Pro-Wrestler Smacks Down Keynesian

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Professor Reich:

I have some questions about some of the points that you brought up when you appeared on CNN’s The State of the Union show Superbowl Sunday. Although all my own training in economics is purely autodidactic, it seems to me that your arguments rest on faulty premises.

When asked what is the fastest way for the government to create jobs (a question which itself relies on the erroneous presumption that the government has the ability to "create" jobs), you replied with a three-part answer, and first stated that "almost all economists agree" with you.

Whether almost all economists agree or not of no importance, but gives your answer an air of authority. Unfortunately, it is the policies of these same economists which have caused the mess in which America currently finds itself. While "almost all economists" may still possess authority in academia, their credibility on Main Street is sorely lacking. In addition, many economists do not agree with you. In fact, Austrian economists vehemently disagree with you.

An Open Letter to Robert Reich by Glenn Jacobs

Professional wrestler Glenn Jacobs, aka "Kane," wrote a letter to Robert Reich. Reich was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration.

 

[Agnapostate]

Yeah, he's been campaigning for market causes and politicians who support that perspective. But then again, he's only 6'8, and is represented as a 7-footer.

Why do people continue to mention the Austrian school as though they possess some sort of significane? They insist on wasting time with impractical and obsolete theoretical matters, and choose to ignore empirical evidence.

 

[Paulie]

Yeah, he's been campaigning for market causes and politicians who support that perspective. But then again, he's only 6'8, and is represented as a 7-footer.

Why do people continue to mention the Austrian school as though they possess some sort of significane? They insist on wasting time with impractical and obsolete theoretical matters, and choose to ignore empirical evidence.

How could something that's supposedly never been put into practice be "obsolete"?

And could you show us the empirical evidence, please?

 

[Ravi]

He's so stupid that he thinks the government has never created jobs.

LOL! And you guys give me a hard time for not understanding economics.

 

[Ravi]

tff! The guy looks just like Joe the Plumber.

 

[Agnapostate]

How could something that's supposedly never been put into practice be "obsolete"?

Because of the failed attempts to apply certain tenets of free market theory. (The consequences of globalization as manifested in the East Asian crisis of the late 1990's, for instance.)

And could you show us the empirical evidence, please?

Empirical evidence regarding what?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

He's so stupid that he thinks the government has never created jobs.

LOL! And you guys give me a hard time for not understanding economics.

The government can't create jobs. To create a job the government must take money from the private sector and thus destroy a job.

tff! The guy looks just like Joe the Plumber.

He's a little bigger than that I believe.

 

[Agnapostate]

The government can't create jobs. To create a job the government must take money from the private sector and thus destroy a job.

I can't imagine where the basis for such claims is found. Were it not for the countless labors of the public sector throughout so many generations, the majority of private wealth would not exist.

 

[Ravi]

The government can't create jobs. To create a job the government must take money from the private sector and thus destroy a job.

Here are a few examples.

The military...do you just believe it's an adventure and not a JOB? And how many of the industries that cater to the military would exist if the government hadn't created that job? And the training the enlistee's get...translate into future jobs.

Schools...a few years ago our public schools made uniforms mandatory. Guess what? Shops that sold school uniforms opened for business and hired people...and bought the uniforms from some where else where others were employed. Not to mention teachers, administrators, etc. Not to mention that education leads to jobs.

Clothing stores for uniforms, boots, etc. for fire fighters, cops, paramedics...none would exist to employ the shop keepers if the government hadn't created those jobs.

Infrastructure jobs...keep people employed for ever with maintenance of the structures.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The government can't create jobs. To create a job the government must take money from the private sector and thus destroy a job.

Here are a few examples.

The military...do you just believe it's an adventure and not a JOB? And how many of the industries that cater to the military would exist if the government hadn't created that job? And the training the enlistee's get...translate into future jobs.

Schools...a few years ago our public schools made uniforms mandatory. Guess what? Shops that sold school uniforms opened for business and hired people...and bought the uniforms from some where else where others were employed. Not to mention teachers, administrators, etc. Not to mention that education leads to jobs.

Clothing stores for uniforms, boots, etc. for fire fighters, cops, paramedics...none would exist to employ the shop keepers if the government hadn't created those jobs.

Infrastructure jobs...keep people employed for ever with maintenance of the structures.

Again, any job the government creates it also destroys by taking money from the private sector so that the private sector can no longer create jobs with that money.

Economics in One Lesson

Government Projects do not "Create Jobs" - Isaac M. Morehouse - Mises Institute

 

[Ravi]

The government can't create jobs. To create a job the government must take money from the private sector and thus destroy a job.

Here are a few examples.

The military...do you just believe it's an adventure and not a JOB? And how many of the industries that cater to the military would exist if the government hadn't created that job? And the training the enlistee's get...translate into future jobs.

Schools...a few years ago our public schools made uniforms mandatory. Guess what? Shops that sold school uniforms opened for business and hired people...and bought the uniforms from some where else where others were employed. Not to mention teachers, administrators, etc. Not to mention that education leads to jobs.

Clothing stores for uniforms, boots, etc. for fire fighters, cops, paramedics...none would exist to employ the shop keepers if the government hadn't created those jobs.

Infrastructure jobs...keep people employed for ever with maintenance of the structures.

Again, any job the government creates it also destroys by taking money from the private sector so that the private sector can no longer create jobs with that money.

