BoatShoes;944514 wrote:You know, and I don't mean to be rude, but you often comment about your lack of economic literacy. That is no big deal. But, then you go on to make this statement which is not supported by the last 70 years of economic thought nor real world experiments run by the IMF in east asia and the late nineties and then Argentina. I just find it strange.

Argentina .......... ah yes, the country with a current inflation rate of 25% .... and exactly where we are headed due to pathetic fiscal mismanagement and keynesian stimuli.

Give it a rest.

QuakerOats;944605 wrote:Argentina .......... ah yes, the country with a current inflation rate of 25% .... and exactly where we are headed due to pathetic fiscal mismanagement and keynesian stimuli.

Give it a rest.

Conservatives have been calling for the inevitable hyperinflation and spike in interest rates for almost half a decade now whereas the IS-LM model has correctly predicted a tripling of the monetary base would not result in hyperinflation (or even moderate inflation) and that interest rates dropped even lower after a downgrade on our debt. Furthermore there is no evidence for Ricardian Equivalence taking hold nor that regulatory or tax uncertainty is holding back economic growth.

Argentina after default and devaulation is seeing the largest GDP growth in South America over the last decade. LOL growth is expected to "slow" to 4.6% next year which would be a full percentage point faster than the average growth rate of Brazil over the last decade. Following the keynesian policies imposed in Argentina country experienced an economic boom. Following the Austere policies imposed on Greece, Greece is experiencing souring unemployment and an economy that is becoming more and more depressed.

Yet of course you focus on inflation because the GOP doesn't really care about economic growth but instead keeping downward pressure on wages.

Conservatives have been wrong about everything...repeating the same failed arguments that conservatives and gold bugs made in the thirties. The full on bet by the ECB on the confidence fairy and mythological "expansionary austerity" is going to end the Euro project.

It is time to reevaluate your thinking.

Argentina has gotten a huge boost from the commodities boom.

And the govt rarely creates value where the private sector couldn't. Bridges and roads are often cited as something the govt should do because the cost of investment are so steep and returns are inadequate to attract private capital. Of course they have need and add value, but the cost/benefit is sketchy. A better description is a justifiable social cost to share - more a reduction in cost than creation of value.

Of what value is growth when inflation is 25%. Get in the game.

http://biggovernment.com/jpollak/2011/10/25/barack-obama-led-occupychicago-circa-1988/

gee, imagine that .....

change we can believe in......

BoatShoes;944956 wrote:Conservatives have been wrong about everything...repeating the same failed arguments that conservatives and gold bugs made in the thirties. The full on bet by the ECB on the confidence fairy and mythological "expansionary austerity" is going to end the Euro project.

It is time to reevaluate your thinking.

Repeat after me: a circle is a square, a spoon is a fork, and more debt solves a debt crisis.

After a while you will believe it ........

gut;944965 wrote:Argentina has gotten a huge boost from the commodities boom.

And the govt rarely creates value where the private sector couldn't. Bridges and roads are often cited as something the govt should do because the cost of investment are so steep and returns are inadequate to attract private capital. Of course they have need and add value, but the cost/benefit is sketchy. A better description is a justifiable social cost to share - more a reduction in cost than creation of value.

The cost/benefit of roads and bridges is sketchy? Are you kidding me?

I Wear Pants;945022 wrote:The cost/benefit of roads and bridges is sketchy? Are you kidding me?

If you're spending millions on bridges to nowhere, a brand spanking new airport in Pennsylvania to service less than 10 flights per day, or a highway in West Virginia that is travelled by less than 100 vehicles per day, then yes, the cost/benefit curve gets way out of whack. Not that our benevolent and superior elitists in DC wouldn't do anything for a supporter or two.

Repeat after me....S O L Y N D R A

BGFalcons82;945075 wrote:If you're spending millions on bridges to nowhere, a brand spanking new airport in Pennsylvania to service less than 10 flights per day, or a highway in West Virginia that is travelled by less than 100 vehicles per day, then yes, the cost/benefit curve gets way out of whack. Not that our benevolent and superior elitists in DC wouldn't do anything for a supporter or two.

Repeat after me....S O L Y N D R A

Repeat after me O U R I N F R A S T R U C T U R E I S S H I T A N D T H E P R I V A T E S E C T O R W I L L N E V E R B U I L D I T.

In 20 years when no business can operate in the country because all our roads and bridges are dangerous, we have horrible telecom services, and no rail system to speak of remind me again how you guys were the pro business crowd and I was some evil person who hated profit.

I Wear Pants;945084 wrote:Repeat after me O U R I N F R A S T R U C T U R E I S S H I T A N D T H E P R I V A T E S E C T O R W I L L N E V E R B U I L D I T.

In 20 years when no business can operate in the country because all our roads and bridges are dangerous, we have horrible telecom services, and no rail system to speak of remind me again how you guys were the pro business crowd and I was some evil person who hated profit.

Wait a minute...is that a news flash?? Unbelieveable news. Can't wait to get home and read how the state and federal gasoline taxes have been discontinued and there isn't any money left to build 1 bridge or fix 1 pothole. Well wait...there is money for potholes in C-bus cuz the great and powerful Oz raised city income taxes 25% a little while ago and the money is a-flowin beyond all recognition. Hallelujah!!

