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.
Consumer demand has nothing to do with recessions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Absolutely nothing? And I'm the 3rd grader?
The OP could not answer these two very simple questions, but perhaps you can...
1st Phase Zero Level Economy always has 0% Unemployment.
1] Why is there 0% Unemployment?
2] What causes Unemployment?
The second question can be answered with a single word.
The correct answers gets you promoted to the 4th Grade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
That's a stupid question, since no matter what you do, the Laws of Economics will handle that, whether you want them to do so or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
It will. But in the real, where the are real consequences, that causes real problems. Social unrest is always good for countries......
Quote:
Scare Tactic
If you suppose that terrorizing your opponent is giving him a reason for believing that you are correct, then you are using a scare tactic and reasoning fallaciously.
Well, hell, where's my uniform...I'd like to be with the National Guard unit that fires the first shots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
No social spending is a direct response to capitalism and industrialization.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
No, social spending is a political policy tool that has nothing to do with Economics, other than the fact that such policies interfere with the Laws of Economics and worsen situations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Nope they are a response to the "Laws of Economics".
No, those are political tools.
There is no requirement or obligation for social spending, and the Laws of Economics will eventually prevent you from social spending, so it's completely stupid and waste of time, money and precious resources.
Capitalism is a Property Theory, but thanks for trying to mislead people just the same. Your labor is Capital that you own and control. It would better if the government owned your labor, right? I mean look at all those who willingly allow unions to own and control them.
And having the government own your labor under Socialism is certainly better than having a feudal lord -- the government...by any other name......own your labor under Feudalism.
Right?
And industrialization has nearly always existed....it merely changes form.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
The world is a not an even playing field and with globalization in full effect, growth has shifted to the developing world.
Well, well, Mr. Critical Thinker (snicker)....why?
Why isn't the world an even playing field?
Who made the playing field uneven?
Why do developing-States exist?
Why is growth shifting to the developing World?
Why do you insist upon using a euphemism like "globalization" (snicker)?
Why do you not understand Economics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
The world is a not an even playing field and with globalization in full effect, growth has shifted to the developing world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Uh-huh.....see this....
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
It's relevant to me and the hundreds of millions of people who have watched the wages become stagnant over the last several decades and saw their benefits decreased. But hey the stock market has been great the past few years so it's all good right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
The funny thing about people like you who talk in circles, is it always comes back around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Are you not human?
I don't know...I'm not sure yet.
Funny you should ask, since I'm having my DNA tested by National Geographic and another entity is doing a test for 67 genetic markers....I'll let you know the results.
The point I was making is that your own ideology blinds you to reality, resulting in your adoption of a position that is hypocritical....and you don't even realize it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Do you not have self-serving interests that contradict modern dogmas?
Oh, yes, I surely do....children....especially mine.
The difference between you and I, is that the methods I use to bring my self-serving interests to fruition do not include murder...or taking things from others....or violating the Constitution...or forcing, threatening, intimidating or abusing power to coerce people to do things against their will....yours do.
And what is the fallacy called where you are insulting in your discussions?
Stop using fallacies and I'll stop showing everyone the fallacies you use.
It's not my fault you're giving me the rope to hang you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Why would employment and wages keep up?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Manna from heaven.....
Quote:
Avoiding the Question
The fallacy of avoiding the question is a type of fallacy of avoiding the issue that occurs when the issue is how to answer some question. The fallacy occurs when someone’s answer doesn’t really respond to the question asked.
Since you can't answer the question, then "3rd Grader" is not hyperbole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
It has occurred to me that you completely missed the point I was making..... I have been arguing that the "American Dream" or the "good ole days" are gone. I have been arguing this is a brave new world.
Again, you are preaching to God.
I've been saying that since 2007, so you're late to the party, which is over, but thanks for showing up nonetheless....you can have an empty glass of champagne....as a token of my esteem.
Unlike you, I actually explain why these things are happening supported with facts --- typically from your own government, while you do nothing but spew ideology, which is not reality, doesn't explain how you got to be in the mess you're in, or how to get out of it (not that you actually can get out of it --- well, there is a way out, but things will be different....forever).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Spending money on social welfare will make things even worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Nope.
Wow....what a well-thought out cogent response.
Social welfare spending does not solve problems, and even that wouldn't be so bad, except that it creates even more problems. It doesn't matter, since you'll run out of money anyway. So, now why don't say something intelligent like, "We'll just print more money, blah, blah, blah, blah" and yes, you can do that, not there is a severe penalty to pay for doing so, and you can't handle it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Obviously you've never been to the deep south or Appalachia.....
Of course I have.
My father's side of the family is Appalachia. I never met my father's dad, since he died in a coal-mining accident.
My father asked a simple question: What would Neanderthal Man do?
Neanderthal Man would move to a different place to have a better life....and that's why my father left Appalachia.
If people want to live in Appalachia, they surely can, and it's their right to do so, but I have no moral, ethical or legal obligation to fund their Life-Style Choices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Twist it however you want...... Public Education is a social program paid with taxpayer money....
