The Economy May Never Recover!

[guerilla]

You don't have to be a Keynesian to know what composes GDP. Ask Milton Friedman, ask Hayek, ask any anti-Keynesian, they will not disagree with that. They may disagree on what makes best economic or fiscal policy but they won't disagree with simple math and nor should you.

Well, I just think it is ridiculous we are talking about GDP when GDP is valueless. GDP is a useless measure to everyone, except politicians, who love macro-economic measures as a means to promote the state and it's debt+spending.

But things are falling apart regardless of what already happened. The question is not who to point fingers at but what to do about the consequences.

I am so tired of this argument. Things are fucked up, so we should just do SOMETHING. ANYTHING. Doing nothing is not an option. Thinking is not an option. Looking at how things got to this point, NOT AN OPTION!

JUST DO SOMETHING RIGHT NOW!

Well they did that with the banker bailout (TARP 1) and it was a total failure. Of course, intelligent people told everyone that. But the argument is, WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING NOW OR THE WORLD WILL DIE ON MONDAY!

If the response is to accept the resulting crash and likely depression - grin and bear the pain that it would entail, well ok, I can intellectually accept that.

No, you don't get it. Interventionist policies create the depression. The crack up is the necessary cure. You can tear the bandaid off in 9 months, or you can spend 12 years peeling it off slowly. We ain't getting any younger you know.

People keep thinking doing nothing causes depressions. It's total frikkin nonsense used to scare people, like WMDs in Saddams House and Bin Laden sending video tapes every 3 months. Our descendents are going to laugh at us, we're all a bunch of moronic douchebags.

But if the response is supply-side tax cuts and this one-dimensional claim that all government spending is bad all of the time, it is neither sufficiently sophisticated nor pragmatic.

Actually, it is incredibly sophisticated, and it is not only pragmatic, it is moral. All government spending is accomplished by taking money by force from people who legitimately earned it, and spending it on stuff they wouldn't pay for if they could choose what they value and thus would finance.

I might need a road, but I don't need a 4 lane highway for transport trucks. I also don't need a Senator who makes laws criminalizing everything I like to do like gay butthole sex, heroin and dog fighting, but costs me $100k+ a year, plus a gold plated pension for the rest of his life. He is definitely some shit I can do without.

But that's another argument for another time. Simply, "government spending" cannot "stimulate" the economy. Even if the government had a tax surplus and no debt, it couldn't do it. That the government is facing trillion dollar deficits, and resorted to printing money now that the Chinese and Saudis are getting squeamish about paying for Billie Bob's pickup and porno subscription on satellite, makes it totally, mentally retarded.

Luckily, there are millions of people who chant Obaaaaaaaama. Obaaaaaaama. And millions more who still believe Bush did a good job and never lied about anything. So no shortage of retards who think a spending bill can create wealth. Or that deficits don't matter. Or that 70% consumption comprising GDP is living the dream.

Well the last part is right. It is living the dream. Someone's kids and grand kids are going to have to pay for it with high taxes and a lower standard of living. That's when it becomes a nightmare.

No affront taken, but I must say, I am floored by your argumentation. :bowdown:

I have some experience with these topics.

I might fix one more drink. I'm feeling naughty.

And "debunked" is an awfully strong word. Not gospel is definitely true. You can be both a Keynesian and a monetarist and still make sense. It just takes a willingness to use the right tool at the right place at the right time.

Keynesians and monetarists are both wrong. There is only one valid business cycle theory, and it is the Austrian theory. It is the only intelligent school when it comes to capital and credit.

 

[guerilla]

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Ummm yea ... What he said!

He's a socialist crybaby, and complaining about capitalism, then you cheer him on and write this...

I was lucky enough to get into AM and find WF for some good peeps for advice.

The only reason AM works for you is that capitalism facilitates raping stupid people with crappy ads for even lousier products that destroy their credit card.

So my question is, have you had an IQ test lately, and did it come back positive?

 

[Nikko]

We're screwed.

I took all my money out of the stock market in October of 2007. I bought gold bullion and had it stored in vaults in two different countries half a world apart, where the US goobermint cannot get its greasy paws on it (see FDR's gold confiscation in the 30's for precendent).

I don't really care what happens, 'coz somewhere there will always be Net access, and somewhere there will always be money to be made. I can run my business from a beach in Costa Rica just as easily as I can from the deck of my house in the US. My passport is up to date and I have family in other countries who will take me in if necessary.

It doesn't matter what the politicians do. Ben Bernanke threw the dollar under the bus in 2007, Hank Paulson made sure his banskta buddies all got their golden parachutes, and Tim Geithner will manage the avalanche all the way down to zero.

