%
2003-2004 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 0%
2003-2004 National Restaurant Association - Positions 29%
2003-2004 National Retail Federation - Positions 38%
2003-2004 National Small Business Association - Positions 0%
2003-2004 Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors-National Association - Positions 33%
2003-2004 Public Citizen's Congress Watch - Positions 76%
2003 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 17%
2003 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 13%
2003 Maryland Business for Responsive Government - Positions 17%
2003 National Association of Government Contractors - Positions 0%
2003 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 0%
2003 National Retail Federation - Positions 38%
2003 Public Citizen's Congress Watch - Positions 91%
2003 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 35%
2003 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 81%
2002 National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association - Positions 36%
2002 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 45%
2002 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 85%
2001-2002 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 11%
2001-2002 Associated General Contractors of America - Positions 16%
2001-2002 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 5%
2001-2002 National Association for the Self-Employed - Positions 0%
2001-2002 National Association of Manufacturers - Positions 6%
2001-2002 National Electrical Contractors Association - Positions 42%
2001-2002 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 25%
2001-2002 Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors-National Association - Positions 0%
2001-2002 Public Citizen's Congress Watch - Positions 96%
2001-2002 Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council - Positions 7%
2001 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 17%
2001 National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association - Positions 40%
2001 Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council - Positions 0%
2001 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 43%
1999-2006 National Ready Mixed Concrete Association - Positions 57%
1999-2004 National Ready Mixed Concrete Association - Positions 20%

Her high scores are typically government contractors (this is my shocked face =o ) and proggie social groups, except for the 2007-2008 American Forest and Paper Association - Forest Products Advocacy Score of 100%. (By an astounding coincidence, government prints money on paper. This means nothing!)

 

[BoberFett]

Anybody with half a brain (meaning most of the US and this forums is excluded) would understand that government has a role in providing infrastructure and trying to ensure fair markets, while business creates the markets.

As far as demand existing without business, sorry but I don't buy that. That's essentially saying that we have unlimited demand that goes unfilled until business supplies it. That pretty much negates any idea that demand drives anything, and that in fact supply side IS the most limiting factor for consumption.

 

[ivwshane]

Unless the business is selling pant suits, Hillary's track record is not particularly pro business. Better than Warren, sure - although I seem to remember Warren turning out a pretty sensible bill discussed on this forum. Banking reform maybe? Don't remember, just remember being surprised at something so sensible coming from Fauxcahontas.

http://votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/55463/hillary-clinton#.VFFWXlnNGfk
47% lifetime score from US Chamber of Commerce,


Her high scores are typically government contractors (this is my shocked face =o ) and proggie social groups, except for the 2007-2008 American Forest and Paper Association - Forest Products Advocacy Score of 100%. (By an astounding coincidence, government prints money on paper. This means nothing!)

Just for comparison let's see how a conservative governor gets rated. Sam brownback whose policies have been nothing but disastrous, so much so even republicans have back his democrat challenger.

http://votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/21952/sam-brownback/11#.VFFhPdm9LCQ

