S&P: Austerity is "Self-Defeating"

[kiwiman127]

the spending cuts have to be made slowly.

why slowly?? the faster and bigger the govt cuts, the faster and bigger that sustainable private spending will take place to end the recession.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Since both Calvin and Hobbes and the Far Side stopped, Krugman is the only consistent laugh in the papers

 

[samjones]

I tried, the blood rushing to my brain convinced me Krugman is a complete hack, and I even discovered irrefutable proof of it. Unfortunately I forgot it when I stood up. I think it had something to do with him saying the stimulus was perfect before he said it was too small.

Do you have a cite where Krugman said he was satisfied with the stimulus? I've been reading him since he started with the Times and from the beginning of this economic crisis he has said that massive stimulus was needed and every time there was a stimulus package he has said it was not enough.

He has complained repeatedly that he didn't like how the stimuluses were being administered, which calls to mind the "food is terrible and such small portions" joke.

 

[editec]

I tried, the blood rushing to my brain convinced me Krugman is a complete hack, and I even discovered irrefutable proof of it. Unfortunately I forgot it when I stood up. I think it had something to do with him saying the stimulus was perfect before he said it was too small.

Do you have a cite where Krugman said he was satisfied with the stimulus? I've been reading him since he started with the Times and from the beginning of this economic crisis he has said that massive stimulus was needed and every time there was a stimulus package he has said it was not enough.

He has complained repeatedly that he didn't like how the stimuluses were being administered, which calls to mind the "food is terrible and such small portions" joke.

You ARE CORRECT, Sam.

QW has been misinformed per usual.

 

[editec]

Austerity means that even less people will be able to buy stuff/

That is NOT a formula for improve the economy.

of course thats liberal and so idiotic. Austerity does not mean you burn money so it cant be spent, it merely means that those who earned it, respect it, and will spent/invest it most sustainably to grow the economy will get to keep more of their income rather than have it stolen by liberal bureaucrats who will then promptly waste it.

I'm fully aware of what austerity means, lad.

You trust the Randian economic philosphy that we've had for the last 30 years, I completely understand that.

How's that worked out for this economy?

See any wealth trickling down, do ya?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You trust the Randian economic philosphy that we've had for the last 30 years, I completely understand that.

actually Rand and our Founders were all about limited or smaller government. Just to help you with the utter-most basics, Bush introduced the first $2 trillion budget, then the first $3 trillion budget, and now BO is pushing $4 trillion.

Does that sound like limited and smaller government????? Do you see why we must conclude that liberalism is the perfect absence of thought? What other conclusion is possible? Sorry.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

the spending cuts have to be made slowly.

why slowly?? the faster and bigger the govt cuts, the faster and bigger that sustainable private spending will take place to end the recession.

perhaps when you've had Econ 101 you'll be able to respond with substance. In the mean time you can continue to pretend you understand the subject.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

See any wealth trickling down, do ya?

Oh my gosh yes. State of the Art medical care, for example, trickles down to the poorest Americans while they are not required to pay for it or contribute in any way to innovation in the industry or any other. They are perfect free riders who live better than kings did just 50 years ago.

 

[kiwiman127]

Austerity means the government spends only as much money as it takes in in tax revenue. A novel concept for people like you, but it leads to stable economies and prosperity.

QW, while I enjoy reading your thoughtful posts, some I agree with, others not so much, I have to disagree with you based on what austerity has done to European countries. (See my earlier post on this in this thread.)

The lesson we learn from Europe is that one doesn't cut government spending drastically during an economic downturn. We may not be in a recession period anymore, but economic growth for a majority is still very, very stagnant. It's correctly argued that one doesn't raise taxes during times like these, that also holds true regarding massive government spending cuts.

Austerity did not cause those problems, over spending did. When that gravy train hit the inevitable fact that governments actually have to pay back the money they borrow people suffered from the need to adjust spending to reality. If, on the other hand, the government had been austere the entire time there would not have been a problem in the first place.

