The Supreme Court of the United States Thread

Nope. There was no shortage of food. How would a food stamp program create more food? It only creates more demand.
If there is already a shortage, why create more demand?

The same reason he created a shortage. Because he had no idea what he was doing.

If there was no shortage of food, why were we importing (with food stamp money) the same food items we paid American farmers not to produce?
 
That's not an answer. Unless you're just a 12 year old who thinks it's cool to be a contrarian.
You asked why I would have less. It's because you guys have to much.
I hold free market capitalism in proper regard. As I do government.
It's you guys who have an irrational hatred of one and unjustified love of the other.
 
You asked why I would have less. It's because you guys have to much.
I hold free market capitalism in proper regard. As I do government.
It's you guys who have an irrational hatred of one and unjustified love of the other.

To be fair that is the most left wing perspective you can possibly have and the same one that FDR had. The God complex that you alone understand the proper balance of the force and if we just give you enough power, you will fix all the things.
 
The same reason he created a shortage. Because he had no idea what he was doing.

If there was no shortage of food, why were we importing (with food stamp money) the same food items we paid American farmers not to produce?
To help the economies being more directly impacted by the beginning of WWII.
 
Nah. It's just that I sense that 3rd dimension that so many of you find so elusive.
tenor.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol
To be fair that is the most left wing perspective you can possibly have and the same one that FDR had. The God complex that you alone understand the proper balance of the force and if we just give you enough power, you will fix all the things.
Reread.....
An over-scrupulous jealousy of danger to the rights of the people, which is more commonly the fault of the head than of the heart, will be represented as mere pretense and artifice, the stale bait for popularity at the expense of the public good. It will be forgotten, on the one hand, that jealousy is the usual concomitant of love, and that the noble enthusiasm of liberty is apt to be infected with a spirit of narrow and illiberal distrust. On the other hand, it will be equally forgotten that the vigor of government is essential to the security of liberty; that, in the contemplation of a sound and well-informed judgment, their interest can never be separated; and that a dangerous ambition more often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people than under the forbidden appearance of zeal for the firmness and efficiency of government. History will teach us that the former has been found a much more certain road to the introduction of despotism than the latter, and that of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people; commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants.
 
To help the economies being more directly impacted by the beginning of WWII.

It's actually the complete opposite. Within 2 years of the war the great depression was over because American farmers had dramatically increased their exports and our imports were dramatically lower.

But nice try.
 
No one said that. But you can't proclaim churches waste too much money while arguing on behalf of government given we all know how efficient government is at wasting money.
I can argue that churches waste money while not saying a thing about what the government does.
 
I can argue that churches waste money while not saying a thing about what the government does.

Congrats?

The entire argument was regarding the efficacy of government vs charity. That's the entire reason he mentioned the waste of churches.
 
It's actually the complete opposite. Within 2 years of the war the great depression was over because American farmers had dramatically increased their exports and our imports were dramatically lower.

But nice try.
It was money they needed in '39 '40. It was food they needed in the final years.
 
It was money they needed in '39 '40. It was food they need in the final years.

You're literally just making this up as you go. Do you have any sources for your claim that we were importing food out of charity?

We should also add that we were importing these items as early as 1935. So why were we importing the same foods that were telling farmers not to produce?
 

VN Store



Back
Top