Manhattan Buckeye;1164646 wrote:This is so delicious I have to fisk this point by point:
"It is clear that you don't want to understand. Your views are being tried and are failing."
As opposed by the geniuses running things now. The idea that I should balance my checkbook likely is misunderstood now.
The deficits being caused by automatic stabilization due to increased spending on SNAP and unemployment insurance and the payroll tax cut have all made sure we are better off than we otherwise would be. We could be doing much better but it is assured that if we tried to run a balanced budget right now it would be disastrously worse. Your checkbook is not analogous to a macroeconomy. Budgets should be balanced or in surplus when the economy is at full employment...not now.
" Where were all of you people in 2005 demanding that government employees be fired? Firing Public Employees during an economic slump and putting them on unemployment insurance when we're no where close to full employment is lunacy. "
Make that 2006 and I can tell you where I was, I wasn't demanding government employees be fired...
Well you should have been. The time to cut government spending and inefficiencies in public employment is doing good economic times...not when there's not enough work available for millions who are already unemployed.
"Even if a Teacher is not that great and could probably be fired; it makes no sense to do that en masse when interest rates are at zero because the Fed cannot offset the depressing effect of fiscal consolidation with lower rates. It is a recipe for higher unemployment and worse long term debt problems. "
So public jobs are guaranteed. Got you there chief, I mean comrade. WTF does the interest rate have anything to do with it. In my world (reality) to keep a job there needs to be a job.
No, public jobs are not guaranteed...they should just be more secure during bad economic times. A government job ought to be less secure during good economic times when government spending actually crowds out private investment. Your statement "what does the interest rate" have anything to do with it reveals your ignorance.
When the economy is doing well, if the government runs a deficit, the central bank will keep interest rates higher then they might otherwise would have which will crowd out private investment. Thus, even though firing public employees will undoubtedly have a depressing effect on gdp...at low levels of unemployment with normal interest rates, the central bank can offset the contractionary effect by lowering the interest rate and the former public employee can find private employment.
When rates are at zero...if you fire a public sector worker, the central bank cannot offset the depressing effect and there's no private sector job for him to find and he goes on the dole...exacerbating debt and deficit problems as well as the unemployment problem.
In Reality, there are all kinds of jobs right now that the public might demand...for instance, building a mega wall on the border of mexico seems to be in high demand amongst tea partiers. Something like that could be down now, as opposed to during good economic times.
"You can't start firing inefficient public employees until we're at full employment and interest rates can be cut when they're fired."
Does your utopia extend to the private sector? Jobs for all! Who cares where the money comes from, we'll just invent it like the USSR early 80's.
No, obviously not. The government and government employees are the producers of last resort. And investors are throwing money at the government right now to do it.
"But just so we're clear; Manhattan Buckeye believes that you get to full employment by firing people and put them on unemployment insurance. "
Liar. Liar. Liar. I said no such thing. Although as lousy as your points are I should feel flattered. I said nothing about full employment. We likely will never enjoy such, some people are unemployable.
Well you never said as much...but you often complain about the state of the economy and the high unemployment rate and the dreary prospects for recent grads, etc. You also are combating me about whether or not it's a good thing to keep or fire public employees right now. Consequently, you seem to suggest that firing people will make our economy better and for that to happen the unemployment rate would have to come down.
Additionally, full employment is probably around 5% these days in order to keep price stability. You don't think we could get there?
But public sector workers shouldn't be shielded from economic realities because of some internet nut's strange economic theories - not even Keynes believed that.
You're right. He thought they should be fired during good economic times if they're not good at their job. You consolidate during the boom not the bust as he would say.
"Getting to full employment is the chief concern and concerns about inefficiencies in the public sector are secondary at this point."
Problem solved, we all become government workers, half digging ditches and the other half filling them - where the money comes from we'll just play ignorant until the house of cards falls.
We don't all have to become government workers. Just makes no sense to fire the ones we have and put them on the dole and even if they're not that good at their job their is productive activity they could do while investors are begging the treasury to take their money. (hint hint, that's where the money will come from).
And here's the bottom line; you think that you some how had a good retort here as my post was "so delicious" you have to go through point by point. Yet, there seems to be little substance in your post. Mostly just calling me a communist, etc.
