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.
That the trillions were lost BEFORE Obama did anything, so claiming that it was lost, and thats why Obama needs to take more money from them, causing them to spend more, is one of the dumbest economic theories I've heard in my entire life.
Where did you learn this crap from?
Quote:
Keynesian economics is the view that in the short run, especially during recessions, economic output is strongly influenced by aggregate demand (total spending in the economy). In the Keynesian view, aggregate demand does not necessarily equal the productive capacity of the economy; instead, it is influenced by a host of factors and sometimes behaves erratically, affecting production, employment, and inflation.
Which economic theory do you support in times of recession?
Quote:
So what you're saying is that when I said Obama is facing the same dam problem that every President before him faced, that your arguing with me, even though i was correct?
Sigh.... aside from the name of "recession", they all differ in size, scope, and impact. Therefore it isn't the same dam problem.
Quote:
Money doesnt disappear.. Do you think people put it in their fireplace and burned it?
BAHAHAHAHA. Dance and deflect. Let me rephase it then..... how much of the value of global assets were lost compared to other recessions..... Keep trying to deflect but I'm going to keep asking.
Quote:
I didnt come close to suggesting that all recessions are the same, but economic theories dont change, neither do cycles. I have yet to hear this economic theory that if you take more money out of the economy, which is what took place, somehow causes people to spend more, thus you expect the economy to improve.
Where did you learn this **** from?
Of course economic theories change and adapt.... who told you that nonsense?
Quote:
What? Obama spends the taxpayers money, how the hell can you be on a political forum and not know basic 101 of where the government gets money from
Why the hell would companies spend money if there isnt a demand for their products? Thats a new economic theory I've never heard of before either..
Then how are they achieving record profits................ HMMMMMMMMMMM?
And government spending cant come close to stimulating if the private sector isnt going along for the ride because you took it from them. Anyone who knows a dam thing about economics knows that you cant spend the same $1 twice and if you give money to the government to spend, instead of you spending it, that the same $1 is spent and it doesnt increase the economic effects.
I'm waiting for you to show me these economic theories that government spending $1 is a > stimulation than you spending $1
It's not greater..... But I can see where your confusion comes from.
The you is not spending that dollar so that's why the govt is......
Nonfarm business sector labor productivity increased at a 2.3 percent
annual rate during the second quarter of 2013, the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics reported today. The increase in productivity reflects increases
of 3.7 percent in output and 1.4 percent in hours worked. (All quarterly
percent changes in this release are seasonally adjusted annual rates.)
From the second quarter of 2012 to the second quarter of 2013,
productivity increased 0.3 percent as output and hours worked rose 2.1
percent and 1.7 percent, respectively. (See table A.)
What's going on here? Why isn't the wealth trickling down when wealthiest are doing fantastic overall?
Which economic theory do you support in times of recession?
You defined Keynesian economics while ignoring the fact that America CAN NOT PRACTICE it.. In order for Keyneisan theories to work, you MUST run surpluses to pay down debt in good years, WHICH WE DO NOT..
So you supporting a theory that is impossible is laughable.
Anyone with 1/2 a brain knows that if you want the economy to improve, then you encourage the PRIVATE sector to spend, because the private sector is 10x as large as the government could ever be. YOU CANT take money from the private sector, and then expect them to spend more.. ITS IMPOSSIBLE..
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Sigh.... aside from the name of "recession", they all differ in size, scope, and impact. Therefore it isn't the same dam problem.
Yes, they usually go up and down, more or less than others, but that doesnt change the fact that they are normally 7 year cycles. We crashed in 2007, meaning that we should be approaching the top about 2014.. We're no where close, unless of course your admitting this is the best Obama can do..
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
BAHAHAHAHA. Dance and deflect. Let me rephase it then..... how much of the value of global assets were lost compared to other recessions..... Keep trying to deflect but I'm going to keep asking.
Actually its the exact same problem, just a different solution, which has been proven to fail over, and over, and over.. but here we are, kooks thinking that if you take money from the private sector after they just lost "trillions" (per you) of dollars, that they will spend more..
Again, what theories does this follow because I havent heard of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Of course economic theories change and adapt.... who told you that nonsense?
Ooh, so economice theories change and adapt and because of that, people will spend money that they dont have.. Where did you hear this from again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Then how are they achieving record profits................ HMMMMMMMMMMM?
Its called a lack of competition.. How old are you again? Profits always go up for those who has no competition, and you cant get competition increased if people have no money.. Again, you cant spend the same $1 twice.. ITS IMPOSSIBLE..
What's going on here? Why isn't the wealth trickling down when wealthiest are doing fantastic overall?
Yes, soaring profits because there is no competition. Most of us understand that when you get less money into the economy, that people wont start companies and thus those businesses in existance, will increase their profits..
Thats pretty much basic 101 of supply and demand.. Why dont you understand this since you said your what, 27 again?
And government spending cant come close to stimulating if the private sector isnt going along for the ride because you took it from them. Anyone who knows a dam thing about economics knows that you cant spend the same $1 twice and if you give money to the government to spend, instead of you spending it, that the same $1 is spent and it doesnt increase the economic effects.
I'm waiting for you to show me these economic theories that government spending $1 is a > stimulation than you spending $1
According to this article, business is hoarding capital rather than investing because consumers are cash-strapped and business doesn't see any potential profit. But as long as business keeps hoarding the cash, consumers are going to continue to be short of cash, because the cash is in the hands of business and banks, not circulating through the economy. Government spending is intended to get cash circulating through the economy, and ultimately into the hands of consumers, so that they aren't so cash-strapped. But the GOP has vowed to stop any legislation to get cash circulating back through the economy. So we have a stalemate, where businesses will continue to hold onto the cash, keeping it in one place instead of moving, and any economy where these record-breaking cash reserves are held back will be a struggling economy.
It's not greater..... But I can see where your confusion comes from.
The you is not spending that dollar so that's why the govt is......
Ahh, so you're calling Obama and Pelosi a liar because they indeed did argue that it was greater when they justified their bull **** economic theories.
According to this article, business is hoarding capital rather than investing because consumers are cash-strapped and business doesn't see any potential profit. But as long as business keeps hoarding the cash, consumers are going to continue to be short of cash, because the cash is in the hands of business and banks, not circulating through the economy. Government spending is intended to get cash circulating through the economy, and ultimately into the hands of consumers, so that they aren't so cash-strapped. But the GOP has vowed to stop any legislation to get cash circulating back through the economy. So we have a stalemate, where businesses will continue to hold onto the cash, keeping it in one place instead of moving, and any economy where these record-breaking cash reserves are held back will be a struggling economy.
According to this article, business is hoarding capital rather than investing because consumers are cash-strapped and business doesn't see any potential profit. But as long as business keeps hoarding the cash, consumers are going to continue to be short of cash, because the cash is in the hands of business and banks, not circulating through the economy. Government spending is intended to get cash circulating through the economy, and ultimately into the hands of consumers, so that they aren't so cash-strapped. But the GOP has vowed to stop any legislation to get cash circulating back through the economy. So we have a stalemate, where businesses will continue to hold onto the cash, keeping it in one place instead of moving, and any economy where these record-breaking cash reserves are held back will be a struggling economy.
But all of that government "spending' has to be borrowed, (i.e. removed from the economy) and then taxed, (i.e. removed from the economy) in order to pay it back.
You arent stimulating a dam thing becaue the people buying into the government debt has the money. You are simply removing money from the "little people", to give it to the rich who we all know, doesnt spend their money, thus they dont stimulate..
What exactly should these cash hoarding companies spend their money on?
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.
