Another rebuttal of Krugman
- Thread starter HFNY
- Start date
sarktastic
New Fish
when is the right time?
sarktastic
New Fish
I sometimes wonder what it must be like living the "guess" life and never having to suffer any consequences.
Last edited:
HFNY
Well-known poster
Bingo.
There never is right time in the eyes of Big Government. What's worse, the economic multiplier of Federal Spending is generally lower than the private sector.
investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/keynesian-multiplier.asp
And the average Joe should support reforms (what Krugman calls "savage cuts") that reduce artificial dependence on the Federal Government (Social Security Disability and Food Stamps) which would free up money for the Feds to spend on higher economic multiplier spending like infrastructure projects (or start an infrastructure bank that matches state spending, dollar for dollar, and let the states oversee the projects so as to prevent as much leakage as would happen with the Federales running things).
Returning to artificial dependence, SSDI has been a bipartisan problem since the mid 90's when welfare reform pushed some people from the welfare rolls into SSDI. Then, as China grew into a manufacturing powerhouse and the USA was rocked by the tech bubble bursting and Sept 11th, some of those unemployed blue-collar workers filed for SSDI (like one of my uncles), further swelling the size of program. So really it's been a problem from Clinton through W. Bush, and now through Obama (and it's doubtful he'll address it since he's a lame-duck president):
downsizinggovernment.org/sites/downsizinggovernment.org/files/charts/ssdi-2013-figure2.gif
And food stamp usage has also soared so the Federal Government should either take aggressive steps to shrink the program again or turn it over to the States via Block Grants (since States are more likely to monitor the spending):
thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/infographics/2014/12/CP-Federal-Spending-by-the-Numbers-2014-08-1-anti-poverty_HIGHRES.jpg
There never is right time in the eyes of Big Government. What's worse, the economic multiplier of Federal Spending is generally lower than the private sector.
investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/keynesian-multiplier.asp
And the average Joe should support reforms (what Krugman calls "savage cuts") that reduce artificial dependence on the Federal Government (Social Security Disability and Food Stamps) which would free up money for the Feds to spend on higher economic multiplier spending like infrastructure projects (or start an infrastructure bank that matches state spending, dollar for dollar, and let the states oversee the projects so as to prevent as much leakage as would happen with the Federales running things).
Returning to artificial dependence, SSDI has been a bipartisan problem since the mid 90's when welfare reform pushed some people from the welfare rolls into SSDI. Then, as China grew into a manufacturing powerhouse and the USA was rocked by the tech bubble bursting and Sept 11th, some of those unemployed blue-collar workers filed for SSDI (like one of my uncles), further swelling the size of program. So really it's been a problem from Clinton through W. Bush, and now through Obama (and it's doubtful he'll address it since he's a lame-duck president):
downsizinggovernment.org/sites/downsizinggovernment.org/files/charts/ssdi-2013-figure2.gif
And food stamp usage has also soared so the Federal Government should either take aggressive steps to shrink the program again or turn it over to the States via Block Grants (since States are more likely to monitor the spending):
thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/infographics/2014/12/CP-Federal-Spending-by-the-Numbers-2014-08-1-anti-poverty_HIGHRES.jpg
2001400ex
New Fish
We've already covered this, food stamp spending is already on a decline and on the current pace will be down to 1995 levels as a percent of GDP.
Why do you single out SSDI and SNAP? They are relatively small programs, even a 10% cut in each is barely measurable in terms of the entire budget. Every program needs to be reviewed for spending cuts.
sarktastic
New Fish
You're surprised I won't engage you in your bullshit propaganda?... that you seldom even understand when you're told to post it?... really?
sarktastic
New Fish
"we've" discussed nothing. You relentlessly post bullshit propaganda void of intellectual honesty then claim victory without making a point or worse, drawing conclusions not offered by supposed 'evidence' you post... but, you already know that.
sarktastic
New Fish
...so, you didn't know that's what you've been posting?
hint: not all jobs are worth it. You should quit shilling while you're still young and begin the process of building some self-respect.
hint: not all jobs are worth it. You should quit shilling while you're still young and begin the process of building some self-respect.
HoustonHusky
New Fish
This...2001400ex thinks all is well because the Fed is pumping the stock market...and we all know everything is hunky dory when good news causes the stock market to go down (afraid of interest rates rising) and bad news causes the stock market to rise. Brilliant Obamanomics...
