PDA

View Full Version : Economics The Stimulus, Before/After


Direckshun
06-11-2012, 07:45 PM
I have not the slightest idea how to copy and paste this piece into a thread here. So my apologies on that.

Fortunately, it's 20 slides you should be able to breeze through in a couple minutes.

http://www.moslereconomics.com/wp-content/pdf/stimulus.pdf

I'm sure the next 50 posts will tell me to shove my head up my ass. :D

It's a good "read" regardless. Thoughts welcome, as if I needed to ask.

patteeu
06-11-2012, 09:19 PM
Interesting. It appears that the stimulus was enacted at the depth of an economic downturn. Who could have imagined that?

The questions raised by these charts are what would these curves have looked like without the stimulus and what would they have looked like if a different remedial policy had been pursued?

SNR
06-11-2012, 09:24 PM
Go shove your head up your ass

SNR
06-11-2012, 09:24 PM
x50

Iz Zat Chew
06-11-2012, 10:47 PM
Not too interested in what you do with your head, but I agree with the first respondent.

I feel much of the stimulus went into pockets rather into business recovery. A percentage of people feel the downturn was going to self heal itself due to business decisions made by those that reacted to the recession as they had in the past.

ClevelandBronco
06-12-2012, 01:07 AM
Not too interested in what you do with your head, but I agree with the first respondent.

I feel much of the stimulus went into pockets rather into business recovery. A percentage of people feel the downturn was going to self heal itself due to business decisions made by those that reacted to the recession as they had in the past.

patteeu is correct, as he just about always is, and so are you. There's no way we can know what would have happened if we had tried a different approach.

But as for the bolded part, yeah. Some of the money went into pockets, but a lot of it soon came out again and went into other pockets. It was spent, it was invested, it was used to shore up the foundations of the banks and businesses that got it, it was put to work in some way. You may have a problem with the people who owned the first set of pockets it went into, and I probably do as well, but the "money" (whatever the hell that really means now) didn't just get piled up in Scrooge McDuck's hoarding house.

As for the money that went to the banks, what the heck were they supposed to do? Just act as a redistribution system for all of it? They got a good portion of the "stimulus" because many of them were teetering on the brink of collapse already because of loose lending practices. What? They were supposed to just turn around and send it all out again to businesses and consumers that were even less able to pay the money back than they had been when this whole mess started? That certainly wouldn't have solved anything at all. It makes even less sense to lend to businesses that are going bust and people who are unemployed or underemployed that it made to lend to them when they were better off. To the extent that the banks held on to a large chunk of it, they were using it for business recovery. It's just that the business they were recovering was their own.

So some other businesses failed and some people lost their homes. Good. Some businesses are supposed to fail and some people are supposed to lose their homes. That was just a temporary return to something resembling sanity.

Maybe some more banks should have been allowed to lose their asses. Maybe a slew of those leeches should have been made to provide us with a perp parade. But to a large extent the banks that took the money used it to get back to a reasonable level of capitalization. That was priority number one in the wake of this crap, despite the P.R. pitch that they were going to use it to enable us to be carefree again. (Besides, even if more banks had gone bust, the replacement banks that would have risen from their ashes would have been run by the exact same pack of bastards that they replaced well, except for the ones that might have been doing time. The new banks wouldn't have been run by unemployed factory and retail workers, for Pete's sake. They would have been run by guys with experience in banking. God help us.)

Yeah, some of the money was used by that pack of thieves to party like it was 1999, but not that much of it in the grand scheme of things. And, quite frankly, I'm happy that someone was spending a little money. Businesses don't just conjure jobs to fulfill some divine inner yearning. Demand for goods and services causes businesses to create and/or preserve jobs. At least these bankster assholes know how to consume.

Now shove your head up your ass, Direckshun.

Comrade Crapski
06-12-2012, 04:02 AM
Obamanomics central planning command economy has worked it's "magic"...

http://moonbattery.com/Food-Stamp-President.jpg

scho63
06-12-2012, 05:36 AM
I have not the slightest idea how to copy and paste this piece into a thread here. So my apologies on that.

