ScienceRocks
Democrat all the way!
- Banned
- #21
The republican party would do this country good being the party of efficacy and getting us back to the 1950-1970's economically, infastructurely and innovativeness.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That's why you punish idiots that waste money. The government needs to hold a high standard to what project, research and infrastructure is done. Our government has become lazy....
So you want to drive across that 50 year old bridge? Or watch our first rate science programs be killed off. Well, you're not rooting for a strong America.
All nations invest in education, science, infrastructure and [email protected] nations that don't are piss poor and are a dream to all conservatives!
http://www.businessinsider.com/imf-admitted-their-economists-were-wrong-2013-1The IMF
Use to be such a staunch supporter.
Has Keynesian Economics ever worked?
USA under Obama demonstrates the total Fail that is Keynsenian economics
With a democracy we have politicians and to have politicians means to have graft and corruption, it can't be stopped. What can be done, however, is to try and keep the graft and corruption to a minimum.
With capitalism we have the business cycles and they can't be stopped. What can be done, however, is for government to keep the cycles to a minimum and their impact to a minimum. So far, no one has figured out a better method to treat business cycles than properly applied Keynes. Hoover and Republicans usually misapply Keynes using the trickle-down approach and it doesn't tricle down, it stops somewhere in the journey from government to business to buyers. The money has to be given to the poor, the buyers, the ones that put the money right back in circulation.
Another shortcoming with Keynes, is the money govenment spends during the recession is supposed to be paid back during a period of properity, and for politicians that's the hard part, and so far the impossible part.
We are still in the economic learning process and for some politicians economic-learning is a waste when reelection is the only thing on their mind.
With a democracy we have politicians and to have politicians means to have graft and corruption, it can't be stopped. What can be done, however, is to try and keep the graft and corruption to a minimum.
With capitalism we have the business cycles and they can't be stopped. What can be done, however, is for government to keep the cycles to a minimum and their impact to a minimum. So far, no one has figured out a better method to treat business cycles than properly applied Keynes. Hoover and Republicans usually misapply Keynes using the trickle-down approach and it doesn't tricle down, it stops somewhere in the journey from government to business to buyers. The money has to be given to the poor, the buyers, the ones that put the money right back in circulation.
Another shortcoming with Keynes, is the money govenment spends during the recession is supposed to be paid back during a period of properity, and for politicians that's the hard part, and so far the impossible part.
We are still in the economic learning process and for some politicians economic-learning is a waste when reelection is the only thing on their mind.
When bush took office in 2001 he went against Keynes. There was prosperity and he gave out tax breaks to good buddies. Like he said. "There are the haves and the have mores. My base is the have mores".
USA under Obama demonstrates the total Fail that is Keynsenian economics
We should have liquidated everything and gotten rid of the rot. (there's a joke in there)
USA under Obama demonstrates the total Fail that is Keynsenian economics
We should have liquidated everything and gotten rid of the rot. (there's a joke in there)
It worked for the USA under Mellon and Coolidge
Spending $1T a year to prop up bad loans....yeah, that's gotta work!
BTW bank execs started 2014 by selling more stock than they did in 2007
We should have liquidated everything and gotten rid of the rot. (there's a joke in there)
It worked for the USA under Mellon and Coolidge
Spending $1T a year to prop up bad loans....yeah, that's gotta work!
BTW bank execs started 2014 by selling more stock than they did in 2007
It was mahvalous in 1930, simply mahvalous. but again, your OP is contrary to the link that you asserted supported it.
http://www.businessinsider.com/imf-admitted-their-economists-were-wrong-2013-1TheIMF
Use to be such a staunch supporter.
Has Keynesian Economics ever worked?
http://www.businessinsider.com/imf-admitted-their-economists-were-wrong-2013-1The IMF
Use to be such a staunch supporter.
Has Keynesian Economics ever worked?
With a democracy we have politicians and to have politicians means to have graft and corruption, it can't be stopped. What can be done, however, is to try and keep the graft and corruption to a minimum.
With capitalism we have the business cycles and they can't be stopped. What can be done, however, is for government to keep the cycles to a minimum and their impact to a minimum. So far, no one has figured out a better method to treat business cycles than properly applied Keynes. Hoover and Republicans usually misapply Keynes using the trickle-down approach and it doesn't tricle down, it stops somewhere in the journey from government to business to buyers. The money has to be given to the poor, the buyers, the ones that put the money right back in circulation.
Another shortcoming with Keynes, is the money govenment spends during the recession is supposed to be paid back during a period of properity, and for politicians that's the hard part, and so far the impossible part.
We are still in the economic learning process and for some politicians economic-learning is a waste when reelection is the only thing on their mind.
When bush took office in 2001 he went against Keynes. There was prosperity and he gave out tax breaks to good buddies. Like he said. "There are the haves and the have mores. My base is the have mores".
Bush and Reagan both practiced Keynes, Reagan tripled the national debt and Bush doubled it again. Where did all that money go, most to trickle-down and of course little trickled down, it is still up there in the upper brackets.
When bush took office in 2001 he went against Keynes. There was prosperity and he gave out tax breaks to good buddies. Like he said. "There are the haves and the have mores. My base is the have mores".
Bush and Reagan both practiced Keynes, Reagan tripled the national debt and Bush doubled it again. Where did all that money go, most to trickle-down and of course little trickled down, it is still up there in the upper brackets.
Reagan put a lot of money into defense spending. In that way it was big government, not capitalism, which defeated the Soviet Union.
When bush took office in 2001 he went against Keynes. There was prosperity and he gave out tax breaks to good buddies. Like he said. "There are the haves and the have mores. My base is the have mores".
Bush and Reagan both practiced Keynes, Reagan tripled the national debt and Bush doubled it again. Where did all that money go, most to trickle-down and of course little trickled down, it is still up there in the upper brackets.
Reagan put a lot of money into defense spending. In that way it was big government, not capitalism, which defeated the Soviet Union.
The new IMF Working Paper, titled Growth Forecast Errors and Fiscal Multipliers, prepared by Blanchard and Daniel Leigh of their Research Department, reports that whereas the IMF had been accepting conservative economists estimates that the multiplier was about 0.5 percent growth, the actual multipliers were substantially above 1 early in the crisis, which was the period when the IMF was recommending and pursuing fiscal consolidation, which is called in the United States austerity.
In other words, the policy recommended by the Republican Partys economists, and which has actually been tried especially in Europe, has failed miserably.
Here are some of the things the IMF study reports:
Read more: The IMF Admits It Was Wrong About Keynesianism - Business Insider
So what did they finally determine?
That Keyneisan spending during a serious economic downturn is FAR MORE EFFECTIVE than they're originally thought.
Cracks me up.
However what this fails to say is that the Keynesian spending means SPENDING not giving trillions to BANKS.
Which is what both Bush II and Obama mostly have done.