The Ecomony will not Recover until the Government Spends MORE Money!!

You haven't really shown much in terms of intelligence. I guess you are so smart you're gonna keep it to yourself! LOL!!

Clown, take a step back, you are way out of your league here.

 

The OP shows exactly what is wrong with government.

When you have a problem...throw money at it.

Now we have a 16 trillion dollar problem...lets throw money at it.

 

And please take note of this.............exit stage left. Once the CONS realize that they can't prove you wrong, they grab their belongings, tuck them neatly into their travel bags and just leave. Its like showing a child how 2+2=4 and when they have exhausted every possible excuse to keep from understanding what you are showing them, they shrug their shoulders and just walk away.

Its classic and just one way that they continue to stay in the dark. They don't even stick around and attempt to learn. It makes me wonder if they even can. Hmmmmmmmmmmm

 

It's either that or just let people suffer. Your choice! And the suffering can last for decades and we can lose precious time for innovation and productivity while our human capital gets wasted because you don't understand economics. The Government is not a person, a household, or a business... it does not play the same game we play.

 

Akphi will not recover until he realizes that his economic idealism is flawed, and is actually the very source of the predicament in which we currently find ourselves. His heroes were wrong all along, failed to predict, failed to prevent, failed to correct, even now fail to recognize but still pose as saviors using the same flawed logic.

Krugman et al are hired hands of statist crony propaganda. We know that the Federal Reserve bought the economics profession, as even does the Huff Post. We know that Friedman was not a free market Austrian. We know that Keynesian, monetarism are failures. Recover.

 

Another example of how closed minded people debate. Ad hominems! Once they realize they can't prove your arguments/graphs/evidence is wrong, they turn into the spelling police. This way they can attack your spelling without ever having to address what you claimed. Its pathetic, but extremely entertaining.

Its a pattern that exists in each one. Shrugs. Oh well. Gotta go!

 

The light bulb hasn't gone off in their heads yet. They have their ideologies so engrained in their minds that even when confronted with facts, they can't accept it with out throwing up some weird theory that is not backed by any data whatsoever. That's why all we provide is actual data, historical data, and actual facts and they provide many theories about "Government is bad", "Inflation is bad", "Gold is good", "Opportunity Costs", "Crowding Out", "Confidence", etc. Nothing quantifiable, just their subjective opinions... which quite frankly are meaningless and driven by a complete lack of education.

 

They have been doing this since before you were born. The last time they tried to cut spending in order to "balance the budget" was 1937 when they sent us right back in to a depression. They have been doing it the Krugman/Keynes/AKPhidelt way for over 75 years now... and yet you still think we don't know what we are talking about. During that 75 years we have become the largest economy in the history of mankind. I suggest you ask questions instead of making these really ignorant comments...

 

if you can't refute my posts don't bother posting, this is not a spelling bee contest. Looks like you have nothing to say on the topic... i figured

 

lol, yeah this is typical... happens all the time when they can't refute one's arguments. At least we have 'spelling police' around which isn't all that bad.

 

These are the three posts Sparky has made so far. Talk about a troll looking for attention!!

 

my dear republicans..

do you guys know that most of the defecit has been a result of: 1. Bush tax cuts, 2. Wars, 3. Financial crisis (unemployment) and little has been a result of bailouts of auto industry and banks? or stimulus? EDUCATE YOURSELFS RETURDICANS!

and i prefer bailouts and Govt aid in times of crisis as opposed to the dangerous view of non intervention..

1. What IF all the big banks wouldn't have been bailed and banks like Wachovia, Citigroup, AIG would've gone backrupt causing a disastrous panic in the banking industry and a trickle down/domino effect?
2. What IF the auto industry hadn't been bailed out and GM and Chrysler, possible Ford would've gone under?
3. What IF Federal reserve wouldn't have kept rates low and rates would've sky-rocketed to ridiculous levels, especially if 1 and 2 would've occured?

MILLIONS OF MORE WOULD BE UNEMPLOYED, UNEMPLOYMENT WOULD BE AT 15%, DOW JONES AT 5k! borrowing rates at 10%+.... GREAT DEPRESSION II

but republicans CANNOT see this and just want to blame and bash Obama...
lasly, IF you returdicans don't want govertnemnt to intervene, then talk to the private sector, look at yourselves in the mirror and tell yourself 'Stop f-king up!' It is your f-k ups and private sector failures that forces your mommy and daddy GOVT to intervene... The irony of it all.

