What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[Sean Renaud]

It has more to do with the law, and tolerance for opposing views.

I leave more integrity floating in the toilet bowl than you'll ever have in life.

It has nothing to do with the law. Not one bit.

If it does perhaps you can explain to me how you telling people who are saying crazy shit to shut up (unless your a legal official threatening to use the law) has anything to do with the law. You're not tolerant of opposing views so don't even try to pull that, you spend all day here telling Liberals how stupid they are. Why didn't you tell birthers how stupid they were?

Integrity. Get some!

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Hey rosco, I spent some time reading the .pdf, which was kinda tough, it's layout confused the book reader so I had to continually hunt for the next page. I think it makes some bad assumptions and so do some other people, here's what I found at mises.org (search = "Warren Mosler"). I find the second link the most insightful.

Warren Mosler

http://newarthurianeconomics.blogspot.com/2010/10/seven-deadly-innocent-frauds-of-warren.html

MMT

http://mises.org/daily/5260/The-UpsideDown-World-of-MMT

There is also a new one up on the coming inflation:

http://mises.org/daily/5407/Is-Higher-Inflation-Inevitable

I have a student coming, so I'll shout at ya in the morning, in a nice way, not in a Democrat thinking cap Grecian Formula sort of shouting...

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

RW lies, misinformation and distortion! INDEPENDENT Keynesian analysis PROVED IT (the stimulus) WORKED!

Actually your own non-Keynsian source you linked the other day proved it (oops, you don't read your own links!). After your self ass-kicking you vanished from the discussion.

Why is that?

 

[mercury14]

Socialism?

A world in which you have no civil rights, must obey authority, must dress (and GROOM) according to a specific code, must live where you are told to live, and are required to carry weapons...,

Yeah, Socialism...

lmao

And when Marines retire they rely on heavily socialist VA care and retirement checks. What's your point? That socialism is perfectly fine - and even desirable sometimes?

 

[Sean Renaud]

I've opposed points of view for sure, but never the right to express them. If I've told somebody to STFU, it was rhetorical in nature; and I have no desire to spend all of my time here engaging in the tiresome "STFU Miles" mentality so pervasive to your benighted kind.

The first half is duh. Where has anybody on this board spoken a single word about taking someones right to say something away or said STFU in anyway other than "I'm done arguing this point?"

Nor am i asking you to spend all your time here posting against people. That would be silly. But you seem to always find time to call me, or Merc or UD on any of our shit. And I find time to call UD and Merc on their shit, sometimes something so minor as they didn't read a post that quoted.

Again the entire board for the most part united in the 9/11 was not Bush's evil plan and tore every post that came up supporting the idea, left right and center. Why don't you and the right in general spend ANY time telling guys that the birth certificate thing is stupid and honestly makes us all look bad?

 

[RightField]

June 30, 2011
Stimulus to Nowhere
By Steve Chapman


Mired in excruciating negotiations over the budget and the debt ceiling, President Barack Obama might reflect that things didn't have to turn out this way. The impasse grows mainly out of one major decision he made early on: pushing through a giant stimulus.

When he took office in January 2009, this was his first priority. The following month, Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, with a price tag eventually put at $862 billion.

It was, he said at the time, the most sweeping economic recovery package in our history," and would "create or save three and a half million jobs over the next two years."

The president was right about the first claim. As a share of gross domestic output, it was the largest fiscal stimulus program ever tried in this country. But the second claim doesn't stand up so well. Today, total nonfarm employment is down by more than a million jobs.

What Obama didn't foresee is that his program would spark a populist backlash and give rise to the tea party movement. Where would Michele Bachmann be if the stimulus had never been enacted -- or if it had been a brilliant success?

To say it has not been is to understate the obvious. The administration says the results look meager because the economy was weaker than anyone realized. Maybe so, but fiscal policy is a clumsy and uncertain tool for stimulating growth, which the past two years have not vindicated.

The package had three main components: tax cuts, aid to state governments and spending on infrastructure projects. Tax cuts would induce consumers to buy stuff. State aid would prop up spending by keeping government workers employed. Infrastructure outlay would generate hiring to build roads, bridges and other public works.

That was the alluring theory, which vaporized on contact with reality. The evidence amassed so far by economists indicates that the stimulus has come up empty in every possible way.

