Exactly why the government can't stimulate the economy.

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Government liberal bureaucrats do not invent new goods and services so can't stimulate the economy. This is something the private sector does as a matter of survival. It is how we got from the stone age to here. The more liberal government interferes with the private sector the slower the economy grows. Its just that simple.

Did the USSR fail because the government interfered too much or too little? Did our liberals spy for the USSR because they understood or because they didn't?

 

[oldfart]

Government liberal bureaucrats do not invent new goods and services so can't stimulate the economy. This is something the private sector does as a matter of survival. It is how we got from the stone age to here. The more liberal government interferes with the private sector the slower the economy grows. Its just that simple.

Did the USSR fail because the government interfered too much or too little? Did our liberals spy for the USSR because they understood or because they didn't?

All bureaucrats work for the government? You haven't dealt with an insurance company lately.

All governement employees are bureaucrats? A lot of schoolteachers and law enforcement might disagree with you.

And the next time you try to record a deed, try doing it without a bureaucrat (also know as clerks).

Grow up. If you have a sector you think government is interfering in too much, debate that; don't just go off repeating conservative cant and drivel.

Don't know why you want to drag the Soviet economy into the discussion, but since you brought it up, it collapsed through a combination of an overcentralized economic system with perverse incentives, a nationality problem they never solved, and the economic stress of WWII from which they never recovered. The United States government spent about $100,000 in today's dollars to send me to graduate school to study the Soviet economy in the early 70's and at that time we could not come up with a good explanation of why the USSR had not collapsed economically by then.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Government liberal bureaucrats do not invent new goods and services so can't stimulate the economy. This is something the private sector does as a matter of survival. It is how we got from the stone age to here. The more liberal government interferes with the private sector the slower the economy grows. Its just that simple.

Did the USSR fail because the government interfered too much or too little? Did our liberals spy for the USSR because they understood or because they didn't?

All bureaucrats work for the government? You haven't dealt with an insurance company lately.

All governement employees are bureaucrats? A lot of schoolteachers and law enforcement might disagree with you.

And the next time you try to record a deed, try doing it without a bureaucrat (also know as clerks).

Grow up. If you have a sector you think government is interfering in too much, debate that; don't just go off repeating conservative cant and drivel.

Don't know why you want to drag the Soviet economy into the discussion, but since you brought it up, it collapsed through a combination of an overcentralized economic system with perverse incentives, a nationality problem they never solved, and the economic stress of WWII from which they never recovered. The United States government spent about $100,000 in today's dollars to send me to graduate school to study the Soviet economy in the early 70's and at that time we could not come up with a good explanation of why the USSR had not collapsed economically by then.

Did you know that there is no law preventing you from changing insurance companies?

No...really.


From chapter 10, "The Secret Knowledge," David Mamet

1. Now, here is the determining criterion as to which is better: which is better able to correct itself? This is the difference between, as Thomas Sowell would say, the free market (constrained) and the Liberal (unconstrained) view of the world. Either side may be wrong about plans, or about programs. But which system is better able to discard the failed and experiment to find the new.

a. The constrained view is that no human beings, nor any conglomeration of same, are omnipotent, nor omniscient, nor omnibenevolent. We are even incapable of knowing the true nature of the problems we face. This may be called the Tragic View. The values of one generation are seen later as absurd: slavery, phenology, lobotomy, women as property, etc.


2. The answer is the free market. It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control. It is the one that has to respond quickly and effectively to dissatisfaction and to demand.

a. In the free market, if a product or service does not please, it is discontinued. Compare that to government persistence and expansion of programs that proven to have failed decades ago: farm subsidies, aid to Africa, busing, etc.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

All bureaucrats work for the government? You haven't dealt with an insurance company lately.

insurance companies are so heavily regulated by liberal government that they are in effect like government

All government employees are bureaucrats? A lot of schoolteachers and law enforcement might disagree with you.

too stupid!!! they get paid almost double what they'd get in the private sector just like all bureaucrats who are protected from competition by liberals and their unions

And the next time you try to record a deed, try doing it without a bureaucrat (also know as clerks).

too stupid!! recording a deed is putting it in a file. A monkey or 2 liberal bureaucrats working for twice the competitive wage pay can do it.

Grow up. If you have a sector you think government is interfering in too much, debate that; don't just go off repeating conservative cant and drivel.

too stupid!!! they just interfered with the housing sector and caused this depression!!!! What planet are you on?????????

Don't know why you want to drag the Soviet economy into the discussion, but since you brought it up, it collapsed through a combination of an overcentralized economic system

exactly, just like Fed, Fanny, Fred in our housing economy and Barry in our health care economy!!

with perverse incentives,

liberal socialist incentives are always perverse while capitalist incentives are always 100% natural

a nationality problem they never solved, and the economic stress of WWII from which they never recovered. The United States government spent about $100,000 in today's dollars to send me to graduate school to study the Soviet economy in the early 70's and at that time we could not come up with a good explanation of why the USSR had not collapsed economically by then.

Too stupid!!! The big liberals like Samuelson and Galbraith and all those other liberals who spied for the USSR thought they had seen the future in the USSR!!!


Notice how as a liberal you lacked the IQ to address the OP about how liberal government cant invent products and so cant stimulate economy.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

In the free market, if a product or service does not please, it is discontinued. Compare that to government persistence and expansion of programs that proven to have failed decades ago: farm subsidies, aid to Africa, busing, etc.

yes or to Hungry in the 1980's where they were still manufacturing cars that had dip sticks in place of gas gages and gravity feed carburetors so that you had go backwards to get up a hill!!

Not only can't the government invent new products to stimulate an economy it also can't intervene in a way that is more helpful than harmful.

A liberal will lack the IQ to understand.
How can our country survive with so many liberals around when a democracy counts on intelligent participation??