The single most important phrase in economics is....

Bullshit. The government put everyone to work.

No, the government took 30% of the labor force and sent them to war in Europe and Asia.

AND PAID THEM TO DO IT YOU IGNORANT ****.
The able bodied men were drafted and their housewives took their places in the factories. Anyone who wanted a paycheck and was willing to work could get one. When the war ended and all the troops came home, they SPENT, resulting in an economic boom.

Economic boom?

ROFL

the 50's, perhaps you've heard of it?
So you can show that increase in GDP exceeds the principle amounts of Porkulus by a given multiplier?

I await your proofs eagerly.
Obviously the answer to that depends on what the given multiplier is. I'm very sorry you're stupid.

ROFL

War is not a time of plenty, despite what the uneducated claim. WWII was marked by severe depredation that Americans had not seen since the 1930. Americans were told to "tighten their belts" in support of the war effort, and that's exactly what they did.
I never said otherwise.
Your little game of rewriting history to portray the war as a time of plenty is not just dishonest, but insulting to the millions who sacrificed as a matter of patriotic duty.
You're little game of claiming that I portrayed the war as a time of plenty when its quite obvious to anyone who can understand the English language that I stated that the time of plenty came AFTER the war reveals that you are nothing but a lying gobshite twat not worth speaking to So go fuck yourself and I sincerely hope that all the bad things in life happen to you and only you!
 
Last edited:
A young hoodlum say,...
A young hoodlum? Really? A young hoodlum?
excerpts from ECONOMICS IN ONE LESSON by Henry Hazlitt
What you meant to source was Frédéric Bastiat's 1850 essay,"Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas," which Heney Hazlitt clearly borrowed from. From reading the quote of Hazlitt you posted, its evident he was just rephrasing Bastiat's points from the perspective of white fear of black "hoodlums". And as fancy as the idea is to simpletons like yourself, it clearly doesn't ALWAYS apply. In fact, I've already refuted it you moron, In this economy, your shopkeeper isn't going to buy a new suit with the money -he's going to stash it in savings and not spend it. I'm not saying its good if the shopkeeper's window is broken - but if his 250 that he wasn't going to spend is taxed and spent on a road - then clearly the "community" you so love gains a road. You can't think in more than one dimension, can you?
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top