Quote:
Straw Man
Quote:
Your reasoning contains the straw man fallacy whenever you attribute an easily refuted position to your opponent, one that the opponent wouldn’t endorse, and then proceed to attack the easily refuted position (the straw man) believing you have undermined the opponent’s actual position. If the misrepresentation is on purpose, then the straw man fallacy is caused by lying.
A new fallacy used by you....you're evolving...what next?
Capitalism is a Property Theory based on the premise that individuals are in the best position to assess Market conditions and properly employ Capital. Capital includes Labor. I am in the best position to determine how my talents should be used, not the government, and not some organization operating in lieu of government, like a union or like the American Hospital Association.
The Free Market makes no judgments....it is merely a defined area in which consumers of all classes voluntarily engage in transactions, without fear, threats, intimidation, coercion, force or punishment by any person or group of people, up to and including government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Poor people have never run any economy, because they are too stupid, which is why they are poor.
Why don't you go invest $25 in the Mega-Millions?....
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
It seems your guiding economic tenant is poor people are stupid and undeserving.
Quote:
Straw Man
Quote:
Your reasoning contains the straw man fallacy whenever you attribute an easily refuted position to your opponent, one that the opponent wouldn’t endorse, and then proceed to attack the easily refuted position (the straw man) believing you have undermined the opponent’s actual position. If the misrepresentation is on purpose, then the straw man fallacy is caused by lying.
Identify the nations, nation-States, dual-States or States in which "the poor" or "the stupid" have created 1st World Level Prosperity.
You ought to have a gay old time doing that.
A retarded person does more to benefit America in one day than any 10 poor stupid people do in an entire month.
And you missed the point....wealth is about personal choices....one either choose to build wealth, or thumbs their nose and refuses to build wealth. The stupid are certainly within their rights to thumb their noses, but I'm not obligated morally, ethically or legally to bail them out, because of their stupid choices.
If the stupid cannot maintain their Life-Style due to the stupid choices they make, then it is the stupid who need to adapt by making alterations, changes or adjustments to their Life-Style, not me, and not anyone else.
Reality bites...
The Oppression System? That is the primary cause of all of your problems.
The Oppression System is how the world operates.....
Quote:
You're preaching to God. I already dictated the Bible on that.
I said that back in 2007 here on C-D, so you're like 7 years late to the party, but thanks for showing up just the same.
I discussed House-Husbands....many households that formerly had two full-time wage-earners will now have only one wage-earner, and that might be woman of the house. I mentioned that 6.5% of households had two wage-earners in the 1950s, increasing to 16+% by the 1970s, peaking at 67+% in 2007, and is now in decline.
In about 2-3 decades, you'll bottom out at 18%-23% (I'll have to look at my notes for the exact figures).
Naturally then, household income declines....with a corresponding decrease in disposable income per household.
Part of rethinking your society is sharing.....living accommodations. If a family of four must rent a 3-bedroom apartment (or house) and share it with a family of three, then that is what they must do.
Your idea of rethinking is taking everyone else's money and giving to them to so they can have their own personal private McMansions, 'cause, you know, throughout history, all children have always had their own personal private 24'x38' bedrooms.
God must be a small man.... Spending time on CD.... I mean this is where the greatest minds come to discuss politics and economics...... You really don't realize how silly you sound. Talk about fallacies....
My idea of rethinking is not taking everyone's money so they can have their own McMansion. My idea would take their money and put into rebuilding this country's infrastructure.
Quote:
And globalization?
A Critical Thinker would realize that "globalization" is a euphemism designed to do two things:
1] hide the embarrassing fact that US Foreign Policy and Geo-Political Strategy for the last 115 years has been a total and complete failure, and you can thank your "you-Harvards" for that; and
2] hide the embarrassing fact that it is Brasil, Russia, India and China who are developing the States that the US should have been developing over the last 115 years.
1. That's a pretty big claim and generalization. I doubt a critical thinker would be so ignorant to make such a claim. Then you further to take a jab at Harvard (aka liberal elitists I'm assuming). What fallacy is that?
2. BRIC? Please.... What ever happened to the Japanese... .they were supposed to eat us alive in the 80s and early 90s.
Why are you choosing 115 years....I'm assuming an event took place that hurt your antiquated notions of how America should proceed.....
Quote:
You are devoid of Critical Thinking Skills, which makes it amusing that you'd call out someone else....and then you're still wrong....and no, I don't have multiple user-names.
"Trickle-Down" is a Straw Man Fallacy in and of itself created by Liberals to attack Reagan's position.
It was common for Liberals during the Reagan Administration. I've mentioned other Straw Man Fallacies proffered by Liberals, such as Reagan's military build-up, and the Straw Man from the stupid idiot Tom Clancy and the morons at the Brookings Institute.
LOLZ. Conservatives do believe that. Their politicians have been preaching it and their policies reflect....
"Trickle-down", supply-side, whatever you want to call it has failed most Americans.
Quote:
Productivity is measured in unit volume or unit cost, not unit revenues, but thanks for trying to skew reality just the same.