Business and Consumers
2010 The National Lumber and Building Material Dealers Association - Positions 80%
2010 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 100%
2009-2010 American Council of Engineering Companies - Positions 67%
2009-2010 Associated General Contractors of America - Positions 75%
2009-2010 Independent Electrical Contractors - Positions 75%
2009-2010 International Warehouse Logistics Association - Positions 92%
2009-2010 National Association of Manufacturers - Positions 92%
2009-2010 National Retail Federation - Positions 88%
2009-2010 National Small Business Association - Positions (Senate Only) 50%
2009-2010 National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association - Positions 60%
2009-2010 Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council - Positions 100%
2009 Heritage Alliance - Positions 100%
2009 The National Lumber and Building Material Dealers Association - Positions 100%
2009 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 71%
2008 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 92%
2008 United States Chamber of Commerce - Lifetime Score 95%
2008 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 88%
2007-2008 American Council of Engineering Companies - Positions 78%
2007-2008 American Forest and Paper Association - Forest Products Advocacy Score 75%
2007-2008 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 100%
2007-2008 Associated General Contractors of America - Positions 50%
2007-2008 International Warehouse Logistics Association - Positions 92%
2007-2008 National Association of Manufacturers - Positions 91%
2007-2008 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 100
2007-2008 National Restaurant Association - Positions on Restaurant Advocacy 66
2007-2008 National Retail Federation - Positions Retail Industry Advocacy 80%
2007-2008 National Small Business Association - Positions 50%
2007-2008 National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association - Positions 60%
2007-2008 Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors-National Association - Positions 75%
2007 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 90%
2007 The National Lumber and Building Material Dealers Association - Positions 75%
2007 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 86%
2006 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 100%
2006 National Association of Government Contractors - Positions 0%
2006 National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association - Positions 63%
2006 State PIRGs Working Together - Positions 5%
2006 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 100%
2006 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 5%
2005-2006 American Forest and Paper Association - Positions 100%
2005-2006 Associated General Contractors of America - Positions 75%
2005-2006 International Warehouse Logistics Association - Positions 75%
2005-2006 National Association of Manufacturers - Positions 89%
2005-2006 National Electrical Contractors Association - Positions 83%
2005-2006 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 100%
2005-2006 National Restaurant Association - Positions 100%
2005-2006 National Retail Federation - Positions 100%
2005-2006 National Small Business Association - Positions 100%
2005-2006 Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors-National Association - Positions 100%
2005-2006 Public Citizen's Congress Watch - Positions on Population Stabilization 8%
2005 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 94%
2005 International Sleep Products Association - Positions 100%
2005 Maryland Business for Responsive Government - Positions 92%
2005 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 100%
2005 Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council - Positions 100%
2005 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 89%
2004 National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association - Positions 73%
2004 Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council - Positions 100%
2004 State PIRGs Working Together - Positions 5%
2004 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 94%
2004 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 5%
2003-2004 American Forest and Paper Association - Positions 100%
2003-2004 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 90%
2003-2004 Associated General Contractors of America - Positions 85%
2003-2004 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 100%
2003-2004 National Association for the Self-Employed - Positions 100%
2003-2004 National Association of Manufacturers - Positions 100%
2003-2004 National Electrical Contractors Association - Positions 83%
2003-2004 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 100%
2003-2004 National Restaurant Association - Positions 100%
2003-2004 National Retail Federation - Positions 100%
2003-2004 National Small Business Association - Positions 100%
2003-2004 Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors-National Association - Positions 100%
2003-2004 Public Citizen's Congress Watch - Positions 0%
2003 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 100%
2003 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 100%
2003 Maryland Business for Responsive Government - Positions 100%
2003 National Association of Government Contractors - Positions 100%
2003 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 100%
2003 National Retail Federation - Positions 100%
2003 Public Citizen's Congress Watch - Positions 0%
2003 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 100%
2003 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 14%
2002 National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association - Positions 83%
2002 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 100%
2002 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 10%
2001-2002 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 100%
2001-2002 Associated General Contractors of America - Positions 100%
2001-2002 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 100%
2001-2002 National Association for the Self-Employed - Positions 100%
2001-2002 National Association of Manufacturers - Positions 94%
2001-2002 National Electrical Contractors Association - Positions 62%
2001-2002 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 88%
2001-2002 Plumbing-Heating-Cooling Contractors-National Association - Positions 100%
2001-2002 Public Citizen's Congress Watch - Positions 15%
2001-2002 Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council - Positions 100%
2001 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 83%
2001 National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association - Positions 100%
2001 Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council - Positions 100%
2001 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 93%
2001 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 17%
2000 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 100%
2000 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 100%
2000 Consumer Federation of America - Positions 20%
2000 Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council - Positions 100%
2000 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 100%
1999-2006 National Ready Mixed Concrete Association - Positions 50%
1999-2004 National Ready Mixed Concrete Association - Positions 60%
1999-2000 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 100%
1999-2000 Public Citizen's Congress Watch - Positions 17%
1999-2000 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 33%
1999 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 100%
1999 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 100%
1999 Consumer Federation of America - Positions 25%
1999 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 94%
1999 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 15%
1998 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 100%
1998 Consumer Federation of America - Positions 20%
1998 Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council - Positions 95%
1998 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 94%
1997-1998 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 100%
1997-1998 Public Citizen's Congress Watch - Positions 25%
1997-1998 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 15%
1997 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 100%
1997 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 95%
1997 Consumer Federation of America - Positions 29%
1997 National Federation of Independent Business - Positions 100%
1997 Public Citizen's Congress Watch - Positions 12%
1997 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 100%
1996 Business-Industry Political Action Committee - Positions 100%
1996 Consumer Federation of America - Positions 15%
1996 United States Chamber of Commerce - Positions 93%
1995-1996 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 93%
1995-1996 United States Public Interest Research Group - Positions 21%
1995 Associated Builders & Contractors - Positions 92%
How to Interpret these Evaluations
Project Vote Smart displays all known interest group ratings for each candidate and official, regardless of issue or bias.
Keep in mind that ratings done by special interest groups often do not represent a non-partisan stance. In addition, some groups select votes that tend to favor members of one political party over another, rather than choosing votes based solely on issues concerns. Nevertheless, they can be invaluable in showing where an incumbent has stood on a series of votes in the past one or two years, especially when ratings by groups on all sides of an issue are compared. Website links, if available, and descriptions of the organizations offering performance evaluations are accessible by clicking on the name of the group.