Fortunately, it's 20 slides you should be able to breeze through in a couple minutes.

http://www.moslereconomics.com/wp-content/pdf/stimulus.pdf

I'm sure the next 50 posts will tell me to shove my head up my ass. :D

It's a good "read" regardless. Thoughts welcome, as if I needed to ask.

:shake:

Some of these slides are factually incorrect-the net worth slide is false. Overall net worth of Americans has suffered incredibly from the housing downturn and is not higher now because of the stimulus.

Also, the unemployment rate is FALSE-it has been rigged to exclude workers who have stopped looking for work. The real rate is 10% or better.

There are some other slides that I am not sure where the data was pulled from.

Spending $5 trillion dollars to generate $1 trillion of productivity can not be considered a good investment or a success for any MBA graduate.

chiefzilla1501
06-12-2012, 06:40 AM
As I've said before, the big thing I can't stand about Obama is that he spends an astronomical amount of money to create short upticks. He wants to hire more teachers, firefighters, and cops. Much as I respect those professions,do we need more of them? No. They aren't job creators. Construction jobs create jobs, but long term jobs? No. And so we fund a whole ton of these projects often on things we don't even need. In this slumping economy I can't even believe the massive amount of construction I've seen to widen street lanes.

You know what creates jobs? The next google. The next Facebook.

And Obama also acts like small businesses are so appreciative of tax cuts. Tax cuts mean nothing if the cost of complying with idiotic regulations balances that tax cut out.

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 06:46 AM
As I've said before, the big thing I can't stand about Obama is that he spends an astronomical amount of money to create short upticks. He wants to hire more teachers, firefighters, and cops. Much as I respect those professions,do we need more of them? No. They aren't job creators. Construction jobs create jobs, but long term jobs? No. And so we fund a whole ton of these projects often on things we don't even need. In this slumping economy I can't even believe the massive amount of construction I've seen to widen street lanes.

You know what creates jobs? The next google. The next Facebook.

And Obama also acts like small businesses are so appreciative of tax cuts. Tax cuts mean nothing if the cost of complying with idiotic regulations balances that tax cut out.

The bad thing about the next google or the next Facebook is that neither of them will produce anything. America used to be a productive nation, most of the factory jobs that used to be in America are now offshore. We have far too few kids that don't know what an honest day's work might be all about.

scho63
06-12-2012, 06:59 AM
Here is a New York Times story that totally rebukes the slide that states net worth has risen since the stimulus

Family Net Worth Drops to Level of Early ’90s, Fed Says

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/family-net-worth-drops-level-185603451.html

scho63
06-12-2012, 07:06 AM
Slide 1 GDP-the government spent 5 trillion and we have GDP that is LOWER than when the crash began. NEGATIVE

Slide 2 Unemployment-Higher than when GB in office and actually higher since Obama decides not to count about 8 million unemployed people who stopped looking. NEGATIVE

Slide 3 Non Farm payrolls-$5 trillion spent hiring gov wokrers, failed green jobs and the sudden spike is now going backwards and DECREASING. NEGATIVE

All other slides point to the fact that the stimulus created a FALSE short term burst driven by printing funny money.

Interest rates are too low, the dollar has been bashed but is now climbing since no more stimulus, oil is now reversing because US dollar strength, and once Obama is gone, things will get much better

Bewbies
06-12-2012, 07:36 AM
The bad thing about the next google or the next Facebook is that neither of them will produce anything. America used to be a productive nation, most of the factory jobs that used to be in America are now offshore. We have far too few kids that don't know what an honest day's work might be all about.

The only jobs that produce anything are factory jobs. No other business model in the world produces anything.

Idiot.

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 08:13 AM
The only jobs that produce anything are factory jobs. No other business model in the world produces anything.

Idiot.

