Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 84

Thread: The coming 'tsunami of debt' and financial crisis in America

  1. #71
    Guru
    Kurmugeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    4,881

    Re: The coming 'tsunami of debt' and financial crisis in America

    Quote Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
    ...

    We already have a centrist party, it's called the Democratic Party.
    ROFLOL

    No... the 2014 Democratic Party is a Extreme Ethnocentric Leftist near socialist party.

    The Democratic Party of JFK was a centrist party, and today his viewpoints and policy decisions would be considered Republican Moderate.

    The funny thing is, as far to the extreme left as the Democratic Party's Rhetoric and Platform have shifted, their ACTIONS and OUTCOMES are often right Cronnie-Corporitist Statist.

    This is not your Grandfathers Democratic Party,...

    they'd call your grandfather a "Racist" for his views on Welfare reduction and work requirements and ban him from the party and then sick the IRS on him.

    -
    Hope and Prayer are integrally linked, never underestimate or undervalue, the power of either! - Kurmugeon
    I do NOT trust people who do not Love Dogs! - Kurmugeon
    Obama Administration Lefties, Innocent after having been proven guilty as sin! - Kurmugeon

  2. #72
    Sage
    jmotivator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,955

    Re: The coming 'tsunami of debt' and financial crisis in America

    Quote Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
    There are problems with your simplistic solution. The first, is that there are three people looking for each job opening. The second, is that your view of "welfare" is a throughback to the 1970s. In 1996, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, was passed, which reduced aid to the poor and reformed your notion of welfare. You can read all about it here: Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    However, what I don't understand is contradictory reasoning. Conservatives are arguing that the stimulus "didn't do anything" and government doesn't create jobs -- but the argument that I am now reading now is that they want a new WPA program to build roads and bridges. Well, we don't need such a program. Roads and bridges are now mainly built by private contractors, who have expertise in these types of projects. If the government wants to spend money to build a road, they need not use "welfare recipients." They let a contract and private companies hire workers. If demand for roads and other projects is great enough, unemployed workers apply for those jobs.

    I don't need to read about it, I was an administrator of the programs during that time. I experienced it first hand.

    I don't have a lot of time to elaborate, but suffice it to say that there have been changes since 1996, and able bodied people still receive welfare. As have been discussed here before, only about 40% of able bodied welfare recipients are actually working.

    Also, this "simplistic plan" doesn't put people in jobs, in creates public works jobs (in construction) for these people to do.
    Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he stops voting for the Free Fish party.

  3. #73
    Guru
    Kurmugeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    4,881

    Re: The coming 'tsunami of debt' and financial crisis in America

    Quote Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
    Several thoughts come to mind after reading the above post. 1) It represents economic illiteracy. (e.g. "Each additional dollar of National Debt reduces the economic activity in the country by several dollars, and it even worse when many of those "stimulus" dollars are going to China.") 2) It makes wild assertions (example: "Having the Government pick and chose activities by radical environmental or ethnocentric ideals is a recipe for getting 0.10 worth of benefit for the dollar at best!") which have nothing to do with Keynesian thought and uses figures clearly plucked from the air. 3) I can't understand why you even bothered to include two Wikipedia links that do not support the wild opinions in the post.
    ...
    I included the links because I expected you to READ them. ( In hindsight, I guess that was too respectful and too hopeful.)

    If you had read them, you would have seen that the basic theorems of Keynesian economics were discredited and abandoned by 1979 and replaced by other economic theories, and did not come back into any form of use until 2008, and the disastrous economics of the Obama Administration.

    Post-war displacement of Keynesianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ( link from the first article in the section on the decline)

    John Maynard Keynes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Economics out of favour 1979–2007

    Keynesian economics were officially discarded by the British Government in 1979, but forces had begun to gather against Keynes's ideas over 30 years earlier. Friedrich Hayek had formed the Mont Pelerin Society in 1947, with the explicit intention of nurturing intellectual currents to one day displace Keynesianism and other similar influences. Its members included Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises along with the then young Milton Friedman. Initially the society had little impact on the wider world – Hayek was to say it was as if Keynes had been raised to sainthood after his death and that people refused to allow his work to be questioned.[64][65] Friedman however began to emerge as a formidable critic of Keynesian economics from the mid-1950s, and especially after his 1963 publication of A Monetary History of the United States.

    On the practical side of economic life, big government had appeared to be firmly entrenched in the 1950s but the balance began to shift towards private power in the 1960s. Keynes had written against the folly of allowing "decadent and selfish" speculators and financiers the kind of influence they had enjoyed after World War I. For two decades after World War II public opinion was strongly against private speculators, the disparaging label Gnomes of Zürich being typical of how they were described during this period. International speculation was severely restricted by the capital controls in place after Bretton Woods. Journalists Larry Elliott and Dan Atkinson say 1968 was a pivotal year when power shifted in the favour of private agents such as currency speculators. They pick out a key 1968 event as being when America suspended the conversion of the dollar into gold except on request of foreign governments,...