Economics in One Lesson

Government Projects do not "Create Jobs" - Isaac M. Morehouse - Mises Institute

You could also say that money kept by the private sector eliminates a job that could be created by the government.

I'm not reading your links. Dispute the examples I gave if you wish, in your own words.

 

[Agnapostate]

I apologize for using the remarks of others to make a point, but again, I find that Reiver makes a knowledgable insight about the nature of American "libertarians."

"There are two types. First, the knowledgeable. These tend to be financed by right wing think-tanks and, knowing their limitations, hide from the orthodox economic literature. Second, the herd. These tend to rely on cliche, combining an utter ignorance of capitalism with a chortling sense of utopia. None of them can make valid remark about the labour market."

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Here are a few examples.

The military...do you just believe it's an adventure and not a JOB? And how many of the industries that cater to the military would exist if the government hadn't created that job? And the training the enlistee's get...translate into future jobs.

Schools...a few years ago our public schools made uniforms mandatory. Guess what? Shops that sold school uniforms opened for business and hired people...and bought the uniforms from some where else where others were employed. Not to mention teachers, administrators, etc. Not to mention that education leads to jobs.

Clothing stores for uniforms, boots, etc. for fire fighters, cops, paramedics...none would exist to employ the shop keepers if the government hadn't created those jobs.

Infrastructure jobs...keep people employed for ever with maintenance of the structures.

Again, any job the government creates it also destroys by taking money from the private sector so that the private sector can no longer create jobs with that money.

Economics in One Lesson

Government Projects do not "Create Jobs" - Isaac M. Morehouse - Mises Institute

You could also say that money kept by the private sector eliminates a job that could be created by the government.

I'm not reading your links. Dispute the examples I gave if you wish, in your own words.

Well then we should all stop being so greedy and send our entire paychecks to the government so that they can create jobs for all of us and supply us with everything else that we'll need. That would work, right?

I did dispute your examples in my own words. The government must steal from the taxpayers to "create jobs," which destroys any jobs the taxpayers would have created. The links were provided to back up my claim. Your refusal to learn is your own problem.

 

[Agnapostate]

The government must steal from the taxpayers to "create jobs," which destroys any jobs the taxpayers would have created. The links were provided to back up my claim. Your refusal to learn is your own problem.

There's no basis for such a claim. The state has been the chief defender of capitalism throughout time, and remains so to this day.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The government must steal from the taxpayers to "create jobs," which destroys any jobs the taxpayers would have created. The links were provided to back up my claim. Your refusal to learn is your own problem.

There's no basis for such a claim. The state has been the chief defender of capitalism throughout time, and remains so to this day.

There's quite a basis for such a claim. The government earns no money of it's own. It taxes, directly or indirectly, the American people and takes their money. Therefore, the taxpayers have less money to spend to create jobs and wealth.

 

[Agnapostate]

There's quite a basis for such a claim. The government earns no money of it's own. It taxes, directly or indirectly, the American people and takes their money. Therefore, the taxpayers have less money to spend to create jobs and wealth.

That is demonstrably false, which is why I advised you to take a look at The Myth of Ownership.

 

[Ravi]

Well then we should all stop being so greedy and send our entire paychecks to the government so that they can create jobs for all of us and supply us with everything else that we'll need. That would work, right?

Nope, that isn't what I said and it certainly isn't what I meant.

I did dispute your examples in my own words. The government must steal from the taxpayers to "create jobs," which destroys any jobs the taxpayers would have created. The links were provided to back up my claim. Your refusal to learn is your own problem.

You didn't do anything but say I was wrong. But it is you who is wrong, the government can and does create jobs as my examples showed. Also, there is no stealing involved. There is a price to pay for living in America, and taxation is one of those prices. There is nothing wrong with taxing people...the wrongness comes when it is too much of a burden. In our entire history, taxation has never reached the point where it was too much of a burden. I pay taxes and yet I still make a profit...else I wouldn't even bother working and neither would anyone else.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Nope, that isn't what I said and it certainly isn't what I meant.

I did not say that you said it or that it is what you meant. I said that if you take the view that people keeping their money is stopping the government from creating jobs then why should we not give them all of our money and let them create jobs for all of us and provide everything else that we'll need.

You didn't do anything but say I was wrong. But it is you who is wrong, the government can and does create jobs as my examples showed. Also, there is no stealing involved. There is a price to pay for living in America, and taxation is one of those prices. There is nothing wrong with taxing people...the wrongness comes when it is too much of a burden. In our entire history, taxation has never reached the point where it was too much of a burden. I pay taxes and yet I still make a profit...else I wouldn't even bother working and neither would anyone else.

I also explained why you were wrong. We are not discussing the fairness of taxes, we are discussing whether the government can create jobs. I told you why they cannot create jobs, and backed this up with a book and article that you could have read.

 

[mash107]

There's quite a basis for such a claim. The government earns no money of it's own. It taxes, directly or indirectly, the American people and takes their money. Therefore, the taxpayers have less money to spend to create jobs and wealth.

That is demonstrably false, which is why I advised you to take a look at The Myth of Ownership.

What does the government produce that is of value? Besides fear and despair, that is... if you find those valuable

 

[Agnapostate]

What does the government produce that is of value? Besides fear and despair, that is... if you find those valuable

The centralized state produces nothing that could not be produced in a superior manner through decentralized libertarian organization. But the state functions as the chief defender of capitalism, and it is the public sector that has created the fortunes of the wealthy.