By the way...come through C-bus and see how many bridges and roads they're fixing at the I-71/I-70/I-670 interchange. I wonder if those folks know they've lost all their funding to build anything unless the Obama jobs bill passes tomorrow? Sure hope CNN shows up to report on this fast developing story.

I Wear Pants;945022 wrote:The cost/benefit of roads and bridges is sketchy? Are you kidding me?

Yes, You cited it as value-added, when it's really a necessary cost (which is why the private sector won't do it - no profits). Sort of like the military, necessary but does it really create value? Negative ROI does not imply no benefits. That's the point being made.

The govt rarely, if ever, takes $1 from the taxpayer and provides $1 or more in benefit. We're probably lucky to get 60cents on the dollar. It's a legitimate "tax" and really necessary value destruction more so than value creation.

I Wear Pants;945084 wrote:Repeat after me O U R I N F R A S T R U C T U R E I S S H I T A N D T H E P R I V A T E S E C T O R W I L L N E V E R B U I L D I T.

In 20 years when no business can operate in the country because all our roads and bridges are dangerous, we have horrible telecom services, and no rail system to speak of remind me again how you guys were the pro business crowd and I was some evil person who hated profit.

If the welfare state keeps expanding at the current pace, in 20 years the last thing we'll be worried about is defunct infrastructure.

jhay78;945174 wrote:If the welfare state keeps expanding at the current pace, in 20 years the last thing we'll be worried about is defunct infrastructure.

A bridge to nowhere is a nice, defensible position....Only one way in!

I know we aren't looking to Argentina for a model of how to run an economy. You can claim whatever GDP growth you want when you understate inflation enough, like we are doing now. They are having their Keynesian easy money boom right now like we had, and it will crash hard, like ours did/will. Their policies stabilized things for a few years after the lst time they collapsed, but as always happens when the boom is based on central planning and easy money/credit, poverty is back above 30% and stores have to raise their prices weekly and wage increases aren't enough for people to buy food to eat.

It's the same story again and again.

1. Easy money and government intervention creates jobs and asset bubbles.

2. Easy credit and/or direct government involvement gets consumers spending, creating temporary jobs.

3. Inflation raises prices, so wages have to rise, but they can never rise enough, bankrupting the poor. (This is where Argentina is.)

4. The unsustainability of the asset bubbles and consumer driven bubbles becomes apparent. The demand for housing or cars or what have you can not continue at the same level indefinitely. Prices stagnate, growth stops, people lose jobs in these areas, which hurts the entire consumer driven sector of the economy. Welcome to a recession. Prices are too high and want and need to crash so that consumers can buy the products that are available. (This is where we were in 2008.)

Then you have two choices for final step

5a. Do whatever is necessary to keep prices from falling. Print as much money as you can. There is no such thing as too many houses. We need to keep prices up. The money printing raises prices even more, destroying the poor and middle class. (This is where we are right now.) Eventually this effort to prop up prices will hyperinflate the currency. (The dollar is the reserve currency of the world, so we obviously have a lot more time than Argentina would before getting to this point.)

5b. Let prices fall. Companies that made their living on the artificial boom would go bankrupt. Many people would lose their jobs. Prices fall to where people can afford them again. Once they bottom, new companies can buy low and get back in business and start employing people again.

Even though Argentina might reach hyperinflation before we do, we are farther along in the cycle than they are. No Keynesian plan is going to reinflate the bubble.

Cleveland Buck;945296 wrote:5b. Let prices fall. Companies that made their living on the artificial boom would go bankrupt. Many people would lose their jobs. Prices fall to where people can afford them again. Once they bottom, new companies can buy low and get back in business and start employing people again.

This assumes, of course, that there are businesses available to purchase at the deflated price.

The problem this economic cycle is that many of those businesses are now in China. This week, for example, 2 of our company's 4 Komori press lines are being disassembled by Chinese riggers and being readied for shipment to Beijing. The other 2 are destined for India. 300 good paying American jobs down the shitter never to return again.

Cleveland Buck;945296 wrote:Even though Argentina might reach hyperinflation before we do, we are farther along in the cycle than they are. No Keynesian plan is going to reinflate the bubble.

Nope.

believer;945347 wrote:This assumes, of course, that there are businesses available to purchase at the deflated price.

The problem this economic cycle is that many of those businesses are now in China. This week, for example, 2 of our company's 4 Komori press lines are being disassembled by Chinese riggers and being readied for shipment to Beijing. The other 2 are destined for India. 300 good paying American jobs down the shitter never to return again.

There will always be someone with money who wants to get in business when prices are at their bottom and labor is cheap. The problem with this economic cycle is that asset prices are being propped up, input prices are rising, and labor isn't cheap because companies have to compete with unemployment benefits and welfare.

I Wear Pants;945084 wrote:Repeat after me O U R I N F R A S T R U C T U R E I S S H I T A N D T H E P R I V A T E S E C T O R W I L L N E V E R B U I L D I T.