Hey Dolt, have you missed the fact that a very large percentage of our factories have been sent to China, Vietnam, Malaysia, India, Mexico and elsewhere?

At this moment we consume as much food from outside the country as we do from inside the country.

SNR
06-12-2012, 10:30 AM
The bad thing about the next google or the next Facebook is that neither of them will produce anything. America used to be a productive nation, most of the factory jobs that used to be in America are now offshore. We have far too few kids that don't know what an honest day's work might be all about.This is the dumbest post I've read on this forum in quite some time.

patteeu
06-12-2012, 10:33 AM
This is the dumbest post I've read on this forum in quite some time.

You mean you don't agree that what America needs is more kids who don't know what an honest day's work is?

Direckshun
06-12-2012, 10:43 AM
Also, the unemployment rate is FALSE-it has been rigged to exclude workers who have stopped looking for work.

That rate of unemployment largely mirrors the one that economists follow.

It's a rate that will always be higher than the one economists study, but its fluctuations almost always go in the same direction.

Direckshun
06-12-2012, 10:44 AM
As I've said before, the big thing I can't stand about Obama is that he spends an astronomical amount of money to create short upticks. He wants to hire more teachers, firefighters, and cops. Much as I respect those professions,do we need more of them? No. They aren't job creators. Construction jobs create jobs, but long term jobs? No. And so we fund a whole ton of these projects often on things we don't even need. In this slumping economy I can't even believe the massive amount of construction I've seen to widen street lanes.

You know what creates jobs? The next google. The next Facebook.

Creating jobs like construction jobs, for instance, injects the economy with demand. So it can create an uptick in job creation, it's basically like a rebate, but through a paycheck instead of a handout. Shrug.

I can't speak to Google, but doesn't Facebook make billions but only employs a few hundred people?

SNR
06-12-2012, 10:53 AM
You mean you don't agree that what America needs is more kids who don't know what an honest day's work is?
It's the notion that just because a company doesn't manufacture widgets, they're not as beneficial to the economy as one who does.

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 10:58 AM
This is the dumbest post I've read on this forum in quite some time.

That you would make that comment only bolsters my belief that I am totally correct. It also indicates that you aren't aware of the massive amounts of goods we consume that are no longer manufactured in the U.S.

SNR
06-12-2012, 10:59 AM
But yes, it's also the "KIDS TODAY SO DAMN DISRESPECTFUL DONT' KNOW HONEST DAYS WORK HURPA DUHR!" old man garbage that I can't stand. If old farts like Tom don't like the changes in society he sees, then guess whose fault that is.

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 11:00 AM
Creating jobs like construction jobs, for instance, injects the economy with demand. So it can create an uptick in job creation, it's basically like a rebate, but through a paycheck instead of a handout. Shrug.

I can't speak to Google, but doesn't Facebook make billions but only employs a few hundred people?

Those billions are not fully shared with those that are employed. You seem to be laboring under a delusion. The owner of Facebook is worth billions, did not the true worth of Facebook show itself when it went public? How many people lost their investment before they even were invested?

As I said, Google and Facebook do not produce any goods of any kind.

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 11:02 AM
It's the notion that just because a company doesn't manufacture widgets, they're not as beneficial to the economy as one who does.

Actually companies that do not manufacture widgets have caused more financial loss than those that do. Remember the dot com bust a few years ago? Non-producing companies that went down the shitter.

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 11:03 AM
But yes, it's also the "KIDS TODAY SO DAMN DISRESPECTFUL DONT' KNOW HONEST DAYS WORK HURPA DUHR!" old man garbage that I can't stand. If old farts like Tom don't like the changes in society he sees, then guess whose fault that is.

Again you are showing a massive amount of ignorance as well as disrespect for the generations that came before us that made America great. Our generation will be the impetus that will most likely kill America.

KC native
06-12-2012, 11:09 AM
Why do people insist that unemployment measurement has changed under Obama?

