Krugman: Recession ?gratuitous? because if Congress created jobs program it ?would all be over? | The Raw Story
This is more Kensian bull shit. You can't stimulate your way out of a depression. This is all brought about because the masses can't stand the idea of a crash. Let it fail and the strongest should survive. Not the ones most in favor with the current govt leaders...
Do you post anything but political stuff. This is a fitness forum... I can recommend some political forums if you need help finding one.
check the archives...I made thousands of posts on training in nutrition for about 6 years on this site, way before most of you were ever here. I've been here since 2002.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swfl
and this is also the Open Chat section...so you don't have to come here, if you don't like it then don't read the posts. it's that simple.
LOL....you think you know more about economics than Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz! :roflmao:
Joseph Stiglitz: “Romney’s plan is based on magic” - Salon.com
?I don't buy any of the shit there selling on tv. I have real world experience. That counts for way more than any theoretical college program. Spending more never fixes anything if you don't have it to spend. I suggest you try that in your household then report back as to how well things went. Once your clear there,the lies you are parroting will be self evident.Quote:
Originally Posted by LAM
of course you wouldn't because you have no idea who they even are or how their economic "theory's" revolutionized economics in the real world. because you don't know a fraction as much about econ as you think you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swfl
deficit spending has it's place and limits. austerity measures during an economic downturn is fodder for those that know nothing about economics like yourself.
Yes, you nailed it I'm stupid. Sorry for offending the economic gods. Peace be with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by LAM
I'm gonna go workout now. That is what I'm here for.
good then now STFU and go workout. I post not as an attempt to change the minds of ideologues that support the policy of the radical right but to inform those who want to learn regardless of their current political affiliation or allegiance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swfl
someone has sand in their vagina this morningQuote:
Originally Posted by Swfl
"Fitness forum" ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Swfl
Where do you think you are?
Mens health?
This is a board relative to building large muscles and better living through 'chemistry experimentation'.
That and KOS great hot wife ass pics.
That all doesn't have shit really to do with "fitness".
Lams threads and posts are on topic for this open chat forum.
Don't like em because you politically disagree with them, don't read em.
Regardless as a member in good standing he has a right to post them.
And how well has Keynesian economics worked out for us? 16 trillion and counting........
debt is ok even when you can't pay the bills. lmao
Krugman is a cunt.
reading economic briefs works better then making up your own "facts"...what do the charts on page. 10 say?Quote:
Originally Posted by Swiper
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-cen...entialecon.pdf
75% of the current deficit is from supply-side tax cuts from Regan and GWB the direct result of spending legislation. the increase in the deficit under Obama is not from spending but from reduced tax receipts while pre-recession levels of spending remained at US historical growth patterns. had GWB not reduced revenue down to 15% of GDP the lowest in many decades and had the 2008 downturn not happened the additional increase in the deficit from a lack of tax receipts would not have occurred. that would be called causality. supply-side tax cuts are not revenue neutral, they have done nothing except increase the deficit and inequality both having negative effects on the overall US economy.
so the LMAO is at what you "think" you know about econ which is nothing...being able to spit out a couple of "buzz words" doesn't mean you understand economics, it means you watch/read lot of right wing media.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAM
Right, Bush's fault, I forgot...
Anyone who concedes that the faults of the government is based on one persons decisions has not been paying attention at all. It's not the fault of Obama, or bush, or Clinton or Reagan or all the other men that have held that office.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swiper
It took thousands of congressmen, senators, local politicians, judges, lobbyist, corporations etc... In addition to presidental administrations To fuck this government up so much.
And the average citizen should absorb some of the blame as well.
Bush returned to supply-side economics which didn't even work under Reagan. actually let me rephrase that, they worked in the sense that they did what they were intended to do transfer wealth from the bottom to the top and create deficits, as this is what the empirical data all shows and what Reagan's own budget chief has stated time and time again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swiper
Keynesian economic principles are only applied in economic downturns. under monetarism you can use policy out of the FED to attempt to increase consumption, but when interest rates are at 0% no more magic bullets. since there are no mathematically modules or formulas in supply-side economics, well there you simply reduce tax rates and the economy magically recovers only pay the price down the road when the debt based consumption it's based on isn't sustainable. giving the wealthy at the top enormous tax breaks so they can lend monies to the middle and some at the bottom. the 2008 bank collapse showed how well that worked after 30 years.
1. top 5% account for 35% of consumption - they never run out of money and spend regardless who is POTUS. but luxury items do not employ a major share of the workers so even when they spend more employment numbers barely move.
2. government accounts for 20-25% of consumption - this depends on policy and politicking
3. semi-skilled and low-skilled labor classes or the lower 3 income quintiles - account for the rest or about 40% of consumption but their wages are stagnant and once adjusted for inflation have the same buying power of that of the 1990 dollar. debt has been fueling excess consumption here for decades as the data shows, was not sustainable. labors share of the national income also hit a 60 year low in 2008 but of course to you none of these "facts" matter.
* in order for the economy to improve demand has to increase which means workforce numbers increase. 1 or 2 has to pick up for the lack of consumption by 3. this stuff is not rocket science.
Household Debt Increase Per POTUS during their admins
Reagan - 1427.71 to 3105.94 or 1.6T
GHWB - 3105.94 to 4000.39 or 900B
Clinton - 4000.39 to 7112.19 or 3.1T
GWB- 7463.58 to 13575.79 or 6.1TB (adjusted for when the Bush Tax Cuts were passed via reconciliation in June, 2001)
Obama - 13,575 to 12867.53 or -708B
Since 1980:
Dems - 2.3T
GOP - 8.6T
It's open chat, dude. Pretty much wide open for topics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swfl
No, it's your fault. Your fault for buying into the partisan bullshit. Go punch yourself in the nuts until you learn something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swiper
that's funny because it worked with the Great Depression, and post WWII and a little in the 80's under Reagan when he increased military spending. LOL at reducing spending during an economic downturn...you read this where exactly? please give on example of when austerity measures in an economic downturn has stimulated an economy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swfl
good luck with that...