Consider the tax cuts. Wage-earners saw their take-home pay rise as the IRS reduced withholding. But as with past rebates and one-time tax cuts, consumers proved reluctant to perform their assigned role.

Claudia Sahm of the Federal Reserve Board and Joel Slemrod and Matthew Shapiro of the University of Michigan found that only 13 percent of households indicated they would spend most of the windfall. The rest said they preferred to put it in the bank or pay off debts -- neither of which boosts the sale of goods and services.

This puny yield was even worse than that of the 2008 tax rebate devised by President George W. Bush. Neither attempt, the study reported, "was very effective in stimulating spending in the near term."

The idea behind channeling money to state governments is that it would reduce the paring of government payrolls, thus preserving the spending power of public employees. But the plan went awry, according to a paper by Dartmouth College economists James Feyrer and Bruce Sacerdote published by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

"Transfers to the states to support education and law enforcement appear to have little effect," they concluded. Most likely, they said, states used the money to avoid raising taxes or borrowing money.

That's right: The federal government took out loans that it will have to cover with future tax increases ... so states don't have to. It's like paying your Visa bill with your MasterCard.

The public works component could have been called public non-works. It sounds easy for Washington to pay contractors to embark on "shovel-ready projects" that needed only money to get started. The administration somehow forgot that even when the need is urgent, the government moves at the speed of a glacier.

John Cogan and John Taylor, affiliated with Stanford University and the Hoover Institution, reported earlier this year that out of that $862 billion, a microscopic $4 billion has been used to finance infrastructure. Even Obama has been chagrined.

"There's no such thing as shovel-ready projects," he complained last year.

Even if jobs were somehow created or saved by this ambitious effort, they came at a prohibitive price. Feyrer and Sacerdote say the costs may have been as high as $400,000 per job.

Based on all this evidence, we don't really know whether the federal government can use fiscal policy to engineer a recovery. We do know it can go broke trying.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Actually your own non-Keynsian source you linked the other day proved it (oops, you don't read your own links!). After your self ass-kicking you vanished from the discussion.

Why is that?

Because you took as gospel the part of the report that said what you wanted to hear and then ignored the logical conclusion and the reality of what is actually happening.

The story of the Obama economy is the story of corporate jets.

You offer a tax break to produce a behavior which you then vilify as corporate greed on the backs of women, children, minorities, students, the unions, the poor, the sick, the mentally challenged...,

Praxeology. Spreadsheets do not have a column for Human Action.
__________________
"You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality."
Ayn Rand

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Let's get back to Economics and it factions, especially MMT and other modeling analysis.

The economy is not a linear event, it is a chaotic event which means it is not a spreadsheet where you can put in inputs, outputs, fudge factors and then get an answer, a prediction, or a valid historical explanation for a chaotic system is more akin to a feedback loop in which history is part of the equation as well as Human Action, neither of which can be quantified, so they are Diffy-Q'd (much as the Glow Ball Warming crowd does in its modeling). As Mises shows us by writings and example, economy is the purview of Sociology, not Mathematics. Mathematics can be a valuable tool for isolated instances and examinations, but an economy is not made up of numbers, inputs and outputs, but of transactions, transactions full of prejudice, flawed calculation, and emotional manipulation.

The failure of economic modeling is in this: F(E) = E^2 + C where E, a complex number, can be roughly defined by known terms, GDP, spending, Trade balances, Production, etc., but C cannot be defined for it is always unique, so while you might select a program that predicts a bifurcation in one direction, you can never pin down an amplitude or frequency for your modification, it's the same thing that makes the market so hard to predict for it is hard to tell what in the offering will be that have-to have stock or sector.

So, the analyst simply sets C to zero, simplifies the definition of E by limiting its factors and tells us, in a theoretical world, the stimulus worked because all our actions are math based.

In the real world, where people have to live with politicians who know or care nothing about math or economics, decisions are made not by calculation, but by observation and they can easily observe that even though he keeps offering token carrots, Obama hates the business community, he is not the President of the Producers, he is clearly the President of the Looters and the Moochers, and as badly as some people here want to believe that their demand drives and economy, it is the producers creating surplus that drives an economy and if you make it painfully clear that you intend to take that surplus from them and give it to someone else in the name of fairness, that is then an unfairness in which they no longer wish to participate.

