Obama Voters: Buyer's Remorse?

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]Sloth wrote:
shookers wrote:
Dhickey are you that naive? You seem to say “THAT WONT HAPPEN, NO IT WONT MARKETS ARE PERFECT NO MATTER WHAT.” You haven’t actually explained how the economy escapes the spiral I explain above.

FYI, I’m read 2 of those books you’ve posted - they’re great, but they’re basic and not technical. Have you read the General Theory? I highly suggest it so you can better understand peoples’ rebukes of it. Paul Krugman’s new book also does a good job of outlining the current case for stimulus (or so I hear).

Orion, the WWII worked for the same reason that this stimulus is INTENDED to work. If you increase demand temporarily (through government), businesses will profit who hire more people and the economy restarts.

Also, comparing the minuscule effects of Iraq and Afghanistan to WWII is laughable. In WWII, not only did the USG run an enormous deficit - but Europe spent billions (likely trillions in todays dollars) on American weapons and products. This combined “stimulus” greatly increased demand and restarted the struggling economy.

It’s not like the opposition really has much power to stop the growth of government spending and intervention (if they even really care), so I think we’ll find out just how effective or ineffective these ideas really are. Perhaps, once and for all.[/quote]

Agreed. But ultimately that’s my point. Not to support or oppose, just to lay out the other side of the argument. If it works, the reasons I presented above will be the reason why.

62

Well, I do have to wonder how much of our economic recovery rested on our industry and infrastructure being spared from the destructive powers of warfare in our homeland. Therefore, providing us little competition in safely meeting the demand for any and all supplies the combatants needed. Seems like a pretty big difference.

Edit: For instance, what if we never joined the fighting? But, instead, our government had allowed the private sector to fullfill the demands of the combatants. All of them. Guns, ammo, ships, planes, medicine, food, whatever.

63

[quote]100meters wrote:
John S. wrote:
shookers wrote:
100meters wrote:
Jeffe wrote:

The Depression, arguably the most desperate time in U.S. history…what was the plan to get us out of the depression? Huge public works. Dams, bridges, tunnels, blowing up mountains. Whatever could be done to spend government money. The outcome? A decade of economic disaster.

Idiot.
increase employment
increased productivity
increased GDP.

The only catch was trying to spend less in '37? bowing to pressure to balance the budget. Then we slipped back down.

So, textbook response to the current situation is to spend, hence the stimulus.

Last I checked, the depression continued for 7-8 years following FDR’s time in power. You can’t seriously suggested he was successful?

100meters won’t let silly things like the facts affect his judgment.
He didn’t bother to address the facts numbnuts. Of course, neither are you. Idiots.
[/quote]

Again you get ready for you daily spanking, will you run away from this thread too?

The new deal was an economic disaster. It tried to do a short term solution and caused an additional 7 year depression. I would suggest picking up a history book and learning about things before you come and discuss them.

History is your friend I suggest you learn about it.

64

[quote]John S. wrote:
100meters wrote:
John S. wrote:
shookers wrote:
100meters wrote:
Jeffe wrote:

The Depression, arguably the most desperate time in U.S. history…what was the plan to get us out of the depression? Huge public works. Dams, bridges, tunnels, blowing up mountains. Whatever could be done to spend government money. The outcome? A decade of economic disaster.

Idiot.
increase employment
increased productivity
increased GDP.

The only catch was trying to spend less in '37? bowing to pressure to balance the budget. Then we slipped back down.

So, textbook response to the current situation is to spend, hence the stimulus.

Last I checked, the depression continued for 7-8 years following FDR’s time in power. You can’t seriously suggested he was successful?

100meters won’t let silly things like the facts affect his judgment.
He didn’t bother to address the facts numbnuts. Of course, neither are you. Idiots.

Again you get ready for you daily spanking, will you run away from this thread too?

The new deal was an economic disaster. It tried to do a short term solution and caused an additional 7 year depression. I would suggest picking up a history book and learning about things before you come and discuss them.

History is your friend I suggest you learn about it.
[/quote]

John, I like history.

