Failure As An Economic Policy

[JackOfNoTrades]

Wrong again. Revenue shortfalls are created by excessive and wasteful spending..... period.

Then Republicans are guilty. Cut taxes and still spend.
Democrats will spend. But they'll raise the taxes to do it.

Supply side economics=>doesn't trickle down=>Failure.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Then Republicans are guilty. Cut taxes and still spend.
Democrats will spend. But they'll raise the taxes to do it.

Supply side economics=>doesn't trickle down=>Failure.

Have you always been a moron????

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Have you always been a moron????



View attachment 702642

This is not a refute. It's a cartoon. Outside of the Student Loan Forgiveness, everything else is largely beyond his control. Woke isn't an issue. It's a weaponized word that the alt-right uses to denigrate the terms....respect, tolerance.

You do remember that Trump spent a lot of money as well...and that was BEFORE the pandemic.

Here's what the UK has to look forward to. Just one of many supply side (conservative) policy initiatives...that don't work.

Kansas Provides Compelling Evidence of Failure of "Supply-Side" Tax Cuts | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

The deep income cuts that Kansas enacted in 2012 and 2013 for many business owners and other high-income Kansans failed to achieve their goal of boosting business formation and job creation, and...

www.cbpp.org

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is not a refute. It's a cartoon. Outside of the Student Loan Forgiveness, everything else is largely beyond his control. Woke isn't an issue. It's a weaponized word that the alt-right uses to denigrate the terms....respect, tolerance.

You do remember that Trump spent a lot of money as well...and that was BEFORE the pandemic.

Here's what the UK has to look forward to. Just one of many supply side (conservative) policy initiatives...that don't work.

Kansas Provides Compelling Evidence of Failure of "Supply-Side" Tax Cuts | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

The deep income cuts that Kansas enacted in 2012 and 2013 for many business owners and other high-income Kansans failed to achieve their goal of boosting business formation and job creation, and...

www.cbpp.org

Actually, you're a cartoon.


Too dumb to realize that graphic portrayed what you support, yet cannot defend.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is not a refute. It's a cartoon. Outside of the Student Loan Forgiveness, everything else is largely beyond his control. Woke isn't an issue. It's a weaponized word that the alt-right uses to denigrate the terms....respect, tolerance.

You do remember that Trump spent a lot of money as well...and that was BEFORE the pandemic.

Here's what the UK has to look forward to. Just one of many supply side (conservative) policy initiatives...that don't work.

Kansas Provides Compelling Evidence of Failure of "Supply-Side" Tax Cuts | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

The deep income cuts that Kansas enacted in 2012 and 2013 for many business owners and other high-income Kansans failed to achieve their goal of boosting business formation and job creation, and...

www.cbpp.org

Trump.....you buffoon:

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Trump.....you buffoon:


View attachment 702679

Same old. Same old. Ok. Again.

1) Itty Bitty agreements with podunk Arab countries..don't count. If he had solved the Palestinian issue...geez, he may still have been President.
2) Iran was in a box..until your boy let them out of it by scrapping the deal. Ooops.
3) LOL. Put the crack pipe down.
4) No one respected us during the term of your savior. Why do you think our foreign policy ground to a halt.
5) Not dealing with immigration issue doesn't equal "controlled". It's just kicking the can down the road for the next guy.
6) There was no invasion of Ukraine. And? But it would have happened the moment your man won re-election....if he had won.
7) Means nothing. We export a great deal of our oil. Always have.

You know, I should just take a page out of your book and copy and paste every time you post this hack stuff.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Same old. Same old. Ok. Again.

1) Itty Bitty agreements with podunk Arab countries..don't count. If he had solved the Palestinian issue...geez, he may still have been President.
2) Iran was in a box..until your boy let them out of it by scrapping the deal. Ooops.
3) LOL. Put the crack pipe down.
4) No one respected us during the term of your savior. Why do you think our foreign policy ground to a halt.
5) Not dealing with immigration issue doesn't equal "controlled". It's just kicking the can down the road for the next guy.
6) There was no invasion of Ukraine. And? But it would have happened the moment your man won re-election....if he had won.
7) Means nothing. We export a great deal of our oil. Always have.

You know, I should just take a page out of your book and copy and paste every time you post this hack stuff.

Please get lost.....I have the fear of second hand stupidity when you post.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Then Republicans are guilty. Cut taxes and still spend.
Democrats will spend. But they'll raise the taxes to do it.

Supply side economics=>doesn't trickle down=>Failure.

Supply side economics works every time.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Please get lost.....I have the fear of second hand stupidity when you post.