 

When the dominos fall where will we be then?

We will never pay off the debt...never..so what do you do...print money until it becomes worthless?
When has the government ever enhanced innovation or productivity?

I know of one repulican walking around work bragging about the 8,000 dollars Obama gave him for a storm shelter. He could afford to pay for the whole thing and he is not suffering.

I run into people every day that refuse to work when offered and can't even tie their shoes or pull their pants up at work.

We can't fight several wars, sent money overseas, grant consessions to big business, bailout banks, pay for storm shelters, pay for heathcare, take care of the elderly, feed and house the poor, hire more and more government workers, more law enforcement....SOMETHING HAS TO GIVE!!!!

The people (most of them) are also broke.

 

Ha ha ha.
This web-site has enough brain cells to even constitute a collective body of intelligence worth calling a 'sample', let alone a population or a LEAGUE?

You are a funny, funny youngster.
Naive, not terribly bright, but full of pi$$ and vinegar.

Give me a call, Junior. Or a PM, even.

I will gladly educate you.
I am, after all, a philanthropist.

.

 

We never have to pay off the debt nor do we ever want to pay off the debt. And we can keep printing money to encourage productivity and growth like we have been for the past century. You realize this is the very same argument they had a century ago and they have been wrong since. In another 100 years they will be having this same argument. When will you guys ever learn?

They are the largest employer and consumer in the entire world. They were at the ground floor of the invention and infrastructure of some of the most pivotal innovations in history, including the computer, internet, radio, etc. You are just making things up.

Yes, so if people (most of them) are broke... don't you think they need money? Isn't that the purpose of the monetary system is to have enough money circulating to generate the growth we want and the productivity we want? Everything you said here is completely and utterly false and typical talking points from conservatives that literally do not have a clue how the economy works.

 

No substance still? Embarrassing! Let me know when you are willing to "educate" us on this topic. I'll be hear listening. But I wouldn't be surprised if this is the nature of all your posts... just looking for attention.

 

sparky is like the forum clown, not troll.

 

'When has the government ever enhanced innovation or productivity? '

NASA

 

Wrong all along and my world is shattered. Wrong all along and it doesn't matter.
I stick by my team and the dream that our ideas are supreme.
Wrong all along
And it doesn't matter.

I wrote a country song for you.

 

You answered your question in your second and third sentence. Federal Reserve can change the quantity of money in existence at will, also the demand for money. really?

Looking at the consolidation of wealth I would not say "the most winners possible". If so, that sucks.

How about for a stimulus the fed buys up student loans and then shreds them? Instead of doing more QE. The banks bought up 1.2 trillion in mortgage backed securities from banks, why not do the same thing with student debt? The Students will buy cars, homes, electronics and all kinds of crap. The banks have been bundling student loans and selling them to investors for years. The students cannot pay this back. A lot of talk about student debt being the next big crash. Should not be inflationary since the money supply has been contracting. Since we care so much about education, how about we give the student a bail-out? After we can re-think student loans so we don't get into the same mess. What is the difference between The student debt and mortgage backed securities? It would just be an asset swap. Or is this a pipe dream because the banks are the ruling class and no one really gives a hoot about the students?

 

The money is sitting in big business savings accounts and t-bills. Some $3,000,000,000,000 of it. The only thing I can figure out is that they need more tax breaks and less regulation so they can have $6,000,000,000,000 sitting idle in savings accounts.

Fact is, unless somebody puts somebody else to work, there ain't ever going to be demand. Might as well be the government since the private sector is completely missing in action.

 

Mike12, akphidelt2007,

I'm sure this quaint little bond you have formed, no matter how vaguely homo-erotic/creepy it appears to the rest of us, is quite comforting to you.

You both have much in common, this is true.
You adore Barack Obama.
You are not terribly-bright.

You don't shower as much as your friends advise you to.
This might explain why neither of you are particularly lucky with the ladies.


Still, I am a generous and magnanimous man of science, philanthropy, and harmony.
I am also a writer, a counselor, and an accomplished musician.

