You are proceeding to a page containing mature content. Is this OK?

check Yes, show me everything
close No, hide anything sensitive

DPJ Slaughters LDP in Election Landslide

rozen-aso-no-more

The Democratic Party of Japan has not unexpectedly crushed the ruling Liberal Democratic Party in an unprecedented landslide, ending their almost uninterrupted 50 year reign with a spectacular victory which sees them on track to seize 300 seats in the 480 seat Diet.

The forecast crushing defeat was widely predicted, with the government unable to control record levels of unemployment or deliver any convincing reforms after the loss of Koizumi; Rozen Aso’s endless gaffes and increasing unpopularity doubtless also contributed.

Political observers tie the scale of the defeat more to exasperation with the LDP’s incompetence and a desire for substantive political change than to any great enthusiasm for the DPJ itself, although as a basically unproven party it is not yet clear how they will perform.

Actual discussion of policies was given limited attention throughout the campaign, with emotional appeals instead being the campaigning mainstay.

The DPJ’s basic domestic policies are to curtail the overpowering influence of the civil service and introduce more benefits; it claims it can fund increases in spending without raising consumption tax, through savings on the bloated civil service bureaucracy.

It also claims it can introduce a $10 hourly minimum wage throughout the country (a substantial increase on prevailing lowlevel wages in many areas).

It has also stated its intent to prepare Japan to effectively receive more immigrants, in particular through allowing permanent residents to vote in local elections, though the LDP also notionally supported this.

Where international policy is concerned, it promises pro-China policies and a reduction in the US military forces stationed in Japan, though with no significant change in alignment.

Critics are intensely sceptical of its ability to fund any of its promised spending increases without increasing the tax burden, strangling private enterprise and further increasing the national debt.

The LDP itself has enjoyed near uninterrupted political power throughout the post-war period, though the existence of multiple competing factions within the LDP, in effect parties unto themselves, ensured an unorthodox form of opposition was present even if the actual opposition was unable to affect policies.

This system may very well have been shattered (though the DPJ has its own internal policy factions), although a lacklustre DPJ performance would likely quickly see the prior status quo reasserted; it seems the real hope of many voters is to see a substantially reformed LDP returned to contest future elections.

Leave a Comment

221 Comments

  • Anonymous said:
    multiculturalism =/= many races
    monoculturalism =/= single race

    Also, “homogeneous society,” is a little vague because it can mean racially so, culturally so, or both. And I don’t think any desire, in and of itself, is a crime. But racism is. In the moral, if not legal sense, at least.

    I suppose it will be hard for you to see passed the side of “desiring to live in a homogeneous society,” and people being racist fuckwads. There is a fine line.

    Race and culture are intertwined. And I really couldn't care less if you think that racism is immoral.

  • MidnightTide said:
    One of their more interesting campaign promises, from a US perspective, is to demand that US treasuries be denominated in yen. In other words, they are effectively saying, F U America, we aren’t playing the printing press game with you ANYMORE! Another interesting promise by the DJP is to INCREASE domestic spending which portends a possible liquidation of US treasuries priced in dollars.

    US currency is worthless in actuality; before it goes belly up, I'm going to stock up on supplies.

  • One of their more interesting campaign promises, from a US perspective, is to demand that US treasuries be denominated in yen. In other words, they are effectively saying, F U America, we aren’t playing the printing press game with you ANYMORE! Another interesting promise by the DJP is to INCREASE domestic spending which portends a possible liquidation of US treasuries priced in dollars.

  • I remember reading that they were “reconsidering” the US military presence in Japan, but I sense that little will really change regarding this matter. Getting the troops out of there (and the rest of the world for that matter) would be a good thing. Saving billions of dollars on military spending would provide an economic boost that the US desperately needs.

  • MasterInfamous said:
    They made Japan what it is today.

    They're a perfect example of the problems Japan has today.
    What Japan is today is heavily flawed and filled with all sorts of racists who vote LDP because they're more conservative and hate non-Japanese.

    "Japan what it is today", you know what Japan is today? A country full of problems! You're not making the LDP sound too great!

    • “filled with all sorts of racists who vote LDP because they’re more conservative and hate non-Japanese.”

      What’s wrong with wanting to live with other people of the same race and culture? People like to associate with other people who have similar interests and beliefs to themselves and when you try to mix people of different beliefs to end up with conflict and ultimately violence.

