Page 9 of 29 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 285

Thread: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

  1. #81
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    It's funny how the Obamaphobes are outraged at Obama for doing the things their guys did. Hypocrites.

    But Obama said transparency *sniffle* and look *sniffle* another politician lied to me... :
    When did Bush raise it twice in 2 months.

  2. #82
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 10:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,323

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    We have a one term president in the White House. Bwuahahahaha
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  3. #83
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    No it's not. It's just the economic dogma you've bought into.
    You may call it anything you want (although it is interesting coming from the pro ABST camp), reality is what it is. Deficits cannot begin to be harnessed until unemployment falls.

    Or do you disagree? I am not interested in normative discussions as they tend to go nowhere.
    Last edited by Kushinator; 02-15-10 at 11:45 AM.
    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.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  4. #84
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    Only if your econ 101 professor is a Keynesian.
    The neoclassical synthesis dominates mainstream economics because Keynesian stabilization policies are integral in fending off depressions. Prior to WWII, recessions and depressions were quite the norm.
    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.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  5. #85
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    and post ww2 they're still here

  6. #86
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    and post ww2 they're still here
    Although 80% less frequent

    You fail!
    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.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  7. #87
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    80%?

    LOL!

    recessions (2 quarters of negative growth), post ww2:

    45, 49, 53, 58, 60, 69, 73, 80, 82, 90, 01

    and TODAY's

    today's DEPRESSION is pretty severe

    perhaps you've heard

  8. #88
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    80%?

    LOL!

    recessions (2 quarters of negative growth), post ww2:

    45, 49, 53, 58, 60, 69, 73, 80, 82, 90, 01

    and TODAY's

    today's DEPRESSION is pretty severe

    perhaps you've heard
    From 1869 to 1920, recessions were quite common. In fact, the months of expansion to months of contraction ratio is about 1:1. Following WWII, (when coherent macro stabilization policy was considered), it has been more than 5:1.

    Any questions?
    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.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  9. #89
    Sage
    Dav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    04-16-16 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,539

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    From 1869 to 1920, recessions were quite common. In fact, the months of expansion to months of contraction ratio is about 1:1. Following WWII, (when coherent macro stabilization policy was considered), it has been more than 5:1.

    Any questions?
    One question: does correlation equal causation?

    The world was very different before the 20th century, and before WWII. So much changed that it's kinda silly to point to one thing and say that it is what caused the phenomenon you mentioned, solely because it was there when things changed.
    Last edited by Dav; 02-15-10 at 03:13 PM.

  10. #90
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,263

    Re: Obama ‘Agnostic’ on Deficit Cuts, Won’t Prejudge Tax Increases

    Quote Originally Posted by Dav View Post
    One question: does correlation equal causation?

    The world was very different before the 20th century, and before WWII. So much changed that it's kinda silly to point to one thing and say that it is what caused the phenomenon you mentioned, solely because it was there when things changed.
    Much has changed, primarily the thought that economies will always self correct in short periods of time. Since the implementation of "Keynesian" stabilization policies (and that includes a competent monetary policy, stable financial systems, etc....) corrections are less likely to occur.

    However.... If your argument is "correlation does not equal causation", why bother replying?
    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.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

Page 9 of 29 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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