Well, based on your posts, you've already been lost to the disease of first hand stupidity.
So, no biggie there.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Supply side economics works every time.

Failure. This is a decade old article. But still relevant.

The Failure of Supply-Side Economics

Michael Ettlinger and Michael Linden give three decades’ worth of evidence that proves supply-side economics doesn’t work.

www.americanprogress.org

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Failure. This is a decade old article. But still relevant.

The Failure of Supply-Side Economics

Michael Ettlinger and Michael Linden give three decades’ worth of evidence that proves supply-side economics doesn’t work.

www.americanprogress.org

Still wrong.

 

[Silent Warrior]

Then Republicans are guilty. Cut taxes and still spend.
Democrats will spend. But they'll raise the taxes to do it.

Supply side economics=>doesn't trickle down=>Failure.

Wow. So wrong and so proud of it. Perhaps you should save up your welfare checks till you can buy a clue.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Wow. So wrong and so proud of it. Perhaps you should save up your welfare checks till you can buy a clue.

Wow...only been hearing those weak, limp-assed conservative responses since...the 1980's.

Trickle down=>Failure.

 

[Mexicano]

...Or.....what Democrats are best at.

1. John Maynard Keynes, economist, could be considered as FDR’s exponent, and he believed that savings was akin to hoarding, and to greed, and that balancing budgets by paying down debt was unnecessary and counterproductive. He mocked the ‘cult of saving.’
   1. Keynes flatly rejected America’s tradition of saving and frugality: “the sole…objective of all economic activity” was consumption; lots and lots of spending. John Maynard Keynes, “The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money,” p. 104.
   2. Economist Henry Hazlitt characterizes Keynesian economics: “the more you eat your cake, the more cake [to eat].” Hunter Lewis, op. cit. p. 134.
2. If one attempts to see economists as scientists, consider this quote by Keynes for its philosophical, or political nature: “The decadent international but individualistic capitalism in the hands of which we found ourselves after the War, is not a success. It is not intelligent, it is not beautiful, it is not just, it is not virtuous- and it doesn’t deliver the goods. In short, we dislike it, and we are beginning to despise it…” Edward J. Nell, “Growth, Profits, and Property: Essays in the Revival of Political Economy,” p. 191.
   1. Keynes argues that economics is different for individuals, and for nations: “If the national debt is all internal, as ours is, the nation can hardly go bankrupt. The American people are on both sides of the balance sheet.” Hunter Lewis, op. cit, p. 314.
   2. Note how the above gives leave to politicians to spend freely.
   3. Capitalism is discredited.
3. With this view of capitalism, based on Keynesian economics, FDR blamed economic collapse on capitalism, and disparaged an economy made up of small entrepreneurs and businesses. The American Constitution held out the hope that ordinary people were capable of deciding their own fates, and this position is very different than the view that drove FDR. Barrus, Eastby, Lane, Jr., Marion, and Pontuso, “The Deconstitutionalization of America: The Forgotten Frailties of Democratic Rule,” p. 70
   1. FDR, therefore, in trying to apply the equality voiced by the Constitution to economics, had to modify the free-market system: capitalism, with its focus on individual wealth, not equal wealth.
   2. The two views: the rights of man vs. the rights of men. FDR fought for the latter.

1. "Joe Biden’s tax-and-spend economic agenda is the most radical plan ever pro- posed by a Democratic president. It is much bigger, costlier, and riskier than any economic plan proposed by Franklin Roosevelt, Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama, or Hillary Clinton. Biden began by shoving a gigantic $1.9 trillion stimulus package through Congress and then immediately followed up with an even bigger “infrastructure” package, accompanied by steep tax hikes on individuals and businesses.
2. President Biden is misreading economic history. Wasn’t he paying attention when President Trump cut taxes, slashed regulations, and unleashed the American economy? Joe Biden is stubbornly committed to the failed Keynesian notion that if you just print up a bunch of money and spread it around like confetti, good things magically happen.
3. That notion fails every time it’s tried. In all of history, no one has ever made a multitrillion-dollar wager before. The Biden-Harris administration has bet the entire U.S. economy, and perhaps the world economy, on the proposition that we can keep printing fiat money and piling up trillions of dollars of debt—and the future’s going to be rosy." Spicer, "Radical Nation"

The inflation rate under Trump.....1.4%

PoliticalChic,
I am no fan of Joe Biden nor do I feel inclined to defend the establishment, so I'll just go straight to the economic dough.