      For example, under Sharia law men aren’t allowed to associate with women who aren’t members of their immediate family while in the west it’s totally acceptable for a man to associate with a women to whom he’s not related. Tell me, how can these two polar opposite principles work together in the same society? Clearly they can’t and that’s why it’s completely impractical for different cultures to live together and why multi-culturalism doesn’t work.

      • 1. “Sharia law” is not universal to all Islamic sects, what you describe is specific to Wahhabist Islam, something that is practiced in Saudi Arabia and is not liked by most followers of the Islamic faith! Sharia law is something which strictly speaking all people of the faith should desire, what isn’t agreed on is what that law contains. Sects like Sufism can actually be rather progressive and compatible in a variety of cultures (coincidently it is also a sect with a history of persecution in Saudi Arabia).

        It is always curious how individuals who rail against multiculturalism seem to know little about other cultures!

        2. It is a mistake to call Japan a homogeneous society, even historically speaking.

        3. Really many of you people hold terrible and hypocritical opinions.

        • Support me? No, it was merely for the purpose of your humiliation after you’ve been ground to a pulp for all to see. But you’ve probably been to the Terry Tremaine forums and had that happen before; I bet it wasn’t your favorite experience.

        • I’m sure someone who won’t debate here alone, who needs 157 like-minded people to support him, is not a coward. Please learn the meaning of words you are planning to use before using them.

          I am truly laughing my head off right now :):)

        • I’m not going to bother debating this with anonymous users on a story page; most of the time I’m simply trolling. However, you’re more than welcome to get your ass kicked on IRC, if you like. In front of the entire 157 member channel, no less. I dare you to show up.
          I've dealt quite effectively with big mouth trash like yourself several times now.

        • And by that 3rd point I am really looking at you Blitz.

          With a quick scan of your posts I have seen you construct strawmen of your imaginary ideological enemy, engage in ad hominem attacks combined with pointless name calling, show a bias towards middle easterners that borderline towards overt racism all while consistently showing your hateful self up anytime a conversation is derailed towards the topic of immigration or really anything that would interest a xenophobe.

          In the spirit of your fallacious methods of argument I will also like to say that judging from your posts, name and avatar combo I’d guess that you probably hold a Stormfront account!

      • I agree, I get sick of liberals always preaching tolerance and diversity. Personally, I’m glad to have the choice of living in the U.S where I can hang around people of all backgrounds but I have the option of going back to India and living in a homegenous society. For whites though, they are starting to lose the option of white homogenous societies.

        Its funny that people like Brian Ashcraft of Kotaku complains about racism in Japan, how he has sometimes been mistreated because he is a forienger and wants Japan to open up like Western nations have, if they want to stay homogenous, its fine, we shouldn’t force it on them, we’ll just look like the evil, baby-eating racists!

        • multiculturalism =/= many races
          monoculturalism =/= single race

          Also, “homogeneous society,” is a little vague because it can mean racially so, culturally so, or both. And I don’t think any desire, in and of itself, is a crime. But racism is. In the moral, if not legal sense, at least.

          I suppose it will be hard for you to see passed the side of “desiring to live in a homogeneous society,” and people being racist fuckwads. There is a fine line.

        • “For whites though, they are starting to lose the option of white homogenous societies.”

          If you lose the colour factor you’ll realize that Anglo-saxon culture has taken more of a hold on the world than any culture has had on Anglo-saxon countries.

          The fact that a system of law such as sharia is not compatible with tort and criminal law is not something that has to be totally culture conflicting.

          Culture comes in many forms and law is just one of them. Multiculturalism is not the sharing of all forms, as that would be mostly impossible. Law and value systems are things that are not usually culture compatible, and so long as you make that clear to immigrating parties you will have for a large part a cohesive society.

        • I’m glad to see people who use common sense these days. The desire to live in a homogeneous society is not a crime. Butthurt otaku who want to go to Japan to steal a Japanese girlfriend, however, don’t like that. And people wonder why many Japanese hate us.

  • sycamore said:
    It’s play on wapanese.

    Which has also been defined as "wannabe Japanese" instead of "white Japanese".

    The general usage of the term more implies a cultural appropriation and not racial thing. Else people like Ken Hirai could be referred to as "weeaboo".

    • Did I say anything offensive? I thought that wapanese and weaboos exclusively referred to white otakus with a strong interest in Japan, probably wanting to be Japanese themselves. Interesting wapanese is a term but there’s no similar terms for people of other races like the wapanese, that I know of anyways.

