Professioinal Economist wrote:
Not a one of you, not a single one of you know the first thing about economics. At best you're espousing economics 101. Lets leave the economic policy making to the experts and armchair quarterback something that's maybe....a little simpler.
This is true.
Where is Kaitainen when you really need him?
Have you looked at the economic indicators for the US recently? Unemployment claims at 3 month high, durable goods orders down, core durable goods orders down. Doesn't look too good for the US either. Expect some bad reports Friday.
Dem wrote:
Seriously, the money they threw at the banks in the fall of 2008 really saved a potential catastrophe.
Yeah the catastrophe of the elite power brokers actually losing money. We gained nothing from TARP.
Actually if you look at the UK, cutting government spending drastically during a downturn creates more debt. Austerity leads to more unemployment which leads to less money for purchasing which leads to a slow down in economic growth which leads to less money for the government which causes more debt. Smart government stimulus can break the cycle and cause an increase in economic output which can lead to more tax returns which causes less debt in the long term. Once the economy starts the positive feedback and grows then you cut government spending. = less debt.
luv2run wrote:
So your plan is to get out of debt by creating more debt?
Europe is different with its multiple economies, governments etc.. To me their failure to solve the problem is a combination of their structural financial/economic problems combined with a governmental/monetary structure that isn't really equipped or set-up to solve anything. However, I think it is still unclear if stimulus has worked. All current stiumuls seems to be based on the hope the economy will magically grow like crazy in the future to solve our budget problems. Stimulus is a short-term solution that hasn't solved a long-term (getting shorter every year) problem. When you consider most of our tax revenue is taken up by medicare/medicaid, social security, retirement, and interest, tell me how stimulus has worked? Until we solve our structural problems nothing has worked. When I look at revenue, mandatory, and discretionary spending, I don't see anything that has worked. We might still need our own austerity soon enough.
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43154
(above info does not include net interest expense)
exactly as someone else said... this is not a hard issue to figure out. Name one country in history who pulled out of a recession through austerity. just one.
if someone wants to blame Obama for the US's slow recovery then they should blame him for not stimulating the economy enough
Didn't the stimulus start under W?
Professioinal Economist wrote:
Not a one of you, not a single one of you know the first thing about economics. At best you're espousing economics 101. Lets leave the economic policy making to the experts and armchair quarterback something that's maybe....a little simpler.
Hahaha, yeah, like all the professional economists who foresaw the housing bubble, economic crash, etc. THOSE guys were really on the ball, weren't they?
Oh yeah, they got it all wrong.
But we're supposed to believe you know what you're doing now, right?
redux wrote:
Didn't the stimulus start under W?
No, the bailouts started under W. Stimulus spending was Obama (and bailouts as well).
I tried running but I didnt lose weight and my knees hurt.
Charles Nonhomogenous wrote:
Professioinal Economist wrote:Not a one of you, not a single one of you know the first thing about economics. At best you're espousing economics 101. Lets leave the economic policy making to the experts and armchair quarterback something that's maybe....a little simpler.
Hahaha, yeah, like all the professional economists who foresaw the housing bubble, economic crash, etc. THOSE guys were really on the ball, weren't they?
Oh yeah, they got it all wrong.
But we're supposed to believe you know what you're doing now, right?
Yeah, you're probably right. Most likely a bunch of anonymous internet trolls are who one should turn to for understanding global economics.
Gonna have to agree wrote:
Charles Nonhomogenous wrote:Hahaha, yeah, like all the professional economists who foresaw the housing bubble, economic crash, etc. THOSE guys were really on the ball, weren't they?
Oh yeah, they got it all wrong.
But we're supposed to believe you know what you're doing now, right?
Yeah, you're probably right. Most likely a bunch of anonymous internet trolls are who one should turn to for understanding global economics.
How dare citizens question their government?! They should know their place.
Concerned Citizen wrote:
Gonna have to agree wrote:Yeah, you're probably right. Most likely a bunch of anonymous internet trolls are who one should turn to for understanding global economics.
How dare citizens question their government?! They should know their place.
I am surprised at the level of stupidity displayed by your post here. Usually you show a reasonable level of intelligence.
Or perhaps you were not trying to imply that your statement and mine had any relationship whatsoever.
A direct comparison between the economies of the USA and members of the EU is ridiculous. Different starting points, different ending points.
Two Points:
1. The difficult [impossible] element to tease out is how this plays out over 5 and 10 years.
2. I'm not a republican and I won't try to speak for them but I believe you can be FOR debt reduction and FOR economic stimulus. It really comes down to what you believe the purpose of the government is; social programs from cradle-to-grave (uni-healthcare, gov student loans, public primary schooling, needless Rx buyer) OR enforcement of contract law, protection of liberty, defense of the state.
I with Concerned.Cit and his satirical remark.
Yes, they (Fed, professors, some politicians) are the "experts" and have been studying/watching the economy for potential their entire grown-up lives BUT if the basis (or school of thought) of their policies is fundamentally flawed (or possibly corrupt for any number of reasons), then we all pay the consequences. If a dissident like ConCit doesn't make a stir of things then even fewer might question if we made the right turn at the last intersection.
What the hell are you talking about? The U.S. pulled out of recessions countless times through austerity before the 1930s. Americans accepted simply having recessions. In fact as far as I can tell the entire world since the beginning of time accepted going through recessions and depressions with plummeting prices. When that cycle ran its course economies started growing again. I'm not advocating it in today's modern economy. Just saying that is one of the most stupid statements that no "country in history" ever pulled out of a recession through austerity.
abcd23 wrote:
exactly as someone else said... this is not a hard issue to figure out. Name one country in history who pulled out of a recession through austerity. just one.
if someone wants to blame Obama for the US's slow recovery then they should blame him for not stimulating the economy enough
ryan foreman wrote:
What the hell are you talking about? The U.S. pulled out of recessions countless times through austerity before the 1930s. Americans accepted simply having recessions. In fact as far as I can tell the entire world since the beginning of time accepted going through recessions and depressions with plummeting prices. When that cycle ran its course economies started growing again.
I'm not advocating it in today's modern economy. Just saying that is one of the most stupid statements that no "country in history" ever pulled out of a recession through austerity.
Pulling out of a recession through austerity isn't the same thing as waiting out the recession while engaging in austerity. Pulling out of a recession through austerity means that the austerity caused the end of the recession. You're citing examples of responding to a recession with austerity, not pulling out of a recession through austerity.
bootsie wrote:[/
I can give you about 100 examples of countries who did it through stimulus/deficit spending..
No you can't! In fact, since you make the claim, let's hear 100 solid examples that that are completely and unquestionably due to stimulus and deficit spemding. Oh...gosh...I know you're being silly, how about 50 then...25?
The fact is there are compensating factors that make an economy turn around. Borrowing your way to prosperity in economics is a farce and requires inflation to make it work. Inflation is a hidden tax and in the end, the prosperity you think you're getting isn't prosperity through liberty. But the problem with bleeding heart liberals is they will not look at facts. So I might as well be talking to a wall.