Here is FDR’s Secretary of the Treasury, in 1939:

“I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot!”

http://www.heritage.org/press/commentary/ed012109f.cfm

“Those who do not know history are condemned to repeat it…”

JeffR

65

[quote]John S. wrote:
100meters wrote:
John S. wrote:
shookers wrote:
100meters wrote:
Jeffe wrote:

The Depression, arguably the most desperate time in U.S. history…what was the plan to get us out of the depression? Huge public works. Dams, bridges, tunnels, blowing up mountains. Whatever could be done to spend government money. The outcome? A decade of economic disaster.

Idiot.
increase employment
increased productivity
increased GDP.

The only catch was trying to spend less in '37? bowing to pressure to balance the budget. Then we slipped back down.

So, textbook response to the current situation is to spend, hence the stimulus.

Last I checked, the depression continued for 7-8 years following FDR’s time in power. You can’t seriously suggested he was successful?

100meters won’t let silly things like the facts affect his judgment.
He didn’t bother to address the facts numbnuts. Of course, neither are you. Idiots.

Again you get ready for you daily spanking, will you run away from this thread too?

The new deal was an economic disaster. It tried to do a short term solution and caused an additional 7 year depression. I would suggest picking up a history book and learning about things before you come and discuss them.

History is your friend I suggest you learn about it.
[/quote]

Economic Historians far from universally condemn the New Deal, FYI.

66

[quote]shookers wrote:
John S. wrote:
100meters wrote:
John S. wrote:
shookers wrote:
100meters wrote:
Jeffe wrote:

The Depression, arguably the most desperate time in U.S. history…what was the plan to get us out of the depression? Huge public works. Dams, bridges, tunnels, blowing up mountains. Whatever could be done to spend government money. The outcome? A decade of economic disaster.

Idiot.
increase employment
increased productivity
increased GDP.

The only catch was trying to spend less in '37? bowing to pressure to balance the budget. Then we slipped back down.

So, textbook response to the current situation is to spend, hence the stimulus.

Last I checked, the depression continued for 7-8 years following FDR’s time in power. You can’t seriously suggested he was successful?

100meters won’t let silly things like the facts affect his judgment.
He didn’t bother to address the facts numbnuts. Of course, neither are you. Idiots.

Again you get ready for you daily spanking, will you run away from this thread too?

The new deal was an economic disaster. It tried to do a short term solution and caused an additional 7 year depression. I would suggest picking up a history book and learning about things before you come and discuss them.

History is your friend I suggest you learn about it.

Economic Historians far from universally condemn the New Deal, FYI.
[/quote]

That’s nice. I prefer people who deal in realities, not theory.

Aka…The guys who actually have to implement policies.

It’s like the mantra floating around “intellectual circles” that communism could work if "done right.

Or, historians claming slavery was a secondary cause for the Civil War.

JeffR

67

[quote]Jeff R wrote:
shookers wrote:
John S. wrote:
100meters wrote:
John S. wrote:
shookers wrote:
100meters wrote:
Jeffe wrote:

The Depression, arguably the most desperate time in U.S. history…what was the plan to get us out of the depression? Huge public works. Dams, bridges, tunnels, blowing up mountains. Whatever could be done to spend government money. The outcome? A decade of economic disaster.

Idiot.
increase employment
increased productivity
increased GDP.

The only catch was trying to spend less in '37? bowing to pressure to balance the budget. Then we slipped back down.

So, textbook response to the current situation is to spend, hence the stimulus.

Last I checked, the depression continued for 7-8 years following FDR’s time in power. You can’t seriously suggested he was successful?

100meters won’t let silly things like the facts affect his judgment.
He didn’t bother to address the facts numbnuts. Of course, neither are you. Idiots.

Again you get ready for you daily spanking, will you run away from this thread too?

The new deal was an economic disaster. It tried to do a short term solution and caused an additional 7 year depression. I would suggest picking up a history book and learning about things before you come and discuss them.

History is your friend I suggest you learn about it.

Economic Historians far from universally condemn the New Deal, FYI.

That’s nice. I prefer people who deal in realities, not theory.

Aka…The guys who actually have to implement policies.

It’s like the mantra floating around “intellectual circles” that communism could work if "done right.

Or, historians claming slavery was a secondary cause for the Civil War.