        • Wrong, “wapanese” was a portmanteau of wannabe japanese, a racist term in itself. However, in anycase, the word is as bad as nigger/wigger, imo.

          And before you ask, “wigger” stands for wannabe nigger, not white nigger…

        • You’re an idiot. The term weeaboo arose from 4chan’s word filter; the original term was “wapanese” which filtered to “weeaboo” after one of the moderators got sick of it. The term “wapanese” is indeed racial in connotation, being it is a portmanteau of White and Japanese, or White Japanese-wannabees. Thus, weeaboo does strictly refer to Whites.

    • It IS a racial term. It’s play on wapanese.

      In regards to the article…

      It should really be irrelevant to us who gets into power as long as they don’t gain too much power. Both parties have strived or shown interest in striving into the censorship culture. The thing that stops it is that both parties disagree about what should be done about it. What we really want (from what I can gather)is a close win from either side, meaning more political dispute on what should be done, meaning that in essence nothing gets done at all.

  • It sounded like a “damned if they do, damned if they don’t” scenario for the voters. The LDP have shown that they cannot control the situation they are in, but the DPJ have been spouting out attacks without any solid policy to get the country out of the rutt it’s in.

    I think the article got it right in saying that, ultimately, the public is more hoping for a reformed, reorganised and more focused LDP to come back from all this rather than hope that the DPJ will be able to do even a fraction of what they have claimed.

  • to be honest, anytime you see a “land slide” in election, the quality of the government just drops because effectively the winner will be able to steam roll though anything. No check or balance at all.

    this happens way too often. the losers? the voters…

  • Anonymous said:
    Communism tends not to work in countries in general, it’s best suited for small settlements, and in such settlement it works wonders; saying that Trotsky showed a fairly good country wide adaptation of communism, though it admittedly did not last long enough before he was murdered to tell if it would really work. Honestly I think governments will never work properly, and only micro systems can work perfectly, but they’re necessary now and a socialistic capitalism tends to work best in the real world, but that’s only my opinion, each person considers certain problems bigger than others.

    There’s a saying I’ve lived with “People can’t work without the system, but the system can’t work with all these people”

    +2 facken this.

  • f course, that doesn’t mean that Keynesian economics works. The LDP used Keynesian policies in the Nineties to overcome the recession caused by the asset bubble in the Nineties. It didn’t work: Japan experienced a decade of stagnation and deflation and the Japanese government evolved into on of the most indebted (between 180 – 200% of the countries GDP) of the world. Taro Aso also used the same policies as back then to overcome this crisis. Let’s see if it will work.

    But I agree with you, the right-wing administrations of the USA (Reagan and the two Bushes) weren’t “fiscal conservative” at all. GWB even used Keynesian economics to overcome the recession caused by the Dotcom bubble. They only true “fiscal conservative” president of the last… 40 years was probably Bill Clinton. He really accomplished what the other preached

    • Yes and no. One of the logical fallacies is that systems set up by one administration generally fail to take effect during that administration’s governance if they’re passed in the 2nd term, and Clinton rode some of the benefits of the previous administration on his way in. However, Clinton did prove fiscally responsible, shortening the duration of welfare to 5 years and closing a number of in-country military bases (which is either good or bad depending on who you ask).

      However in order to balance the budget he also orchestrated the largest tax increase in the country’s history, which is what in turn led to the surplus. There is so much government bloat and waste that ideally we would want some of that eliminated instead of just chasing bad money with more money.

      I give no excuse really for what Bush Jr. did during his administration with that surplus and then some, but do not idealize Clinton–he is more moderate than his wife certainly, but he caused his fair share of problems as well.

    • Once she gangs up with the incredible number of whacked-out feminists in the DPJ, you can count on complete enactment of every one of her demands.
      Enjoy your manga and anime while you can, because it’ll all be gekiga within a year.

    • DPJ
      – moral issues: partly liberal and partly leftist (FEMINISTS!)
      – economic issues: slightly to the left, more welfare, may more regulation or government intervention
      – more like the Liberal Party of Canada but that ideological and less unified

      LDP
      – “conservative” in the Japanese sense of the word
      – pro-Business, popular among Civil servants, pro-American, strictly anti-Communist, since Koizumi they’re also more economically free market and less interventionist
      – compareable to the Conservative Party but also less unified and with some ideologically differences

      The NPD is compareable to the Japanese Social Democrats.

