What would a liberal Federal Reserve do:

[Oddball]

Romeo and Juliet...West Side Story.

Same plot, different words.

You're showing me nothing I haven't seen.

 

[samjones]

Problem being that a significant portion of the relatively poor people might do things with their unexpected windfalls, like save or pay down credit lines, that have absolutely no "stimulative" effect.

No - those are things that the relatively rich do. The poor catch up on a couple of their bills and use the rest for lottery tickets.

What the hell do you think catching up on your bills is?

On top of that, the completely snobbish notion that the poor would just piss the remainder away on lottery tickets wouldn't have any real stimulative effect either.

No - not true. Pissing the money way on lottery tickets stimulates just like anything else. And there's a difference between, say, paying a past due electric bill and paying down the debt on a credit card. The former has a stimulative effect. The latter may not.

 

[editec]

What is evident to me while reading these posts is that some of us understand that the economy constantly changes and so our responses to it must also change, and some of us think an economy never changes so a one size fits all economic policy will work the same way every time.

Can monetary policies work? Could increasing or decreasing the amount of money in a system help?

Sometimes, yes, that is the right thing to do.

Sometimes, that is not the right thing to do.

What startles me is how so many of you are convinced that when Bush started bailing out the BANKSTERS that was a good conservative response.

But now that Obama's FED contines to do the same thing tht is a socialistic response.

You guys are either terrible partisan liars or you truly are stupid stupid people.

 

[Oddball]

No - those are things that the relatively rich do. The poor catch up on a couple of their bills and use the rest for lottery tickets.

What the hell do you think catching up on your bills is?

On top of that, the completely snobbish notion that the poor would just piss the remainder away on lottery tickets wouldn't have any real stimulative effect either.

No - not true. Pissing the money way on lottery tickets stimulates just like anything else. And there's a difference between, say, paying a past due electric bill and paying down the debt on a credit card. The former has a stimulative effect. The latter may not.

What product or service gets created from buying a lottery ticket?.....Nothing....It's a tax on the mathematically challenged.

And there's no difference between paying a past bill and paying off a line of credit...Both involve a product or service which was already consumed, yet not paid for.

Sheesh!

 

[samjones]

What the hell do you think catching up on your bills is?

On top of that, the completely snobbish notion that the poor would just piss the remainder away on lottery tickets wouldn't have any real stimulative effect either.

No - not true. Pissing the money way on lottery tickets stimulates just like anything else. And there's a difference between, say, paying a past due electric bill and paying down the debt on a credit card. The former has a stimulative effect. The latter may not.

What product or service gets created from buying a lottery ticket?.....Nothing....It's a tax on the mathematically challenged.

And there's no difference between paying a past bill and paying off a line of credit...Both involve a product or service which was already consumed, yet not paid for.

Sheesh!

Nope. Paying down a line of credit may not stimulate the economy, but merely paying the interest on a line of credit does. Buying a lottery ticket simulates the economy to the extent that it drives that line of gambling. It's the same as taking that uemployment check and betting it on black. Is it smart? No. Does it stimulate the economy? Yes.

Paying a past-due bill stimulates the economy in exactly the same way that paying a current bill does.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

What startles me is how so many of you are convinced that when Bush started bailing out the BANKSTERS that was a good conservative response.

of course you have lied to yourself and created a strawman. No one said it was a good conservative thing to do, just a practical thing to do to prevent another liberal Great Depression. Too subtle for you?

But now that Obama's FED contines to do the same thing tht is a socialistic response.

it is because conservatives want to get back to a free market asap and it often does not appear that Bernanke is doing that. Too subtle for you?

You guys are either terrible partisan liars or you truly are stupid stupid people.

Perhaps the liberal understands now?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

No - not true. Pissing the money way on lottery tickets stimulates just like anything else. And there's a difference between, say, paying a past due electric bill and paying down the debt on a credit card. The former has a stimulative effect. The latter may not.