KC native
06-12-2012, 11:11 AM
Actually companies that do not manufacture widgets have caused more financial loss than those that do. Remember the dot com bust a few years ago? Non-producing companies that went down the shitter.

Tom, you are fucking stupid.

What about Amazon, Google (I could go on but everyone knows you're a dipshit.)?

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 11:14 AM
Why do people insist that unemployment measurement has changed under Obama?

Has it? What I see now that I didn't see before is that after your UE benefits run out you are no longer unemployed. Did they keep the same format for counting the unemployed from administration to administration? If they have not changed the method why is it that the liberals didn't have that as one of their points of contentionduring conservative presidents administrations?

This administration is not concerned with the wellbeing of the American public, only the American President. It's all about Obama.

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 11:16 AM
you are ****ing stupid.

What about Amazon, Google (I could go on but everyone knows you're a dipshit.)?

Amazon provides a physical service. Google does not, it lives on advertising just as Facebook does. You should go on, it will only out your ignorance.

Go out and get a job, get off the computer and I bet you'll lose about 200 of those 450 pounds you weigh.

KC native
06-12-2012, 11:20 AM
Has it? What I see now that I didn't see before is that after your UE benefits run out you are no longer unemployed. Did they keep the same format for counting the unemployed from administration to administration? If they have not changed the method why is it that the liberals didn't have that as one of their points of contentionduring conservative presidents administrations?

This administration is not concerned with the wellbeing of the American public, only the American President. It's all about Obama.

No, it hasn't. The BLS last revised it under Bush. A simple google search would have told you that.

Saul Good
06-12-2012, 11:21 AM
That rate of unemployment largely mirrors the one that economists follow.

It's a rate that will always be higher than the one economists study, but its fluctuations almost always go in the same direction.

It does, but this is the first time that significant numbers of unemployed have been out for long enough to really make the flaws in the methodology significant.

KC native
06-12-2012, 11:21 AM
Amazon provides a physical service. Google does not, it lives on advertising just as Facebook does. You should go on, it will only out your ignorance.

Go out and get a job, get off the computer and I bet you'll lose about 200 of those 450 pounds you weigh.

And Tom is back to being Tom. How long until you get this mult banned?

Direckshun
06-12-2012, 11:24 AM
It does, but this is the first time that significant numbers of unemployed have been out for long enough to really make the flaws in the methodology significant.

It's tragic that so many people have been unemployed for so long. But I haven't seen anything to suggest this is radically different.

SNR
06-12-2012, 11:32 AM
Tom,

The 50s are back that way. This country can't and won't return to them. Sorry, but that's how the market works.

A young person in the 21st century finds much greater success in creating non-manufacturing companies. Period. I'm not an economist, so I don't know why that happens to be the case, but it is. It likely has to do with cheaper labor elsewhere.

And get off your high horse for fuck's sake. I don't hate old people, and I'm not disrespecting their contributions they made to this country. I just hate the ones like you who bitch all the time about how younger generations are running the country into the ground. If you possessed any self-knowledge at all you would realize that the older generation was saying that about you when YOU were young. History tends to repeat itself, so just shut the fuck up, please. Hard back-breaking labor jobs for people in their 20s don't happen anymore, but that doesn't mean young people don't work hard or don't know what self-reliance is.

What worked for you back in the time of the dinosaurs probably isn't the right solution for a large majority of people these days. Quit pretending like you know what's right.

Direckshun
06-12-2012, 11:41 AM
Is there some way we can find out who is giving Tom rep?

Some people need to be exposed.

vailpass
06-12-2012, 11:52 AM
Is there some way we can find out who is giving Tom rep?

Some people need to be exposed.

Stupid.

patteeu
06-12-2012, 12:05 PM
Why do people insist that unemployment measurement has changed under Obama?