We're fucked, and there's not a damned thing any one of us can do about it but cover our own asses.

Hope you've covered yours...

 

[allcelldeals]

The only reason AM works for you is that capitalism facilitates raping stupid people with crappy ads for even lousier products that destroy their credit card.

To be real... I do feel like shit sometimes. But I don't JUST push Acai and other BS.
But it is not being a crybaby seeing whats going on around you. I don't know where you come from or how you came up. But you can get off your high fucking horse and come down to reality.

Capitalism comes in every form and fashion...from the young boy down the block pushin' pills to your cousin to the boys on Wall Street "raping" our tax dollars (tarp1).

I may not be a fucking cake-eater but that doesn't mean that I don't know that the fuck is going on around me. So my point is basically...
Fuck You!

 

[guerilla]

But it is not being a crybaby seeing whats going on around you.

It doesn't matter if you are looking around, and have no idea what you are looking at.

I don't know where you come from or how you came up. But you can get off your high fucking horse and come down to reality.

I've been down and up. I'm not on a high fucking horse, if you're going to write

OMGZ HAI! LEET! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ YES SOCIALISM HAHAH!

Then you will get told when you are being hypocritical. If you're not going to post smart, that's not my problem.

Capitalism comes in every form and fashion...from the young boy down the block pushin' pills to your cousin to the boys on Wall Street "raping" our tax dollars (tarp1).

Like I said, you don't even understand what you are supposedly looking around at.

It's not your tax dollars. The US government runs a deficit. Taxes only pay the interest on the debt, not the principal or any new debt for spending. The people who will pay for the rape are your kids and grand kids. By putting up with it, you're letting your own kin down. But to each his own.

So my point is basically...
Fuck You!

Yeah, fuck you too. Have a nice night.

 

[allcelldeals]

Taxes only pay the interest on the debt, not the principal or any new debt for spending.

So what do you suppose we do right now. I'm no economist but it does make sense to spend on things that can not be outsourced. Taxes suck, no doubt, but the comment about buying the new TVs and SUVs is so true unless they are being produced here.

I honestly thing that the whole mentality has to change ... meaning that people who can afford the finer things need to pay up for US made goods. But in order for that to happen we have to start producing and not just consuming.

I remember in the 80's when everyone was on that made in the USA kick. We need to get back to it.

Regardless I still love you ...

Good luck Bro'

edit: I don't give a fuck about the mistypes.

 

[guerilla]

So what do you suppose we do right now..

Cut government spending, reduces taxes and regulation.

Bad regulations have made it hard to start small business, and harder for small business to become big business by getting financing through stock offerings.

Taxes are too high.

Government is literally gorging itself at the trough, spending like there is no limit. And there is no limit, because they are just printing money. If/when hyperinflation comes, there will be riots. Of course by then, the only good jobs will be in the army anyway.

I'm no economist but it does make sense to spend on things that can not be outsourced.

Stop spending.

STaxes suck, no doubt, but the comment about buying the new TVs and SUVs is so true unless they are being produced here.

You're missing the point. Americans needs to make things to export. Not buy their own cars for too much money in a protectionist environment.

I honestly thing that the whole mentality has to change ... meaning that people who can afford the finer things need to pay up for US made goods. But in order for that to happen we have to start producing and not just consuming.

The whole mentality is going to change because everyone is going to be very poor. Forcing people to buy American because they are successful is bullshit. If Americans make good stuff at a good price, people will buy it naturally.

It's like my point about taxes. They have to take it from you under threat of imprisonment or beating or even death, because there is no way you would pay for wars in countries you can't find on a map, or foreign aid that goes to Robert Mugabe and his cocaine harem. There is no way you would defer your own spending to see a satellite get launched into outer space on a 30 year mission. Someone has to take that money from you because there is no way in your right mind that you would buy that crap.

The problem is, there are too many "two thousandaires". No one saves anymore. Everyone buys shit on credit. No one actually owns anything, they just borrow it. But then they think they own it, like the people who worked at McDonalds and bought a $500,000 house. They don't even have equity, they actually have negative equity in a depressed market, and yet they say it is THEIR HOUSE. Like they paid for it. And now they want the government to take money from people who do pay their mortgages, and work 60 hours a week, and put their kids through school and cut their lawns, to pay for their dream!

Regardless I still love you ...

I love you too, but stop looking at my ass.

Good luck Bro'

Yeah, may Vishnu and Lakshmi guide you.