Meanwhile, the 93 million people not in the labor force (i.e. the 37.2% of the people not in the labor force...highest in 30+ years), the 80% of those households whose effective income is shrinking, and the 7+ trillion in debt all laugh at the stupidity of 2001400ex and his notion that Obama's policies 6 YEARS after the recession ended has nothing to do with the fact the economy is fragile enough that the Fed is still scared to raise interest rates above 0%. Zero Effine Percent.
And if you even ask Yellen, she believes "the number of people who are working part time but would prefer a full-time job remains very high"...once with an ounce of intelligence (i.e. not 2001400ex) would notice that means U6 and not U3...and if we were to look at that compare to the previous graph we can all get another good chuckle at 2001400ex's stupidity:
Keep gurgling...
2001400ex
New Fish
This...2001400ex thinks all is well because the Fed is pumping the stock market...and we all know everything is hunky dory when good news causes the stock market to go down (afraid of interest rates rising) and bad news causes the stock market to rise. Brilliant Obamanomics...
Meanwhile, the 93 million people not in the labor force (i.e. the 37.2% of the people not in the labor force...highest in 30+ years), the 80% of those households whose effective income is shrinking, and the 7+ trillion in debt all laugh at the stupidity of 2001400ex and his notion that Obama's policies 6 YEARS after the recession ended has nothing to do with the fact the economy is fragile enough that the Fed is still scared to raise interest rates above 0%. Zero Effine Percent.
And if you even ask Yellen, she believes "the number of people who are working part time but would prefer a full-time job remains very high"...once with an ounce of intelligence (i.e. not 2001400ex) would notice that means U6 and not U3...and if we were to look at that compare to the previous graph we can all get another good chuckle at 2001400ex's stupidity:
Keep gurgling...
Keep repeating zero hedge bullshit. You act like the economy is in a depression even tho the unemployment chart you post yourself shows we aren't.
HoustonHusky
New Fish
You can't argue any of my points, so you claim it is all "zerohedge bullshit" when its not from there. They are all simple stats I pointed out...feel free to refute any of them (or Yellen for that matter).
And I never said we were in a depression (another strawman argument from you...) or even a recession so keep making it easy to point out how all of this conversation appears to be over your head.
And I never said we were in a depression (another strawman argument from you...) or even a recession so keep making it easy to point out how all of this conversation appears to be over your head.
Last edited:
2001400ex
New Fish
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=4054
I have posted that before. Food stamps are already declining as a natural result of a better economy. Total for stamp expenditures are around $70 billion a year. SSDI is about $150 billion, but you can see that there are specific receipts for SSDI, which just recently started spending more than it takes in. My point? Cut 10% out of $220 billion, that's $22 billion. Where are you going to get the other $500 billion we need??
For the economy overall. Yes unemployment isn't the best, but even the chart you post shows it's improved consistently since 2009. There are many indicators for an economy. More of them are showing positive trends than negative trends. Even in 1999 when our economy was the best ever, there were trends you could look at and say the economy wasn't good.
So keep up the good work there. I know Rush thinks you are a good disciple.
I have posted that before. Food stamps are already declining as a natural result of a better economy. Total for stamp expenditures are around $70 billion a year. SSDI is about $150 billion, but you can see that there are specific receipts for SSDI, which just recently started spending more than it takes in. My point? Cut 10% out of $220 billion, that's $22 billion. Where are you going to get the other $500 billion we need??
For the economy overall. Yes unemployment isn't the best, but even the chart you post shows it's improved consistently since 2009. There are many indicators for an economy. More of them are showing positive trends than negative trends. Even in 1999 when our economy was the best ever, there were trends you could look at and say the economy wasn't good.
So keep up the good work there. I know Rush thinks you are a good disciple.
Last edited:
sarktastic
New Fish
Yes, you did post his before. You were called on it too, for being yet another meaningless picture with pretty colors.
sarktastic
New Fish
... and yet you can't even comprehend that.
Btw, I've noticed you've gone silent on Hillary now that BO has turned his attack dogs on her.
Hondo = Party > person??? ... or is it Paycheck > Loyaly (or, principals)
Btw, I've noticed you've gone silent on Hillary now that BO has turned his attack dogs on her.
Hondo = Party > person??? ... or is it Paycheck > Loyaly (or, principals)
sarktastic
New Fish
you still don't (won't, can't afford to) get it, do you.