The Problem With keynesian economics

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It's easy. The economy is depressed because everyone tries to cut spending. But everyone's income is some one else's spending, so when everyone is trying to save, everyone's income falls, making it harder to pay off debt. They call it "debt deflation".

In this situation someone has to start spending. And it has to be the government -- nobody else will.

yes but it is artificial spending or mal investment like the recent housing bubble. What we want is people spending there own hard earned money in sustainable ways that improve their standard of living not liberal bubble spending that must cause a recession or depression like the current housing depression when the spending is withdrawn. Making sense now?

you want a bubble to correct the previous bubble! Got it now??

 

[ilia25]

We are not living a bubble, genius, we are in economic depression. Therefore, first we have to make the economy performing at its potential. Only then we should start to worry about preventing a bubble.

 

[Charles_Main]

The real reason the stimulus failed is the money went to prop up state budgets instead of being spent in a way that would have helped.

Why do you continue to wallow in this nonsense? Do you get some kind of perverse pleasure from being wrong?

The stimulus was not a failure. It saved jobs and kept the economy from total collapse.

Maybe so, But it could have been far more Effective had it actually Targeted the Private Sector.

 

[Charles_Main]

We are not living a bubble, genius, we are in economic depression. Therefore, first we have to make the economy performing at its potential. Only then we should start to worry about preventing a bubble.

Not Preventing, Creating. Government Created the Housing Bubble, Government is now attempting to Temporary Prop up the Economy with Another Bubble, Because Government does not see further than 2 to 4 years ahead, and the Next Election. They Know the Big Picture, they just Care more about getting Re-elected than addressing the Big Picture. Therefore it never will be Addressed, We will keep Propping things up with Deficit Spending, Until the Lenders stop lending, the Interest Rates go Sky High, Our Currency Collapses, and the ******* thing Burns down.

Best get Prepared, Because I see not way of Avoiding it. Sweeping Republicans into Power wont stop it, Keeping Obama wont Stop it. The Only thing that can stop this is Leaders who care more about the Long Term Health of their Nation, than they care about their Next ******* Election. Often the Sound, And Prudent thing to do in Bad Situations like this are not very Popular. They would never happen in a Direct Democracy, We have a Republic for situations like this.

Our Representatives are not, Contrary to Popular Belief, There to just Enact the will of the People like a Puppet. Imagine how long Slavery would have hung around, or Civil Rights would have taken, If only the 51% Vote of the People mattered? Our Representatives are suppose to Do what is Right for this country, even if the UN-informed Public Does not understand it is what its Right. The Average Person does not Understand the Global Economic Factors at play, or even have a real Grasp of the Size of our Coming Debt Problems, and UN-Funded Liabilities.

To sum it up. I don't think it matters who the **** wins in 2012. I used to, but I have come to Believe nothing can stop the Inevitable.

 

[Peach]

The Basic Premise of Keynesian economics is that you Spend money when the Economy is Down to Stimulate it, Then Make cuts when the Economy is up.

It's 2 Sides of a Coin. The Problem is the Keynesian are only Keynesian when the Economy is down. When it is Up they forget about the Rules of Keynesian Economics and Continue to Spend more than we have instead of Making cuts.

We never cut

That's not a problem with Keynesian theory. That's a problem with the people in charge of implementing policy.

Just learning that Keynes existed is a step forward for many posters, mostly it is "Marxism, Socialism, Statists"...........

 

[ilia25]

Government Created the Housing Bubble

No, it did not. That one of those myth stemming from human belief that all good things have to paid back with suffering. There was nothing wrong with low employment and, if you think about it, a lot of houses being build are not a bad thing either. People busy doing useful things is what the good economy is about.

Yes there were problems, mainly with banks making risky bets. But those thing could and should have been corrected w/o creating huge unemployment. Anyone saying that millions people being out of work are a necessity to cure the economy of the past sins must be crazy.

