Bigger Burden: Federal Debt or Mass Unemployment?

I have to make an "argument" that adding a trillion dollars plus a year to our debt is a bad thing? Are you serious?

Seriously. Why is it a bad thing?

1) our kids will have to pay it off and so suffer a decreased life style for your immoral behavior

2) government spending is wasted mal-investment Solyndra bridge to nowhere spending or crippling welfare payments that buy votes, subvert democracy, and destroy the soul

Economics is about the redistribution of scarce resources. Money is simply a medium for determining the relative perceived value of the stuff. It is simply a way of keeping score.

All goods consumed in the future will be produced in the future. We cannot eat future food and we cannot occupy future houses. The economy is not a house hold where purchases on the credit card have to be paid back by forgoing consumption. There is no borrowing from future consumption.

Some how the books have to balance, but the value of money is not fixed and consumption is only affected if we a) don't produce or b) we sell it all to China.

See, this is why you are positively to slow to understand economics. Clearly, you have no understanding of economics, at the most fundamental level.
 
Last edited:
The economy is not a house hold where purchases on the credit card have to be paid back by forgoing consumption. There is no borrowing from future consumption.


now now you must remember your tiny conceptual IQ??

oh???? so the $16 trillion debt and any more the libturds ring up won't decrease future consumption for anyone??? Please explain
 
2) government spending is wasted mal-investment Solyndra bridge to nowhere spending or crippling welfare payments that buy votes, subvert democracy, and destroy the soul

How about highway funding, defense spending, and education. Are these all mal-invstments?

Why Small Businesses Fail: SBA

"The U.S. Small Business Administration has seen lots of small businesses come and, unfortunately, go. According to the SBA, over 50% of small businesses fail in the first five years."

How about the Edsel, Enron, Sony Betamax, and the Titanic? Excellent private market investments?

This is the nature of capitalism, taking shots at the goal.

See why you are positively too slow to understand the economy?
 
2) government spending is wasted mal-investment Solyndra bridge to nowhere spending or crippling welfare payments that buy votes, subvert democracy, and destroy the soul

How about highway funding, defense spending, and education. Are these all mal-invstments?

no, libertarians are not anarchists


This is the nature of capitalism, taking shots at the goal.
See why you are positively too slow to understand the economy?

not sure what your point you thought you were making?? Please explain
 
Last edited:
The economy is not a house hold where purchases on the credit card have to be paid back by forgoing consumption. There is no borrowing from future consumption.


now now you must remember your tiny conceptual IQ??

oh???? so the $16 trillion debt and any more the libturds ring up won't decrease future consumption for anyone??? Please explain

We cannot eat future food.

Why are you so afraid to put forth your best explanation of how we can eat future food or occupy future houses? What does your fear tell you?
 
The economy is not a house hold where purchases on the credit card have to be paid back by forgoing consumption. There is no borrowing from future consumption.


now now you must remember your tiny conceptual IQ??

oh???? so the $16 trillion debt and any more the libturds ring up won't decrease future consumption for anyone??? Please explain

We cannot eat future food.

do you mean we won't eat food in the future so there will be no decrease in food consumption in the future? It seems you have a conceptual problem and an English problem.
 
Last edited:
2) government spending is wasted mal-investment Solyndra bridge to nowhere spending or crippling welfare payments that buy votes, subvert democracy, and destroy the soul

How about highway funding, defense spending, and education. Are these all mal-invstments?

no, libertarians are not anarchists


This is the nature of capitalism, taking shots at the goal.
See why you are positively too slow to understand the economy?

not sure what your point you though you were making?? PLease explain

When in doubt, feign ignorance. It suits you.

Got nothing ,do you?
 
2) government spending is wasted mal-investment Solyndra bridge to nowhere spending or crippling welfare payments that buy votes, subvert democracy, and destroy the soul



no, libertarians are not anarchists


This is the nature of capitalism, taking shots at the goal.
See why you are positively too slow to understand the economy?

not sure what your point you though you were making?? PLease explain

When in doubt, feign ignorance. It suits you.

Got nothing ,do you?

please make your point in plain English. I've asked twice now. How will you learn if you are afraid to try?
 
Taking data from here, here are the following unemployment rates by age:

(Quarter 1, 2005) [Quarter 1, 2012]

18-19 years: (15.2) [21.4]
20-24 years: (9.6) [13.4]
25-29 years: (6.2) [9.9]
30-34 years: (5.2) [8.7]

The millions of young people who are missing out of employment experience because of employers too uncertain of future economic growth: what should be done about them?

To those people who say that the key to economic prosperity and jobs is to eliminate or reduce food stamps, welfare, unemployment compensation, capital gains taxes, corporate income taxes, the EPA, the Federal Reserve, Pell Grants, direct Stafford student loans, and make everyone in the USA pay 20% income tax or whatever in an effort to reduce the budget deficit in order to make businesses confident to start investing in human capital, I say fine.

If people of your mindset make it to the presidency and have a majority in the Senate and the House, I certainly hope the economy recovers under your watch.

However, if after years of your efforts, the debt to GDP ratio raises significantly, and the unemployment rate is still sky high, I am going to have the biggest burst of Schadenfreude the world has ever seen.

(This is all a hypothetical strawman agruement. Feel free to drop in with a real opinion of your own.)



I'm glad you have recovered and you seem to be out of your coma.

Just to catch you up, after years of Obama's efforts, the debt to GDP ratio has risen significantly and the unemployment rate is still sky high.

Now you're up to date.

Please continue with that "burst of Schadenfreude" thingy that you are looking forward to.
 
I'm glad you have recovered and you seem to be out of your coma.

Just to catch you up, after years of Obama's efforts, the debt to GDP ratio has risen significantly and the unemployment rate is still sky high.

Now you're up to date.

Please continue with that "burst of Schadenfreude" thingy that you are looking forward to.

Obama did not call for another big stimulus package after the original fizzled because of its relatively small size.

Look what's happening in recent years:

060312krugman1-blog480.jpg


Why is this happening when the evidence suggests that fiscal policy works?

021812krugman1-blog480.jpg
 
Last edited:
I'm glad you have recovered and you seem to be out of your coma.

Just to catch you up, after years of Obama's efforts, the debt to GDP ratio has risen significantly and the unemployment rate is still sky high.

Now you're up to date.

Please continue with that "burst of Schadenfreude" thingy that you are looking forward to.

Obama did not call for another big stimulous package after the original fizzled because of its relatively small size.

Look what's happening in recent years:

060312krugman1-blog480.jpg


Why is this happening when the evidence suggests that fiscal policy works?

021812krugman1-blog480.jpg



As with most propaganda charts, I'm not sure what it is you're trying to foist upon us.

Are you saying that the government is not spending anything on the people at all?

The graph seems to indicate that the government spending has moved into the negative, but the government continues to run up a debt.

What is it you're trying to say?
 
As with most propaganda charts, I'm not sure what it is you're trying to foist upon us.

Are you saying that the government is not spending anything on the people at all?

The graph seems to indicate that the government spending has moved into the negative, but the government continues to run up a debt.

What is it you're trying to say?

The y-axis on the top chart says "change from previous year". This means that government spending is less now than it was a year ago.
 

Forum List

Back
Top