In 20 years when no business can operate in the country because all our roads and bridges are dangerous, we have horrible telecom services, and no rail system to speak of remind me again how you guys were the pro business crowd and I was some evil person who hated profit.

I would say that sadly, we are way too broke to fix our bridges, roads and dillapidated cities. We just don't have any money. With that said, a much worse scenario that is playing out is the annual funding of our global empire. We don't have any money for that either. But the military lobbyists ensure that we funnel hundreds of billions of dollars...on the country credit card. We spend boatloads to blow up the infrastructure in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, and then spend hundreds of billions of dollars rebuilding the same structires that we just blew up. Isn't that nice?

Not to mention that the poverty levels in this country continue to soar. And now candidate Cain wants to raise taxes on the poorest people in the country. I honestly think that some of these Republican candidates want to see the poverty rate hit 50%. Why that is, it's not exactly clear.

Footwedge;945487 wrote:I would say that sadly, we are way too broke to fix our bridges, roads and dillapidated cities. We just don't have any money. With that said, a much worse scenario that is playing out is the annual funding of our global empire. We don't have any money for that either. But the military lobbyists ensure that we funnel hundreds of billions of dollars...on the country credit card. We spend boatloads to blow up the infrastructure in places like Iraq and Afghanistan, and then spend hundreds of billions of dollars rebuilding the same structires that we just blew up. Isn't that nice?

Back in the old days empires actually payed for themselves, by fleecing the natural resources and enslaving the people of the nations that fell under the power of the empire. Now they just throw it on the card to appear benevolent.

Footwedge;945487 wrote:Not to mention that the poverty levels in this country continue to soar. And now candidate Cain wants to raise taxes on the poorest people in the country. I honestly think that some of these Republican candidates want to see the poverty rate hit 50%. Why that is, it's not exactly clear.

How much have you had to drink tonight?

Consumer confidence falls "unexpectedly" (that's the new Obamaconomy word) to a 2.5 year low.

http://news.yahoo.com/october-consumer-confidence-drops-lowest-2-1-2-141445843.html

At least the organizer is capping student loans, and ignoring the real problem in overinflated tuition/fees.

Footwedge;945487 wrote:I honestly think that some of these Republican candidates want to see the poverty rate hit 50%.

Doesn't your buddy Rush Limbaugh claim that Obama and the democrats are purposefully destroying the middle class? You and Rush are the same in this respect. The only difference is a political party.

majorspark;945515 wrote: How much have you had to drink tonight?

No, I don't drink anymore...and that's probably my problem. But let's see....the poverty rate has risen over the past 3 years from 13 to 16%. Now Mr. Cain wants to add a 9% tax on all perishables..ie..value added tax, correct?

Given that by definition, those in poverty have a below the standard of buying power enough to sustain a minimum standard of living...how exactly will this added 9% tax not further the poverty levels? But more apt to my point, at what percentage of people who are just above the poverty level, now fall below the threshold and into full blown poverty...given that they have to pay an additional 9% on groceries, electric, gas, clothes, tooth brushes. shavers, and toothpaste?

In my new line of work, I visit about 12 families per week...people from all walks of life. As it stands today, more than a third of the people I visit are either living in poverty or are on the brink. Zap em another 9% and the poverty rate equals or exceeds the banana Republics around the globe.

Yes indeed...your buddy Cain would love to see the impoverished rate hit 50% here in the US. Only the GOP is begging for a less progressive tax. Today, the fucking idiot Perry proposed a flat tax. Is he serious? A flat tax? Then change my estimate from 50% to 60% in poverty if that idiot is elected.

majorspark;945586 wrote:Doesn't your buddy Rush Limbaugh claim that Obama and the democrats are purposefully destroying the middle class? You and Rush are the same in this respect. The only difference is a political party.

LOL. You don't ever want to equate what I say with that of the fatman on the AM dial. I've listed countless lies that man has spewed. On the other hand, every premise that I've ever stated here has been backed up with facts....or links from non biased sources proving my point to be accurate.

Here is a fact check on Cain's 999 plan. As horrible of a plan that I've ever seen. Cain isn't Able...that's for sure. Percentage wise, he is promoting a regressive tax...yeah...that will get him elected.

Let's throw half of Americans into poverty...and at the same time, eliminate completely the Capitol Gains tax. LOL. What a fuggin dolt

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/herman-cains-misleading-pitch-for-the-999-plan/2011/10/12/gIQAHszPgL_blog.html

It is capital gains. I'm normally not a spelling Nazi but the "A" and "O" aren't even close on the keyboard.

Are any of these candidates worse than the disaster in the White House now?

Footwedge;945595 wrote:the poverty rate has risen over the past 3 years from 13 to 16%.

Lets start out by putting poverty in America in context. No one is going hungry in America. It may be on the credit card but the taxpayers are taking care of those at income levels defined as "poverty" in the US. Americans at or below the poverty level have purchasing power to buy items beyond the necessities of food, clothing, and shelter.

Footwedge;945595 wrote:those in poverty have a below the standard of buying power enough to sustain a minimum standard of living