All this suffering was artificially created by policy makes who forgot the lessons of the 30s, among them the Keynes theory. This total failure of leadership is even more pronounced in Europe -- but only because US was fortunate to have a Democrat as President, and Keynesian as the head of Federal Reserve. Both are pretty much gutless, but at least they don't share the madness of their European counterparts (or Republicans).

 

[Polk]

Why do you continue to wallow in this nonsense? Do you get some kind of perverse pleasure from being wrong?

The stimulus was not a failure. It saved jobs and kept the economy from total collapse.

Frankly the stimulus wasn't big enough. And everyone knew it.

We've learned this lesson before. FDR increased spending in the 30's but it didn't seem to help much, unemployment was still very high. Then WW II came along and spending went up 10 foldish and the government essentially hired any able bodied man who needed a job to kill German and Japanese. When the war ended all those guys had stacks of cash saved up (the benefit of the 30's was they had learned austerity) and they bought houses and had kids and opened business and BOOM the economy was fixed.

Everyone?

Obama says stimulus package is right size, scope | Reuters

There's a difference between knowing something and saying what you know.

 

[Rshermr]

The real reason the stimulus failed is the money went to prop up state budgets instead of being spent in a way that would have helped.

Why do you continue to wallow in this nonsense? Do you get some kind of perverse pleasure from being wrong?

The stimulus was not a failure. It saved jobs and kept the economy from total collapse.

Maybe so, But it could have been far more Effective had it actually Targeted the Private Sector.

Actually, the Obama admin tried to pass a stimulus spending bill to target infrastructure. Something that the repubs believed in years ago. Remember when Eisenhower built the interstate highway system. Reagan had numerous stimulus efforts. But in this case, with really bad employment, the repubs voted en mas against the infrastructure stimulus. Which was a private business stimulus. Construction, electricians, and all sorts of private contractors and subcontractors. Just about no public worker stimulus. So, why did all the repubs vote against it??? Why have they voted against anything except tax decreases and decreases in services to those not rich.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Frankly the stimulus wasn't big enough. And everyone knew it.

We've learned this lesson before. FDR increased spending in the 30's but it didn't seem to help much, unemployment was still very high. Then WW II came along and spending went up 10 foldish and the government essentially hired any able bodied man who needed a job to kill German and Japanese. When the war ended all those guys had stacks of cash saved up (the benefit of the 30's was they had learned austerity) and they bought houses and had kids and opened business and BOOM the economy was fixed.

Everyone?

Obama says stimulus package is right size, scope | Reuters

There's a difference between knowing something and saying what you know.

Why did Obama lie?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why do you continue to wallow in this nonsense? Do you get some kind of perverse pleasure from being wrong?

The stimulus was not a failure. It saved jobs and kept the economy from total collapse.

Maybe so, But it could have been far more Effective had it actually Targeted the Private Sector.

Actually, the Obama admin tried to pass a stimulus spending bill to target infrastructure. Something that the repubs believed in years ago. Remember when Eisenhower built the interstate highway system. Reagan had numerous stimulus efforts. But in this case, with really bad employment, the repubs voted en mas against the infrastructure stimulus. Which was a private business stimulus. Construction, electricians, and all sorts of private contractors and subcontractors. Just about no public worker stimulus. So, why did all the repubs vote against it??? Why have they voted against anything except tax decreases and decreases in services to those not rich.

Another delusional left wing moonbat.

 

[Polk]

Everyone?

Obama says stimulus package is right size, scope | Reuters

There's a difference between knowing something and saying what you know.

Why did Obama lie?

Because telling the truth wouldn't have done anything except give Republicans something to club him over the head with. Saying he needed to tell the truth is based on the idea that the Republicans would have supported additional stimulus if he had said more was needed. That's a pretty laughable claim.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

There's a difference between knowing something and saying what you know.

Why did Obama lie?

Because telling the truth wouldn't have done anything except give Republicans something to club him over the head with. Saying he needed to tell the truth is based on the idea that the Republicans would have supported additional stimulus if he had said more was needed. That's a pretty laughable claim.

Saying that the Republicans could have stopped it if he had pushed for more money is even more ridiculous.

