One of the Best U.S. Presidents of All times, if not the best

[Spartacus Sully]

I accept the problems that you described, but I don't accept your solution,

can you quote the solution i posted, i cant figure out which post its in.

yeah grover was great president, rallied for labor unions inorder for workers to get more of a share from their greedy capatilists owners, which paved the way for the formation of the AFL.

but really look into the gilded age of the three party system with repubs demos and the rich independants. check out the depression between 93-97.

history repeates itself.....though the main diffrence between then and now?

The wealth of the period is highlighted by the American upper class' opulence, but also by the rise of American philanthropy (referred to by Andrew Carnegie as the "Gospel of Wealth") that used private money to endow thousands of colleges, hospitals, museums, academies, schools, opera houses, public libraries, symphony orchestras, and charities. John D. Rockefeller, for example, donated over $500 million to various charities, slightly over half his entire net worth.

the capatialists then wernt greedy pices of escrement.



and as far as the bail out, we stopped it, the american people protested it and shut it down.

till a week later when it magically passed.

personally i would have put requirements that the money went absolving the debt of existing student loans, and not into the pockets of the capatialists.

but thats just one of the things id do to help society. though id be interest in the quote where you claim my solution would be to absolve free market blah blah blah....

[One_Tycoon]

can you quote the solution i posted, i cant figure out which post its in.

Hmm, advocating for Communism? I assume that means nationalizing businesses and taking the profit motive out with Government completely taking over. That qualifies as a solution, no?


As for the rest of your post, you're gonna have to a little coherent.

[One_Tycoon]

You see I'm not going to be sucked into this ideological debate of Capitalism Vs Socialism or Communism, that a lot of people have. I'm past that.

I'm so far to the right of Capitalism, leaning towards Anarcho-Capitalism or Free-Market Anarchism, that I'm way past that point and only debate disagreements amongst people within the Pro-Capitalism family.

Just recently I posted a thread, that criticized famous Economist Milton Friedman, and his Chicago School of Economics that preach small Government and Capitalism, but like to be in charge of Price Control with the Federal Reserve, which in some ways makes them no different than their more Liberal, Central planning Economist counter-parts.

And mainstream Conservatives love themselves some Friedman. He talks a good game in the general scheme of things.

[Spartacus Sully]

Hmm, advocating for Communism? I assume that means nationalizing businesses and taking the profit motive out with Government completely taking over. That qualifies as a solution, no?


As for the rest of your post, you're gonna have to a little coherent.

you're gonna have to a little coherent. ummm you first.

but ok....

grover saw a large problem with labor disputes across the country and put in action to have a labor union created stripping the rights of capaltists and enpowering the workers.

his ideal for a union never came into fruition but at the same time groups had lleardy started forming and with his help the American federation of Labor was created in an effort to change the bolded:

Capitalism: the act of feeding on the stupidity of the public to sell them things they dont need for the SOLE purpose of makeing the seller rich.

the result was greater pay for the workers and less pay for the greedy capitalists.



now during grovers first presedency he saw 15% tarrifs and a 500 million $ surplus in government from the terrifs and decided to drop them to 7 or 8% (im not sure) from the 15%. the reaction to this was for the republicans to claim he was attempting to create free trade and outsource jobs to the uk. thus he did not get re-elected untill 1892? 93? im not sure.

right around this time the gilded age was coming to an end and we were realizing that the golden age we thought we were in was just gold plated. the united states fell into a depression for about 4 years.

during this time the "1%" donated nearly 50% of their net worth back to society thorugh chaities hospitals colleges universities orphanages libraryies ect.

though this and the change in the peoples train of thought brought us the progressive age, an agure of government purity, or atleast that was their goal.

during this age society took on the task of brining down the man, the political machine that was big buisness. they even supported the protestants rallying for prohibition as a way to take away the power of the saloon owners. aswell society took great effort to allow women to vote, increasing the purity of the government and reducing big buisness involvement by increasing public involvement.

this age of progression was in its prime untill WW1, after ww1 there was still a progressive movement but not as strong. the progressive movement existed in smaller and smaller numbers untill rosevelt passed his new deal amids progressive opression causing the progressives movements end.




SOOOOOO esentially the same thing happened in 1893 as whats happenening now, and what changed it was the "1%" donating nearly 50% of their networth back to society and the publics dedication to removing big buisness from government.


communism was just an option thats better then what we have in our current form of capitalism, in no way is it a solution i would suggest.

though one factor i would suggest as a solution would be a socital bail out, where we bail out the large banks under the stipulation that the bail out is to pay off any student loans made under certain stipulations involving family income, date loan was made, and school the loan was for along with other things to allow full bail out or partial bail out for college students, thus allowing those that spent 100k on school, to be happy working at MC Donalds living with their parrents till they get their life together as they dont owe the bank 100k anymore, this inturn allows the parents housing their child to recieve rent helping to prevent bankruptcy and having their home repoed.

but thats just all part of a much bigger plan i call the deal, that i would put inplace to resolve the countries woes, increase the public's governemt involvement, resolve issues with the internet, resolve social security issues, reduce unenplyment, reduce homeless ness, and many other things.

though the above

SOOOOOO esentially the same thing happened in 1893 as whats happenening now, and what changed it was the "1%" donating nearly 50% of their networth back to society and the publics dedication to removing big buisness from government.

would also work pretty well in resolving alot of ****.

[One_Tycoon]

[..........wrong thread.

[Spartacus Sully]

[..........wrong thread.

was the post i replied to from a diffrent thread?

no?

so really you could have just said "you win"

[One_Tycoon]

all about grover man, and his crusade against the capitalists!!!!

Grover wasn't against Capitalists, it's your skewed misinterpretation.

I wouldn't even know where to begin with your long-winded, put together post (is too much incorrect nonsense to get through). So you win by default.

Grover was small-govt as small Govt. gets. That's all that matters.

[Spartacus Sully]

So you win.

Thanks, i figured as much.

[One_Tycoon]

The strategy from the ******s seems to be start out with a fallacious argument from the get-go, attacking Capitalism.

And then expend on it by enlarging your posts and making them bigger and bigger, all over the place with misinformation. Brilliant work commie.

[One_Tycoon]

Thanks, i figured as much.

I only read long posts from correct grammar, well informed people.

You're not very intelligent, but you certainly have a opinion. And that's your right.