Forget Econ Stats, Do Americans Feel Economic Exhuberance or Malaise?

[JakeStarkey]

Of course it was. It had real data in it. And this post here? Where's the data dumbass? You're the one using generalizations about the Confidence Index without putting it into any detailed context. I was the one that drilled down and explained it.

Self-loathing? LOL, if I suffer from anything, it's too much self-esteem darlin.

Now you're down to baby talk since you're not only out of data that supports this idiot president, you're also out of cool one-liners for your personal attacks.

When the opposition gets to this low of a point in a debate, you KNOW they've completely lost the debate.

Jakey Fakey, you and your allies on this thread are the lowest caliber libs I've ever debated anywhere. Hate to hurt your feelings but sharp liberals would disown you, sweetheart.

you are trolling your own thread because you can't defend the OP

We now have two PoliticalChic style punching bags to work out on.

Yup, but econchick is not a sock, I think, or if she is, then PC is deliberately dumbing down her output, and if it is one thing that PC is, is her vanity and perception of how she writes. econ is simply not in her league.

 

[kaz]

"If this is a serious question, here's a great book by Charles Adams that retells history and the rise and fall of empires through their tax policy and how it directly drove their success and failures. The book is, "For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of Civilization.""

TALKING ABOUT BLACK AND WHITE THINKING HUH? lol

Talk about talking out of your ass about a book you haven't read regarding a post you didn't understand.

Yes, because a book premised on success and failure of EMPIRES and the role of taxation that "directly drove their success and failures." needs to be taken seriously? lol

I bet my university profs would've LOVED to teach from such an ideological driven book *shaking head*

Thanks for your review on a book you haven't read, it was very helpful

 

[Dad2three]

I stopped reading here, you know why.

3rd grade reading comprehension?

I had a bet with myself that I would get a playground response to this. I won. You realize you're a big boy. Just so you know, adult conversations are more fun. Adult conversations also do not include misrepresenting people's views.

I also like the irony you nag me about answering your contrived questions, but you won't answer mine. Name a policy I have that is Republican and is not libertarian.

" I also like the irony you nag me about answering your contrived questions "

YOUR PREMISE that lower tax burden WOULD create more economic activity!

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ic-exhuberance-or-malaise-41.html#post9559959

"but you won't answer mine. Name a policy I have that is Republican and is not libertarian. ""

I did.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ic-exhuberance-or-malaise-43.html#post9560218

 

[Dad2three]

Talk about talking out of your ass about a book you haven't read regarding a post you didn't understand.

Yes, because a book premised on success and failure of EMPIRES and the role of taxation that "directly drove their success and failures." needs to be taken seriously? lol

I bet my university profs would've LOVED to teach from such an ideological driven book *shaking head*

Thanks for your review on a book you haven't read, it was very helpful

'Yes, because a book premised on success and failure of EMPIRES and the role of taxation that "directly drove their success and failures." needs to be taken seriously? lol'


HE DOESN'T LIKE TAXES. Who does?

This sweeping anecdotal survey of taxes through the ages aims to support the author's libertarian attacks on the current U.S. tax system and his call for a flat tax of 10% to replace the current income tax system. Tax attorney Adams ( Fight, Flight, Fraud: The Story of Taxation )

Nonfiction Book Review: For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of Civilization by Charles Adams, Author, Lorenz Books, Author, Alvin Rabushka, Designed by Madison Books $29.95 (318p) ISBN 978-0-8191-8631-7

LOL

 

[kaz]

3rd grade reading comprehension?

I had a bet with myself that I would get a playground response to this. I won. You realize you're a big boy. Just so you know, adult conversations are more fun. Adult conversations also do not include misrepresenting people's views.

I also like the irony you nag me about answering your contrived questions, but you won't answer mine. Name a policy I have that is Republican and is not libertarian.

" I also like the irony you nag me about answering your contrived questions "

YOUR PREMISE that lower tax burden WOULD create more economic activity!

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ic-exhuberance-or-malaise-41.html#post9559959

"but you won't answer mine. Name a policy I have that is Republican and is not libertarian. ""

I did.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ic-exhuberance-or-malaise-43.html#post9560218

Not liking my answer doesn't mean I didn't answer your question. I directly did.

