"I helped create the GOP tax myth. Trump is wrong. Tax cuts don't equal growth."

WrongWhile it is true that tax and Spend is burden the real burden is having government bureaucrats spend and waste our money. Mostly government money is spent in sustaining and breeding dependency while it should be spent doing the exact opposite. It should be a safety net that you bounce off of not a house that you live in for generations. 1+1 Equals two for conservatives but astrophysics for liberals

 

Of course. We don't disagree.

 

Its like Keynes never existed! There's no notion of 'self healing'. We can't even refer to simple concepts such as a return to the natural rate of unemployment as, following recession, we can expect more long term unemployed.

Market failure in investment is well recognised. Take it up with the economists if you want to peddle a utopia that they've somehow missed!

But you don't base that on any sound economics. It is non-economic opinion, nothing more.

 

I love how Georgists try and hide from their reliance on our Henry. Its cute.

 

I'm not sure I accept the concept of "sound economics." For me economics is social analysis riddled with opinion. After all it is about people and human behavior is ephemeral and unpredictable. I think it would be better if Keynes never existed. His opinions are anathema to me. So suggesting that I take something up with an economist isn't very useful. It would simply be another opinion. The opinions that really count with me are my own. Thanks.

 

i.e. from a genuine economic school of thought, rather than non-economic twaddle.

There's certainly a value structure, despite how neoclassicalists ignore it. However, that doesn't give you an excuse to make comment without any valid reference to economics. You've got a lot of economic analysis to choose from after all!

Even in irrationality, behavioural economics shows that behaviour is typically predictable.

So you only have opinion! That ensures that you have no economic argument. Try something a little more powerful: (1) construct argument based on theory; (2) demonstrate validity of argument with empirical analysis.

 

he was a meglomanical libcommie genius who thought he could gain power from turning the economy into a math model that he could control. If Keynes hadn't tried it someone would have. He was as necessary to economics and Henry Ford was to cars. Friedman was the same. A huge genius who succeeded in turning the economy into a math model, but a model based on freedom rather than libcommie control.

 

I don't think you understand me. I don't view what economists do as having any value. It is just opinions, often opposing opinions. It is patently unscientific. It is social analysis. For me there is no point in quoting the work of economists for that reason. I stated my opinions. Feel free to ignore them.

 

So you think you can refer to economics, with a level of validity, without actually referring to any economics? Given the multiple schools of thought (e.g. choose the Austrian School if you want to peddle some free market guff), that's impressively silly

 

very absurd, Friedman and Bernanke just stopped housing recession from turning into world wide depression. Would you have preferred electricians or chemists at the helm??

 

We are set up to think of spending by the government funded by taxes. In a fiat economy, taxes are not necessary to fund government spending. Imagine a completely different system. No taxes at all for anyone. How would the government spend money? Since they create money, they could just spend it by making it out of thin air. That is one extreme. The other extreme is to forbid any spending beyond tax expenditures, the so-called balanced budget approach. This would forbid any lending by the government to fund spending and force them to use only tax receipts. We have a hybrid system. Why? Because government spending is a means of controlling the macro economy to fulfill political goals by the state who acts on our behalf to pursue those political goals. One very important goal is to have one single currency which is the money of choice. Taxes paid only in dollars forces us to standardize on the dollar as the currency of record.

 

no idea what on earth you are trying to say? we do have one single currency!!! taxes are used to fund govt. Ask questions about what you do't understand.

 

we are not set up, we merely observe facts??? it is a fact that taxes fund govt. Now do you understand?

 

no they cant!!! the mandate is no inflation because inflation is deadly for a country. Do you understand? Please ask questions about what you don't understand. It seems the world is full of amateur economists, sadly.

 

Economics is the study of how people allocate scarce resources.

 

Begs the question, "who is us"?
I don't see that spending as being on my behalf. I don't see their political goals as my own and that is why they take money by stealth and by borrowing, because we won't agree to pay for it but they still want it.

 

well let's not blame the politicians when the people elect them instead of libertarians

 

As the old saying goes, if you put all the economist in the world end-to-end they will all point in different directions.

 

Well, that's the downside of living in a society with 326 million other people. This system was here before you and it won't change just because you are personally offended by it. Fortunately, you benefited from it and it only asks that you contribute, if possible, so that other some day adults will have the same opportunities as you. If you can't see how you benefit from spending I submit you either aren't looking or aren't capable of recognizing it. If you are over 40, there is probably little hope that you ever will.

If you don't like it, you can go live out your dream in a society more to your liking as this society isn't closed and doesn't force citizens to stay. Of course, you can stay and try to convince others that the children of today shouldn't have the societal benefits (potential or realized) you had as a child, that's your call.

 

Aren't libertarians people?

 

notice you are playing trivial pursuit because you cant make the case for liberalism? ever see a libertarian who is afraid to make his case? So why do you insist on being liberal when you have learned it is not defensible?

 

Seems this Libertarian has thin skin.

 

who cares if I do or not??? resorting to psychology instead of substance because you know you cant make the a case for liberalism. Ever see a conservative afraid to make the case? What does that teach you?

 

I love how enemies of liberty, justice and truth always have to make $#!+ up about what the honest have clearly written. It's reassuring when the opposition proves they are evil.

 

Banks create money by lending for asset purchases, which increases asset prices, which increases the perceived return to asset ownership, which increases demand for loans for asset purchases. That is the cause of the asset bubble phase. Then when asset prices have increased to the point where the debts undertaken to buy them can't be serviced, people stop borrowing to buy them, the money supply contracts as loans are repaid, leading to deflation and reduced economic activity, lower returns to asset ownership, further reduction in demand for loans for asset purchases, etc. That is the cause of the bust phase. Positive feedback in both directions.