JeffR
[/quote]

All good realities started in theory. There could be no French and American revolutions without enlightenment theories

68

[quote]Jeff R wrote:
shookers wrote:
John S. wrote:
100meters wrote:
John S. wrote:
shookers wrote:
100meters wrote:
Jeffe wrote:

The Depression, arguably the most desperate time in U.S. history…what was the plan to get us out of the depression? Huge public works. Dams, bridges, tunnels, blowing up mountains. Whatever could be done to spend government money. The outcome? A decade of economic disaster.

Idiot.
increase employment
increased productivity
increased GDP.

The only catch was trying to spend less in '37? bowing to pressure to balance the budget. Then we slipped back down.

So, textbook response to the current situation is to spend, hence the stimulus.

Last I checked, the depression continued for 7-8 years following FDR’s time in power. You can’t seriously suggested he was successful?

100meters won’t let silly things like the facts affect his judgment.
He didn’t bother to address the facts numbnuts. Of course, neither are you. Idiots.

Again you get ready for you daily spanking, will you run away from this thread too?

The new deal was an economic disaster. It tried to do a short term solution and caused an additional 7 year depression. I would suggest picking up a history book and learning about things before you come and discuss them.

History is your friend I suggest you learn about it.

Economic Historians far from universally condemn the New Deal, FYI.

That’s nice. I prefer people who deal in realities, not theory.

Aka…The guys who actually have to implement policies.

It’s like the mantra floating around “intellectual circles” that communism could work if "done right.

Or, historians claming slavery was a secondary cause for the Civil War.

JeffR
[/quote]

I agree 100% with you JeffR. When we look back on the new deal we can see it did nothing to accomplish its goals, making it a failure.

69

[quote]shookers wrote:
Dhickey are you that naive? You seem to say “THAT WONT HAPPEN, NO IT WONT MARKETS ARE PERFECT NO MATTER WHAT.” You haven’t actually explained how the economy escapes the spiral I explain above.

FYI, I’m read 2 of those books you’ve posted - they’re great, but they’re basic and not technical. Have you read the General Theory? I highly suggest it so you can better understand peoples’ rebukes of it. Paul Krugman’s new book also does a good job of outlining the current case for stimulus (or so I hear).

Orion, the WWII worked for the same reason that this stimulus is INTENDED to work. If you increase demand temporarily (through government), businesses will profit who hire more people and the economy restarts.

Also, comparing the minuscule effects of Iraq and Afghanistan to WWII is laughable. In WWII, not only did the USG run an enormous deficit - but Europe spent billions (likely trillions in todays dollars) on American weapons and products. This combined “stimulus” greatly increased demand and restarted the struggling economy.[/quote]

What was restarted and how?

Swoosh, war is over.

Now what?

How does the war translate into a booming economy?

You could argue that their was a lot of bent up demand, but that would actually be because the war destroyed a lot of wealth in Europe and did not let a lot of wealth come into existence in the US.

So yes, rebuilding makes an economy grow, but that is a ginourmous broken window fallacy.

You might as well say that the US economy benefited from Katrina.

70

[quote]John S. wrote:
100meters wrote:
John S. wrote:
shookers wrote:
100meters wrote:
Jeffe wrote:

The Depression, arguably the most desperate time in U.S. history…what was the plan to get us out of the depression? Huge public works. Dams, bridges, tunnels, blowing up mountains. Whatever could be done to spend government money. The outcome? A decade of economic disaster.

Idiot.
increase employment
increased productivity
increased GDP.

The only catch was trying to spend less in '37? bowing to pressure to balance the budget. Then we slipped back down.

So, textbook response to the current situation is to spend, hence the stimulus.

Last I checked, the depression continued for 7-8 years following FDR’s time in power. You can’t seriously suggested he was successful?

100meters won’t let silly things like the facts affect his judgment.
He didn’t bother to address the facts numbnuts. Of course, neither are you. Idiots.

Again you get ready for you daily spanking, will you run away from this thread too?

The new deal was an economic disaster. It tried to do a short term solution and caused an additional 7 year depression. I would suggest picking up a history book and learning about things before you come and discuss them.

History is your friend I suggest you learn about it.
[/quote]

Please square basic facts with your idiocy. Which of the following, specifically were “disasters” moron?
a.increased employment
b. increased GDP
c. increased productivity
d. giant sustained recovery, see:

Now please stop trolling.