 

[kaz]

Yes, because a book premised on success and failure of EMPIRES and the role of taxation that "directly drove their success and failures." needs to be taken seriously? lol

I bet my university profs would've LOVED to teach from such an ideological driven book *shaking head*

Thanks for your review on a book you haven't read, it was very helpful

'Yes, because a book premised on success and failure of EMPIRES and the role of taxation that "directly drove their success and failures." needs to be taken seriously? lol'


HE DOESN'T LIKE TAXES. Who does?

This sweeping anecdotal survey of taxes through the ages aims to support the author's libertarian attacks on the current U.S. tax system and his call for a flat tax of 10% to replace the current income tax system. Tax attorney Adams ( Fight, Flight, Fraud: The Story of Taxation )

Nonfiction Book Review: For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of Civilization by Charles Adams, Author, Lorenz Books, Author, Alvin Rabushka, Designed by Madison Books $29.95 (318p) ISBN 978-0-8191-8631-7

LOL

Now two reviews of a book you haven't read, even more helpful. Thank you for that, much appreciated. A link to a liberal who hates libertarians and loves government even adds more to the discussion. Maybe you could read the book.

 

[itfitzme]

...

3) Printing money. Let's say if you add up the value of all assets in the country, they are worth $1 million. Now let's say nothing changes except the treasury prints $100,000. Now the total size of the money supply is now $1.1 million. However, they created no value, just printed more money. They have $100,000 that came from the value of people who own all the assets, they took your money. It is a stealth tax.
..

Yeah, that is a rather big misconception of what money is and what is does.

Money doesn't nor should it represent assets. What it represents is labor, the expenditure of time and effort put into the production of goods and services.

There is also an unstated assumption that somehow the government is the source of money in the economy by, as you say, "the treasury prints" money.

The Treasury does print physical money, but that isn't, in any manner, shape, or form a source of actual money inside the economy.

I don't know about the rest of your ideas, but this one is completely false. It is, in no way, representative of how the economy, banking, finance or the money supply function. Money, inside the economy, doesn't arise from the government. Money, inside the economy, is the result of borrowing.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

...

3) Printing money. Let's say if you add up the value of all assets in the country, they are worth $1 million. Now let's say nothing changes except the treasury prints $100,000. Now the total size of the money supply is now $1.1 million. However, they created no value, just printed more money. They have $100,000 that came from the value of people who own all the assets, they took your money. It is a stealth tax.
..

Yeah, that is a rather big misconception of what money is and what is does.

Money doesn't nor should it represent assets. What it represents is labor, the expenditure of time and effort put into the production of goods and services.

There is also an unstated assumption that somehow the government is the source of money in the economy by, as you say, "the treasury prints" money.

The Treasury does print physical money, but that isn't, in any manner, shape, or form a source of actual money inside the economy.

I don't know about the rest of your ideas, but this one is completely false. It is, in no way, representative of how the economy, banking, finance or the money supply function.

Most of us do, and they're also completely false.

 

[Dad2three]

I had a bet with myself that I would get a playground response to this. I won. You realize you're a big boy. Just so you know, adult conversations are more fun. Adult conversations also do not include misrepresenting people's views.

I also like the irony you nag me about answering your contrived questions, but you won't answer mine. Name a policy I have that is Republican and is not libertarian.

" I also like the irony you nag me about answering your contrived questions "

YOUR PREMISE that lower tax burden WOULD create more economic activity!

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ic-exhuberance-or-malaise-41.html#post9559959

"but you won't answer mine. Name a policy I have that is Republican and is not libertarian. ""

I did.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...ic-exhuberance-or-malaise-43.html#post9560218

Not liking my answer doesn't mean I didn't answer your question. I directly did.

No, what you did is throw out OTHER VARIABLES, YOUR premise was Gov't taking less taxes, and they did during Dubya's reign, the US economy should've been booming. WHY DIDN'T IT?

 

[Dad2three]

Thanks for your review on a book you haven't read, it was very helpful

'Yes, because a book premised on success and failure of EMPIRES and the role of taxation that "directly drove their success and failures." needs to be taken seriously? lol'


HE DOESN'T LIKE TAXES. Who does?

This sweeping anecdotal survey of taxes through the ages aims to support the author's libertarian attacks on the current U.S. tax system and his call for a flat tax of 10% to replace the current income tax system. Tax attorney Adams ( Fight, Flight, Fraud: The Story of Taxation )

Nonfiction Book Review: For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of Civilization by Charles Adams, Author, Lorenz Books, Author, Alvin Rabushka, Designed by Madison Books $29.95 (318p) ISBN 978-0-8191-8631-7

LOL

Now two reviews of a book you haven't read, even more helpful. Thank you for that, much appreciated. A link to a liberal who hates libertarians and loves government even adds more to the discussion. Maybe you could read the book.

