Re: Leftists knocking Friedman ?

On Feb 18, 10:41 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Werner wrote:
> > On Feb 17, 2:53 pm, Vide...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> >>On Feb 17, 12:23 am, Werner <whetz...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >>>On Feb 16, 11:25 am, stuff_st...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> >>>>On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 02:04:29 -0600, problems@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>
> >>>>>After some decades [eg. the 70's stagflation] the market
anticipated
> >>>>>and became immune to the state manipulations.
>
> >>>>This is nonsense.
>
> >>>>>Rightly so, Friedman pointed out that decades of post war lack of
> >>>>>market discipline had had inevitable results,
>
> >>>>More nonsense. it's not a matter of discipline. It was a matter of
oil
> >>>>embargoes causing stagflation.
>
> >>>Oil prices went up because the value of the dollar went down - kind
of
> >>>like now. How else to pay for the Great Society?
>
> >>it was the vietnam war.
>
> > and both were failures.
>
>  From 1960 to 1969 the poverty rate dropped significantly.
>

Interesting this was the period of the first Reagan tax cut. The
Kennedy tax cut was almost identical to Reagan's 1980 cut. If John F.
Kennedy were to run today he would be a Republican. He was pro-defense
and pro-tax cuts. He wanted a strong military and stood up to the
Soviet Union. He laid the ground work for the war in Veitnam. A more
true democrat Johnson screwed it up and changed it from a covert war
to an overt war so he could get his name in the history books.
Kennedy, despite being from MA., was very popular with old Southern
Democrats who are Republicans or more similar to Republicans today.