And that statement is true to a point. Over spending was the intital cause but sudden large cuts in government spending as a result of the debt causes economic downturn. Now as I have stated repeatedly, I have no problem with cutting spending if done in a manner that doesn't effect economic growth to the point of causing a double dip recession. In order to stabilize an economy, an economy has to grow, not shrink. Once an economy is on more stable ground, then the government spending can be cut more aggressively. Cutting too much to soon hurts economic growth when an economy is fragile, the UK, Spain and Ireland attest to that! It's like taxes, you don't raise taxes when an economy is fragile, it makes no common economic sense. The same holds true is cutting government spending in a frenzy mold.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Cutting too much to soon hurts economic growth when an economy is fragile,

Wrong wrong wrong!!

The faster you cut the faster you stop the Solyindras, bridges to nowhere, and welfare, and the faster real, sustainable private sector recovery spending can begin.

 

[kiwiman127]

why slowly?? the faster and bigger the govt cuts, the faster and bigger that sustainable private spending will take place to end the recession.

perhaps when you've had Econ 101 you'll be able to respond with substance. In the mean time you can continue to pretend you understand the subject.

Maybe if you read my posts in an objective manner, you'd realize I had Econ 101-303. If you read my posts with an objective eye, you'd see that I used real world and current examples to back up my analysis. I noted that you didn't even attempt to address the examples I provided. Why?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I noted that you didn't even attempt to address the examples I provided. Why?

what is your best example????

 

[kiwiman127]

I noted that you didn't even attempt to address the examples I provided. Why?

what is your best example????

Post 8

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I noted that you didn't even attempt to address the examples I provided. Why?

what is your best example????

Post 8

why so afraid to state your best example??

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I tried, the blood rushing to my brain convinced me Krugman is a complete hack, and I even discovered irrefutable proof of it. Unfortunately I forgot it when I stood up. I think it had something to do with him saying the stimulus was perfect before he said it was too small.

Do you have a cite where Krugman said he was satisfied with the stimulus? I've been reading him since he started with the Times and from the beginning of this economic crisis he has said that massive stimulus was needed and every time there was a stimulus package he has said it was not enough.

He has complained repeatedly that he didn't like how the stimuluses were being administered, which calls to mind the "food is terrible and such small portions" joke.

You obviously need to read more carefully, either that or see your doctor about your memory problems.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I noted that you didn't even attempt to address the examples I provided. Why?

what is your best example????

Post 8

since you've never studied economics I'll explain. The choice is austerity now or austerity later. But, the sooner you do it the less austerity required. The longer hooked on heroin you are the harder the rehabilatation.

Yes another hit of heroin makes you feel that you're not so hooked, but in reality it just makes you more hooked and in need of harsher rehabilitation.

 

[kiwiman127]

what is your best example????

Post 8

since you've never studied economics I'll explain. The choice is austerity now or austerity later. But, the sooner you do it the less austerity required. The longer hooked on heroin you are the harder the rehabilatation.

Yes another hit of heroin makes you feel that you're not so hooked, but in reality it just makes you more hooked and in need of harsher rehabilitation.

If you read my earlier post, I took Economics 101-303 at the University of Minnesota, where I got my BBA.

YOU, on the other hand offer no contradiction to that post, you use no facts, you spew talking points with nothing to back you up!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Krugman goes to college

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If you read my earlier post, I took Economics 101-303 at the University of Minnesota, where I got my BBA.

you of course got a liberal brainwashing. Ask for your money back!!

YOU, on the other hand offer no contradiction to that post, you use no facts, you spew talking points with nothing to back you up!

what?? your bleeding heart says more heroin is good for the junkie, we say the sooner the rehab begins the less severe the addiction and the easier it will be.

Is that really over a liberals head?

 

[kiwiman127]

If you read my earlier post, I took Economics 101-303 at the University of Minnesota, where I got my BBA.

you of course got a liberal brainwashing. Ask for your money back!!

YOU, on the other hand offer no contradiction to that post, you use no facts, you spew talking points with nothing to back you up!

what?? your bleeding heart says more heroin is good for the junkie, we say the sooner the rehab begins the less severe the addiction and the easier it will be.

Is that really over a liberals head?

How many times do I have to ask you to back your claims up with facts? All I get is uneducated non-factual talking points with NO substance!