Just google the freaky author, like you he believes in myths and fairy tales. Weird, almost like he thought Ayn Rand wrote non fiction

 

[kaz]

...

3) Printing money. Let's say if you add up the value of all assets in the country, they are worth $1 million. Now let's say nothing changes except the treasury prints $100,000. Now the total size of the money supply is now $1.1 million. However, they created no value, just printed more money. They have $100,000 that came from the value of people who own all the assets, they took your money. It is a stealth tax.
..

Yeah, that is a rather big misconception of what money is and what is does.

Money doesn't nor should it represent assets. What it represents is labor, the expenditure of time and effort put into the production of goods and services.

There is also an unstated assumption that somehow the government is the source of money in the economy by, as you say, "the treasury prints" money.

The Treasury does print physical money, but that isn't, in any manner, shape, or form a source of actual money inside the economy.

I don't know about the rest of your ideas, but this one is completely false. It is, in no way, representative of how the economy, banking, finance or the money supply function. Money, inside the economy, doesn't arise from the government. Money, inside the economy, is the result of borrowing.

You don't understand what I said

 

[kaz]

...

3) Printing money. Let's say if you add up the value of all assets in the country, they are worth $1 million. Now let's say nothing changes except the treasury prints $100,000. Now the total size of the money supply is now $1.1 million. However, they created no value, just printed more money. They have $100,000 that came from the value of people who own all the assets, they took your money. It is a stealth tax.
..

Yeah, that is a rather big misconception of what money is and what is does.

Money doesn't nor should it represent assets. What it represents is labor, the expenditure of time and effort put into the production of goods and services.

There is also an unstated assumption that somehow the government is the source of money in the economy by, as you say, "the treasury prints" money.

The Treasury does print physical money, but that isn't, in any manner, shape, or form a source of actual money inside the economy.

I don't know about the rest of your ideas, but this one is completely false. It is, in no way, representative of how the economy, banking, finance or the money supply function.

Most of us do, and they're also completely false.

Yes, I regularly violate the inherent truth of liberalism that you live by

 

[Listening]

LOL, and then when you COMPLETELY run out of ANY stats that support reality on the ground, and you run out of posts replete with funny or even corny personal attacks, then you have nothing more to post

Like this dumbass post. Thanks Fakey, I gotta go, but you sure have made my day. I haven't done this much laughing in months.

trollin trollin trolling keep those econchicks strollin

Support your generalizations with real facts. Your melt down is not argument.

Awww, look? Fakey is regressing from 5th grade to 2nd grade. Awwwww.

You give him to much credit.

He's a disgrace.

 

[Listening]

Of course it was. It had real data in it. And this post here? Where's the data dumbass? You're the one using generalizations about the Confidence Index without putting it into any detailed context. I was the one that drilled down and explained it.

Self-loathing? LOL, if I suffer from anything, it's too much self-esteem darlin.

Now you're down to baby talk since you're not only out of data that supports this idiot president, you're also out of cool one-liners for your personal attacks.

When the opposition gets to this low of a point in a debate, you KNOW they've completely lost the debate.

Jakey Fakey, you and your allies on this thread are the lowest caliber libs I've ever debated anywhere. Hate to hurt your feelings but sharp liberals would disown you, sweetheart.

you are trolling your own thread because you can't defend the OP

We now have two PoliticalChic style punching bags to work out on.

You couldn't beat PolitcalChick if she had both hands tied behind her back.

You are a moron.

 

[Listening]

Bottom Line: No one feels this economy is going gang busters. Intuitively, Americans know something's wrong.

We econ geeks can spend hundreds of hours on this board throwing around economic statistics, but my guess is the average American/average reader doesn't read threads in the Economy section. It's too wonky.

Oldfart commented that my posts don't sound the way most macroeconomists talk. I can't stand how most macroeconomists talk. Most don't speak in a way that normal Americans can understand. They speak to out-geek the next geek. Just like every econ professor I ever had.

I'd like this to be a thread meant for "normal" Americans - those living out on main street, not Wall Street - who just want to know why they're not feeling optimistic about their economic situations and what can be done about it.

This thread is meant to involve people who want more "intuitive" answers about the economy.

Let's see if we can manage to do that.

