It's official: Austerity in Europe has failed and the Stimulus worked

asdfe wrote:

I see. You've proved the correlation and causation in these instances?

No I haven't. Which is kind of my point. Saying that a country engaged in austerity during a recession isn't the same thing as saying that they pullout out of the recession as a result of austerity.

No. They did engage in austerity. The only argument you may have is that governments never really even considered recessions something you try to get out of or stay out of except until about the 1950s and even then only in America and Europe. But then that makes your grandiose statement that no country in "history" ever got out of a recession through austerity absurd. Unless history only goes back about 6 decades for you. But really, you just seem oblivious to the fact that mass bankruptcies and deflation is in itself a stimulus. Bankruptcies wipe out debt and create a clean slate while low prices eventually get people to buy again and renew growth. Again, I'm not saying this is necessarily a good idea in this day and age where everybody is so interconnected. But it did work back in the days.

spain, for instance, had its budget in order but had a housing bubble, and austerity measures have only made things worse. ireland, which had a housing bubble, adopted very harsh austerity measures and has seen its economy tumble. it goes on.

I want to lose weight. Do I diet or run more? Cross train? How many miles per week? Should I do some lifting? Im worried about body composition too. Reduce calories? What kind of calories? What proportion of macronutrients?

It's like a runner who's gained 50 extra lbs and runs much slower because of it. He loses 5 of those 50 lbs and isn't back to the speed he was at before and concludes that losing weight doesn't help his performance.

That's how the liberals determine results. They not only think the 50 extra lbs is good but another 50-100 lbs would be even better.

The vast bulk of this so-called stimulus cash has ended up in the pockets of the super-rich and their Wall Street cohorts. As the Goldman Sachs of this country thrive, more and more of our population are reduced to poverty and food stamps.

This is a terrible analogy.

TCBmath wrote:

It's like a runner who's gained 50 extra lbs and runs much slower because of it. He loses 5 of those 50 lbs and isn't back to the speed he was at before and concludes that losing weight doesn't help his performance.

That's how the liberals determine results. They not only think the 50 extra lbs is good but another 50-100 lbs would be even better.

Cave Johnson wrote:

This is a terrible analogy.

TCBmath wrote:

It's like a runner who's gained 50 extra lbs and runs much slower because of it. He loses 5 of those 50 lbs and isn't back to the speed he was at before and concludes that losing weight doesn't help his performance.

That's how the liberals determine results. They not only think the 50 extra lbs is good but another 50-100 lbs would be even better.

Agreed.

The only valid reason to bring analogies into an argument is when the original topic is somehow too emotional for folks to see clearly when discussing it. Even then, the analogy, in order to be useful, must be demonstrated to be essentially similar in all of the primary dimensions as the original topic in order for it to be valid.

This "analogy" fails wildly on both counts.

Thank you. My thoughts exactly. The analytical capability of 99% of this country is pathetic.

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.

EconomistsimonocE wrote:

Thank you. My thoughts exactly. The analytical capability of 99% of this country is pathetic.

Why would you say that 99% of this country is pathetic?

I feel for the future of this country if the younger segment is as stupid as the lefties on this forum.

Those who would prematurely proclaim success, haven't an inkling how far removed from its original moorings the Fed actually is, and don't understand the law of unintended consequences, Jim Grant's personal indictment is a worthwhile read.

http://www.grantspub.com/userfiles/files/g30n06d.pdf