So what do these rating really mean?

 

[TheSlamma]

Anybody with half a brain (meaning most of the US and this forums is excluded).

I've traveled this world enough to know that people are people. Meaning people are stupid all over this planet. I thought Europe was going to be this place where people were future thinking based on what many people told me. Not so much. Just like carlin said "a few winners a whole lot of losers"

Go to the Anne frank house and participate in the voting machine there. You will see they are not that forward thinking either.

 

[ivwshane]

Anybody with half a brain (meaning most of the US and this forums is excluded) would understand that government has a role in providing infrastructure and trying to ensure fair markets, while business creates the markets.

As far as demand existing without business, sorry but I don't buy that. That's essentially saying that we have unlimited demand that goes unfilled until business supplies it. That pretty much negates any idea that demand drives anything, and that in fact supply side IS the most limiting factor for consumption.

I'm sorry, was there someone in this thread saying businesses don't create demand? I seem to recall the argument being that demand typically comes from consumers, that doesn't mean that's always where it comes from.

Clinton's whole argument is about policies that support supply side economics vs policies that are keysian based. History and facts don't support supply side economics as being the better option for Americans in general.

 

[ElFenix]

Anybody with half a brain (meaning most of the US and this forums is excluded) would understand that government has a role in providing infrastructure and trying to ensure fair markets, while business creates the markets.

As far as demand existing without business, sorry but I don't buy that. That's essentially saying that we have unlimited demand that goes unfilled until business supplies it. That pretty much negates any idea that demand drives anything, and that in fact supply side IS the most limiting factor for consumption.

no, it's not unlimited. there's a limit to what consumers will demand, and obviously that's higher the higher the real income of the consumers (be they people, corporations, government, whatever). which is why there's shit demand in africa despite all the want.

 

[werepossum]

Just for comparison let's see how a conservative governor gets rated. Sam brownback whose policies have been nothing but disastrous, so much so even republicans have back his democrat challenger.

http://votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/21952/sam-brownback/11#.VFFhPdm9LCQ

So what do these rating really mean?

Well, one can get a very rough idea of a politician's stance on issues important to businesses by looking at aggregate scores, with some obvious exceptions. The United States Public Interest Research Group and State PIRGs Working Together for example are pure progressive advocacy groups masquerading as business groups. The Heritage Alliance is a similar but conservative libertarian group. These groups track well with party loyalty because they are based on ideology. Other groups, such as the National Association of Government Contractors, are so narrowly focused as to possibly be counterproductive unless one is in that business. The National Federation of Independent Business and the National Small Business Association poll their members to take positions, so they honestly represent their clients. Other than that, you really have to know the group's position for the years in question. For example, the American Forest and Paper Association might be pushing for sensible, sustainable forestry practices, or for permission to clear cut national forests. Their issue of the moment might even be immigration (cheaper labor) or taxes (to lower a profitable period's tax burden) or import limits and tariffs (to blunt foreign competition.) There's no guarantee that their issues are good for the country or even the industry they represent.