There is real stimulation and liberal stimulation. Real stimulation causes real growth like the growth that got us from the stone age to here as supply siders like Steve Jobs supplied new goods and services that improved our standard of living.

Liberal stimulation is artifical and temporary leaving no net gains. They tax money from one large group very quietly then very loudly build a bridge and invite everyone to see the stimulation bridge while ignoring the destimulative taxes used to pay for it. Liberals fall for it everytime.

 

[Oddball]

No - not true. Pissing the money way on lottery tickets stimulates just like anything else. And there's a difference between, say, paying a past due electric bill and paying down the debt on a credit card. The former has a stimulative effect. The latter may not.

What product or service gets created from buying a lottery ticket?.....Nothing....It's a tax on the mathematically challenged.

And there's no difference between paying a past bill and paying off a line of credit...Both involve a product or service which was already consumed, yet not paid for.

Sheesh!

Nope. Paying down a line of credit may not stimulate the economy, but merely paying the interest on a line of credit does. Buying a lottery ticket simulates the economy to the extent that it drives that line of gambling. It's the same as taking that uemployment check and betting it on black. Is it smart? No. Does it stimulate the economy? Yes.

Paying a past-due bill stimulates the economy in exactly the same way that paying a current bill does.

It's official: You have NFI what you're babbling about.

 

[samjones]

Nope. Paying down a line of credit may not stimulate the economy, but merely paying the interest on a line of credit does. Buying a lottery ticket simulates the economy to the extent that it drives that line of gambling. It's the same as taking that uemployment check and betting it on black. Is it smart? No. Does it stimulate the economy? Yes.

Paying a past-due bill stimulates the economy in exactly the same way that paying a current bill does.

It's official: You have NFI what you're babbling about.

Your own Ron Paul Whackjob buddies know that I'm right. That's why their not rushing to your aid. But since you still don't quite get it, I'll try to do a more basic illustration....

Say you go to Vegas and you gamble a little and you see a show.... both the gambling and the show were services that you paid for. Extend that to the lottery. Same difference. The ticket is a "game-of-chance" service that you paid for, same thing as if you'd dropped that dollar in a slot machine.

The fact that the lottery may be state run has nothing to do with it. You still bought a service. Was it a wise purchase? Maybe not, but it was still a purchase and it still puts money into the economy to help the lottery people pay their employees and their bills.

Whether you like it or not, it's that simple.

As to whether you pay a bill late or on time, it makes no difference. Paying the bill stimulates the economy. It's that simple.

Glad I could help you better understand this topic.

 

[editec]

What startles me is how so many of you are convinced that when Bush started bailing out the BANKSTERS that was a good conservative response.

of course you have lied to yourself and created a strawman. No one said it was a good conservative thing to do, just a practical thing to do to prevent another liberal Great Depression. Too subtle for you?

No YOU didn't say, that ED, (that because you are actually a honest guy who actually believves what you write) but many of the GOP TOOLS here do

But now that Obama's FED contines to do the same thing tht is a socialistic response.

it is because conservatives want to get back to a free market asap and it often does not appear that Bernanke is doing that. Too subtle for you?

Which conservatives ARE those, ED. Ron Paul is about as close to your ideal as it gets.

The rest of the GOP pack are basically Insiders who are no more conservatives (as you define it) than Obama.

You guys are either terrible partisan liars or you truly are stupid stupid people.

Perhaps the liberal understands now?

YOu see my point here, Ed.

I hope so.

There are Republicans here, like youself, with whom I disagree, but who are at least HONEST players.

You honest GOPers here (who incidently also know something) in vastly outnumbers by your KNOW NOTHING pals.

 

[samjones]

No - not true. Pissing the money way on lottery tickets stimulates just like anything else. And there's a difference between, say, paying a past due electric bill and paying down the debt on a credit card. The former has a stimulative effect. The latter may not.

There is real stimulation and liberal stimulation. Real stimulation causes real growth like the growth that got us from the stone age to here as supply siders like Steve Jobs supplied new goods and services that improved our standard of living.

