fucktard barney frank

ib1yysguy said:
... and the minds of anyone who knows anything about economics.

Seriously, this all you retards have? "Your ecnomic theories r stuped!" If they're wrong, you'd be able to tell me why. The problem is, it's textbook economics. It's not some wild crazy lefty thing. It's the same shit you learn in maco econ 101.
Click to expand...

its plain common sense that you don't spend money that you don't have, betting on a high return on investment. They call that 'gambling' when it's done by a private citizen.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
its plain common sense that you don't spend money that you don't have, betting on a high return on investment. They call that 'gambling' when it's done by a private citizen.
Click to expand...

HA! The god of "common sense" does not take precedence over ESTABLISHED ECONOMIC THEORY.

I've got the entire economic community behind me, save some very far right wingers who rail against deficit spending but aren't taken seriously. Right and left both agree that deficit spending is necessary. EVERYONE who thinks it's bad economics can be found in one very narrow band of the economic spectrum. That tells you something about the validity of their opinions.
 
ib1yysguy said:
The math doesn't lie, retard.
Click to expand...

no, we reserve that for liberals....

Stimulus (ie deficit spending) is recognized by right and left as 100 percent necessary in situations like this.
Click to expand...
no it isn't....in fact there is plenty of evidence to show that it doesn't work, for example, Japan tried it ten times in the last twenty years and it didn't work....

The problem was it was neutered by Republicans and made ineffectual because of the size constraints of it. If it had been larger, it'd have been more effective.
Click to expand...
only if the effect you are trying to achieve is bankrupting the country as quickly as possible....

when the plan was implemented with a spending timetable of two years.
Click to expand...

the "plan" had to be implemented before it could even be read, because if we didn't do it by Thursday we were all going to die a horrible death......
 
The stimulus money actually slowed many projects.

Many projects that were to be started in 2009 or 2010 were put on hold in order to apply for stimulus money to pay for them. If they get the stimulus then the money set aside for the project will be spent elsewhere. If they don't get the stimulus they will use the original funds.

Eventually it will break loose and could appear even larger (as far as infrastructure projects).
 
PostmodernProphet said:
no you don't.....I don't think there is any credible economist who thinks the current stimulus plan is a good idea......
Click to expand...

Thats because they all thought it should have been larger.

Not that your view of who makes an economist credible is reasonable. I could show you an economist who won the Nobel prize in economics telling you it was a good idea but for the fact that it wasn't big enough and you would say he wasn't credible.
 
The problems is JOBS!!!!

Nobody wants to talk about it because outsourcing all jobs is the next step in the globalist plan to destroy america.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Thats because they all thought it should have been larger.

Not that your view of who makes an economist credible is reasonable. I could show you an economist who won the Nobel prize in economics telling you it was a good idea but for the fact that it wasn't big enough and you would say he wasn't credible.
Click to expand...

I will say YOU aren't credible, for saying there is an economist who won the Nobel Prize who thinks the stimulus wasn't big enough....

In total, Japan spent $6.3 trillion on construction-related public investment between 1991 and September of last year, according to the Cabinet Office. The spending peaked in 1995 and remained high until the early 2000s, when it was cut amid growing concerns about ballooning budget deficits. More recently, the governing Liberal Democratic Party has increased spending again to revive the economy and the party’s own flagging popularity.

In the end, say economists, it was not public works but an expensive cleanup of the debt-ridden banking system, combined with growing exports to China and the United States, that brought a close to Japan’s Lost Decade. This has led many to conclude that spending did little more than sink Japan deeply into debt, leaving an enormous tax burden for future generations.
Click to expand...

oops, from the New York Times, probably not a credible source....

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/world/asia/06japan.html

also

Among ordinary Japanese, the spending is widely disparaged for having turned the nation into a public-works-based welfare state and making regional economies dependent on Tokyo for jobs. Much of the blame has fallen on the Liberal Democratic Party, which has long used government spending to grease rural vote-buying machines that help keep the party in power.
Click to expand...

deja scu'......
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
I will say YOU aren't credible, for saying there is an economist who won the Nobel Prize who thinks the stimulus wasn't big enough....
Click to expand...

Oh my.

"Paul Krugman, the professor of economics at Princeton University and a Nobel Prize winner, spoke Tuesday to CNBC, where he discussed his views on the stimulus package.

The $787 billion stimulus is not nearly enough to fill the "well over $2 trillion hole" in the economy, Krugman said. "A fair bit of the bill is not really stimulus," he adding, noting that just about $650 billion would actually spur consumer spending and other types of stimulus."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/17/paul-krugman-stimulus-too_n_167721.html


That was easy. PWNED.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
owned as easily as the Lost Decade of Japan....looking forward to your response....
Click to expand...

Japan's deficit spending ≠ the US stimulus package. The economics is sound. You called me not credible for saying economics supported it. I said I could show you a Nobel prize winning economist who thought it should be bigger, you said I was lying. You really stepped in it now.

This is one of the better pwns I've seen on this site in a long time. I'm making my own thread for it.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Japan's deficit spending ≠ the US stimulus package. The economics is sound. You called me not credible for saying economics supported it. I said I could show you a Nobel prize winning economist who thought it should be bigger. You really stepped in it now.
Click to expand...
The economics is not sound.

Tell me, do you think the trade deficit and america having been positioned as a "consumer economy" has anything to do with our current economic troubles?
 
AssHatZombie said:
The economics is not sound.

Tell me, do you think the trade deficit and america having been positioned as a "consumer economy" has anything to do with our current economic troubles?
Click to expand...

Trade deficit is part of the equation that makes up the GDP. It's not as significant as the government spending factor, which makes it less useful to manipulate when trying to recover a shortfall in private sector investment and consumption.
 
ib1yysguy said:
"Paul Krugman, the professor of economics at Princeton University and a Nobel Prize winner
Click to expand...

oh, you mean this guy?....

In his twice-a-week column and his blog, Conscience of a Liberal, he criticizes the Obamaites for trying to prop up a financial system that he regards as essentially a dead man walking. In conversation, he portrays Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and other top officials as, in effect, tools of Wall Street (a ridiculous charge, say Geithner defenders). These men and women have "no venality," Krugman hastened to say in an interview with NEWSWEEK. But they are suffering from "osmosis," from simply spending too much time around investment bankers and the like. In his Times column the day Geithner announced the details of the administration's bank-rescue plan, Krugman described his "despair" that Obama "has apparently settled on a financial plan that, in essence, assumes that banks are fundamentally sound and that bankers know what they're doing. It's as if the president were determined to confirm the growing perception that he and his economic team are out of touch, that their economic vision is clouded by excessively close ties to Wall Street."
Click to expand...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/191393/page/1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top