1. 1. Keynes flatly rejected America’s tradition of saving and frugality: “the sole…objective of all economic activity” was consumption; lots and lots of spending. John Maynard Keynes, “The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money,”

Not exactly, you'll see all fiat money comes from the expansion of the accounting balance sheet of entities.
There are only two entities that can expand their balance sheets:
a) The central bank
b) Banks
So, in order to keep the amount of money in circulation stable savings must be matched with new private loans or government spending (public loans).

1. Keynes argues that economics is different for individuals, and for nations: “If the national debt is all internal, as ours is, the nation can hardly go bankrupt. The American people are on both sides of the balance sheet.”

True, since the Fed has an indirect monopoly on the issue of money it can't run out of money.
That said, this doesn't mean it is healthy to increase debt in perpetuity.
The interest paid on bonds put new money into circulation, increasing the financial capital of bondholders. The largest holders of foreign debt are large investors, banks, and foreign nations. Those are the ones reaping the benefits of the interest paid on bonds. Generally speaking, this creates even more wealth inequality.

1. 1. Capitalism is discredited.

Well , capitalism was discredited long before Keynes, The Capital is both a response to the abuses of Capitalism and a critique of it ( a critique with flaws, like the labor theory of value).

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

PoliticalChic,
I am no fan of Joe Biden nor do I feel inclined to defend the establishment, so I'll just go straight to the economic dough.


Not exactly, you'll see all fiat money comes from the expansion of the accounting balance sheet of entities.
There are only two entities that can expand their balance sheets:
a) The central bank
b) Banks
So, in order to keep the amount of money in circulation stable savings must be matched with new private loans or government spending (public loans).




True, since the Fed has an indirect monopoly on the issue of money it can't run out of money.
That said, this doesn't mean it is healthy to increase debt in perpetuity.
The interest paid on bonds put new money into circulation, increasing the financial capital of bondholders. The largest holders of foreign debt are large investors, banks, and foreign nations. Those are the ones reaping the benefits of the interest paid on bonds. Generally speaking, this creates even more wealth inequality.


Well , capitalism was discredited long before Keynes, The Capital is both a response to the abuses of Capitalism and a critique of it ( a critique with flaws, like the labor theory of value).

There are only two entities that can expand their balance sheets:
a) The central bank
b) Banks

I can expand my balance sheet.

The interest paid on bonds put new money into circulation,

Can you explain how?

increasing the financial capital of bondholders.

Decreasing the financial capital of bond sellers.

The largest holders of foreign {did you mean sovereign?} debt are large investors, banks, and foreign nations. Those are the ones reaping the benefits of the interest paid on bonds.

Who is reaping the benefit of the debt?

Generally speaking, this creates even more wealth inequality.

That's awful! We should only sell bonds to poor people.

 

[Mexicano]

There are only two entities that can expand their balance sheets:
a) The central bank
b) Banks

I can expand my balance sheet.

How can you expand your balance sheet on your own?
Banks simply do the following journal entry
Assets (Loans) + 100
Liabilities ( Deposits ) + 100

The interest paid on bonds put new money into circulation,

Can you explain how?

Yes,
The journal entry for the treasury is :
Assets -100 ( deposits)
Equity - 100
The journal entry is identical when the treasury spends. Both operations increase the deposits in banks and allow firms and people to spend the money.

The journal entry for the bondholder is
Assets +100 (deposits)
Equity + 100

The downside, of course, is the bondholder has to spend the money to put it into circulation.

increasing the financial capital of bondholders.

Decreasing the financial capital of bond sellers.

Correct. Since the economy is a set of interleaved balance sheets the negative equity of the treasury is the positive equity of the other sectors.

The largest holders of foreign {did you mean sovereign?} debt are large investors, banks, and foreign nations. Those are the ones reaping the benefits of the interest paid on bonds.

Who is reaping the benefit of the debt?

Here is the link if you want to make the breakdown

The Federal Government Has Borrowed Trillions, But Who Owns All that Debt?

The nation’s high and rising levels of debt can affect economic growth and pose a number of risks.

www.pgpf.org

Generally speaking, this creates even more wealth inequality.

That's awful! We should only sell bonds to poor people.

Not awful, it just creates stagnation, most of the profits go into financial instruments instead of going into spending or capital expenditure (investment). From the GDP point of view buying financial instruments is not counted as investment.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP): Formula and How to Use It

Gross domestic product is the monetary value of all finished goods and services made within a country during a specific period.

www.investopedia.com

Investment refers to private domestic investment or capital expenditures. Businesses spend money to invest in their business activities. For example, a business may buy machinery.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How can you expand your balance sheet on your own?
Banks simply do the following journal entry
Assets (Loans) + 100
Liabilities ( Deposits ) + 100


Yes,
The journal entry for the treasury is :
Assets -100 ( deposits)
Equity - 100
The journal entry is identical when the treasury spends. Both operations increase the deposits in banks and allow firms and people to spend the money.