71

[quote]orion wrote:

How does the war translate into a booming economy?

[/quote]

Remember the spiral I described above…the same way, except in reverse.

Excess military capacity is converted to manufacturing goods. War time profits create extra demand, employment, consumption, investment etc. yada yada yada you get it.

72

[quote]shookers wrote:
orion wrote:

How does the war translate into a booming economy?

Remember the spiral I described above…the same way, except in reverse.

Excess military capacity is converted to manufacturing goods. War time profits create extra demand, employment, consumption, investment etc. yada yada yada you get it.

[/quote]

No, I don´t-

I want you to describe the steps in between.

Maybe then you will get why it cannot be that way.

War is over.

Millions of soldiers lose their “job”.

All the factories are geared towards a war economy-

Now what?

73

[quote]Jeff R wrote:
John S. wrote:
100meters wrote:
John S. wrote:
shookers wrote:
100meters wrote:
Jeffe wrote:

The Depression, arguably the most desperate time in U.S. history…what was the plan to get us out of the depression? Huge public works. Dams, bridges, tunnels, blowing up mountains. Whatever could be done to spend government money. The outcome? A decade of economic disaster.

Idiot.
increase employment
increased productivity
increased GDP.

The only catch was trying to spend less in '37? bowing to pressure to balance the budget. Then we slipped back down.

So, textbook response to the current situation is to spend, hence the stimulus.

Last I checked, the depression continued for 7-8 years following FDR’s time in power. You can’t seriously suggested he was successful?

100meters won’t let silly things like the facts affect his judgment.
He didn’t bother to address the facts numbnuts. Of course, neither are you. Idiots.

Again you get ready for you daily spanking, will you run away from this thread too?

The new deal was an economic disaster. It tried to do a short term solution and caused an additional 7 year depression. I would suggest picking up a history book and learning about things before you come and discuss them.

History is your friend I suggest you learn about it.

John, I like history.

Here is FDR’s Secretary of the Treasury, in 1939:

“I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. … And an enormous debt to boot!”

http://www.heritage.org/press/commentary/ed012109f.cfm

“Those who do not know history are condemned to repeat it…”

JeffR

[/quote]

Do you understand Numbers?
1933: 24.9% (20.9)–>new deal workers
1938: 19% (12.5)
Mind you '38 was when the numbers went back up while FDR unwisely tried to balance the budget. And even leaving the real employment numbers that wingnuts don’t use most 5 year olds can see that 25 is larger than 19.

Idiot. And linking to heritage no less.

74

[quote]John S. wrote:
Jeff R wrote:
shookers wrote:
John S. wrote:
100meters wrote:
John S. wrote:
shookers wrote:
100meters wrote:
Jeffe wrote:

The Depression, arguably the most desperate time in U.S. history…what was the plan to get us out of the depression? Huge public works. Dams, bridges, tunnels, blowing up mountains. Whatever could be done to spend government money. The outcome? A decade of economic disaster.

Idiot.
increase employment
increased productivity
increased GDP.

The only catch was trying to spend less in '37? bowing to pressure to balance the budget. Then we slipped back down.

So, textbook response to the current situation is to spend, hence the stimulus.

Last I checked, the depression continued for 7-8 years following FDR’s time in power. You can’t seriously suggested he was successful?

100meters won’t let silly things like the facts affect his judgment.
He didn’t bother to address the facts numbnuts. Of course, neither are you. Idiots.

Again you get ready for you daily spanking, will you run away from this thread too?

The new deal was an economic disaster. It tried to do a short term solution and caused an additional 7 year depression. I would suggest picking up a history book and learning about things before you come and discuss them.

History is your friend I suggest you learn about it.

Economic Historians far from universally condemn the New Deal, FYI.

That’s nice. I prefer people who deal in realities, not theory.

Aka…The guys who actually have to implement policies.

It’s like the mantra floating around “intellectual circles” that communism could work if "done right.

Or, historians claming slavery was a secondary cause for the Civil War.