I will offer you an education, but only if you impress me enough to warrant my spending even ten more minutes on you.

PM me, or phone me on my iPhone at 256-679-5567, and I will query you.
I will ask you a series of questions that will satisfy my curiosity regarding your aptitude, suitability, and/or worthiness.

If you are worth a $hit, I will offer you elucidation.
I will give you guidance, education, information, and direction.
If you are up to it, I will provide you spiritual enlightenment.


I'm right here waiting.
Give me a jingle, any time.

 

1) We already wasted $800b on a failed stimulus.
- This is false, the stimulus did in fact help out aggregate data, and as it was spent unemployment started to decrease. However, it simply was not big enough. It was almost a third tax cuts, and only $200b+ in direct Government spending. The country lost $17 trillion in wealth and was spending $2.6 trillion less than before. If you can possibly show me how $800b makes up for these losses, then math has a problem. The fallacy is that government needs to, should or could make up for lost wealth. I have seen no evidence that the stimulus helped 'aggregate data', or any data for that matter.

2) We are bankrupt
- This is false, we are not and never will be bankrupt. They said we were bankrupt in 1937 when we had $41b in debt. Always ask yourself this question... how does a country with a made up currency run out of that made up currency? It can't, and it won't. These are just more ridiculous fallacies that have been perpetuated for decades. I agree the country is not bankrupt....yet. But remember your monopoly money has to play in a world market. It can become worthless compared to other currencies.

3) We can't keep borrowing from the future
- This is false, we don't borrow from the future because that would be impossible, we actually invest in the future. If you want your children and grandchildren to have horrible lives, then keep asking the Government to cut spending Borrowing vs. investing is just semantics. More government spending does not = better future. Sound financial practices give our children a better chance at a nice life and not voodoo economics.

4) We have to pay the debt back
- This is false. Over a 3rd of the national debt matures every year, and we pay it with no problems. The national debt is nothing more than a recycled loan that comes from the sky and never ever have to be paid off. That would require the Government taking back all the money they have given us. You're only looking at part of the picture. We borrow money from other countries, which we have no control over.

5) The Government spending less gives the private sector more
- This is false. You pay the same amount of taxes regardless of how much the Government spends. When the Government spends less, the private sector has less. Which is why they don't do it, and why the last time they tried it (1937), it lead us right back in to a depression. Then why all the fuss about raising taxes on the rich? This is a false narrative all around. A thriving economy leads to greater tax revenue which results in more money for government to spend. However, more government spending will never result in a thriving economy. It's just not possible as you proved in 1).

6) The Fed has already pumped trillions in to the economy
- This is false. The Fed can't pump money in to the economy. They can pump reserves in to the banking system. Since banks can't lend reserves but only trade them amongst each other, all it does is target the Feds interest rates. Those trillions of dollars simply sit in an account at the Fed. I couldn't have made a better argument against stimulus spending.

7) Inflation is out of control
- This is false. In fact deflation is a bigger concern in the future than inflation. If you understand basic fundamental economics and can understand data, you can see why inflation is not a big problem and that we actually need more inflation. Inflation is a problem but not because it is too high. The fed has kept it artifically low for the past 40 years. If inflation were allowed to react naturally all of the sudden, 99% of the country would be living below the poverty line. Another case where I wish government would be less involved over the years. And now you want us to get on the same type of merry-go-round with government spending?

 

have an idea..

1. Govt/treasury pumps 250k into every poor person's bank account and 150k into every middle class person
2. Fed scolds the banks and takes away all the excess reserves which it has pumped into banking (money banks haven't used)
3. Obama goes out and makes a speech 'Okay private sector, no more asking me to solve your problems, get on your feet and put this money to use!! there are no more poor and middle class has more money to spend so no excuses

I will now go in vacation but on my return, things better be good! you asked for govt to stay out, well the ball is on your court now! Let's see what you can do!

this would be great...

 

Check your history...look into the Germen economy before Hitler rose to power...The Wiemar republic. When the money became so worthless it took a grocery cart full of money to buy a loaf of bread. I have 20,000 marks in a bill at home...it is worthless.

You are right I am no economist...but I do know this...the reason money has value is because of its scarcity.