I'm not a number!
__________________
If you ask your government to treat everyone "fairly," the only way it can ever accomplish that task is to treat someone "unfairly."
A_J, the Stupid

 

[NeverEndingMe]

And when Marines retire they rely on heavily socialist VA care and retirement checks. What's your point? That socialism is perfectly fine - and even desirable sometimes?

you are such a confused man. by creating a way to reduce the cost per American, you call that socialism?

why are you so anti American? you say you are helping our military people, yet you spit right in their face. you are a disgraceful non American

the military, police, fire, school are not socialism. pull your head out of your ass

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Rightfield, the observations of Chapman are a companion to what I say.

We are not simply inputs.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

didn't Clinton try to punish the "rich" or "elite" by a new tax on luxury goods?

this hit the middle of the road cars up to yachts. it failed and guess what, they had to repeal that TAX

Merc & sean is two lazy sorry human being, who wants others to pay for his way of life. the founders of America would bitch slap their ass! WWII vets would shoot them on site for their anti American rhetoric

Because you took as gospel the part of the report that said what you wanted to hear and then ignored the logical conclusion and the reality of what is actually happening.

The story of the Obama economy is the story of corporate jets.

You offer a tax break to produce a behavior which you then vilify as corporate greed on the backs of women, children, minorities, students, the unions, the poor, the sick, the mentally challenged...,

Praxeology. Spreadsheets do not have a column for Human Action.
__________________
"You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality."
Ayn Rand

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Sean, you are the queen of faulty logic

The first half is duh. Where has anybody on this board spoken a single word about taking someones right to say something away or said STFU in anyway other than "I'm done arguing this point?"

Nor am i asking you to spend all your time here posting against people. That would be silly. But you seem to always find time to call me, or Merc or UD on any of our shit. And I find time to call UD and Merc on their shit, sometimes something so minor as they didn't read a post that quoted.

Again the entire board for the most part united in the 9/11 was not Bush's evil plan and tore every post that came up supporting the idea, left right and center. Why don't you and the right in general spend ANY time telling guys that the birth certificate thing is stupid and honestly makes us all look bad?

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

you are such a confused man. by creating a way to reduce the cost per American, you call that socialism?

why are you so anti American? you say you are helping our military people, yet you spit right in their face. you are a disgraceful non American

the military, police, fire, school are not socialism. pull your head out of your ass

Seems to me that they are more akin to a teachers or autoworkers union, so I guess we need to point out that unions are socialism and since the biggest unions are now government, then the government must be Socialist.

However, their top administrator is a Fascist...

A Peronista...

Can Michelle, ma belle sing? Pray for me Ameritina!

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

didn't Clinton try to punish the "rich" or "elite" by a new tax on luxury goods?

this hit the middle of the road cars up to yachts. it failed and guess what, they had to repeal that TAX

Merc & sean is two lazy sorry human being, who wants others to pay for his way of life. the founders of America would bitch slap their ass! WWII vets would shoot them on site for their anti American rhetoric

We know that taxing is a great vehicle for reducing an activity, take smoking for example and the Left knows this too, but they see an economy in terms of fairness and tradeoffs...

__________________
Q: You favor an increase in the capital gains tax, saying, “I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton, which was 28%.” It’s now 15%. That’s almost a doubling if you went to 28%. Bill Clinton dropped the capital gains tax to 20%, then George Bush has taken it down to 15%. And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28%, the revenues went down.
A: What I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness. The top 50 hedge fund managers made $29 billion last year--$29 billion for 50 individuals. Those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries. That’s not fair.
Q: But history shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up.
A: Well, that might happen or it might not. It depends on what’s happening on Wall Street and how business is going.
Source: 2008 Philadelphia primary debate, on eve of PA primary Apr 16, 2008

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Seems to me that they are more akin to a teachers or autoworkers union, so I guess we need to point out that unions are socialism and since the biggest unions are now government, then the government must be Socialist.

However, their top administrator is a Fascist...

A Peronista...

Can Michelle, ma belle sing? Pray for me Ameritina!

I would agree, obama and his flock of followers are turning into Fascist fools

in some ways, I think it would be a good thing if the debt ceiling isn't increased and the Rep's hold their ground. granted, this will be a finical hell but its time for obama to get serious and get an education.

will the next civil war be government workers/obama flock vs the rest of America?