 

[allcelldeals]

But then they think they own it, like the people who worked at McDonalds and bought a $500,000 house. They don't even have equity, they actually have negative equity in a depressed market

A lot of people would be fine if gas would not have shot up to x.xx a gallon and heating costs for their home went sky high. Not to mention that their jobs ask them to take a pay cut and there isn't anything else in the area, plus yea there ARM got broke (that one is kinda their fault in a way). Seriously I know a lot of people that would have been fine if things were not so fucked up. I'm in Pa and we used to have a ton of steel mills and a bunch of people that worked for packard electric, oburgh industries and a whole lot more I can name that just went under. I also know a lot of sales people that lost there job (from cars to appliances). On some real shit ... a lot of people don't realize that most of the people who defaulted on there mortgages were not living beyond their means. Not saying that includes everyone, but most people that I know that are struggling right now are responsible people that got fucked and they are the ones that are sending their kids off to fight for us.

 

[guerilla]

they are the ones that are sending their kids off to fight for us.

There is nothing productive about war. Those boys and girls should stay home, work, take care of their parents, raise families.

Wars and militarism cost a shitload of money and there is no return on it. It's a quick path to bankruptcy.

 

[erect]

@gureilla ... you should drink more & consider running for office. It only takes a year or so of experience to be elected president these days.

Let us dream for a minute although it does absolutely no good whatsoever.

If RP were in office right now: there would be no "stimulus" package, no federal reserve, no war on drugs & the war in Iraq would be over. All of this would save trillions of dollars THIS YEAR and inflation would be a thing of the past.

True, we'd be feeling our economic pinch right now (it will happen eventually anyways) but the US would be 90% recovered by 2010.

Why again was everyone so up Obama's ass? Change? So where is it? All I see is more money being thrown into the fire by an fiscally irresponsible liberal during a serious financial crisis.

Like has been said many times in this thread ... you cannot spend your way out of debt. Thanks to the obots, we're all sleeping in the bed you voted for. Although I must say that McCain would have been only margnially better.

VOTE 3RD PARTY YOU IGNORANT MOTHERFUCKERS!!!

 

[jdomaha]

Cut government spending, reduces taxes and regulation.

Bad regulations have made it hard to start small business, and harder for small business to become big business by getting financing through stock offerings.

Taxes are too high.

Government is literally gorging itself at the trough, spending like there is no limit. And there is no limit, because they are just printing money. If/when hyperinflation comes, there will be riots. Of course by then, the only good jobs will be in the army anyway.


Stop spending.


You're missing the point. Americans needs to make things to export. Not buy their own cars for too much money in a protectionist environment.


The whole mentality is going to change because everyone is going to be very poor. Forcing people to buy American because they are successful is bullshit. If Americans make good stuff at a good price, people will buy it naturally.

It's like my point about taxes. They have to take it from you under threat of imprisonment or beating or even death, because there is no way you would pay for wars in countries you can't find on a map, or foreign aid that goes to Robert Mugabe and his cocaine harem. There is no way you would defer your own spending to see a satellite get launched into outer space on a 30 year mission. Someone has to take that money from you because there is no way in your right mind that you would buy that crap.

The problem is, there are too many "two thousandaires". No one saves anymore. Everyone buys shit on credit. No one actually owns anything, they just borrow it. But then they think they own it, like the people who worked at McDonalds and bought a $500,000 house. They don't even have equity, they actually have negative equity in a depressed market, and yet they say it is THEIR HOUSE. Like they paid for it. And now they want the government to take money from people who do pay their mortgages, and work 60 hours a week, and put their kids through school and cut their lawns, to pay for their dream!


I love you too, but stop looking at my ass.


Yeah, may Vishnu and Lakshmi guide you.

While I am, for the most part, anti-governmental intervention, I do believe that government can do some wonderful things. The problem is that our focus is so off that we're effectively running a 100-yard dash with two bears and a 59 Buick 2-door strapped to our back.

Let businesses die. They'll come back. Wealth will catch its breath, look around, see opportunity and get greedy again.

Government should focus on making it easier to enter the market. Which market? Any market! Make it easier to build a new store. Make it easier to hire employees and pay them a good wage. Make it easier to develop a new product and benefit from that investment. Make it easier to take care of good employees.

Government should be focused on making things easier for business. Add infrastructure, ease exports diplomatically, etc. If needed, start a trade war or two.

Any warmaking should be quick and overwhelming. While I understand maintaining a sphere of influence/protection, sometimes it's best to lean back and maintain/upgrade what you have for a while.