I know. Why isn't it enough to point out that the rate has skyrocketed since Obama sat down in the driver's seat?

patteeu
06-12-2012, 12:09 PM
Has it? What I see now that I didn't see before is that after your UE benefits run out you are no longer unemployed. Did they keep the same format for counting the unemployed from administration to administration? If they have not changed the method why is it that the liberals didn't have that as one of their points of contentionduring conservative presidents administrations?

This administration is not concerned with the wellbeing of the American public, only the American President. It's all about Obama.

It's the same formula. It's just that under previous Presidents, most people who wanted to work were able to find jobs before their unemployment benefits ran out. You might say that Obamaconomics broke the measurement system.

patteeu
06-12-2012, 12:11 PM
It does, but this is the first time that significant numbers of unemployed have been out for long enough to really make the flaws in the methodology significant.

Prepost!

Direckshun
06-12-2012, 12:17 PM
Prepost!

preQ?

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 12:20 PM
Fred, The 50s are back that way. This country can't and won't return to them. Sorry, but that's how the market works.

A young person in the 21st century finds much greater success in creating non-manufacturing companies. Period. I'm not an economist, so I don't know why that happens to be the case, but it is. It likely has to do with cheaper labor elsewhere.

And get off your high horse for ****'s sake. I don't hate old people, and I'm not disrespecting their contributions they made to this country. I just hate the ones like you who bitch all the time about how younger generations are running the country into the ground. If you possessed any self-knowledge at all you would realize that the older generation was saying that about you when YOU were young. History tends to repeat itself, so just shut the **** up, please. Hard back-breaking labor jobs for people in their 20s don't happen anymore, but that doesn't mean young people don't work hard or don't know what self-reliance is.

What worked for you back in the time of the dinosaurs probably isn't the right solution for a large majority of people these days. Quit pretending like you know what's right.

So you feel like I'm an old retired person? I just know for a fact that this country no longer produces the commodities it uses. What will you do if China cuts us off? If the economy tanks as the guys in NYC are predicting who's going to have the money to buy those things that aren't made here any longer? If I knew what was right I'd be in New Zealand rightnow being a millionaire. I know what's wrong and this country is moving in that direction.

ClevelandBronco
06-12-2012, 12:51 PM
It's the notion that just because a company doesn't manufacture widgets, they're not as beneficial to the economy as one who does.

It's antique thinking that is embraced by people who are convinced that ideas are a finite commodity. Manufacturing jobs are the safety net for those people. Those jobs are a form of private welfare that creative people pay to able bodied people. Of course it scares people to death that the welfare is coming to an end. The foundation has shifted. Get used to it. Any politician that tells you that he can deliver us back from the future is a liar or a dangerous idiot.

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 12:59 PM
It's the notion that just because a company doesn't manufacture widgets, they're not as beneficial to the economy as one who does.

It's not the economy that is the question. It's survivability if we get cut off from those that manufacture the commodities we use. When you go to the grocery store read the lables, the items prepared/manufactured in the U.S. tell you so, those that aren't are distributed by: whomever. Check out how many items are distributed inside the U.S., you might be surprised.

Should the providers of commodities cut us off how wil the masses survive? On internet services?

ClevelandBronco
06-12-2012, 01:03 PM
It's not the economy that is the question. It's survivability if we get cut off from those that manufacture the commodities we use. When you go to the grocery store read the lables, the items prepared/manufactured in the U.S. tell you so, those that aren't are distributed by: whomever. Check out how many items are distributed inside the U.S., you might be surprised.

Should the providers of commodities cut us off how wil the masses survive? On internet services?

Who do you think owes you these American-made and American-grown commodities? Private business? The government?

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 01:40 PM
Who do you think owes you these American-made and American-grown commodities? Private business? The government?

It's not that anyone owes us anything. We owe it to ourselves to be a self sustaining country. Without that capability we are going to be up a creek without a paddle.

fan4ever
06-12-2012, 01:59 PM
If you possessed any self-knowledge at all you would realize that the older generation was saying that about you when YOU were young. History tends to repeat itself, so just shut the **** up, please

A bit off topic, but this part of your post reminds me of a quote attributed to Plato/Socrates

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."