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

President Obama is not in leading or administering mode, he is in campaign mode and he is panicked. I am convinced his goal is to create a disaster and then go into the election blaming George Bush and the Republican House, for if they reach an agreement and we get an economic bounce from it, he will have to share credit and it will make it look like his policies did not make the difference, but the "failed Republican policies of the past," so he seeks to recreate the vast, right-wing conspiracy cry RACISM and unleash the race lords...

May יהןה have mercy on our souls...

 

[mercury14]

Because you took as gospel the part of the report that said what you wanted to hear and then ignored the logical conclusion and the reality of what is actually happening.

The part of your article I quoted (3mil to 4 mil jobs saved) was from its conclusion section. What other conclusion was the reader supposed to to come to? That it didn't save millions of jobs as you claim?

You know you're really bad at this, right?

 

[NeverEndingMe]

The part of your article I quoted (3mil to 4 mil jobs saved) was from the conclusion section. What other conclusion was the reader supposed to to come to? That it didn't save millions of jobs as you claim?

You know you're really bad at this, right?

and you are happy with that one result. for all the debt America has taken under obama to save 3-4 million jobs.

when will you be happy, when WE are the next Greece?

 

[NeverEndingMe]

President Obama is not in leading or administering mode, he is in campaign mode and he is panicked. I am convinced his goal is to create a disaster and then go into the election blaming George Bush and the Republican House, for if they reach an agreement and we get an economic bounce from it, he will have to share credit and it will make it look like his policies did not make the difference, but the "failed Republican policies of the past," so he seeks to recreate the vast, right-wing conspiracy cry RACISM and unleash the race lords...

May יהןה have mercy on our souls...

history will tell the truth, once we take America back

 

[mercury14]

We know that taxing is a great vehicle for reducing an activity, take smoking for example and the Left knows this too, but they see an economy in terms of fairness and tradeoffs...

__________________

Tradeoffs like defense and Medicare for 86 year-olds who have no other way to see a doctor. Mostly the same tradeoffs you see.

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

The part of your article I quoted (3mil to 4 mil jobs saved) was from the conclusion section. What other conclusion was the reader supposed to to come to? That it didn't save millions of jobs as you claim?

You know you're really bad at this, right?

That is not the number of success, but the number of, "at least we got this."

Remember too, our very, very smart vice-President, probably the second-most intelligent man in Washington DC (unless O'Bama's on another vacation) said that because of this stimulus, we would be adding half a million jobs a month beginning this time last year, yet we do not have six million new jobs, therefore, you are confusing an effect with a success.

Success would be nearing 7% unemployment the way Reagan did with his plan.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Tradeoffs like defense and Medicare for 86 year-olds who have no other way to see a doctor. Mostly the same tradeoffs you see.

here is the rub, obama wants to take away from "corporate jet owners" okay good. that's peanuts. why doesn't obama want to attack the fat government management?

obama isn't serious.

and this attacking seniors - is sick rhetoric on your part (and the left wing Fascist) more anti American dribble from a non American

 

[NeverEndingMe]

That is not the number of success, but the number of, "at least we got this."

Remember too, our very, very smart vice-President, probably the second-most intelligent man in Washington DC (unless O'Bama's on another vacation) said that because of this stimulus, we would be adding half a million jobs a month beginning this time last year, yet we do not have six million new jobs, therefore, you are confusing an effect with a success.

Success would be nearing 7% unemployment the way Reagan did with his plan.

the positive side with Reagan is the middle class lift. ending inflation. under obama he is creating more inflation and about to kill the credit market.

next, Reagan did pour billions into defense but this spending created the tech boom that gave America the foundation for all our little fun toys

 

[Frisco_Slug_Esq]

Tradeoffs like defense and Medicare for 86 year-olds who have no other way to see a doctor. Mostly the same tradeoffs you see.

Back to the emotional pleas of the "unassailable victim" in order to prove anyone who disagrees is mean-spirited, greedy, hateful and proof that we need to destroy the very vehicle which can provide the most for those in need, Capitalism, the reason that our desperate poor have TVs and cars instead of living in a shanty...

The attempt here is to override reason with emotion, but the problem for the Party is that that message only resounds with the people who are going to vote for you no matter what, because it's how they already think.

To those who are being vilified for taking tax breaks designed to improve the economy it's a steel gauntlet across the face.

Obama is becoming transparent in his desperation, but it seems he has many foot-soldiers ready to unfurl the banner of desperation.

Good luck with that tactic.