 

[Trademark]

Yeah, common sense is that FDR's New Deal didn't worsen the depression. That Hoover did nothing (he had the first New Deal which FDR originally campaigned against). False + false.

"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. ... I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started ... And an enormous debt to boot!"

- Henry Morgenthau, FDR's Treasury Secretary, key architect of FDR’s New Deal

Source: ‘We’re Spending More Than Ever and It Doesn’t Work’ The Foundry

 

[Nikko]

You guys want an amazing read, check out "Freedom From Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945" by David M. Kennedy. It won the Pulitzer in 2000. Normally I hate history books, but this one is an absorbing, fast-paced and very satisfying read.

"Those who can not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it."

-

 

[guerilla]

While I am, for the most part, anti-governmental intervention, I do believe that government can do some wonderful things.

Its a discussion for another day, but you're looking at it through the broken window fallacy, also known as "what is seen, and what is unseen".

In order for government to do anything, it has to intervene. It has to direct something natural, into something unnatural.

So for every park that gets built, people were deprived of tax money they could have used to start a business, or go on vacation, or put their kids through school.

People only see the park, because government waves it's magic wand and new things appear. They never see the lost opportunities and costs of appropriating the money from the economy to build the park.

Government itself produces nothing. It can only re-arrange, which inevitably can make winners losers, and losers winners.

That's why socialist whiners are such douchebags. They fall into two groups. Jealous capitalist haters who want someone to blame for the lack of profitability from having massive student loan debt and a liberal arts degree (their own bad decisions), and the people who actually want to use the state to confiscate wealth from the productive, so they can make political parasitism a wealth building skill. A good example of this are minority community leaders who don't want their flocks' lot in life to improve, but enough welfare to flow to keep them in power and dining with white folks in Washington.

People really need to start thinking objectively and deal only in facts. Do the knowledge.

 

[LotsOfZeros]

A good example of this are minority community leaders who don't want their flocks' lot in life to improve, but enough welfare to flow to keep them in power and dining with white folks in Washington.

QFT, The Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of the world would lose all of their powers if their supporters weren't kept in an 'oppressive' state of mind

 

[BrooklynBlue]

People really need to start thinking objectively and deal only in facts. Do the knowledge.

You mean like your favorite Austrian School economics? Sure, there's a ton of great insight there, but it's not fact-based in a measurable sense. The Austrians aside from Hayek mostly rejected the idea of forming hypotheses and then measurably testing to verify or falsify their predictions.

I'm sorry, but when you reject empirical measurement and the notion of falsifiable hypotheses, it's intellectual masturbation at best and quackery at worst.

Austrian economics is an intellectually seductive framework built on a political philosophy. But it is not science and makes no attempt to be - in fact they outright reject the idea of the scientific method. That is why Austrian economics has been academically irrelevant since the middle of the 20th century.

There's a reason it survives only in libertarian circles now. Because it is far too tightly intertwined with a political philosophy. There is no science to separate from the politics. You cannot generalize with Austrian economics unless you accept its political & philosophical axioms from the outset. It is dogmatic, not instructive.

I'm not saying throw the baby out with the bath water, there is a lot of valuable insight sprouting from that school of thought (e.g. some portions of their theory of business cycles when applied to appropriate scenarios). But hard-line Austrians & Objectivists are no different from nutty left-wing Marxists who cling to an outdated mode of economic thought to provide air cover for what ultimately is a political platform.

Yes, it's hard to separate economics from politics and philosophy, but taking the best pieces of each school of thought and applying the right tool in the right place at the right time makes far more sense to me.

Compromise & ideally *collaboration* is the name of the game when it comes to getting things done. I don't give two shits about divergent moral philosophies. -isms and -ists are for the retards, it's just a recipe for paralysis.

p.s. Enjoying the dialogue - while I disagree with you almost as much as I disagree with popeye, at least you read books.

 

[guerilla]

You mean like your favorite Austrian School economics? Sure, there's a ton of great insight there, but it's not fact-based in a measurable sense..

You mean, it doesn't rely on modeling. Of course not. It is impossible to model human behavior.

It is based on a epistemological approach which leads to praxeology.

I'm sorry, but when you reject empirical measurement and the notion of falsifiable hypotheses, it's intellectual masturbation at best and quackery at worst.

Oh gee, you can read Wikipedia.

Now see if you can actually make a valid criticism. Provide an example.

Austrian economics is an intellectually seductive framework built on a political philosophy. But it is not science and makes no attempt to be - in fact they outright reject the idea of the scientific method. That is why Austrian economics has been academically irrelevant since the middle of the 20th century.