Of course, since this sounds so contemporary, it is portrayed as folly...because the world is still here...right? Because the fall of the Greek civilization never happened.

ClevelandBronco
06-12-2012, 02:30 PM
It's not that anyone owes us anything. We owe it to ourselves to be a self sustaining country. Without that capability we are going to be up a creek without a paddle.

Who the hell is this "we" that owes us and who is going to enforce their compliance with your plan, which sounds to me like nothing more than happy horseshit at best, and fascism at worst?

SNR
06-12-2012, 04:32 PM
A bit off topic, but this part of your post reminds me of a quote attributed to Plato/Socrates

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."

Of course, since this sounds so contemporary, it is portrayed as folly...because the world is still here...right? Because the fall of the Greek civilization never happened.Well, sure. The world IS still here today. And your sarcastic quip about the fall of Ancient Greece ignores the REAL reasons why its culture and society is no longer around today, so I'll just pretend you didn't just make that argument.

SNR
06-12-2012, 04:39 PM
So you feel like I'm an old retired person? I just know for a fact that this country no longer produces the commodities it uses. What will you do if China cuts us off? If the economy tanks as the guys in NYC are predicting who's going to have the money to buy those things that aren't made here any longer? If I knew what was right I'd be in New Zealand rightnow being a millionaire. I know what's wrong and this country is moving in that direction.That has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

The manufacturing sector of the economy could stand to be stronger. Absolutely. Does this mean that every time a company like Google rises in this country, it's a bad thing because the company doesn't manufacture stuff?

I'll extend it even further. We don't even have to call it a bad thing. We can call it a good thing with a dark side to it. How substantial is that dark side?

I would say it's barely substantial at all, and not even worth mentioning. What would you say?

fan4ever
06-12-2012, 05:21 PM
Sarcastic? Not trying to be. While there were a multitude of issues that lead to Greece's demise, the civilization eventually unravelled and fell...so therefore you could argue Socrates' concerns may have been valid.

But what I'm really speaking to is the point of "that's what the generation before you said about you".

Just because it's been said before, doesn't make it invalid.

We're on a slippery slope in this country. It's hard to imagine it will get better.

Who's fault? You're absolutely right...the generation before. But is it wrong, no matter who's to blame, to recognize something you see as a problem or is it more wrong to simply ignore it and let it perpetuate?

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 05:23 PM
Who the hell is this "we" that owes us and who is going to enforce their compliance with your plan, which sounds to me like nothing more than happy horseshit at best, and fascism at worst?

WE owe it to ourselves - as in the American people. Call it happy horseshit or facism all you want. If Americans don't fix the problem we will most likely not be considered Americans.

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 05:25 PM
That has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

The manufacturing sector of the economy could stand to be stronger. Absolutely. Does this mean that every time a company like Google rises in this country, it's a bad thing because the company doesn't manufacture stuff?

I'll extend it even further. We don't even have to call it a bad thing. We can call it a good thing with a dark side to it. How substantial is that dark side?

I would say it's barely substantial at all, and not even worth mentioning. What would you say?

I would say that we will never agree. I feel America should be self sustaining. I never said that google or facebook is bad, they provide nothing of substance.

mlyonsd
06-12-2012, 05:34 PM
I would say that we will never agree. I feel America should be self sustaining. I never said that google or facebook is bad, they provide nothing of substance.If facebook went under 20-30 million teenagers would commit suicide. That's kind of a big deal.

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 05:39 PM
If facebook went under 20-30 million teenagers would commit suicide. That's kind of a big deal.

I seriously doubt that, but if that's your pov then OK. Someone would come along with another non-product program to replace it. MySpace was big until facebook took over, I don't remember there being masses of teens killing themselves.

ClevelandBronco
06-12-2012, 07:42 PM
WE owe it to ourselves - as in the American people. Call it happy horseshit or facism all you want. If Americans don't fix the problem we will most likely not be considered Americans.