    And I expected you to be fair and wise enough to read the section of Criticism of the Keynesian economic theory:

    Criticisms
    Public choice theory

    James M. Buchanan and Richard E. Wagner, in Democracy in Deficit: The Political Legacy of Lord Keynes[31] criticized Keynesian economics on the grounds that governments would in practice be unlikely to implement theoretically optimal policies. According to them, the implicit assumption underlying the Keynesian fiscal revolution was that economic policy would be made by wise men, acting without regard to political pressures or opportunities, and guided by disinterested economic technocrats. They argued that this was an unrealistic assumption about political, bureaucratic and electoral behavior.
    New Classical Macroeconomics criticisms
    See also: Lucas critique

    Another influential school of thought was based on the Lucas critique of Keynesian economics. This called for greater consistency with microeconomic theory and rationality, and in particular emphasized the idea of rational expectations. Lucas and others argued that Keynesian economics required remarkably foolish and short-sighted behavior from people, which totally contradicted the economic understanding of their behavior at a micro level. New classical economics introduced a set of macroeconomic theories that were based on optimising microeconomic behavior. These models have been developed into the Real Business Cycle Theory, which argues that business cycle fluctuations can to a large extent be accounted for by real (in contrast to nominal) shocks.

    Beginning in the late 1950s new classical macroeconomists began to disagree with the methodology employed by Keynes and his successors. Keynesians emphasized the dependence of consumption on disposable income and, also, of investment on current profits and current cash flow. In addition, Keynesians posited a Phillips curve that tied nominal wage inflation to unemployment rate. To support these theories, Keynesians typically traced the logical foundations of their model (using introspection) and supported their assumptions with statistical evidence.[32] New classical theorists demanded that macroeconomics be grounded on the same foundations as microeconomic theory, profit-maximizing firms and rational, utility-maximizing consumers.

    ...
    I stand behind the assertions I made, an examination of the facts of the Obama Administration will prove each and every one of them out, to any who is NOT an St. Obama-Blinded Sycophant.

    You seem to completely lack understanding of the impact on consumer confidence on economic activity. We have a crisis of consumer confidence which has lasted the entire Obama Presidency, particularly by Corporate Management.

    You ignore the impact of rising National Debt on the costs of servicing that debt, monies which could and should be spent on helping the American People.

    Much of the stimulus spending did go to the China, and the CBO has stated it so!

    Stimulus Package - Wsj.com

    http://dailysignal.com/2009/02/12/tr...-327-trillion/

    http://www.heritage.org/research/com...-sham-stimulus

    http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/08/...on-jobs-today/

    CBO: Obama stimulus may have cost as much as $4.1 million a job | AEIdeas

    As Dems Borrowed From China, Their Stimulus Sent Jobs to China - National Republican Congressional Committee www.nrcc.org

    A TRILLION DOLLAR DISASTER… CBO Confirms Obama-Pelosi Stimulus Damages Economy in Long Run | The Gateway Pundit


    So much for my having made "Wild Assertions".

    You devolve your argument in personal attacks, insults and barbs, and lie about the FACTS.

    I'll let the rest of forum decide what to do with you...

    -
    Last edited by Kurmugeon; 09-11-14 at 08:51 PM.
    Hope and Prayer are integrally linked, never underestimate or undervalue, the power of either! - Kurmugeon
    I do NOT trust people who do not Love Dogs! - Kurmugeon
    Obama Administration Lefties, Innocent after having been proven guilty as sin! - Kurmugeon

  4. #74
    Sage


    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,607

    Re: The coming 'tsunami of debt' and financial crisis in America

    Quote Originally Posted by Kurmugeon View Post
    ...
    If you had read them, you would have seen that the basic theorems of Keynesian economics were discredited and abandoned by 1979 and replaced by other economic theories, and did not come back into any form of use until 2008, and the disastrous economics of the Obama Administration.
    ...
    Apart from proof of being discredited, you only have shown that economists disagree -- hardly a stop the presses moment. Moreover, James Buchanan and Richard Wagner are hardly the final word in economics. Other economists, such as Krugman, Stiglitz and Romer -- as well as Janet Yellen, Ben Bernanke and many others affirm Keynesian thought.

    What we learned from Keynes and John Richard Hicks, has actually held up very well in the latest economic crisis. To the extent that we have a crisis in macroeconomics as practiced, it comes from the way many economists chose to reject sensible macro. The truth is nearly the opposite: at least for those economists who didn’t forget Keynes, and understood the IS-LM model. Those economists actually had a very good run, successfully predicting the quiescence of interest rates despite huge budget deficits, the quiescence of inflation despite huge increases in the monetary base, and the adverse effects of harsh austerity policies.