You haven't made an actual criticism of the school yet. All you have done is regurgitate false claims.

There's a reason it survives only in libertarian circles now. Because it is far too tightly intertwined with a political philosophy. There is no science to separate from the politics. You cannot generalize with Austrian economics unless you accept its political & philosophical axioms from the outset. It is dogmatic, not instructive.

This is also false. I challenge you to show where Austrian economics is political. Not what it's actors believed, but the actual school of economic thought's core axioms.

I'm not saying throw the baby out with the bath water, there is a lot of valuable insight sprouting from that school of thought (e.g. some portions of their theory of business cycles when applied to appropriate scenarios). But hard-line Austrians & Objectivists are no different from nutty left-wing Marxists who cling to an outdated mode of economic thought to provide air cover for what ultimately is a political platform.

Objectivists are not Austrians. You continue to post stuff that is totally incorrect. Is it ignorance, or dishonesty? Ignorance I can help.

Compromise & ideally *collaboration* is the name of the game when it comes to getting things done.

Actually, things get done naturally if you understand spontaneous order. That's praxeology. Man acts. He doesn't need a Senator to act. He doesn't need Congress to tell him to work, or eat, or fuck or defend himself.

Compromise and collaboration in the political sense, is a sophisticated but dishonest manner of re-branding mob rule and institutionalized aggression.

I don't give two shits about divergent moral philosophies. -isms and -ists are for the retards, it's just a recipe for paralysis.

Well, if you're so dedicated to objective facts, then please provide some to debate.

p.s. Enjoying the dialogue - while I disagree with you almost as much as I disagree with popeye, at least you read books.

You only disagree with me because you have erected barriers around conventional thinking. You've managed to successfully repeat numerous fallacies which are easily exposed, I don't know if this is because you really do understand and believe them, or you have never bothered to go below the surface and question them.

 

[BrooklynBlue]

I'll be honest, no, I didn't study Austrian school in depth. Only read and learned enough in undergrad econ survey class work and MBA courses to have a passing knowledge of why real economists have considered it a joke for the last 50 years. I won't claim expertise in it because I don't consider it useful beyond navel gazing, like a lot of philosophy.

Human behavior at a macro level can absolutely be modeled from a perspective based on probabilities. All systems are complex, and societies & economies are complex systems composed of complex actors. But believing none of that can be modeled with some predictive capability just because "whoa man it's too hairy" should lead you to reject all social science outright. You're not really that extreme, are you?

Austrian economics is political in the sense that is built on a foundation of a priori assumptions about human nature. Yes, I use the word political there loosely, I don't mean in the organized sense.

This is my basic understanding of the Austrian axiomatic argument in plain english. My apologies if I confuse it a little with Chicago school - I've kept their empirical bias out but may muddle something else.

Assuming a perfectly free market:
People act - they make choices. Choices incur benefits and costs, meaning all choices are acts of exchange.

People are perfectly rational beings and act in pure self-interest, thus each individual exchange maximizes utility.

Since all exchanges are rational and maximize utility then total utility in the whole economy is maximized. This means a perfectly capitalist society will create perfect resource allocation and everyone will be happy.

Thus the government should exist only to protect property rights, ensuring a perfectly free market and nothing else.

Interesting maybe, but it is a tautology in which the assumption equals the conclusion.

If you don't see the politics dripping all over that, then ... um ok, I'll move along. Whether I've missed a few pieces or not, I'm pretty sure that captures the spirit of it in layman's terms well enough for the purposes of discussion.

As for objectivists = austrians, I said no such thing. I lumped them together in my statement because except for fights between libertarian sects, they appear in tight clusters to the rest of the world. They are not identical by any means, but there are some closely shared philosophical underpinnings and desired political outcomes -- that is inarguable.

Anyway, I threw you a few bones, man, and was genuinely enjoying the argument. But your unsubstantiated accusations that I am willfully ignorant, blind or whatever are just bratty ad hominem attacks, not arguments. That is why arguing politics or philosophy online is silly (and why I should stop trying). There is so rarely any room for nuance or collegial disagreement.

If you want to continue discussing without what appears to be your need for macho posturing, feel free to PM.

 

[BrooklynBlue]

oh and apologies to everyone else for the thread hijack.

To get things back on track, here's a quick and easy reference for all of the spending & tax cuts in the stimulus bill to get things back on track. Let the bitching commence.

spending

tax cuts

 

[ratamiss]

I gotta say guerilla, you actually fucking convinced me. (not sarcasm)

Not bad for a drunk!