Conservatism vs Liberalism

*For those who may have missed it, Yeet posted their argument in the 'Comments' tab of the page. Yeet said that s/he apologizes for missing the due date of their argument, which I fully accept and understand. Yeet should not be penalized for this.* However, I do criticize Yeet for his/her argument. Now, Yeet is obviously advocating for a conservative approach regarding economics. For the first part of my argument, I will pick apart Yeet's argument point by point. 1. "Economically a comservative stands for lowering interest rates, lowering taxes burdening the middle class and removing regulations on small businesses. [sic]" We can carefully assume that Yeet is trying to say that high taxes are bad for the economy. However, this can be easily disproven.The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development says people in Denmark, Finland and the Netherlands are the most content with their lives. The three ranked first, second and third, respectively, in the OECD's rankings of "life satisfaction," or happiness. According to World Happiness, six out of the ten happiest countries in the world are nordic countries (the US is number 15, below MEXICO). There is nothing special about the people of Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, etc. They are the same as you or I, except for one thing: they have heavy taxes. The world's happiest country, Denmark, pays around 60% in taxes (many sources say about the same thing) yet they are the happiest country in the world. However, it does not just stop at happiness. According to Demos.org, Danes receive free health care, guaranteed parental leave, the average citizen works 300 hours less than the average American, mothers can have at a minimum of 52 weeks of PAID parental leave, and their country has much less debt than the US (For reference:"http://www.demos.org...;). Taxes May seem bad, but they have benefits through all aspects of ones life. 2. "While lowering or eliminating the corporate tax conservatives are clearly more favorable regarding the economy. A booming economy starts when people are spendig [sic] more money in the government. This is only possible with lower taxes and interests rates which allow people to borrow money for something even if they don't have the money yet." I wish Yeet could have either cited their sources or given an example, but I think I know what s/he is trying to say. Although Yeet says that taxing corporations is bad, in 2013 alone corporate income tax added up to $341.7 billion for the government (nationalpriorities.org). This is a HUGE amount of money that the US gets from corporations alone. Yeet is also saying that lower taxes and interest rates will make less people invest in the economy and I have a few problems with this statement: (1) Yeet has provided no evidence of this and I on my own can't find any statistics of this either, and (2) I think that when Yeet means 'spending more money in the government', s/he means buying stocks. The stock market has nothing to do with taxes. Also, loans from private banks and the interest that rivate banks put on the loans have nothing to do with taxes. Banks are independent organizations, so blaming liberals for an increase in the interest rate is ludicrous. 3. "A democratic approach is to tax and allow tariffs. Unfortunately, we have seem exactly what this does. It creates a hundred billlion dollar befeceit with China, millions of people unemployed and the lowest GDP in centuries. [sic]" This is purely propaganda. It is true that liberals of course tax more and are in favor of tariffs, but once again something that may at first appear detrimental is in reality beneficial. The average tariff right now is 1.3% (Historical Statistics of the USA), which generates $25 billion in revenue every year (Historical Statistics of the USA). Tariffs also stimulate domestic production and consumption, which is good for the economy. In regard to our debt with China, most of that money came from borrowed money for our War on Terror during the Bush Administration, and more specifically the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In regard to another of Yeet's points, millions of people have always been unemployed, and if anything the unemployment rate has fallen in recent years. Also, when Yeet talks about our lowest GDP in centuries, s/he is obviously not remembering the Great Depression. 4. "Something else i would love to point out is under Obama, obamacare has single handidly killed jobs and the economy. Obama care states that a small business with 50 people or more, who work 30 hours or more cannog recieve the healthcare. So what do company's do? They cut many of their employers sp they can gurantee this healthcare to the other workers. They then have to raise prices to make up for this dramatic event, in which case they cause inflation as well. This along with many other problems democrat's face is exactly why liberals are inefficient at running the economy. [sic]" I have found that arguments about politics most often lead to the Affordable Care Act, or "ObamaCare". I would like to point out that I have no obligation to believe Yeet's argument because s/he did not have any sources, but I will assume that the statistics are correct. First of all, Obamacare has not killed jobs. The Bureau of Labor and Statistics has said that from August 2010 to October 2015 there was consistent national monthly job growth. Also, our stock market has done better than ever since the stack market crash of 2008. DOW has increased by 185% since 2009, and the NASDAQ has increased by 313% since 2009. The economy is doing better than ever, and don't worry, we are still the richest country in the history of the world. It is true that businesses with 49 or less employees are required to provide healthcare to their employees, but this is not a reason to completely get rid of healthcare or to damn liberalism. All this means is that there needs to be some revisions to the law, which is common. Another thing I would like to point out is that when businesses raise their prices, it doesn't cause inflation. It just means that no one will buy their products because they are expensive. It is not in any war linked to inflation. Finally, I would like to say is that Yeet has in no way proved that "liberals are insufficient at running the economy". Just because you present 2-4 un-cited biases does not make it an argument, and DEFINITELY does not mean that a liberal economist view is detrimental to the economy. In support of this I will reference the Great Depression. FDR a progressive liberal and arguably the greatest president we have ever had, implemented most of the 'socialist' programs we have today, such as unemployment and social security. Oh, and he single-handily brought us out of the greatest financial collapse ever. In conclusion, higher taxes mean a higher national happiness level, taxing corporations has no statistical evidence of hurting the economy (but it provides benefits), and much of what Yeet has said has not been supported by fact. I am also eventually expecting a reason as to why conservatism is better socially, as well as economically.