I really like these ratings since they stem from behavior more than promises, but they aren't worth anything unless you do your homework. And you have to dig in; "supporting the American family" could mean anything they want it to mean.

 

[fskimospy]

Well, one can get a very rough idea of a politician's stance on issues important to businesses by looking at aggregate scores, with some obvious exceptions. The United States Public Interest Research Group and State PIRGs Working Together for example are pure progressive advocacy groups masquerading as business groups. The Heritage Alliance is a similar but conservative libertarian group. These groups track well with party loyalty because they are based on ideology. Other groups, such as the National Association of Government Contractors, are so narrowly focused as to possibly be counterproductive unless one is in that business. The National Federation of Independent Business and the National Small Business Association poll their members to take positions, so they honestly represent their clients. Other than that, you really have to know the group's position for the years in question. For example, the American Forest and Paper Association might be pushing for sensible, sustainable forestry practices, or for permission to clear cut national forests. Their issue of the moment might even be immigration (cheaper labor) or taxes (to lower a profitable period's tax burden) or import limits and tariffs (to blunt foreign competition.) There's no guarantee that their issues are good for the country or even the industry they represent.

I really like these ratings since they stem from behavior more than promises, but they aren't worth anything unless you do your homework. And you have to dig in; "supporting the American family" could mean anything they want it to mean.

According to DW-NOMINATE Hillary Clinton was basically exactly in the center of the democratic caucus as of her last term as a senator. This is a far better measure than attempting to average what a bunch of lobbying groups think.

Hillary is a moderate democrat. More hawkish than most, slightly more corporatist, but with a populist streak when it's convenient. She is certainly no ultra liberal, but she's also not the DINO that some people try to paint her as.

Pretty simple, really.

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

This thread sure hasn't proved me wrong. Most leftists are economic idiots.

Unproven pet theories are also idiotic.

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

Anybody with half a brain (meaning most of the US and this forums is excluded) would understand that government has a role in providing infrastructure and trying to ensure fair markets, while business creates the markets.

As far as demand existing without business, sorry but I don't buy that. That's essentially saying that we have unlimited demand that goes unfilled until business supplies it. That pretty much negates any idea that demand drives anything, and that in fact supply side IS the most limiting factor for consumption.

Indeed if a pure libertarian society was the best answer we would have shining examples of this...somewhere.

Yet there is very little data to back this theory up, or the data sets are too small.

The only thing we have are quasi socialist societies, and they seem to do ok (and in fact by many measures far better than the more libertarian countries like the US).

 

[fskimospy]

Indeed if a pure libertarian society was the best answer we would have shining examples of this...somewhere.

Yet there is very little data to back this theory up, or the data sets are too small.

The only thing we have are quasi socialist societies, and they seem to do ok (and in fact by many measures far better than the more libertarian countries like the US).

Economic natural selection of sorts has definitely picked mixed partially socialist partially capitalist economies as the winners so far.

It's possible as technology removes friction a more decentralized approach could be more effective but I think we are a LONG way from that being generally applicable right now. Although I do love Uber destroying the taxi/city hall nexus.

 

[ivwshane]

So we agree, the ratings by themselves are useless

Well, one can get a very rough idea of a politician's stance on issues important to businesses by looking at aggregate scores, with some obvious exceptions. The United States Public Interest Research Group and State PIRGs Working Together for example are pure progressive advocacy groups masquerading as business groups. The Heritage Alliance is a similar but conservative libertarian group. These groups track well with party loyalty because they are based on ideology. Other groups, such as the National Association of Government Contractors, are so narrowly focused as to possibly be counterproductive unless one is in that business. The National Federation of Independent Business and the National Small Business Association poll their members to take positions, so they honestly represent their clients. Other than that, you really have to know the group's position for the years in question. For example, the American Forest and Paper Association might be pushing for sensible, sustainable forestry practices, or for permission to clear cut national forests. Their issue of the moment might even be immigration (cheaper labor) or taxes (to lower a profitable period's tax burden) or import limits and tariffs (to blunt foreign competition.) There's no guarantee that their issues are good for the country or even the industry they represent.

I really like these ratings since they stem from behavior more than promises, but they aren't worth anything unless you do your homework. And you have to dig in; "supporting the American family" could mean anything they want it to mean.