Reply With Quote
It should. I thought the recession would too, but it looks like some people are special.
Any solution to keep us from spiraling to doom is going to hurt several classes of people.
It should. I thought the recession would too, but it looks like some people are special.
You seriously have no idea of how economics works. Brazil has huge land and resources, africa does too. England enriched itself without many national resources. Please, don't even try arguing economics, you're a dumb .
Wow, your re ed ass made a post without erotic fantasies? It's a big first step for you.
This is the reason why our economy is ed.
1. You can have all the progressive tax structure you want, but the fact is that while you have a fiat currency backed by empty promises, the govt will have no incentive to be fiscally responsible which will give inflation. Inflation is an indirect tax on the middle and lower class. They have to pay more for the price of goods.
2. The govt will stagnate when you have a workers economy. Advocating that the producers, innovators, and ceo's who create markets be punished at the expense of a workers paradise is no way of progressing. You will have unprofitable buisinesses and largesse.
3. Social security is and was a ponzi scheme, along with medicare we're ed. When govt got into the medical buisinesses, prices skyrocketed. Why do boob implants cost a fraction of knee surgery? One of them is insured, the other is not. Do the math. Govt intervention equals market distortions.
4. When you have govt coercion into the market whether it be through Corporations getting favorable regulation at the expense of buisiness, minimum wage laws, fractional reserve banking, forced union contracts, mandatory insurance, you take away the bargaining position of one group or the other, and either the buisinesses have no incentive to lower prices, or the workers have no interest in making their employers be profitable and sustaining.
5. If you need to understand how govt intervention distorts prices, look at college tuition.
Such post would have made more sense than the bull workers paradise you're spouting. LOok at your state and it's budget, moron. And then rethink your garbage position.
Too bad all this is too logical for the typical liberal to understand.
Not to mention not necessarily true.
I'm going to repeat that I'm not a fan of the FIAT economy, but the biggest inflation experienced in this country all happened during the gold standard era (1917-1920, 1945).
Inflation for the most part has been pretty low since 1981.
The other part that's really debatable is whether all government intervention is bad. You don't have to look further than the recent property bubble for lack of adequate regulation.
It can be good or bad. Depends on the situation.
There are certain things where the free market is really ty at, simply because the priorities cannot be returning a profit to shareholders. Lots of countries figured that one out with healthcare a long time ago. Canada, for example, used to be under a pile of debt and they turned it around (the have had budget surpluses for a while and been paying down their debt, along with keeping unemployment at around 6%) all the while not needing to 'privatize' their public healthcare.
The reason our economy is ed is because both parties talk the talk, but never walk the walk. The last time we had an administration that did do what needed to be done as far as cuts and attempting to balance the budget was Clinton/GOP Congress before dubya. All things considered, that's pretty recent. And it proves that when the good intentions are there, things can get done. Unfortunately this is a very ty generation of politicians, on both sides of the aisle.
When part of the solution proposed for fixing the deficit is more tax cuts you're just not being realistic.
If you want to complain about inflation lately, look to the oil traders sending food and transportation costs through the roof.1. You can have all the progressive tax structure you want, but the fact is that while you have a fiat currency backed by empty promises, the govt will have no incentive to be fiscally responsible which will give inflation. Inflation is an indirect tax on the middle and lower class. They have to pay more for the price of goods.
Germany destroys the rightwing myth that workers can't made good wages and have decent job security and worker rights. And also that unions make people lazy.2. The govt will stagnate when you have a workers economy. Advocating that the producers, innovators, and ceo's who create markets be punished at the expense of a workers paradise is no way of progressing. You will have unprofitable buisinesses and largesse.
....
4. When you have govt coercion into the market whether it be through Corporations getting favorable regulation at the expense of buisiness, minimum wage laws, fractional reserve banking, forced union contracts, mandatory insurance, you take away the bargaining position of one group or the other, and either the buisinesses have no incentive to lower prices, or the workers have no interest in making their employers be profitable and sustaining.
Did you just really compare inserting a bag of saline to repairing ligaments and joints?3. Social security is and was a ponzi scheme, along with medicare we're ed. When govt got into the medical buisinesses, prices skyrocketed. Why do boob implants cost a fraction of knee surgery? One of them is insured, the other is not. Do the math. Govt intervention equals market distortions.
You're ignoring the death of what was the backbone of our economy: manufacturing. You could cut every cent of subsidized student aid and there would still be an enormous demand for college degrees without those manufacturing jobs and with a ty secondary school system that does very little in the way of teaching practical work skills as an alternative to college. You think the banks that gave ninja mortgage loans for closing costs would have been scared of providing student loans before the 2008 crash? Even now, the schools will keep bending over backwards to maintain student enrollment via grade inflation to keep the banks making loans.5. If you need to understand how govt intervention distorts prices, look at college tuition.
EDIT: Apparently the Pell Grant is on average about $3700 for those who qualify (capped above at $5500, below at $550). I suppose at a school like UTSA you could probably get by on $10,000-$12,000 a year for a full courseload, fees, books, computer, and transportation by really pinching pennies, but that doesn't explain a school like Baylor having its costs rise at the level they have the last 15 years.
Last edited by baseline bum; 07-17-2011 at 01:40 AM.
If you need to see how government intervention distorts prices look no further than energy deregulation. If you want to see how government intervention distorts prices look no further than Medicare.
Tuition isn't about government intervention at all. Its about an exploding population and growing demand for a limited resource due to lower skilled labor jobs being moved overseas due to globalization. In other words, Its the exact opposite of rising due to government intervention.
This can't be stressed enough right now.
Last edited by Winehole23; 07-17-2011 at 03:45 AM. Reason: shortened
You think the pucker is bad now? Just wait. The really bad news hasn't been announced yet, and even then, it will be years before people understand it well enough to misrepresent it to others. It all goes back to the hot minute in 2008 where it looked like our system of payment might fail without substantial public support.
Last edited by Winehole23; 07-17-2011 at 03:42 AM.
Too bad prompt action laws didn't work. Could have used one back there.
Lack of risk transparency is a .
Here come the aftershocks.
Too bad the repugs have proposed only an ultimatum, not a "deal".
Thankfully, the American people know this (if only because they've been told repeatedly by Obama & the media), and that's why the repugs will get the majority of the blame if we do default.
The House tea bagger mob's destructive/obstructive refusal to raise taxes or the deficit ceiling proves beyond a doubt they are proxies for the under-taxed Kock/VRWC/Wall St crowd, not representing the best interests of their districts.
Honestly, at this point I would not put deliberately ruining the economy for the sole purpose of benefiting in the 2012 election past the Republicans in Congress. I used to not be that cynical.
"I used to not be that cynical."
bandwaggoner!
You could say the exact same thing about Obama.
If you ignore the proposal he's made then sure. But that requires some willful ignorance.
I could.
But I would be foolish to do so, since presidents, even more than Congress, become identified with the economy in general, arguably with less logical linking.
Given, however, the stated intention of the GOP to "destroy" Obama, one has to wonder just how far they would go to do so.
The fact is, before August 2nd it appears that he will have a couple of different options (one from the House and one from the Senate) available to him to raise the debt ceiling that don't involve raising taxes. The question is what will he do then?
Each side characterizes the other as illegitimate. Collegiality and decorum are out, demonization and hysterical denunciation are in.
Enjoy!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