So wages and productivity have not decoupled.....?
Quote:
If you don't know the answer --- and you don't --- it's not hyperbole....it's truth.
#1 The stock market loses 40.9% of its "value" over a period of 959 days. Characterize the state of the economy during that time.
Spoiler
If you said anything negative about the economy, then you would be wrong.
GDP growth was averaging an astounding 12.5% per quarter = economics fail for you.
That actually happened September 1939 to April 1942
#2 The stock market sets records over a period of 651 days. Characterize the state of the economy during that time.
Spoiler
If you said anything positive about the economy, then you failed.
That was the recession 1957-1961. The DJIA doubled in value from 250 to 500+.
#3 The stock market loses 45.1% of its value over a period of 694 days. Characterize the economy.
Spoiler
If you said the economy was bad.....then you failed.
That was January 1973 to December 1974 US GDP grew at rates of 1.03% per quarter to as much as 3.77% per quarter, averaging 2.24% per quarter over those 8 quarters.
Systematically....
Mircea
All those words..... yet no substance. Stop beating around the bush and stop using 100 words when 20 will do.
Again what is your point? For the second time.....
Since you can't answer the question, then "3rd Grader" is not hyperbole.
I did. Remember.... Reaganomics..... supply side..... trickle down..... blah blah. But don't let that stop you from being insulting and fallacious while simultaneously calling me out for being fallacious....
Quote:
Again, you are preaching to God.
I've been saying that since 2007, so you're late to the party, which is over, but thanks for showing up nonetheless....you can have an empty glass of champagne....as a token of my esteem.
Unlike you, I actually explain why these things are happening supported with facts --- typically from your own government, while you do nothing but spew ideology, which is not reality, doesn't explain how you got to be in the mess you're in, or how to get out of it (not that you actually can get out of it --- well, there is a way out, but things will be different....forever).
..... only 2007?
Quote:
Wow....what a well-thought out cogent response.
Social welfare spending does not solve problems, and even that wouldn't be so bad, except that it creates even more problems. It doesn't matter, since you'll run out of money anyway. So, now why don't say something intelligent like, "We'll just print more money, blah, blah, blah, blah" and yes, you can do that, not there is a severe penalty to pay for doing so, and you can't handle it.
Norway is doing pretty good. Small countries, especially with natural resources, can disproves your notion that social spending cause more problems.... Try not throwing out so many generalizations.... They are easily picked apart.....
Quote:
Of course I have.
My father's side of the family is Appalachia. I never met my father's dad, since he died in a coal-mining accident.
My father asked a simple question: What would Neanderthal Man do?
Neanderthal Man would move to a different place to have a better life....and that's why my father left Appalachia.
If people want to live in Appalachia, they surely can, and it's their right to do so, but I have no moral, ethical or legal obligation to fund their Life-Style Choices.
You claimed liberals don't take care of their communities. I proved you wrong. Rural areas have some America's highest poverty, worse drug abuse, unemployment, and they are conservative. I guess Gods can be fallible.....
Quote:
I guess that means you're lying (again).
Public education is a matter of Opportunity Costs.
Why do you think I rag on Libertarians?
If Libertarians are too damn dumb to articulate their position, then double dumb-ass on them.
So I am not paying property taxes in order to fund schools? What the hell is wealth redistribution then?
A new fallacy used by you....you're evolving...what next?
Capitalism is a Property Theory based on the premise that individuals are in the best position to assess Market conditions and properly employ Capital. Capital includes Labor. I am in the best position to determine how my talents should be used, not the government, and not some organization operating in lieu of government, like a union or like the American Hospital Association.
The Free Market makes no judgments....it is merely a defined area in which consumers of all classes voluntarily engage in transactions, without fear, threats, intimidation, coercion, force or punishment by any person or group of people, up to and including government.
The free market is a fairy tale. It's true today as it was true over 115 years ago.
Quote:
Identify the nations, nation-States, dual-States or States in which "the poor" or "the stupid" have created 1st World Level Prosperity.
You ought to have a gay old time doing that.
A retarded person does more to benefit America in one day than any 10 poor stupid people do in an entire month.
And you missed the point....wealth is about personal choices....one either choose to build wealth, or thumbs their nose and refuses to build wealth. The stupid are certainly within their rights to thumb their noses, but I'm not obligated morally, ethically or legally to bail them out, because of their stupid choices.
If the stupid cannot maintain their Life-Style due to the stupid choices they make, then it is the stupid who need to adapt by making alterations, changes or adjustments to their Life-Style, not me, and not anyone else.
Reality bites...
Mircea
Your entire premise is faulty.
America is a great example. Your beloved stupid, poor folks have this thing called mobility in this country..... If you are seriously that fool of yourself not to realize some of this country's greatest leaders and captains of industry came from poor backgrounds.
Of course poor people havne't created 1st world level prosperity.... by definition they don't have the resources to do so..... Thank goodness for economic mobility..... poor people become middle class or upper class.....
Seriously.... is that the best you got or you that spiteful of the poor?
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.
