Some on the left believe we could solve simple poverty in our Republic on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States; the right wing has no solution for Capitalism's, natural rate of unemployment.
Quibble? You continue just to make error. Using right wing concept to craft conflicting left wing argument isn't in the realm of good sense.
That is Your problem, not the problem of the Left. It is a simple and existing and used for official metrics in our economy. In any case, why do you believe we would be worse off by better ensuring full employment of Capital resources so Capital can circulate, as it must for Any economy to grow; the Capital show, Must go on.
Nope. I'm not making the error and deriving a nonsensical argument (which is then repeated again after again without any consideration of logic)
You have nothing but dogma; too bad you aren't a Sergeant Major General of the Office of Official Dogma.
This is the premise: Some on the left believe we could solve simple poverty in our Republic on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States; the right wing has no solution for Capitalism's, natural rate of unemployment. Have any more non sequituriolal, Excuses?
This is drivel. There is no solution to 'natural rate of unemployment'. The clue is in the title! The point is the approach is alien to left wing political economy, given its merely an adaptation of Friedman and his moentarism curse.
Yes, there is; why do you believe there isn't? Recourse to an basic income is what would accomplish it.
A basic income guarantee has naff all to do with "solving NRU". Indeed NRU analysis simply predicts that the vertical Phillips Curve will shift rightwards.
It would no longer be the same NRU; it would be mostly structural. Recourse to a social safety that provides for an basic income solves for that. It should be on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.
UNCLE SAM'S DEBT OVERHANG Wrong. Debt is a simple expression of both Discretionary* and Non-Discretionary Expenditure being larger than Total Revenues* both private and governmental. Reduce the cost of the Department of Defense, or DoD, (more than 50% of total government expenditure) and we can handle the Debt particularly given the present expansion. (It will require also the opposite of what Donald Dork has just done - that is, an increase of upper-income taxation to enhance revenues.) Your statement addresses the right problem but the wrong culprit. Americans wanted Donald Dork - owned by BigBusiness - you got him. There will be no reduction of DoD expenditures because those businesses are providing goods/services to the DoD don't want reductions. They are doing a damn-fine business. But, ask yourself, "At whose cost?" Lotsa luck answering that question. The rest of the Discretionary Budget is bits and pieces all over the place. With the evident exception of the Debt Overhang caused almost uniquely by the predominance of DoD spending. See here ... *Meaning it is part of the budget that is decided by the PotUS and is not related to Debt Interest Payments that are non-discretionary.
didn't we cover this already; I am a federalist; I offer No Excuses. The right wing has no solutions, Because they don't understand the concepts. Who cares; your dogma is not right, twice a day, anyway.
You haven't changed the script. Found out abusing the NRU concept, you did go with a temporary switch to a made up natural rate of inefficiency. However, you continue to make conclusion based on inconsistent economic approach.
Nothing but Dogmatic Excuses, instead of Dogmatic Results? What inconsistency are you referring to? What is the right wing Solution, not Excuse, for even Simple forms of poverty in our Republic? the "work or die" thing, should have died, last millennium.
When Rwnypu going to learn? You've uses the NRU, believing it makes your comment look more credible. You didn't appreciate that it actively attacks your own argument (including unemployment payments through a basic income guarantee and the minimum wage)
Perhaps, in right wing fantasy. I don't resort to fallacy and don't have to care about fallacious, existing dogma. I have a running argument with right wing about this; their arguments are simply not superior enough; and I don't "want to get called on it, if it is an open book test". Please state your opposing point of view.
Nothing but Dogmatic Excuses, instead of Dogmatic Results? What is the right wing Solution, not Excuse, for even Simple forms of poverty in our Republic. If you have no solution, "I win."
in the future, "time to market" will be considered a metric, in our arguments. The right wing should have several alternative solutions already. Not, nothing but repeal. Because, that really is worth-less, in the non-porn sector. Men should Always have solutions, simply Because, we are not wo-men.
You're not making sense. You can't take a right wing concept as part of your argument and then whinge about right wing solutions.
This, from YOU??!?!?? BWAHAHHAAAAA!!!1! Because 'free market economics' is very different from free market economics.