JeffR

I agree 100% with you JeffR. When we look back on the new deal we can see it did nothing to accomplish its goals, making it a failure.
[/quote]

Other than accomplishing the goals that one might want to accomplish with a stimulus, the exact opposite of failure.

examples:
raised employment: success!
raised productivity: sucess!
raised GDP: success!

Only a wingnut could say taking unemployment from 23.6% in 1932 to 9.2% in 1937 was a failure. But that’s exactly what John S is trying to say!

Of course I realize he’s just trolling but still, what a douche!

75

Well, I guess it was better than the worst. But that’s not really a strong arguement. Unless one assumes that it was going to hit bottom and remain constant, forever. The arguement is that the numbers could’ve decreased at an increased rate. The recovery would have been faster.

Even doing nothing, surely there would be a bottom to point to as proof of doing nothing being succesful.

76

[quote]John S. wrote:
Jeff R wrote:
shookers wrote:
John S. wrote:
100meters wrote:
John S. wrote:
shookers wrote:
100meters wrote:
Jeffe wrote:

The Depression, arguably the most desperate time in U.S. history…what was the plan to get us out of the depression? Huge public works. Dams, bridges, tunnels, blowing up mountains. Whatever could be done to spend government money. The outcome? A decade of economic disaster.

Idiot.
increase employment
increased productivity
increased GDP.

The only catch was trying to spend less in '37? bowing to pressure to balance the budget. Then we slipped back down.

So, textbook response to the current situation is to spend, hence the stimulus.

Last I checked, the depression continued for 7-8 years following FDR’s time in power. You can’t seriously suggested he was successful?

100meters won’t let silly things like the facts affect his judgment.
He didn’t bother to address the facts numbnuts. Of course, neither are you. Idiots.

Again you get ready for you daily spanking, will you run away from this thread too?

The new deal was an economic disaster. It tried to do a short term solution and caused an additional 7 year depression. I would suggest picking up a history book and learning about things before you come and discuss them.

History is your friend I suggest you learn about it.

Economic Historians far from universally condemn the New Deal, FYI.

That’s nice. I prefer people who deal in realities, not theory.

Aka…The guys who actually have to implement policies.

It’s like the mantra floating around “intellectual circles” that communism could work if "done right.

Or, historians claming slavery was a secondary cause for the Civil War.

JeffR

I agree 100% with you JeffR. When we look back on the new deal we can see it did nothing to accomplish its goals, making it a failure.
[/quote]

Who’s “we” and what economic model are you using to come to this conclusion? This should be hilarious. Economists struggle year in and year out trying to measure the effects the New Deal had on the economy. You may even win an award!

In 1995 an economist at Wake Forest published a survery of academic economists that asked them if they agreed with the statement, “Taken as a whole, government policies of the New Deal served to lengthen and deepen the Great Depression.” 51% disagreed, 49% agreed.

I think the only thing most everyone can agree on – besides some court historians enamored with Roosevelt – is that many of his policies were far from perfect.

77

[quote]shookers wrote:
Dhickey are you that naive? You seem to say “THAT WONT HAPPEN, NO IT WONT MARKETS ARE PERFECT NO MATTER WHAT.” You haven’t actually explained how the economy escapes the spiral I explain above.
[/quote]

The free market is not perfect. I is the best we have. I have explained many thing on threads on this board. You need more help than I can give you in this medium. Read a couple of the books I recommended. At least understand how the business cycle and speculation work.

This all makes perfect sense now. I pegged you as a keynesian but figured you were unaware. Now I see you are educated in Keynesianism. quite telling. Which two of the others did you read? They are all in direct oposition of Keynes.

I have tried to read Keynes but never got all the way through it. His is incredibly bright but his logic is flawed. Keynesianism has been proven flawed many times over. There has been no successful rebuttle of the Austrian theory.

My favorite Keynes quote : “In the long run we are all dead”. This about sums up the short sightedness of his economic theory and this stimulous bill.

100% wrong.

[quote]
Also, comparing the minuscule effects of Iraq and Afghanistan to WWII is laughable. In WWII, not only did the USG run an enormous deficit - but Europe spent billions (likely trillions in todays dollars) on American weapons and products. This combined “stimulus” greatly increased demand and restarted the struggling economy.[/quote]

Wrong. increased demand after WWII was the stimulous. 5 years of saving and not buying any automobiles, refrigerators, ect. Spending on nothing but essentials. Insanely pent up demand.