    As a response to the Great Depression, American Keynesians said, "We have inadequate demand. Increase government spending!" Almost immediately the economy of the 1930s reversed. So now we came into another great crisis, and again we wanted answers. What would reduce unemployment, and what would make it worse? What effects could we expect from a huge expansion of the Fed’s balance sheet? What about unprecedented peacetime budget deficits? What about austerity programs?

    What we saw was that the people who reject Keynes and IS-LM predicting soaring inflation and high interest rates got it wrong, when the Keynesian argued that we had entered a liquidity trap, predicted little effect from the Fed's balance sheet expansion, certainly not an explosion of inflation; low interest rates despite government borrowing; severe adverse effects from austerity. And they were right – because in reality, using a "silly" little model is a lot more sophisticated than talking grandly about complexity, and then trying to make diagnoses with no explicit model at all.

    To conclude then that Keynes is "discredited" when it was only the Keynesian economists of today who got it right during the latest crisis while the Austrian economists got it completely wrong, is breathtaking.

    Now, onto you "disastrous economics of the Obama Administration." You should know that the Obama Administration has no effect on monetary policy. To the extent that any president has an effect on the economy, it is in fiscal policy only and that is shared with Congress, who has to pass the president's plan. What, exactly was the disaster? The economy, as measured by GDP, dropped 6-8% a year before Obama was President and employment was dropping by hundreds of thousands of workers per month. Almost immediately upon Obama's stimulus program taking hold, unemployment stopped falling and reversed. In addition, GDP rose.

    If there is any criticism of the Obama stimulus, it is that he should have pushed for a bigger stimulus or a second stimulus, as Keynesian economists had argued.

    To conclude that the policies of Obama created a disaster has no evidence to support it.
    Last edited by MTAtech; 09-11-14 at 09:47 PM.
    "I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it." --J.S. Mill

  5. #75
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: The coming 'tsunami of debt' and financial crisis in America

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post

    Yes, we know Obama lied about " shovel ready " jobs.

    We would have to be pretty stupid to trust that guy again.

    Who knows, he might even try to restart his failed "green jobs " initiative again
    http://www.debatepolitics.com/govern...post1063748949
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  6. #76
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,754

    Re: The coming 'tsunami of debt' and financial crisis in America

    Quote Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
    Here, here. You are presenting a position that is remarkable. Conservatives were previously arguing that raising the money stock would be inflationary and, therefore, the QE program was a failure because it will cause high inflation. Now, since QE did not cause high inflation, you make the exact opposite argument -- QE is a failure because it did not cause inflation.

    If one is claiming that the middle class is shrinking and it is due to Obama policies, which policies might those be? What has happened over the last three decades in growing income inequality, with more and more income concentrated into the top class, which means less is available below. The latest data shows that "Average, or mean, pretax income for the wealthiest 10% of U.S. families rose 10% in 2013 from 2010, but families in the bottom 40% saw their average inflation-adjusted income decline over that period, according to the Fed's Survey of Consumer Finances, which is conducted every three years." Obama didn't cause that. That is the legacy of rolling back taxes on the rich going back to the Reagan years and made worse under Bush.

    Well Conservatives AND Ben Bernanke.

    He sold QE on the basis it would be inflationary.

    Monetary Stimulus wherever its implemented is supposed to be inflationary.

    But a continued horrible economy keeps that inflation in check.

  7. #77
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,754

    Re: The coming 'tsunami of debt' and financial crisis in America

    Quote Originally Posted by gimmesometruth View Post

    lol !!!

  8. #78
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: The coming 'tsunami of debt' and financial crisis in America

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    lol !!!
    Typical, you get the answers for the same questions in another thread....I link to it....and instead of responding there....you giggle like a schoolgirl here.

    Sad.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  9. #79
    Sage
    Gimmesometruth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    US Southwest
    Last Seen
    09-13-17 @ 10:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    22,405

    Re: The coming 'tsunami of debt' and financial crisis in America

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Well Conservatives AND Ben Bernanke.

    He sold QE on the basis it would be inflationary.
    Citation, please.

    Monetary Stimulus wherever its implemented is supposed to be inflationary.
    Only when holding a faulty view for the current economic environment and how QE was used.

    But a continued horrible economy keeps that inflation in check.
    Not in the context of QE, QE (and there was more than on type used) as it was used in these instances did not because of the circumstances. Without QE, the economy would be MUCH worse.
    Quote Originally Posted by trouble13 View Post
    If you wanna know why Trumpsters are ignoring you its for the same reason you ignored the KKKs complaints about Obama.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moderate Right View Post
    When it comes down to it, all facts are cherry picked.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    He didn't say it didn't make sense. He said it is complete nonsense.

  10. #80
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,754

    Re: The coming 'tsunami of debt' and financial crisis in America

    Quote Originally Posted by Gimmesometruth View Post
    Typical, you get the answers for the same questions in another thread....I link to it....and instead of responding there....you giggle like a schoolgirl here.

    Sad.
    I just think its funny that you buy into the level of nonsense that that thread represents.

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 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
  •