Liberal stimulation is artifical and temporary leaving no net gains. They tax money from one large group very quietly then very loudly build a bridge and invite everyone to see the stimulation bridge while ignoring the destimulative taxes used to pay for it. Liberals fall for it everytime.

"Liberal stimulation" is what this country needs and it's the only kind of "stimulation" I would like to see the Fed engaging in. Just a quick jolt to get people spending and to get employers hiring. That's all.

"Real stimulation" is a great idea, but not accomplished through short-term monetary policy. Better accomplished through long term government policies on seeding and encouraging innovation - like when Al Gore invented the Internet. Ben Bernanke shouldn't bother himself with "real stimulation."

Glad to be able to educate you on that matter.

 

[Oddball]

Nope. Paying down a line of credit may not stimulate the economy, but merely paying the interest on a line of credit does. Buying a lottery ticket simulates the economy to the extent that it drives that line of gambling. It's the same as taking that uemployment check and betting it on black. Is it smart? No. Does it stimulate the economy? Yes.

Paying a past-due bill stimulates the economy in exactly the same way that paying a current bill does.

It's official: You have NFI what you're babbling about.

Your own Ron Paul Whackjob buddies know that I'm right.

No, we don't know you're right...We know that you have absolutely NFI what you're yammering about, therefore most of we "whackjobs" don't even bother in the first place.

 

[samjones]

It's official: You have NFI what you're babbling about.

Your own Ron Paul Whackjob buddies know that I'm right.

No, we don't know you're right...We know that you have absolutely NFI what you're yammering about, therefore most of we "whackjobs" don't even bother in the first place.

You Ron Paul Whackjobs don't know anything at all and there's no talkiing to you. Someone presents proof-postive that you're bizarre notions couldn't work in the real world and you go away for 10 minutes and come back with the exact same idea like nobody ever said anything at all.

It's tedious.

Bottom-line - you were 100% wrong on this one, Oddball, and instead of insulting me you should be apologizing for your own ignorance. And you should use this as a lesson to yourself about how and why so many of the other strange and impossible economic ideals that you hold so dear won't ever work outside of Middle Earth and when you're crotchety old candidate gets nowhere close to receiving any party's nomination for President you should ask yourself whether you really want to expend so much passion on bullshit that's never going to mean anything to anybody.

You're welcome.

 

[Oddball]

Bottom line: You're a total economic ignoramus.

Now, get back to your finger paints.

 

[samjones]

Bottom line: You're a total economic ignoramus.

This is how a Ron Paul Whackjob admits he's wrong.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

This is how a Ron Paul Whackjob admits he's wrong.

please tell me where libertarianism is wrong. Thanks

 

[samjones]

There is real stimulation and liberal stimulation. Real stimulation causes real growth like the growth that got us from the stone age to here as supply siders like Steve Jobs supplied new goods and services that improved our standard of living.

Right. I agree. Like JFK/LBJ's space program and Al Gore's Internet. These are examples of real "stimulation" (using the term loosely) that actually create markets and make our country better.

Steve Jobs didn't supply new goods (and he sure as hell didn't supply any services). He just took a bunch of stuff other people invented and resold it. We admire inventors in America - I'm talking about guys like Edison and the Wright's and the manufacturing processes that Ford developed. Steve Jobs invented fuck all. He was a figure head and a really rich guy.

 

[sparky]

This is how a Ron Paul Whackjob admits he's wrong.

please tell me where libertarianism is wrong. Thanks

because libertopia does not exist....

~S~

 

[editec]

The FED cannot fix our economic woes.

It isn't even trying really.

UNIONISM can solve these problems.

Fat chance that's going to happen, though.

 

[Oddball]

This is how a Ron Paul Whackjob admits he's wrong.

please tell me where libertarianism is wrong. Thanks

because libertopia does not exist....

~S~

Total strawman argument...Perfection or Utopia has not ever been an option for libertarians.


In fact, if anyone is the Utopian dreamer, it's the modern progressive socialist.