  • Seravy said:
    Keynes…was someone who plotted on taking over the world by making every government fall into huge, impossible to repay debts.
    It’s about time for the world to wake up. It’s f*king abnormal that every single government and most people/ corporations are in debt which is the direct result of money being created by banks lending it to them. If money is “created” by lending it, and it needs to be repayed with interest, it will obviously result in more total debt than total money in the system…which is impossible to repay, then.
    I’d vote for a democratic communist party if there would be any, but so far never heard about one. Capitalism already proven itself not working, but so far we haven’t seen real communism, only the dictatorship version which was obviously not good.
    And this is only one of the very very serious problems in the “system”. Overproduction and overconsumption (also direct result of Keynes) is another one that’s about to destroy the planet. Not to mention Keynes didn’t care about what we produce…nuclear weapons add to GPD so making them is good isn’t it…of course not!

    You sir are a retard.

    • If you’ve been keeping up with things, DPJ means potential trouble for the eroge market. LDP seemed to prefer to table the issue for later when possible, while DPJ tended to vocally support it.

      Let us hope that the universal truth of “all politicians are lying bastards” works to our benefit, though honestly I worry more about the economic impact of the country in general now that a party with such… “interesting” policy ideas is in control.

  • Keynes…was someone who plotted on taking over the world by making every government fall into huge, impossible to repay debts.
    It’s about time for the world to wake up. It’s f*king abnormal that every single government and most people/ corporations are in debt which is the direct result of money being created by banks lending it to them. If money is “created” by lending it, and it needs to be repayed with interest, it will obviously result in more total debt than total money in the system…which is impossible to repay, then.
    I’d vote for a democratic communist party if there would be any, but so far never heard about one. Capitalism already proven itself not working, but so far we haven’t seen real communism, only the dictatorship version which was obviously not good.
    And this is only one of the very very serious problems in the “system”. Overproduction and overconsumption (also direct result of Keynes) is another one that’s about to destroy the planet. Not to mention Keynes didn’t care about what we produce…nuclear weapons add to GPD so making them is good isn’t it…of course not!

    • “democratic communist party” that is not possible. Communism is absolute control beyond socialism which murders entire states and cities to maintain and achieve control and maintain control. Communists are the ultimate mafia structure which keep control over a group of people there for the ‘democratic’ part does not exist. By the way, you have to live in a free country to have any ‘democratic’ policies with in the government that are real. Other places which have kings and queens as dictators are not free countries either. To understand what a free country is, you would never allow Communism to happen. I hope you understand as this is not a personal attack on you just FYI.

        • Marx himself never said how true communism would arise after the proletariat got to power. The only ideal he expressed was that:

          “Capitalism is destined to fail. The best political system possible is one where the people are given what they deserve based on their respective capacities”

          This means that someone with a weak body who worked a lot would always earn the same of someone with a strong body who worked with the same intensity. So everyone would be rewarded for their passion and dedication to work, unrelated to what they can physically accomplish with it.

          To “dissolve the state” only means that people must break free from political, economical and religious bonds to be able to think with their heads, that everyone must build the new state together from scratch.

          In the end what was truly needed back then and is needed now to make true communism possible is a whole new theory of communism itself. (as Marx said: “Pertinent to the time”)
          Marx & Engels, as philosophers, meant mainly to give the ideals necessary for it to be done.
          To take Marxism literally is the same as doing so with the Bible.

        • Communism seeks to dissolve the state through a transitory ‘dictatorship of the proletariat’ where control of the state is taken over by democratic processes subject to universal suffrage. Whether that necessarily means direct democracy or not is debatable, since Marx endorsed the Paris Commune and it had an elected council and its participants were mostly republicans.

          I suspect the less literate among us would erroneously invoke the “No True Scotsman” fallacy in objection to the insistence that rather than being rampant Marxists, the Soviet Bloc used Leninism as a rhetorical device to sooth the throats of the populace as its malevolent oligarchy jammed its member firmly down them.

        • Communism is true democracy, were every person votes on every aspect, unfortunately this is impossible in large scale, and thus communism in said scale is nothing more than a concept. Stalinism is not communism, not even close.

  • Now that the Japanese LDP is out of power in Japan, I would love to see them come to America where their policies would be far better then the ones of the Republicans or Democrats here. Neutrality, fiscal restraint, good treatment of workers, awesome cartoons. Makes me feel all patriotic just thinking about it. I for one would welcome our new ninja overlords.

