U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-12-2017, 06:46 PM
 
Location: North West Arkansas (zone 6b)
2,477 posts, read 1,706,852 times
Reputation: 3271

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911 View Post
^^^ That was fake news manufactured by .....
The term "Fake news" stirs so much resentment in me, I can't describe it.

One side of the aisle wants to give money to the rich with the notion that it will drive productivity. This is known as supply side economics. Kansas and Louisiana have tried this approach and both experiments have failed fantastically.

The other side of the aisle wants to give money to the poor with the proven notion that they will spend the money thus driving the demand to spur productivity. This is known as demand side economics.

if you give a rich man $10, he's going to put it in the bank
if you give a poor man $10, he's going to buy stuff at the protest of the the politicians standing behind the rich man that the poor man is lazy and should work for that money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-12-2017, 07:13 PM
 
2,240 posts, read 1,385,700 times
Reputation: 4894
Quote:
Originally Posted by gunslinger256 View Post
The term "Fake news" stirs so much resentment in me, I can't describe it.

One side of the aisle wants to give money to the rich with the notion that it will drive productivity. This is known as supply side economics. Kansas and Louisiana have tried this approach and both experiments have failed fantastically.

The other side of the aisle wants to give money to the poor with the proven notion that they will spend the money thus driving the demand to spur productivity. This is known as demand side economics.

if you give a rich man $10, he's going to put it in the bank
if you give a poor man $10, he's going to buy stuff at the protest of the the politicians standing behind the rich man that the poor man is lazy and should work for that money.
And what if you give the poor man money, he or she hurried out to spend it, and the talented and hardworking people who provided the valued goods and services end up with the money again? Do you reward the doers by taking it away from them a second time? Do they want to hustle again? Have you destroyed the incentive of the person who got the original check from becoming a doer?

Perhaps both sides of the government aisle are wrong and the answer falls somewhere in the middle. I can say for certain that no government has the most efficient and effective answer.

And you know what causes resentment in me? Someone thinking that the rich person is not entitled to put that money into the bank. Or to shread it and throw it to the wind. Or make a fancy wallpaper. If they earned it, who are you to tell them that spending it immediately is more noble than alternative x? Perhaps holding it and providing capital to society provided more value that some idiot blowing it on a lottery ticket?

Last edited by Thatsright19; 07-12-2017 at 07:21 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-12-2017, 07:29 PM
 
Location: Close to an earthquake
890 posts, read 626,278 times
Reputation: 2384
I'll tell you what is the absolute truth regardless of which side of the aisle you stand: money earned is the best money to have, ask a former poor person who has experienced it both ways (freebies and earned the hard way). He or she will tell you the truth proving what I've said is true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2017, 07:12 AM
 
Location: Gainesville, FL
190 posts, read 195,522 times
Reputation: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911 View Post
Well, both Reagan and Bush-43 led missions to shift income (and assets) from lower to higher rungs on the economic ladder. There are those who will refuse to recognize such efforts as "income redistribution," but the problem remains that these higher-rung people spend money more slowly than lower-rung people do. As GDP depends critically on the velocity of money, such upward redistributions are inherently contractionary.

Meanwhile, the original formulations of Keynesian economics have been revisited and modified in many ways over the ensuing 80 years. It is the way of all science to do this. It is seemingly the way of all right-wingers to mischaracterize the process.
*Looks at forum title; confirmed it's not politics*

Good job.

Unfortunately, I don't hold Reagan or Bush (I, II, burning or otherwise) in any high regard. I like how you use it to attempt to shut down conversation though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2017, 08:46 AM
 
4,229 posts, read 1,904,197 times
Reputation: 3782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avram42 View Post
*Looks at forum title; confirmed it's not politics* Good job.
Do you imagine that economics is or can be independent and exclusive of politics???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avram42 View Post
I like how you use it to attempt to shut down conversation though.
What certainly shuts down conversation from some sources is the use of facts to blow up their childish bits of pure propaganda. Will you dispute the fact that the rich spend more slowly than the poor? Do you deny the truism that GDP is equal to the supply of money times its velocity? Do you reject the notion that both Reagan and Bush-43 knowingly took steps to move income and assets from lower to higher points along the income scale? I'll be generous and assume probably not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2017, 08:54 AM
 
4,229 posts, read 1,904,197 times
Reputation: 3782
Quote:
Originally Posted by borninsac View Post
I'll tell you what is the absolute truth regardless of which side of the aisle you stand: money earned is the best money to have, ask a former poor person who has experienced it both ways (freebies and earned the hard way). He or she will tell you the truth proving what I've said is true.
Learn more about real life in the real world. Most people believe that steak is superior to hamburger. But when times get tough, an assurance of access to hamburger can be the most important thing in the world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2017, 08:58 AM
 
2,768 posts, read 1,494,078 times
Reputation: 2172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911 View Post
Do you imagine that economics is or can be independent and exclusive of politics???


What certainly shuts down conversation from some sources is the use of facts to blow up their childish bits of pure propaganda. Will you dispute the fact that the rich spend more slowly than the poor? Do you deny the truism that GDP is equal to the supply of money times its velocity? Do you reject the notion that both Reagan and Bush-43 knowingly took steps to move income and assets from lower to higher points along the income scale? I'll be generous and assume probably not.
It's true. The person you replied to, and the vast majority of CD readers, have no clue about any of that. They simply don't want to take time to research something that could actually help them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2017, 09:16 AM
 
Location: Gainesville, FL
190 posts, read 195,522 times
Reputation: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911 View Post
Do you imagine that economics is or can be independent and exclusive of politics???
Depends how you would like to define politics. As a study of human interaction it's certainly independent until you choose for it not to be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911 View Post
Will you dispute the fact that the rich spend more slowly than the poor?
Define "more slowly". Why is this important?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911 View Post
Do you deny the truism that GDP is equal to the supply of money times its velocity?
What does this statement mean? Supply of money is meaningless if it is fiat. If we spend by accumulating more debt does this imply prosperity? Forgive my ignorance of the terminology if it's somehow obvious. (Before you project upon me that I have a problem with national debt this is not my point; I simply mean that if GDP does not account for assumed debt it is not a useful measure of the real amount of income).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pub-911 View Post
Do you reject the notion that both Reagan and Bush-43 knowingly took steps to move income and assets from lower to higher points along the income scale? I'll be generous and assume probably not.
Knowingly? I don't give any president that much credit. As I said before, I don't hold either in high regard. I find the reverence that most 'conservatives' have for Reagan blindly ignorant. If we're simply going to revere someone for good sound bites I'd rather elect H.L. Mencken.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2017, 09:17 AM
 
Location: Gainesville, FL
190 posts, read 195,522 times
Reputation: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by damba View Post
It's true. The person you replied to, and the vast majority of CD readers, have no clue about any of that. They simply don't want to take time to research something that could actually help them.
Chalk one more in the column that assumes I'm a republican.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-13-2017, 09:18 AM
 
2,768 posts, read 1,494,078 times
Reputation: 2172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avram42 View Post
Depends how you would like to define politics. As a study of human interaction it's certainly independent until you choose for it not to be.



Define "more slowly". Why is this important?
Good grief. Rich people sitting on even more cash does nothing to help the economy. Does that about cover it for you? LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top