78

[quote]shookers wrote:
dhickey wrote:
shookers wrote:

You do realize there is a helluva a lot of economic support for the idea of a stimulus right?

this tells me nothing. logic and reason are not democratic.
[qutoe]
You saying it makes ZERO economic sense is a gross hyperbole, ignoring the voices of many renowned economists.

how about this…

it makes zero economic sense unless you are ok with long term damage to avoid short term discomfort.

What is the interest on the money we are borrowing?

What % inflation should we expect?
If there are magically calculated multiples for gov’t spending and tax cuts, what are the reduction multiples for increased taxation and gov’t consumption?

Please show me how this is a good long term investment.

Go read up on Japan’s national debt.
[/quote]

I don’t know how many times this has to be explained on this board. In economics one can not just point to historical examples and say “see it worked for them” or “see what happens when you raise taxes”. History is great for putting economic theory to test, but it cannot be used to form economic theory.

Japan’s national debt has nothing to do with this topic. Pointing at Japan as either a disaster or shining success is only useful in defining what side of this argument one is one.

I asked very simple questions and your response was “go read up on japan’s national debt”. It is quite obvious you do not understand the very basics of economics. You can not put together the potential short term benefit AND long term consequenses for the same action. This discussion will not go very far as I have no interest in discussing only short term effect.

You’ll just have to hang out and watch with 100meters.

79

[quote]orion wrote:
shookers wrote:
orion wrote:

How does the war translate into a booming economy?

Remember the spiral I described above…the same way, except in reverse.

Excess military capacity is converted to manufacturing goods. War time profits create extra demand, employment, consumption, investment etc. yada yada yada you get it.

No, I don´t-

I want you to describe the steps in between.

Maybe then you will get why it cannot be that way.

War is over.

Millions of soldiers lose their “job”.

All the factories are geared towards a war economy-

Now what?

[/quote]

…fine.

Due to the war, people are rich. Businesses have profited, people have saved money during the period and thus, investment is strong. When the war ends, everyone can now consume again! Because consumption is high, business on sum total, make a profit. When businesses are doing well, unemployment drops.

Military factories are converted into consumer goods factories. People spend their war savings (victory bonds), invest, consume etc.

Happy?

80

[quote]dhickey wrote:

The free market is not perfect. I is the best we have. I have explained many thing on threads on this board. You need more help than I can give you in this medium. Read a couple of the books I recommended. At least understand how the business cycle and speculation work.[/quote]

You’re completely missing the point. I want you to explain to me how free market mechanisms fix the spiral I described above. Don’t just say “it works”.

[quote]

This all makes perfect sense now. I pegged you as a keynesian but figured you were unaware. Now I see you are educated in Keynesianism. quite telling. Which two of the others did you read? They are all in direct oposition of Keynes.

I have tried to read Keynes but never got all the way through it. His is incredibly bright but his logic is flawed. Keynesianism has been proven flawed many times over. There has been no successful rebuttle of the Austrian theory.

My favorite Keynes quote : “In the long run we are all dead”. This about sums up the short sightedness of his economic theory and this stimulous bill.[/quote]

Most modern day “Keynesians” aren’t really Keynesians at all. He advocated running a surplus during boom times and a deficit in bust times - which in the long run are supposed to cancel each other out, mitigating these “long-term effects” you are so frightened of.

Most criticism of Keynes is directed at his rush to use Fiscal policy instead of Monetary policy. Milton Friedman in particular believed that Keynesianism was flawed not because government stimulus is a bad thing, but because Monetary policy should be manipulated rather than fiscal policy (which he asserted was wasteful and bad).

Right now however, this criticism is irrelevent. The interest rate is up against the 0 barrier and the only available tool now left is fiscal policy. It might interest you to know that during Japan’s lost decade, Friedman advocated Japan print money.

Errr…you’re kind of proving my point here. If people are “richer”, i.e. have more money (Whether that be from saving during war time, or government borrowing), demand increases & the economy grows. That’s the point of the stimulus, to dump more money into the economy, to make everyone collectively richer to increase demand.