    • “Neutrality”
      more like sucking up to the US on every foreign issue
      “fiscal restraint”
      subsisiding the marode construction industry by ordering large and useless concrete projects, that’s totally not wasting money
      “good treatment of workers”
      to the point that they’re now forced to work for chump change wich doesn’t even is enough to keep their families fed. There’s a reason why the JCP is so strong compared to other communist parties in the industrialised world. But hey, Aso said it himself, poor people shouldn’t marry.
      “awesome cartoons”
      what has that to do with the LDP?

      And you also forgot to mention how utterly corrupt LDP politicians are. There goes no year by without a major corruption scandal by a LDP politician (granted, the DPJ isn’t much better when it comes to corruption, they’re made up of former LDP politicians afterall)

    • “Neutrality, fiscal restraint, good treatment of workers, awesome cartoons.”

      As a U.S. citizen, I’d happily settle for the first three, if I could get them. The fourth would be a nice bonus.

      But could I _really_ get the first three from the LDP?

  • When this kills their economy and the yen falls like a dollar tied to a lead balloon they will re-elect the LDP. Something the recent years of Republican and Democrat super majorities in America has taught me is that I prefer it when it’s close and they have to negotiate with each other then get everything they want.

      • not you per say, just that your system, while well meaning doesn’t work in reality. Your goals are admirable but the problem is no one will work hard if they get the same pay for being lazy. In a perfect world full of people who work because they want to it would be great though. Name one first world Communist country? And China doesn’t count for two reasons.

        • “the best political system today would be something like in Scandinavian country’s. Democracy mixed with socialism. btw to all commie haters out there, there is a big difference between communism and socialism.”

          and there’s an even bigger difference between socialism (which really IS a state-owned and planned economy) and a free-market capitalism combined with a welfare state, as in Scandinavia or nearly all of Europe.

        • In theory, but not in practice. In theory there is no upper class, and its stifles excellence while at the same time promoting competition. In practice it has so far lead to bloated corruption.

          Socialism is a theory with a high level of faith in the good of humanity, but this is a difficult ideal to swallow if you believe that humanity is inherently a selfish creature by nature.

        • you sir are a moron, 1, they’re fixing a minimum wage based upon the lowest level of living costs, thus allowing anyone with a residence and the will to work to have a basic survival. In a communism, the lack of residence would also be taken care of, and everybody would be forced to work so long as they can. Socialism instead simply redistributes the money to those who needs it and gives the possibility for lazy asses to earn a living wage, those who are too lazy to do so will not be kept alive unless they can’t work for a living wage for some reason. Socialism is more about giving possibilities to everyone, communism is making sure everyone is equal, even if they don’t want to be.

        • Tito-machette, please enlight me and tell me the difference between socialism and communism.

          Fixing a minimum wage based on nothing and increasing government spending does sound very communist to me.

          No doubt taxes will be raised, confiscating people’s freedom and arbitrarily redistributing wealth to chosen lazy asses. Fuck that.

        • Communism tends not to work in countries in general, it’s best suited for small settlements, and in such settlement it works wonders; saying that Trotsky showed a fairly good country wide adaptation of communism, though it admittedly did not last long enough before he was murdered to tell if it would really work. Honestly I think governments will never work properly, and only micro systems can work perfectly, but they’re necessary now and a socialistic capitalism tends to work best in the real world, but that’s only my opinion, each person considers certain problems bigger than others.

          There’s a saying I’ve lived with “People can’t work without the system, but the system can’t work with all these people”

        • Tito-Machete says:

          Yugoslavia was one of em. sadly it was created among people who had more then a thousand years of hate and small wars. the best political system today would be something like in Scandinavian country’s. Democracy mixed with socialism. btw to all commie haters out there, there is a big difference between communism and socialism.

        • There’s a saying by the Russians that goes something like, “Everything the Communists said about Communism was wrong. Unfortunately, everything they said about capitalism was right.”

        • As tingle said, communism has nice goals; and if they were obtainable I might support it. But the cold reality is that communism when applied outside of theory is a complete failure because of human nature; and nobody will ever be able to change that.

        • I’d like you to point out one country in history that was actually Communist because just like China right now any country that has claimed to be Communist has simply been a Dictatorship trying to pretend its something it isn’t.

        • The problem is that neither communism NOR capitalism have worked perfectly.

