Page 128 of 149 FirstFirst ... 2878118126127128129130138 ... LastLast
Results 1,271 to 1,280 of 1482

Thread: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that." [W:417]

  1. #1271
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Romulus View Post
    Certainly. I just happen to be reading Where Keynes Went Wrong by Hunter Lewis which is the best deconstruction of Keynesian economics I've read since Hazlitt's The Failure of the "New Economics". Lewis boldly goes where F.A. Hayek wouldn't and describes Keynes as an "immoralist" in ch. 4. Keynes of course was a homosexual, but it was rejection of morality in general or acceptance of a nihilism that is most disturbing to me. It also explains how he came up with his famous retort to critics "in the long run, we are all dead". Saddling future generations with insurmountable debt just did not matter to him, and by advocating his economic philosophy Obama advocates his moral philosophy.
    Maybe you should read up more on Keynes' economics theories and spend less time on the tabloid stuff. Keynes did not favor ever-growing debt. Rather, he counseled a counter-cyclical monetary policy. When the economy is sound, taxes should be raised and/or spending cut (to build a surplus) so that taxes could be lowered and/or spending raised when the economy sinks.

    Unfortunately the previous administration followed just the opposite course to what Kenyes suggests: it cut taxes and increased spending during an economic expansion. That helped fuel the asset bubble and it made it much more difficult to react to the recessionary economy, as taxes were already very low and spending already quite high (and thus the debt was too hight).
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  2. #1272
    Haters gon' hate
    MarineTpartier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    01-04-16 @ 04:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,586
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: No dumb ass, but you've finished confirming what I have been thinking about you.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoongLoong View Post
    I don't know why you are insulting me by accusing me of "ranting" like a "noob" whatever that is. But I am a tolerant person, and I am aware that you queers are attempting to change the English language with a lexicon of your own.

    About your bizarre sensitivity: I must apologize because I didn't know there was a PC qualification for addressing you queers. I don't remember ever broaching the subject of the sensitivity of the terms before.

    I woulda thought the term "queer" which was used for decades, aptly described your abnormality and therefore acceptable. Also knowing the term "gay" I woulda thought you abnormals preferred a term that best described you. There isn't anything particularly "gay" about you.

    May I suggest that what with your predilection for changing the meanings of the English language (changing the meaning of the term "marriage" to include the union of the same sexes, and abolishing the term "queer' used for decades to "gay") ..... you people evolve to the next level and adopt the term "strange" to aptly describe your abnormality and thereby maintain a consistency with REALITY.

    I am sorry that in order to obfuscate the irrefutable truths involved in the exposure of LIEberrhoidal, or the subset: Obamarrhoidal bogus convolutions of REALITY...... which was the topic of my post......... to avoid facing REALITY, you deliberately pulled a cop out and changed the topic.

    But, that's OK. I am a tolerant person and I understand that people will go to any lengths to avoid confronting the unpleasant truths about their bogus LIEberrhoidal (and/or Obamarrhoidal) mental gyrations.
    n00b:
    a peron who thinks they are very "internet savvy" but they just make them self look stupid.
    Urban Dictionary: n00bs
    So you gathered from my post that A) I'm gay and B) I'm a liberal. LOL. The purpose of my post was not to point to some unwritten rule about being Politically Correct. It was to point out that when you use names that are offensive to a group of people such as queer, honky, nigger, gook, whatever race or group you want to offend, it tends to make people not take you seriously and gaff off your opinion as marginal. You apparently have the double whammy of being a bigot and irrellevant. Nice going.
    Also, if you had any clue about politics you would merely have to look at my user name and know I am the furthest thing from a liberal. Maybe the reason no one addresses your points is because they are moronic, fragmented, border line indistinguishable from a 5 year old's rant, and full of words that no one has ever heard of ie LIEberrhoidal/Obamarrhoidal. If you want to make up your own language, don't expect us civilized English speakers to be able to decipher your words. You have done what is typical of "noobs" on this website and came in with what you believe is an awesome rant that will lay all of us flat on our backs and make us all respect the anger with which you deliver it. Not so my Noobian friend. What you have done is showed yourself to be someone who has no idea what debate is, supports none of his claims with any sort of facts, and a bigot who believes that he is somehow better than a person who happens to have a different sexual orientation that himself. Good luck gaining any sort of traction in this arena with those traits.
    “Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger.” ― Ron Paul
    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

