New unemployment numbers show cutting govt spending doesnt crash the economy. (unemployment rate, layoff)

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks

What I'm trying to figure out is why you get so upset when proven wrong.

So if you just imagine things to be true, then they are, is that how it works?

Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks

You said the spending cuts haven't hurt the economy, which they already have.

First, we arent cutting spending, we're actually increasing it, just cutting the rate of grwoth, but if they have hurt the economy then why isnt the unemployment numbers growing rather than hitting a 5 year low?
Facts arent on your side, and all you can do is repeat the same old talking points from the White House..

Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks

I never said that spending cuts wouldn't hurt the economy because they actually do.

Actually no they dont.. Once again, government cant spend without first taking money out of the economy, so if the government cuts spending, this spending is left in the private sector. What do you think people will do with their money, burn it?

Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks

That said, running large deficits for too long is bad policy and deficits have to be cut which will cause pain.

Once again, you completely dont know a dam thing about economics. Leaving money into the economy doesnt cause pain. It might cause spotted layoffs because individual companies that have specialized industries with the government will be hurt, but to pretend that money that normally would be going through the governments hand, wont get spent regarless is one of the dumbest economic theories I've heard in my entire life.

Where is all of these job losses at Winter?

[Winter_Sucks]

Originally Posted by pghquest

So if you just imagine things to be true, then they are, is that how it works?

First, we arent cutting spending, we're actually increasing it, just cutting the rate of grwoth, but if they have hurt the economy then why isnt the unemployment numbers growing rather than hitting a 5 year low?
Facts arent on your side, and all you can do is repeat the same old talking points from the White House..

Actually no they dont.. Once again, government cant spend without first taking money out of the economy, so if the government cuts spending, this spending is left in the private sector. What do you think people will do with their money, burn it?

Once again, you completely dont know a dam thing about economics. Leaving money into the economy doesnt cause pain. It might cause spotted layoffs because individual companies that have specialized industries with the government will be hurt, but to pretend that money that normally would be going through the governments hand, wont get spent regarless is one of the dumbest economic theories I've heard in my entire life.

Where is all of these job losses at Winter?

The government borrowing to fund operations isn't taking money out of the economy.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks

The government borrowing to fund operations isn't taking money out of the economy.

If you Have $1,000 and you buy $1,000 in tbills, how do you still have $1,000 left to spend?

And when you have to to give me back $1100 to buy those tbills back from me, where does the money come from?

Explain this new math to me

[Winter_Sucks]

Originally Posted by pghquest

If you Have $1,000 and you buy $1,000 in tbills, how do you still have $1,000 left to spend?

And when you have to to give me back $1100 to buy those tbills back from me, where does the money come from?

Explain this new math to me

Where does the borrowed money return too? Back into the economy, which means money isn't taken out of the economy.

This is also assuming that the treasure bills are all bought with domestic buyers or lenders. That's not always the case.

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks

You don't think the trillions spent on Iraq and Afghanistan have contributed to the deficit?

It certainly has and maybe you could explain why we went to war in Libya and we're still in Afghanistan.

[Winter_Sucks]

Originally Posted by momonkey

It certainly has and maybe you could explain why we went to war in Libya and we're still in Afghanistan.

How much did we spend in Libya?

How much did we spend in Afghanistan?

How much did we spend in Iraq?

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks

The government borrowing to fund operations isn't taking money out of the economy.

Yes, but it does devalue the currency and that has the same effect as taking money out of the economy.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks

Where does the borrowed money return too? Back into the economy, which means money isn't taken out of the economy.

When you have to borrow money to buy back the tbills, the result is a NEGATIVE effect on the GDP..

Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks

This is also assuming that the treasure bills are all bought with domestic buyers or lenders. That's not always the case.

So its even better in your messed up mind if its foreign lenders, thus removing the interest rate "profits" and shipping them overseas?

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks

How much did we spend in Libya?

How much did we spend in Afghanistan?

How much did we spend in Iraq?

Whatever the total, it clearly adds to the national debt, and the deficit because of the borrowing required to pay for it

Does it matter if its $1, or $1T, regardless its a debt

[Winter_Sucks]

Originally Posted by pghquest

Whatever the total, it clearly adds to the national debt, and the deficit because of the borrowing required to pay for it

Does it matter if its $1, or $1T, regardless its a debt

There's no difference in adding $1 of debt or $1 trillion of debt? Wow. I give up.