          The financial crisis shows what’s wrong with ultra-capitalism.

          Interestingly, it’s the greed and stupidity of single people that’s causing the failure of both capitalism and communism.

          Maybe the best thing is some middle ground between them, but that would already be “too left” in the US spectrum.

  • I’m more concerned of the DPJ’s coalition partners. The SDP is a bunch of nutjobs and all the PNP cares about is reversing Koizumi’s postal privitization. The DPJ doesn’t even need them with their huge wins.

    • Anon, you’re absolutely right, the DPJ doesn’t need those nutjobs at all.

      But the thing is, the DPJ may also be the biggest party in the upper house, but not a majority, in which a chunk is held by those partners at the moment.

      So for now, the DPJ would have to make peace with them to prevent anymore gridlock, at least until the upper house election next year, when they look to consolidate their advantage and win an outright majority there as well. Then the DPJ can get rid of the SDP and PNP.

      • insane. the so-called biggest economy of the world has impressively shown how braindead a two-party system is – not much better than a one-party system. politicians become lazy and corrupt, because their success in the next election is secured. they’ve got the money for an expensive campaign after all. and if they don’t win, they’ll just have to brandish the mistakes of their opponent and score a glorious victory in the next election.

        there’s only one solution to this: a good slice of radicalism in the governement to tap the bastards on their knuckles when they screw up. it needn’t be left- or right-wing radicalism. just a few strong minor parties that can overthrow their worst decisions.
        wanna spend another billion on defense? hey, how about you take care of the 10% unemployment rate first?

  • Though I am a conservative (by European standards), I must say that in my opinion it’s not too bad that the LDP lost. The DPJ doesn’t seem to be as anti-free market as many European social democrats are; they are more like American “welfare liberals”. The LDP on the other hands messed so many things up since Koizumi, Aso was a awful Prime Minister and you can’t expect the LDP to make some necessary structural reforms (some of which go directly against their clientele). Hopefully the DPJ isn’t as corrupt and will try to change things in Japanese politics.

    The really bad thing for the LDP is that the Japanese economy was already showing signs of recovery and if it really will recover, it will be probably the DPJ who will have achieved this in the public opinion.

  • Another country ready to be destroyed by the left and their policy of spending money that doesn’t exist. New Labour in the UK has spent trillions of pounds that we don’t have and has put the country in massive debt. Obama is spending trillions the US doesn’t have, adding to the colossal $11.5trillion national debt and $2trillion budget deficit.

    Now we have a leftist party in Japan who’s going to magically increase benefits without raising taxes. They’re also going to increase immigration and bring multi-culturalism to Japan – something that has failed in every country it has been implemented.

    Just as Obama is the final nail in the coffin of an already mis-managed America the DPJ is going to finish of the destruction of Japan.

    I suppose we should all welcome our Chinese overloads since every developed nation is going to be in massive debt to them.

    • Multiculturism only failed due to the stupidity of people. Which means it isn’t multiculturism that’s wrong, it’s the people’s mindset that’s wrong.

      We should try to fix what’s wrong, not to try to fix what’s right in order to fit with what’s already wrong.

        • @Blitz:

          Part of the problem in discussing this is everyone will have a different idea of how much accomodation consitutes “multi-culturalism”.

          I agree with your statement, “…a people who share little in common cannot build a cohesive bond to become a nation.”

          What is the minimum amount of common values required to make a nation sufficiently cohesive?

          I think a single, common, shared “official” language which does _not_ change when party B comes to power, is part of that minimum.

          Monocultures scare the shit out of me — it’s like a mob, just waiting to be manipulated by someone clever and charismatic enough to pull it off (Adolf Hitler was very charasmatic).

          The members of a monoculture don’t ever think they can be wrong, because the monoculture’s individuals don’t receive enough conflicting feedback.

    • In Keynesian economics, in a time of depression, governments are supposed to increase deficit spending and cut taxes in order to give unemployed citizens a salary to spend. Once they begin to spend money, the economy will begin to pick up. Furthermore, it isn’t the left that spends money where there isn’t any. The Conservatives are always wanting to cut taxes, but never cut defense spending.

      • MelancholyMomo says:

        Keynesian economics is one of the main reasons why most of the Japanese economy back then and the global economy now is so messed up..