The American people do not collectively own the means of production, so I'm eager to hear your plan. I assume it involves force of government.

mlyonsd
06-12-2012, 07:44 PM
I seriously doubt that, but if that's your pov then OK. Someone would come along with another non-product program to replace it. MySpace was big until facebook took over, I don't remember there being masses of teens killing themselves.Tom, it was a joke. Lighten up.

ClevelandBronco
06-12-2012, 07:50 PM
I would say that we will never agree. I feel America should be self sustaining. I never said that google or facebook is bad, they provide nothing of substance.

Time to rethink what substance looks like in 2012.

Iz Zat Chew
06-12-2012, 08:02 PM
Tom, it was a joke. Lighten up.

I'll lighten up if you use my real name.

patteeu
06-13-2012, 06:36 AM
I'll lighten up if you use my real name.

:facepalm:

Iz Zat Chew
06-13-2012, 11:36 AM
:facepalm::rolleyes:

chiefzilla1501
06-13-2012, 08:01 PM
So you feel like I'm an old retired person? I just know for a fact that this country no longer produces the commodities it uses. What will you do if China cuts us off? If the economy tanks as the guys in NYC are predicting who's going to have the money to buy those things that aren't made here any longer? If I knew what was right I'd be in New Zealand rightnow being a millionaire. I know what's wrong and this country is moving in that direction.

You're not factoring in how much prices go up when you force domestic firms to use domestic resources. Take sugar. That one commodity alone is costing billions of dollars because we place tariffs to protect American sugar farmers. That means my sugar price is significantly higher than it would cost in Europe. That means that manufacturers like Coca-Cola have to either decide to pay for expensive sugar or produce an artificial substance like high fructose corn syrup. Forcing domestic production means higher prices for consumers, higher costs for businesses, and an inability to compete in the global economy.

I get your intention. But economically, it doesn't make any sense to force more domestic production. The theory of comparative advantage suggests that if some other country can do it a hell of a lot cheaper than you, then your country should shift resources to producing things you can do a hell of a lot better than they can.

Facebook is an imperfect example, because it's not totally clear how they will continue to make money. Apple is a classic example. When Apple does very well in Japan, that means that Japanese people are pumping money into our economy.

Iz Zat Chew
06-13-2012, 08:28 PM
I get your intention. But economically, it doesn't make any sense to force more domestic production. The theory of comparative advantage suggests that if some other country can do it a hell of a lot cheaper than you, then your country should shift resources to producing things you can do a hell of a lot better than they can.

Facebook is an imperfect example, because it's not totally clear how they will continue to make money. Apple is a classic example. When Apple does very well in Japan, that means that Japanese people are pumping money into our economy.

It's not the need to force production in the U.S. The problem I see is that should there be a war thatmost of the countries of the world is involved in then we won't have the ability to be self sustaining. I would re-locate to the middle of the country where land is available and prepare to grow my own food. But if you look at the large metropolitan areas on the east and west coasts there will be more hungry people than you could possibly feed. If we aren't getting imports there will be a very drastic shortage of food. The San Joaquin Valley in Califonia has plenty of land and does grow a substantial amount of produce, I don't believe they can feed the country.

I'm not sure I agree with your opinion of Apple and Japan. You might need to push that issue further.

If I were to be correct would Japan still be pumping money into the U.S.?

Comrade Crapski
08-28-2012, 12:05 AM
http://moonbattery.com/?p=16457

BucEyedPea
08-28-2012, 08:40 AM
You folks had better be prepared. No matter who wins this election....the fallout is going to be much worse than 2008. Mitt's gonna inherit something much worse.

Comrade Crapski
12-21-2012, 10:51 AM
I'm sure the next 50 posts will tell me to shove my head up my ass. :D



Well, yeah. duh.

http://www.examiner.com/article/new-study-confirms-economy-was-destroyed-by-democrat-policies?CID=examiner_alerts_article