US Presidents are nobodies

colddiesel

Literotica Guru
Joined
Aug 22, 2006
Posts
5,740
Nobodies that is to ordinary people. A chance question I heard today got me thinking.

Which politician in the last 50 years has done the most to affect ( posiitvely or negatively), ordinary people? No American President comes even close to the answer. Deng Xioping is miles ahead of all of them . When he opened up China the world was flooded with super cheap consumer goods.

What do American Presidents do or for that matter the entire political "elite." They rob the public , the voter for their own and their cronies benefit, and take it in turns to share the spoils of robbery every 4 to 8 years.

And despite all the absurd passion put into so called debates in this forum when it comes to affecting our everyday lives, that tiny little four foot ten inch Chinaman, has had far more importance than the whole of the circus in Washington.
 
What market would the cheap goods have had, had the US presidents (Nixon and Clinton) not worked so hard to open up the US market to China?

As the US goes, so goes the world.
 
What market would the cheap goods have had, had the US presidents (Nixon and Clinton) not worked so hard to open up the US market to China?

As the US goes, so goes the world.

Quit adding perspective to the conversation.
 
LBJ -- both positively (Great Society, civil rights legislation) and negatively (Vietnam War).

Let me fix that for you...

LBJ, both positively (by getting out of the Republican's way on Civil Rights..finally) and negatively (Vietnam War, The Great Society.)
 
president fires blanks

For the next two years, Obama will be firing blanks, he has just been castrated by both the Senate, and The House of Reps, he might as well go fishing, you might not like the British political system, but it dosn,t render the leader totally powerless mid term.
 
Let me fix that for you...

LBJ, both positively (by getting out of the Republican's way on Civil Rights..finally) and negatively (Vietnam War, The Great Society.)

You're confusing the Republicans of the late 19th century with those from the mid-20th century onwards. Prior to the Gilded Era, the GOP was the liberal--and later liberal populist, under the first Roosevelt--party in the United States.

The post 1920s Republican Party--and especially post-1930s Republican Party--on the other hand? They were already firmly turning towards the interests of capitalists and would then turn towards the interests of racists in equal measure when the white working South left the Democrats and joined them.
 
No, he didn't.
Now now, where would the world be without fairy tales?

You know what's funny about the whole "Reagan brought down Soviet" idea? It imples that without Magic Reagan, the USSR woulda been just fine. Ergo, authoritarian socialism works. Reduce Reagan's impact to a more realistic level and you have the perfect narrative to point at and show how untenable grand scale planned economy is.
 
Now now, where would the world be without faity tales?

You know what's funny about the whole "Reagan brought down Soviet" idea? It imples that without Magic Reagan, the USSR woulda been just fine. Ergo, authoritarian socialism works. Reduce Reagan's impact to a more realistic level and you have the perfect narrative to point at and show how untenable grand scale planned economy is.

That is also a skewed version of the history of the USSR. The fairer thing to say about it is that it started out as a genuine people's revolt against capitalism and the constant and immediate interference of panicked Western capitalists with their economic and political affairs permanently stacked the deck against the USSR.

This is especially apparent when you recount that, in Word War II, Russia suffered the equivalent of everything east of Chicago being leveled to the ground in the US in the aftermath of the German invasion--and we rebuilt Germany, not Russia.

If you want to give a US President the credit for killing the USSR, give it to Roosevelt. If he hadn't died prior to the end of the war, we probably would not have nuked Japan and we probably wouldn't have completely fucked over the Russians after they won the ground war in Europe for us.
 
You're confusing the Republicans of the late 19th century with those from the mid-20th century onwards. Prior to the Gilded Era, the GOP was the liberal--and later liberal populist, under the first Roosevelt--party in the United States.

The post 1920s Republican Party--and especially post-1930s Republican Party--on the other hand? They were already firmly turning towards the interests of capitalists and would then turn towards the interests of racists in equal measure when the white working South left the Democrats and joined them.

He's still googling his response.
 
Back
Top