The journal entry for the bondholder is
Assets +100 (deposits)
Equity + 100

The downside, of course, is the bondholder has to spend the money to put it into circulation.


Correct. Since the economy is a set of interleaved balance sheets the negative equity of the treasury is the positive equity of the other sectors.


Here is the link if you want to make the breakdown

The Federal Government Has Borrowed Trillions, But Who Owns All that Debt?

The nation’s high and rising levels of debt can affect economic growth and pose a number of risks.

www.pgpf.org

Not awful, it just creates stagnation, most of the profits go into financial instruments instead of going into spending or capital expenditure (investment). From the GDP point of view buying financial instruments is not counted as investment.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP): Formula and How to Use It

Gross domestic product is the monetary value of all finished goods and services made within a country during a specific period.

www.investopedia.com

How can you expand your balance sheet on your own?

On my own? LOL!
I can expand my balance sheet and I'm not the Fed or a bank.

Banks simply do the following journal entry
Assets (Loans) + 100
Liabilities ( Deposits ) + 100

Me too!!!
Assets (cash) + 100
Liabilities (debt) + 100

This ^ explanation didn't explain how bond interest puts new money into circulation.
Plus, your equations are wrong.

Here is the link if you want to make the breakdown

That didn't explain who benefits from the debt.

Not awful, it just creates stagnation, most of the profits go into financial instruments instead of going into spending or capital expenditure (investment).

Most interest paid on bonds goes "into financial instruments instead of going into spending or capital expenditure"? How do you know? Why do you care?

From the GDP point of view buying financial instruments is not counted as investment.

When a corporation buys new machinery with bond proceeds, my bond purchase
didn't finance their investment?

 

[Mexicano]

Assets (cash) + 100
Liabilities (debt) + 100

Now use that cash you concocted to pay something.
Banks not only expand their balance sheet but are able to make transactions with that expansion.

Most interest paid on bonds goes "into financial instruments instead of going into spending or capital expenditure"? How do you know? Why do you care?

If it was going into capital expenditure industrial production would be increasing... it isn't.
On the other hand financial instruments' values are increasing their value.
Do I care? No , not particularly I am just stating that such monetary flow doesn't translate into gdp just into asset inflation.

From the GDP point of view buying financial instruments is not counted as investment.

When a corporation buys new machinery with bond proceeds, my bond purchase
didn't finance their investment?

"When a corporation buys new machinery" that is capital investment, but that's not what I said, I said : buying financial instruments is not counted as investment.
If you get paid interests on government bonds and use that money to buy crypto or derivatives or non-ipo stocks that doesn't count as investment for the gdp formula.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Now use that cash you concocted to pay something.
Banks not only expand their balance sheet but are able to make transactions with that expansion.

If it was going into capital expenditure industrial production would be increasing... it isn't.
On the other hand financial instruments' values are increasing their value.
Do I care? No , not particularly I am just stating that such monetary flow doesn't translate into gdp just into asset inflation.

"When a corporation buys new machinery" that is capital investment, but that's not what I said, I said : buying financial instruments is not counted as investment.
If you get paid interests on government bonds and use that money to buy crypto or derivatives or non-ipo stocks that doesn't count as investment for the gdp formula.

Now use that cash you concocted to pay something.

I bought groceries.

Banks not only expand their balance sheet but are able to make transactions with that expansion.

Me too!

If it was going into capital expenditure industrial production would be increasing... it isn't.

Some is going into capital expenditure, obviously.

On the other hand financial instruments' values are increasing their value.

Some are, some aren't. And so what? What does the seller do with the money?

No , not particularly I am just stating that such monetary flow doesn't translate into gdp

Some does, some doesn't. Again, so what?

buying financial instruments is not counted as investment.

But buying financial instruments funds investment or other spending that does.

If you get paid interests on government bonds and use that money to buy crypto or derivatives or non-ipo stocks that doesn't count as investment for the gdp formula.

Who told you that interest on bonds was part of the GDP formula?

Did you notice your equation error yet?

 

[Mexicano]

I bought groceries.

Hahahah. Don't make me laugh .... hahahah.
So... you had 0 cash, 0 deposits in the bank
You write down on your balance sheet:

Toddsteerpatriot's Balance Sheet
Assets : 1,000
Liabilities : 1,000
Then ,you went to the grocery store grabbed some groceries, went with the cashier ,and presented your shiny expanded balance sheet. The look of the cashier must have been something to behold.
Hey if you took a pic please post it... hahaha.
How did that go? hahaha.