        All it does cause more inefficiency.. and inhibits competition.. I agree that some policies can be good, but only ones that try to bring about more competitiveness in a market..

        not that I support monetarism as well.. I disagree with quite a lot of it actually….

        governments should stick to keeping the economic market as efficient and competitive as possible.. that is it..

        sadly the Keynesian and monetarism are seen by most as the only orthodox schools of economic thought

        • MelancholyMomo says:

          I have yet to bother researching Austrian economics.. >_>..

          I am definitely not an expert.. nor am I claiming to be one.. >_>..

          I have only been studying it for a year or so.. I am just making my opinions from studying both Keynesian-ism and Monetarism in-depth.. and to me it sounds highly logical..

          that is really it.. If you have problems with my opinions, all you need to do is explain why they are wrong.. I would probably enjoy listening..

          ‘I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me.’

          >_>..

        • Economics is one of those subjects where everyone on the Internet is an expert, because they read a few paragraphs of the fishwrap distributed by the Ludwig von Mises Institute. Perhaps you can also let us know how QED and the Spectral Theorem are responsible for Japan’s stunted growth, since you know about as much about those subjects.

      • Of course, that doesn’t mean that Keynesian economics works. The LDP used Keynesian policies in the Nineties to overcome the recession caused by the asset bubble in the Nineties. It didn’t work: Japan experienced a decade of stagnation and deflation and the Japanese government evolved into on of the most indebted (between 180 – 200% of the countries GDP) of the world. Taro Aso also used the same policies as back then to overcome this crisis. Let’s see if it will work.

        But I agree with you, the right-wing administrations of the USA (Reagan and the two Bushes) weren’t “fiscal conservative” at all. GWB even used Keynesian economics to overcome the recession caused by the Dotcom bubble. They only true “fiscal conservative” president of the last… 40 years was probably Bill Clinton. He really accomplished what the other preached.

        • @kajunbowser:

          Don’t presume that spending money is enough to ensure a sufficiently strong military; it’s not.

          Overpriced military equipment of inferior quality has been the bane of armies for ages.

          I am willing to have my tax dollars spent to buy military techno-stuff that _works_, in preference to being a cheap-ass and having our soldiers wounded and killed.

          Other countries and cultures (i.e., China, Korea, etc.) likely have a different opinion.

        • @ Anonymous 00:22:

          The pattern in U.S. politics has been:

          * the “political right” takes the citizens’ tax money, and “gives” it to its favored economic interests, in the form of overpriced military and development contracts, and tax breaks (“loopholes”) and de-regulation.

          In exchange for this, a relatively small number of businesses and individuals give large amounts of money to the campaigns of those politicians.

          * the “political left” takes the citizens’ tax money, and “gives” it to a large number of people (poor people and government bureaucrats).

          In exchange, a relatively large number of people give relatively small amounts of money to the campaigns of those politicians.

          Both “sides/parties” take too much of the citizens’ money and give it to other people/companies.

          It’s been written (in the Bible?), “Money is the root of all evil.”

          I disagree; I claim, “Concentration of things is the root of all evil.”

          “Things” being:

          * People
          * Chemicals and radioactive substances
          * Money
          * Power

        • The housing bubble and our ongoing recession was caused by the artificially cheap credit provided by the Federal Reserve. Without ridiculously low 1% interest rates, the housing bubble never could have happened. While Bush and friends certainly poured fuel on the fire, the primary blame must go to Greenspan, Bernanke and the other fools at the Fed.

        • The problem that Japan faced was a reluctance to acknowledge insolvent banks, which resulted in a steady drag on its economy and rendered its subsequent monetary policy ineffective. Mired as you are in debt for its own sake, the Japanese government engaged in a lot of counterproductive activities like allowing insolvent banks to refuse intervention for years and raising taxes.

          The Bush administration mostly used a lack of oversight and monetary policy to combat the recession that it inherited, expanding the California housing bubble with its roots in the frenzy of the tech boom, and engaged in myriad policies pertaining to fixation on tax cuts with low multipliers. The tax rebates that the Bush administration distributed had a muted impact on aggregate demand, because they were slow and were not targeted; resulting in a lower marginal propensity to consume. The second round of rebates were largely inconsequential to the picture of the following collapse, because they didn’t remedy the balance sheet problems of households or banks.

          The Clinton administration handed the Bush administration a recession on a silver platter, and while its repeal of banking regulation contributed to the fortunes of Rubin and his cohorts it also paved the way for the real estate frenzy that has been a bit of a drag of late. Mission Accomplished, fiscally conservative Bill Clinton.

