I think it's pretty obvious by now that like most Republicans McCain has an inability to track cause-and-effect. The problem is prevalent among most conservatives it seems, and very strong in Bush in particular. I personally think it's because he has a mild form of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, but whatever the cause, he's got it in spades.
Laissez-faire economics don't work in a massive, populous, interconnected society. It would work in a small village where everybody knows everybody else, but it doesn't work when you have a population of 300,000,000 potential suckers to exploit, 50 states to incorporate in, and 3,500,000 square miles to hide and relocate to connected by 47,000 miles of Interstate Highways and 133,000 miles of US Routes. And it especially doesn't work when the Internet, the shipping industry, and airlines make super-cheap exploitable labor for manufacturing effectively as close as being in America as well as international financial corruption and theft.
Yet despite these experiences, McCain doesn't get it.
Reaganomics tax cuts don't work. Making the rich richer doesn't increase demand for products, services, labor, or raw materials. The rich and the corporations are not going to pay above-market rates for labor or raw materials just because they have more money in the bank. Why would they when they are legally obligated to be as profitable as possible for their shareholders? It does, however, give the investor class TONS of freshly-untaxed money for them to reward the politicians (Republicans) that freed up that money for them. And it gives them the cash to continue to promote and advocate for their own wealth by buying and selling political influence.
Despite the obviousness of this, McCain doesn't get it. Much to his and his wife's own personal profit.
Reaganomics mergers and acquisitions don't work. No company wants to compete. Cutthroat competition is good for the
consumer, not the corporation! Who in God's green Earth wants to
compete? Competing is
hard. And risky. You need to have a superior product or product line for the price, cheaper prices do to more effective manufacturing and/or management, better advertising and promotions to get customers, and the customer support and public relations to keep them. All of this is
good for the consumer but
bad for the company. Monopolies, cartels, and trusts are
soooooooo much easier and more profitable! Ask the Columbian drug cartels or OPEC.
Despite the obviousness of this, McCain doesn't get it.
Deficits do matter! For every $1 we spend on NASA we spend $20 on the interest on the national debt! The interest we pay is almost as much as what we spend on the Pentagon. And it's owned in large part by foreign powers that are competitors to America and hold that debt as a sword dangling over our heads. The existence of massive national debt also serves as an excuse to cut things that politicians (especially Republicans) don't want because "we can't afford them".
Despite the obviousness of this, McCain doesn't get it.
Our enemies will engage us in a military quagmire. Our conventional military is very powerful. Any military force from a medium-sized country or smaller that we engage in conventional military combat will lose, and lose in fairly short order. Any paramilitary force from a terrorist group or rebel army that choses to engage in conventional military combat will lose even faster. THEREFORE, our enemies will NOT engage us in conventional military combat. They will engage us in asymmetrical warfare. In guerrilla warfare. In an insurgency. They will engage us in such a manner as to force us to spend billions of dollars over the course of years in a grinding war of wills that sends back a steady stream of dead and maimed. This kind of warfare can only be defeated by getting popular sentiment in the country occupied to come to a political reconciliation and involvement.
Despite the obviousness
and personal experience with this, McCain doesn't get it.
McCain does not have experience. Wikipedia defines
experience as:
Experience as a general concept comprises knowledge of or skill in or observation of some thing or some event gained through involvement in or exposure to that thing or event. The history of the word experience aligns it closely with the concept of experiment.
The concept of experience generally refers to know-how or procedural knowledge, rather than propositional knowledge. Philosophers dub knowledge based on experience "empirical knowledge" or "a
posteriori knowledge". The interrogation of experience also has a long tradition in continental philosophy. The German term
Erfahrung, which is translated as 'experience' into English has, however, a slightly different implication, given that it is associated with the coherency of life's experiences.
A person with considerable experience in a certain field can gain a reputation as an expert.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExperienceMcCain has a long string of experiences that he has learned nothing from and is not going to.
Feel free to add your own.
:rant:
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