So we see here that we are dealing a request for ideas around a premise posited in the first sentence.

Instead of defining what this means the first thing that happens in that Dudpeepee immediately (as in post 2) tries to make this about Booooosh. No request for info to back up the assertion.....straight to Bush.

I left the thread last night after watching Dudpeepee with his cross dressing cheerleader in tow post all the same horseshit he's been posting on this and other threads for the 100th time to come back and guess what.

We have ten more pages of all the same horseshit. He's just trying it on a different crowd.

Won't address the OP (as in is it right or wrong), won't address the assertions or information brought forth relative to the OP....

It's just about what Dudpeepee wants to discuss which is how his hero BHO can do no wrong and about how Carter did such a great job (and got his ass kicked out after one term) and all the other left wing cow droppings that accompany their screachings.

Thanks for trying Econchick....to bad you got two of the board morons linked in.

 

[Listening]

Yep, you are busted and have failed all accounts, econchick.

She's owned you and Dudpeepee at every turn.

You can't digest the OP because it does not neatly fit your talking points. Heaven forbid you think on your own.

(1) You are not conducting an intellectual discussion, because you have made a faulty assertion with very little and poor evidence, yet you demand everyone accept it.

Please show us where she demanded this. Show the post FakeJake or admit (again) that you are a liar.

Quarrel with those who know better than you, as many of us do, you will end up in the gutter, yes. Be polite, get polite. Be quarrelsome, get stepped on. Hard.

You don't know better than anybody. You've never posted a fact your entire time here. You are nothing but a liar. She's been kicking your ass since you bothered to get on the thread.

Stepped on ? The only thing getting stepped on is your tiny little dick.

Yes, you are rewording because the original OP is fail.

Only you could make such a stupid moronic claim.

Yes, you personally, and wrongly, believe it is economic malaise. .

You can't define it so you can't argue against it. You are the one claiming some kind credibility when, in reality, we all laugh at you on a regular basis. I understand you are pissed because your diploma came out of a cereal box, but don't compound your mistake by show us just how ignorant you really are.

Yes, the population's confidence is high as the evidence does show, and as your evidence is unable to contradict.

The populations confidence is still low compared to the past 50 years (normalized). She never said it wasn't getting better...just that it was low. That is what the "facts" are.

Moron.

Very interesting watching you melt down, econchick. However, political chick melts down more spectacularly. Work on it.

Another JakeTheFake wet dream.

She's still kicking your ass and we are still laughing at you.

When she's not crushing you, Politicalchick is.

It's fun to see a tag team that will own your ass until you all do us a favor and check out.

 

[JakeStarkey]

trollin trollin trolling keep those econchicks strollin

Support your generalizations with real facts. Your melt down is not argument.

Awww, look? Fakey is regressing from 5th grade to 2nd grade. Awwwww.

You give him to much credit. He's a disgrace.

Says one of the three most disgraced posters active on the Board.

ec and L: ec's general opinion unsupported by evidence is not a fact.

If she can't support what she says, then it isn't fact.

Tis what it is.

 

[JakeStarkey]

L, go back to the OP. She gave a general assertion, that she admits further below is only her belief, she is told her belief is not worthy until she supports it, then she blows up. Like you.

You knuckleheads will never, ever be let off the grill where you sizzle and pop in your own sweat if you will not give objective evidence and discussion.

When you go ad hom, you admit you have lost the OP, and when you ad hom are mocked by the same, you both melt.

Tis what it is.

 

[Listening]

Awww, look? Fakey is regressing from 5th grade to 2nd grade. Awwwww.

You give him to much credit. He's a disgrace.

Says one of the three most disgraced posters active on the Board.

ec and L: ec's general opinion unsupported by evidence is not a fact.

If she can't support what she says, then it isn't fact.

Tis what it is.

Opinions are, by definition, are......wait for it.....opinions.

Pull your head out of your ass.

Nobody cares what you have to say.

She's been kicking your ass from the start.

You belong in the Romper Room.

 

[Listening]

L, go back to the OP. She gave a general assertion, that she admits further below is only her belief, she is told her belief is not worthy until she supports it, then she blows up. Like you.

You knuckleheads will never, ever be let off the grill where you sizzle and pop in your own sweat if you will not give objective evidence and discussion.

When you go ad hom, you admit you have lost the OP, and when you ad hom are mocked by the same, you both melt.

Tis what it is.

Lecture someone who does not wish you to die quickly and soon.