  3. #1273
    Advisor Romulus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    12-28-14 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    324

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Maybe you should read up more on Keynes' economics theories and spend less time on the tabloid stuff.
    "tabloid stuff"? I referenced Nobel Laureate F.A. Hayek, and economists Hunter Lewis and Henry Hazlitt. I'm sure the wiki articles you've googled are great non-"tabloid stuff", yet they would't garner a passing grade if you referenced it in an undergraduate essay.

    Keynes did not favor ever-growing debt. Rather, he counseled a counter-cyclical monetary policy. When the economy is sound, taxes should be raised and/or spending cut (to build a surplus) so that taxes could be lowered and/or spending raised when the economy sinks.
    Keynes falsely believed a 'zero' interest rate policy would liquidate debt through his non-existent 'multiplier effect' of deficit spending. Tax rates should be held high on the wealthy--not to balance budgets--but to check the inevitable outcome of his suggested policy which is inflation and/or sector bubbles, according to Keynes. He also mentioned 'social justice' reasons for keeping taxes high, but they were non sequiturs regarding macroeconomics. If you're actually familiar with Keynes (which I doubt) you know he was extremely vague and often duplicitous on almost everything he espoused--minus his zero interest rate, deficit spending philosophy, and his hallucinated "paradox of thrift".

    Unfortunately the previous administration followed just the opposite course to what Kenyes suggests: it cut taxes and increased spending during an economic expansion. That helped fuel the asset bubble and it made it much more difficult to react to the recessionary economy, as taxes were already very low and spending already quite high (and thus the debt was too hight).
    You are definitely a Keynesian..."taxes" are "very low", spending "quite high" and "debt too hight". Like your master, you provide no specifics. This makes your economic philosophy essentially a horoscope. Tell me, what should the debt/GDP ratio be according to Keynes, what makes spending "quite high" and when are taxes "very low"?

  4. #1274
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Romulus View Post
    "tabloid stuff"? I referenced Nobel Laureate F.A. Hayek, and economists Hunter Lewis and Henry Hazlitt. I'm sure the wiki articles you've googled are great non-"tabloid stuff", yet they would't garner a passing grade if you referenced it in an undergraduate essay.



    Keynes falsely believed a 'zero' interest rate policy would liquidate debt through his non-existent 'multiplier effect' of deficit spending. Tax rates should be held high on the wealthy--not to balance budgets--but to check the inevitable outcome of his suggested policy which is inflation and/or sector bubbles, according to Keynes. He also mentioned 'social justice' reasons for keeping taxes high, but they were non sequiturs regarding macroeconomics. If you're actually familiar with Keynes (which I doubt) you know he was extremely vague and often duplicitous on almost everything he espoused--minus his zero interest rate, deficit spending philosophy, and his hallucinated "paradox of thrift".



    You are definitely a Keynesian..."taxes" are "very low", spending "quite high" and "debt too hight". Like your master, you provide no specifics. This makes your economic philosophy essentially a horoscope. Tell me, what should the debt/GDP ratio be according to Keynes, what makes spending "quite high" and when are taxes "very low"?
    I was referring to your tabloid references to his alleged sexual proclivities. Don't mistake your lack of understanding for duplicitousness on Keynes' part. He was crystal clear that deficit spending should be avoided during strong economic conditions. Taxes too low and spending too high refers to conditions that led to significant deficits during the Bush years when the economy was relatively strong. If Bush had followed Kenyes' philosphy we would not be in the mess that we are in.

    Clinton provided a good example of Keynes' theory: raise taxes and control spending during an economic upturn to reduce deficits and prevent the economy from overheating. It worked quite brilliantly, but for the dotcom bubble which is attributable in part to an unwise drop in capital gains rates.

