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.
First they accuse you of being long winded, and then that you have no substance. I keep pointing it out but whenever I explain it with any of the needed complexity, there is no response.
Here is plenty of substance to what is exactly going on.
One cannot discuss the roles of finance and government without the concept of economic rent, because rent seeking is the largest category of bank lending – and also of tax favoritism. Today’s academic mainstream rejects the classical idea of unearned income, defined as that which has no counterpart in socially necessary costs of production. But economic historians will recognize the concept of a free lunch as the centuries-long description of rentiers – bankers and landlords in the private sector. It is to this class that Keynes referred to when he spoke of “euthanasia of the rentier” as the wave of social reform to avert future depressions.
If the GOP really wanted a balanced budget amendment they could have passed it when they held both houses of Congress. But then W Bush would have faced an embarrassing dilemma.
It's such a shame the GOP has never controlled the House and the Senate at the same time!
Oh, wait... they did, from 2003 to 2006... and no balanced budget amendment was so much as introduced in either house of Congress...
Oh, that's right, the President was a Republican who routinely submitted budgets full of massive deficits to Congress, that were subsequently routinely rubber-stamped by both housed, including by John Boehner and Eric Cantor, the leadership that now expects you to think they care about balancing the budgets!
And just like Pavlov's dogs, you go nuts when they ring the bell, just like you're supposed to...
How many balanced budget bills have the House GOP sent over to the Senate this year? How many budgets of any kind has the Senate voted on the past 3 years? Why Dirty Harry even commented in early spring that he thinks we have got along famously without a budget.
After you answer my questions then you can go ahead and say why shouldn't our people pull the tricks since yours did. Never accept any blame for not doing a thing when you can go back to a period when we were at war and say the GOP managed to not do it either. Why is it that anything that happens is an example of something that is done because the other guys did or didn't do it years ago?
So you would be for shrinking the money supply I take it.
That would do a lot toward cutting back the inflation we will see soon because of the printing of money to pay deficits. Sometime you need to study a bit about the heavy inflation that ran the Weimar Republic out of business and what caused it. Maybe you could look into the heavy inflation that China had when the Communists took over the government. I know that progs don't understand that part of things but you could learn so much if you tried.
Last time I checked, the GOP controlled the House.
Q: If they really support a balanced budget, why don't the pass one?
A: Because they don't really support a balanced budget. If they did, the would have balanced all four of the budgets between 2003 and 2006, when they controlled both houses of Congress and the White House.
And now, back to your regularly scheduled kabuki theater!
You really don't understand that unless a balanced budget has a provision that allows borrowing because of a war you just can't have it. Give it a try and maybe you can understand what is going on. I know it is very hard for progs to understand things like this but try, anyway.
Democrats, swayed by the arguments of their leaders that a balanced budget requirement would force Congress to make devastating cuts to social programs, overwhelmingly voted against it.
Just like paygo, they dont really want to live without their means and they dont mind spending our childrens money for votes.
I actually agree with your first paragraph, but your statements saying the GOP hasnt been responsible for decades is incorrect. Prior to the GOP takeover of the Congress in 1997, the Democrats held control for decades. This takeover of course lead to "balanced budgets" until the early 2000's and it was only war expenses which created deficits. Of course then Democrats took back over Congress and has yet to pass a budget since.
I didn't say that the democrats were paragons of fiscal discipline, you'll note. And it wasn't only war expenses that created deficits, although those did contribute. The 2001-2002 tax cuts didn't help, unfunded programs like Medicare Part D contributed, and the 2008 financial crisis (which, to be clear, both parties are clearly complicit in) pushed it to it's current level. and that's why nobody has come up with a credible plan to balance the budget next year - there's no way to do so without causing a crash that would make late 2008 look like fun.
I'm a progressive, and in my view, congressional dems are cowards on this. Even the idea of raising the top marginal tax rate on the wealthy by 3% was enough to send Pelosi, Reid, and supposed progressive champion Russ Feingold to their fainting couches. They aren't much better than the republicans on this.
The BBA, as a constitutional amendment, requires a *two-thirds* majority of both the House of Representatives, and the Senate, before it's passed on to the states, at which point three-quarters of the states must ratify it in order for it to take effect.
The House GOP does not have the votes to pass a constitutional amendment on their own, even though they have a majority. The amendment won a majority of votes, and all but four GOP House members, but because only a small number of democrats voted for it, it did not pass the 2/3 voting threshold, and thus failed in the House. Therefore, it's reasonable to state that it was blocked by House democrats.
Again, I think it's an idiotic amendment, so I'm quite happy about it's failure, and am happy with my democratic representative for voting against it.
That would do a lot toward cutting back the inflation we will see soon because of the printing of money to pay deficits. Sometime you need to study a bit about the heavy inflation that ran the Weimar Republic out of business and what caused it. Maybe you could look into the heavy inflation that China had when the Communists took over the government. I know that progs don't understand that part of things but you could learn so much if you tried.
In such a short work , I see that it is laced with many patronizing insults. I can determine it is of pseudo intellectual origin. And I am not a progressive.
Hyperinflation has been caused by war and foreign debt every time. WWI and the oppressive indemnity were the primary cause, and hyperinflation was the symptom. Its as if you believe Germany post WWI lacked for a MBAs that would have brought into existence fountains of chocolate. Perhaps you should look at the communist take over and the destruction of the economy that ensues rather than what was used as its wall papering. The current austerity around the world is caused by rent seeking and looting of their economies.
Your estimation of the present is no better. I have seen this ridiculous argument for inflation since 2008. While I believe we will see inflation in the future, it is for vastly different reasons and related to the destructive stagflation policies you promote.
We will see inflation because the current private credit apparatus is stalled. The rising monetary base has no meaning in such an environment. This has inflamed the situation since what finance there is is economic rent seeking, driving up the costs of doing business.
The current zero interest rate policy deflects from the currently debt saturated domestic economy to flood international markets in dollar carry trade. I find it astounding how those who continually crow about our government, who could actually create something in the goods and service economy, have no concern over the destruction of our dollar in this manner.
Inflation will be caused from the shrinking US economy which may indeed accelerate repatriated dollars from the stagflationary policies you seem to promote.
Speaking of World War, it was the likes of Grand Coulee that won it.
Last edited by gwynedd1; 11-19-2011 at 08:47 AM..
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.
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.
