BASIC ECONOMICS FOR THE RETARDS - About deficits

Cypress said:
:lolup:

And your hero Bush was powerless to stop the Dems from destroying his wonderful economy, right.

Man, I'm glad USC reminded us of your love letter to bush. I swear man, bush could be fucking you up the ass and you would beg him for more.
Click to expand...

You are a sicko, but typical for a liberal.
 
Yurt said:
you already said the government was manipulating it by lowering tariffs...and using other tools at their disposal...i see your point that high tariffs could cause trade wars...and that would not be good

and instead of deficit spending....how about cutting taxes, thus more money to the consumers to spend or invest in the private sector....instead of giving the money to the government to spend for us...
Click to expand...

Because all that does is give people more money to save as well.

You're taking quantity out of the G variable and putting only a fraction of it (somewhere between 0 and 100 percent) and putting it back into the C variable. No matter what the number is, it's less efficient than the government just spending it according to the equation.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Because all that does is give people more money to save as well.

You're taking quantity out of the G variable and putting only a fraction of it (somewhere between 0 and 100 percent) and putting it back into the C variable. No matter what the number is, it's less efficient than the government just spending it according to the equation.
Click to expand...

i don't put much stock in government efficiency when it is spending in a trillion dollar deficit amount...and then some...for a limited government, there is seemingly no end...
 
TuTu Monroe said:
Look what our government has done to Medicare. It's pathetic.
Click to expand...

It is private entities, not the government, such as the Frist boys Columbia/HCA that have screwed Medicare. It is not an internal problem, particularly after 14 years without oversight. With the for-profit entities gone Medicare would be, even more, the most efficient part of the healthcare system. Who would you say is to blame for Medicare's inability, by law, to negotiate for lower pharma prices, thus saving multi-billions?
 
Dixie said:
Bush's tax cuts DID work! Things started going to shit when Democrats took over Congress in 2006.
Click to expand...

Yep, the country really misses Supply-Side Economics(better known as "Trickle-Down" or "Voodoo"), with us as policy until 1/20/09. Don't you guys ever change your tune?
 
belme1201 said:
Yep, the country really misses Supply-Side Economics(better known as "Trickle-Down" or "Voodoo"), with us as policy until 1/20/09. Don't you guys ever change your tune?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't think you can credit the son of the man who coined the phrase, "voodoo economics" with implementing such policies. The closest thing we've seen to "trickle down" since Reagan, happened on a little blue dress under Clinton.
 
Dixie said:
Sorry, but I don't think you can credit the son of the man who coined the phrase, "voodoo economics" with implementing such policies. The closest thing we've seen to "trickle down" since Reagan, happened on a little blue dress under Clinton.
Click to expand...

Quoted so everyone can see what a huge ignoramus Dixie is.
 
Dixie said:
Back when I was working my way through college, I was a cottage parent at a facility for the severely and profoundly retarded. Joe was this man of about 30, who had been institutionalized since he was a young boy. On Wednesdays, we had an ice cream vendor who came to our cottage, and sold the residents ice cream at half price. Some of the residents had family who would give them some coinage to buy ice cream, but Joe had no family and thus, no coinage. When I would come in on Wednesday, I would ask Joe... "You gettin' some ice cream today, Joe?" ...and he would look at me with this very sad expression, and pull his empty pockets out of his pants and shrug. Here's the economics lesson pinheads.... Even Joe, a 30-year-old severely retarded individual, understood, you can't spend what you don't have. Of course, I would always give Joe some money so he could buy ice cream, but he never asked me for it. When he was asked the direct question, he knew and understood, no money=no ice cream.

We are currently $10 trillion PLUS in debt... growing at a rate of $1 trillion per year, it will not take long for the interest to become so much of a burden the tax revenue can no longer support it. At this point, we are still spending money we don't have, WAY more money that we don't have, and WON'T have. The only way it can be done is by borrowing more from China, or printing it, or raising taxes dramatically. None of these options are desirable or sustainable.

I once thought the lefties were just mentally retarded, but I now believe the mentally retarded actually have more sense and understanding of economics. IBee can rip off his little smart ass threads all he likes, but he hasn't explained how the government can spend money it doesn't have. This is because liberals have this mental concept of Washington, where the US has this huge endless pile of money, and we can literally spend as much as we want to, we'll never exhaust the supply. It's the only way they could possibly justify their insanity!
Click to expand...

So you would have allowed the world's banking system to just collapse or don't you believe that either? Unless you kept your money under the bed, I'm sure you would be as pissed off as anyone else when the ATMs stopped working.
 
tom prendergast said:
So you would have allowed the world's banking system to just collapse or don't you believe that either? Unless you kept your money under the bed, I'm sure you would be as pissed off as anyone else when the ATMs stopped working.
Click to expand...

Of course, rewarding the morons who did this with trillions of dollars and no strings attached was the only option.

Fascist much?
 
I totally agree with Dixie's post above.
Here's the fucking problem, not many republican politicians do ya douchbag.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Of course, rewarding the morons who did this with trillions of dollars and no strings attached was the only option.

Fascist much?
Click to expand...

There were other options but not much time, the basic problem was to do with the US and the West living on credit for too long and the banks generating money from nothing. You like starting wars but don't like paying for them preferring China to pay instead.
 
tom prendergast said:
There were other options but not much time, the basic problem was to do with the US and the West living on credit for too long and the banks generating money from nothing. You like starting wars but don't like paying for them preferring China to pay instead.
Click to expand...

This fiasco was a coordinated action between wallstreet and the government to collapse the economy and then demand "swift action" to implement more fascism.

I don't like starting wars.
 
ib1yysguy said:
It's the most basic fucking economics ever.

Economics lesson for the retards:

GDP = c+i+g

C=consumption (which is down)
i=investment in the private sector (which is down)
g=government spending (the only factor left)

So, retards, if you have the gross domestic product dependent on the three factors, two of which are down, and the one remaining one is government spending (the only one you have control over as the government), then what do you do as the government to raise the GDP?

YOU SPEND you retards. You idiots have been saying we need to balance the budget and cut spending. WHAT THE FUCK DOES THAT DO THE EQUATION YOU MORONS.

It's the most basic economics ever, and it's agreed upon by people on the right and the left.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_domestic_product


So quick fucking complaining about the deficits. The spending is necessitated by the mess you idiots left. Consider yourself served.
Click to expand...

LOL as if GDP were a true measure of economic growth. You dummy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top