    Bush, in contrast, was a textbook example of what NOT to do per Kenyesian theory, and we all know how that worked out.
    Last edited by AdamT; 07-30-12 at 04:02 PM.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  5. #1275
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    10-20-13 @ 04:50 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,195

  6. #1276
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Oh well -- looks like Cook will be losing a lot of business when they can't meet increased demand.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  7. #1277
    Advisor Romulus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    12-28-14 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    324

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I was referring to your tabloid references to his alleged sexual proclivities. Don't mistake your lack of understanding for duplicitousness on Keynes' part. He was crystal clear that deficit spending should be avoided during strong economic conditions. Taxes too low and spending too high refers to conditions that led to significant deficits during the Bush years when the economy was relatively strong. If Bush had followed Kenyes' philosphy we would not be in the mess that we are in.
    Keynes was a homosexual, that isn't tabloid discussion it is a historical fact. As my first statement on this reads, it isn't his homosexuality that bothers me...it is his rejection of morality in general that is a troublesome epistemology for somebody as influential Keynes. I only mentioned Keynes homosexuality to preface that I wasn't referring to it, when I describe him as an immoralist. He was a nihilist, and he openly admits to it in his collected writings.

    You are obfuscating, if I ask a physicist why a baseball player didn't hit a home run, he won't say "he hit the ball too soft". /"too low" or "too high" are non-quantifiable and therefore not testable.

  8. #1278
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Romulus View Post
    Keynes was a homosexual, that isn't tabloid discussion it is a historical fact. As my first statement on this reads, it isn't his homosexuality that bothers me...it is his rejection of morality in general that is a troublesome epistemology for somebody as influential Keynes. I only mentioned Keynes homosexuality to preface that I wasn't referring to it, when I describe him as an immoralist. He was a nihilist, and he openly admits to it in his collected writings.

    You are obfuscating, if I ask a physicist why a baseball player didn't hit a home run, he won't say "he hit the ball too soft". /"too low" or "too high" are non-quantifiable and therefore not testable.
    Whatever Keynes personal beliefs were, they in no way detract from his economic theories. You are dancing about trying to make excuses for your ad hominem.

    In this case too low and too high are prefectly quantifiable. If the tax rate is too low to bring in enough revenue to offset spending during a decent economy, then taxes are too low and/or spending is too high, because the goal is to, at minimum, not run deficits during a robust economy. Bush ran up $5 trillion in deficits, ergo....
    Last edited by AdamT; 07-30-12 at 04:40 PM.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  9. #1279
    Advisor Romulus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    12-28-14 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    324

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Whatever Keynes personal beliefs were, they in no way detract from his economic theories. You are dancing about trying to make excuses for your ad hominem.

    In this case too low and too high are prefectly quantifiable. If the tax rate is too low to bring in enough revenue to offset spending during a decent economy, then taxes are too low and/or spending is too high, because the goal is to, at minimum, not run deficits during a robust economy. Bush ran up $5 trillion in deficits, ergo....
    Define "decent" or "robust", or better yet...I want to know where Keynes used those terms and how he quantified them. I also want to know where Keynes advocates for a balanced budget through taxation during specifically defined "robust" times. Is it in The General Theory? If so, what page and paragraph?

  10. #1280
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Obama to business owners: "You didn't build that."

    Quote Originally Posted by Romulus View Post
    Define "decent" or "robust", or better yet...I want to know where Keynes used those terms and how he quantified them. I also want to know where Keynes advocates for a balanced budget through taxation during specifically defined "robust" times. Is it in The General Theory? If so, what page and paragraph?
    Keynes generally quantified it in terms of full employment, i.e. when there is full employment government should not engage in deficit spending. When unemployment rises then government may engage in deficit spending -- which he called investment (in education, R&D, infrastructure) to boost aggregate demand and set the stage for a return to full employment. It is in the General Theory but I couldn't give you a page number right now. It's been a long time since I read it.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •