Reagan's Gift

[8537]

What it went into was a second depression.

3 quarters of economic decline is not a depression, especially in light of the near-record growth that followed.

Contrary to the belief of Keynesian economic alchemists, scooping water out of the deep end of the pool and pouring it into the shallow end doesn't make the shallow end any deeper.

Contrary to the beliefs of the Innsbruck Elitisti club, the government doesn't "scoop water out of the deep end and pour it into the shallow end". What "they" like to forget is that simple random platitudes about water depth don't actually explain economic activity.

 

[Oddball]

Right...Keynesian witch doctors believe that they can just make some water come out of printing presses and make everything all better.

 

[8537]

Oh, so the wealthy don't keep their money in mattresses but invest it into even more productive activities instead?

Thank you for that little lesson in economics, President Reagan.

Purely financial investment does not add to the productive capital, all of your juvenile laughies aside.

 

[8537]

Right...Keynesian witch doctors believe that they can just make some water come out of printing presses and make everything all better.

No, Keynesians believe that the economy is poorly represented by a swimming pool full of water. In fact, they find such comparisons juvenile and stupid.

 

[Oddball]

Right...They believe everyone is juvenile and stupid, except for themselves as they believe to be demi-gods on Earth.

Little wonder that most of them are closet eugenicists, to boot.

 

[HUGGY]

Oh, so the wealthy don't keep their money in mattresses but invest it into even more productive activities instead?

Thank you for that little lesson in economics, President Reagan.

Purely financial investment does not add to the productive capital, all of your juvenile laughies aside.

I would tend to agree except for IPO's. They do raise enormous capital and are usually when companies use that influx of money to expand and hire. The rest of the stock market is basically just a shell game.

 

[Oddball]

Oh, so the wealthy don't keep their money in mattresses but invest it into even more productive activities instead?

Thank you for that little lesson in economics, President Reagan.

Purely financial investment does not add to the productive capital, all of your juvenile laughies aside.

I would tend to agree except for IPO's. They do raise enormous capital and are usually when companies use that influx of money to expand and hire. The rest of the stock market is basically just a shell game.

Gee...Why is it you suppose they hire new employees and purchase new equipment?

 

[8537]

Right...They believe everyone is juvenile and stupid, except for themselves as they believe to be demi-gods on Earth.

There is a certain irony in you, of all people, pointing out that others feel those that disagree might be juvenile and stupid - you, the person who started a thread dancing on the grave of one of the 20th centuries most noted economists on the same day he passed.

I didn't say everyone else was juvenile and stupid - i said comparing the economy to a swimming pool was juvenile and stupid.

Keynesians have, over the past 70 years, evolved into three distinct branches, invited insight from Milton, Lucas, Barro and others, and adopted models to meet changing understanding of markets. Meanwhile, Austrian's have changed....well, not a bit - still believing that the problem we have here is a simply misallocation of resources through time over the production process.

 

[8537]

Oh, so the wealthy don't keep their money in mattresses but invest it into even more productive activities instead?

Thank you for that little lesson in economics, President Reagan.

Purely financial investment does not add to the productive capital, all of your juvenile laughies aside.

I would tend to agree except for IPO's. They do raise enormous capital and are usually when companies use that influx of money to expand and hire. The rest of the stock market is basically just a shell game.

Yes! IPO's are very different animal that actually places capital into the hands of a company for the purposes of expanding productive capacity.

Everything after is just an exchange of one kind of paper for another kind.

 

[Oddball]

Right...They believe everyone is juvenile and stupid, except for themselves as they believe to be demi-gods on Earth.

There is a certain irony in you, of all people, pointing out that others feel those that disagree might be juvenile and stupid - you, the person who started a thread dancing on the grave of one of the 20th centuries most noted economists on the same day he passed.

Keynesians have, over the past 70 years, evolved into three distinct branches, invited insight from Milton, Lucas, Barro and others, and adopted models to meet changing understanding of markets. Meanwhile, Austrian's have changed....well, not a bit - still believing that the problem we have here is a simply misallocation of resources through time over the production process.

Galbraith was an elitist snob and the world is better off with fewer of them, no matter which field they choose to get into.

That Austrian economic models haven't changed is to their advantage...But I'm not the one who needs to make up a new theory to explain away my grand Utopian central planner theories blowing up in my face.

 

[BlindBoo]

Transferring those savings to where?...Under what expectation of what will become of those savings?

When you buy or sell a stock on, for example, the NASDAQ or NYSE you are not "increasing productive capacity" or investing in any economic sense. You are simply transferring savings from one person to another.

Oh, and what do those who obtain the funds do with that money..Stuff it in their mattresses?