        • kajunbowser says:

          Cut taxes all around, promote economic growth and let weeaboo companies fail. Then, put some regulation on it with some teeth. Also, NEVER weaken the military w/ budget cuts b/c if something happens on a grand scale, less funding means we fukken screwed.

        • Not only Bush, But I think even McCain warned of this.
          However, trading debt, isn’t much of a good idea. And neither was being forced and/or given incentive to sell to people who could barely, or if at all, afford it just in the interests of being politically correct.

        • It’s true that if you’re looking for a scapegoat for the housing market bubble you’re going to have to blame Congress for the past 40 years, when the policies began. It technically started back with Carter and congress continually deregulated banks until eventually investment banks were able to “trade debt” like their bretheren, which led to the problems. This wasn’t an entirely partisan issue either, as the progression of bills leading to it came from both Republican and Democrat congressional bodies a little at a time.

          It’s ironic, but Bush Jr. actually stood before Congress TWICE before the collapse and cautioned them that allowing banks to debt trade freely could lead to issues later, to which Congress snubbed their nose at him. Too bad he wasn’t more insistant.

        • When looking at spending, it’s completely unfair to only look at the president. You must also look at the congress.

          Reagan took over with a democratic congress They liked him, but not enough to do a good amount of his bidding. Clinton HAD a democratic congress, and it was during those years his was spending like a mad man. When he lost it to republicans though, he became more fiscally conservative, albeit his doing so while kicking and screaming. Bush had a republican congress, and he most certainly spent alot, but deficits never reached higher than 500billion. He then later gained a democratic congress. And in the last year of office upped spending. But not that much.

          Obama has come in with a democratic congress, and we are already looking at a 1 trillion deficit. And that’s a conservative estimate sadly.
          Keynesian economics tends to believe more in deficit spending than tax cuts though. Tax cuts would be more supply siders territory.
          And Bush did cut taxes, which probably helped during the dotcom bubble. Considering we lost the twin towers too, we weren’t so bad off.

          Oh and to the person who said Bush gave us a $9 trillion dollar debt, Thats not all Bush’s fault(out debt is the debt from all former presidents). And Obama sadly seems content on outdoing Bush. I’d give Obama a pass here, but he’s not holding his democratic allies back and saying, ‘we should slow though the spending here’.

    • you’re retarded. career politicians are all fucked up regardless of alignment. if you want change, you can’t vote for a major party whose dicks are in the asses of mega corporations. Who gave the US a $9 quadrillion debt? GEORGE W BUSH. fuck

        • If Obama had actually put any stimulation into the stimulus bill, you would be correct. However, he instead put political plums for the Democrat allies, without actually stimulating the economy. It dragged on it, according to the CBO.

          It isn’t so much a “blame the Obama” though— as it is to “blame the Democrats” because they got majority and therefore looted the US treasury for everything they could think of. Most of their spending has YET to transpire, so there is a chance for it to be legally blocked— but the chances of that are very low. Government spending is votes for politicians, and that’s all they care about.

        • MelancholyMomo says:

          @kajubowser.. I missed you comment..

          I was merely telling the guy.. that the majority of the increase in expenditure, was due to stimulating the economy…

          From your other comments I see that you disagree with Keynesian economics.. same here..

          *copy and paste from another comment of mine*

          Keynesian economics has damaged most economies.. so much in fact that now we <b>cannot ignore</b> some of the problems it has caused.. and now sadly in some cases the government is justified with using fiscal policies…

          All Keynesian economics does is inhibit competition and reduce overall efficiency.. and causes a reliance of the government.. something that should never have happened..

          Not that I am a monetarist.. to me monetarism is the economic version of communism.. >_>..

          *end – copy and paste from another comment of mine*

          but I repeat.. <b>you cannot ignore some of the problems it has caused</b>..

          ———————————–

          Obama.. hasn’t really done anything wrong in my personal opinion.. it was expected and highly logical for him to try and stimulate the American economy.. the loss of a few trillion dollars of investment is nothing to what they could lose if they didn’t..

          If you are still going to blame Obama..
          blame his economic advisors..

        • kajunbowser says:

          Look @ the damn numbers, idjit. @anon 00:02, go get ur head out of ur fukken ass. National debt has been there since Jefferson was president. Also, exaggerated numbers and Bush-bashing is exaggerated.

          Do troll harder, and commence with the Obamming already.