Depends The Government made 13 billion off the selling of part of it's GM shares during the IPO. Now stocks that are sold after the IPO...Broker fees and the rest to the seller/owner of the stock not the company.

 

[8537]

Right...They believe everyone is juvenile and stupid, except for themselves as they believe to be demi-gods on Earth.

There is a certain irony in you, of all people, pointing out that others feel those that disagree might be juvenile and stupid - you, the person who started a thread dancing on the grave of one of the 20th centuries most noted economists on the same day he passed.

Keynesians have, over the past 70 years, evolved into three distinct branches, invited insight from Milton, Lucas, Barro and others, and adopted models to meet changing understanding of markets. Meanwhile, Austrian's have changed....well, not a bit - still believing that the problem we have here is a simply misallocation of resources through time over the production process.

Galbraith was an elitist snob and the world is better off with fewer of them, no matter which field they choose to get into.

Spoken like a true Eugenicist and elitist snob.

That Austrian economic models haven't changed is to their advantage...

Of course! Why let reality get in the way of a theory that looks so nice on paper?

 

[Oddball]

Yeah...Reality...Let's look at a little reality.


How about the little reality that happened when all the economic "geniuses" told us the we needed to throw a few hundred billion at the banks, ostensibly so they could get to lending out those funds.

But what happened?...They deposited the money, used it to pay off their own outstanding debts and/or stashed it into Treasuries....But do the "geniuses" get introspective and say "gee, we really screwed the pooch there"?....Nope, they huddle up and come up with some more screwy central planner theories, intended to try and cover their tracks for the last effort at pushing ropes, while they trot out double-speaking spokesholes like Baghdad Ben Bernake, trying to make make you believe that they can turn goat piss into gasoline.

Seems the only exrternalities y'all can't ever see coming are those involved with the grandiose schemes of the authoritarian central planning.

 

[HUGGY]

Purely financial investment does not add to the productive capital, all of your juvenile laughies aside.

I would tend to agree except for IPO's. They do raise enormous capital and are usually when companies use that influx of money to expand and hire. The rest of the stock market is basically just a shell game.

Gee...Why is it you suppose they hire new employees and purchase new equipment?

Why do YOU think they hire and expand capacity? Usually you don't miss the point. That being that once the influx of capital has been achieved the stock market has little to do with a companies success. It can cause a various set of problems. A companies future depends on the market they are involved in and their performance operating within that market.

 

[Oddball]

I still didn't miss the point.

My point being that companies can use monies invested in their stock for a whole range of efforts that require capital (i.e. GMAC for GM to finance the sales their own vehicles).

Just because a public company is solvent and profitable doesn't necessarily mean that they stuff all the excess in their metaphorical mattresses.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

When you buy or sell a stock on, for example, the NASDAQ or NYSE you are not "increasing productive capacity" or investing in any economic sense. You are simply transferring savings from one person to another.

Oh, and what do those who obtain the funds do with that money..Stuff it in their mattresses?

Depends The Government made 13 billion off the selling of part of it's GM shares during the IPO. Now stocks that are sold after the IPO...Broker fees and the rest to the seller/owner of the stock not the company.

The government made money on GM? Do you know what any one of those words mean?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Transferring those savings to where?...Under what expectation of what will become of those savings?

When you buy or sell a stock on, for example, the NASDAQ or NYSE you are not "increasing productive capacity" or investing in any economic sense. You are simply transferring savings from one person to another.

What? So companies capitalize their activities by what? What currency? Obama's Stash?

 

[rdean]

Reagan gave his greatest gift to the Middle Class. But it wasn't as big as the one Bush gave:

 

[AquaAthena]

More than anything else, what Reagan gave us is an enduring, entitled class of individuals who believe that work should be taxed, but wealth should not. These were the people who were the prime beneficiaries of Reagan’s first and most important tax cut: the one that brought down the top rate. Excerpt from:


Reagan's Gift - Columns - Baltimore City Paper

Taxes have already been taken out of your payroll. Whatever amount that you put back after you pay your bills could be considered your wealth. That wealth has already been taxed. So, what you're saying: if I build up a business, make millions, pay taxes on the gross, sell it, pay capital gains taxes and then leave it to my kids, then they should pony up another 50 percent in taxes to keep their inheritance?

Yes, otherwise known as double taxation. Redistribute your inheritance...why invest and grow it???

 

[8537]

Yeah...Reality...Let's look at a little reality.


How about the little reality that happened when all the economic "geniuses" told us the we needed to throw a few hundred billion at the banks, ostensibly so they could get to lending out those funds.

There was no requirement that they lend those funds.

But what happened?

The overnight markets went from complete collapse to being partially rebuilt - just as Paulson etal had hoped.

best idea? Probably not. Decent idea? yes. Especially in light of the end costs involved.