Why did he lie?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So, why did all the repubs vote against it???

Republicans are against mal-investments, i.e., Solyndra bridges to nowhere that create bubbles( like the housing bubble) that cause depressions.

Now you no how FDR prolonged the depression for 10 years and became a hero to idiot liberals.

IF BO can prolong this depression for 10 years he will also be a hero to idiot liberals.

When you think that millions and millions supported Hitler Stalin and Mao and that our liberals spied for Stalin its not so hard to believe.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Why have they voted against anything except tax decreases and decreases in services to those not rich.

Why would intelligent people vote for taxes , liberal.
If millions of average Joes keep their money ( instead of having it taxed away by liberals) they spend it regularly in sustainable ways that grow the economic based on their real needs.

When liberals steal the money they prevent the sustainable development of the economy and instead give us bubbles and depressions.

 

[Polk]

Why did Obama lie?

Because telling the truth wouldn't have done anything except give Republicans something to club him over the head with. Saying he needed to tell the truth is based on the idea that the Republicans would have supported additional stimulus if he had said more was needed. That's a pretty laughable claim.

Saying that the Republicans could have stopped it if he had pushed for more money is even more ridiculous.

Why did he lie?

What's ridiculous about it? You must live in this fantasy world where the filibuster doesn't exist.

 

[Polk]

So, why did all the repubs vote against it???

Republicans are against mal-investments, i.e., Solyndra bridges to nowhere that create bubbles( like the housing bubble) that cause depressions.

Now you no how FDR prolonged the depression for 10 years and became a hero to idiot liberals.

IF BO can prolong this depression for 10 years he will also be a hero to idiot liberals.

When you think that millions and millions supported Hitler Stalin and Mao and that our liberals spied for Stalin its not so hard to believe.

I do enjoy being called an idiot by someone who tells someone "how you no how" fictional events occurred. Also, that he thinks liberals were behind building a bridge to an island with just a handful of people in a state whose entire Congressional delegation at the time was made of Republicans.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So, why did all the repubs vote against it???

Republicans are against mal-investments, i.e., Solyndra bridges to nowhere that create bubbles( like the housing bubble) that cause depressions.

Now you no how FDR prolonged the depression for 10 years and became a hero to idiot liberals.

IF BO can prolong this depression for 10 years he will also be a hero to idiot liberals.

When you think that millions and millions supported Hitler Stalin and Mao and that our liberals spied for Stalin its not so hard to believe.

I do enjoy being called an idiot by someone who tells someone "how you no how" fictional events occurred. Also, that he thinks liberals were behind building a bridge to an island with just a handful of people in a state whose entire Congressional delegation at the time was made of Republicans.

dear, they may have been Republicans but they were not acting like Republicans. Nevertheless, 100% of the energy for limited government comes from the Republican Party

 

[ilia25]

Frankly the stimulus wasn't big enough. And everyone knew it.

We've learned this lesson before. FDR increased spending in the 30's but it didn't seem to help much, unemployment was still very high. Then WW II came along and spending went up 10 foldish and the government essentially hired any able bodied man who needed a job to kill German and Japanese. When the war ended all those guys had stacks of cash saved up (the benefit of the 30's was they had learned austerity) and they bought houses and had kids and opened business and BOOM the economy was fixed.

Everyone?

Obama says stimulus package is right size, scope | Reuters

There's a difference between knowing something and saying what you know.

I don't think Obama knew that the stimulus was too small. He is a lousy leader because he was never able to choose right advisers. He is not very bright.

 

[ilia25]

Because telling the truth wouldn't have done anything except give Republicans something to club him over the head with. Saying he needed to tell the truth is based on the idea that the Republicans would have supported additional stimulus if he had said more was needed. That's a pretty laughable claim.

Saying that the Republicans could have stopped it if he had pushed for more money is even more ridiculous.

Why did he lie?

What's ridiculous about it? You must live in this fantasy world where the filibuster doesn't exist.

It is not an excuse for not trying to do the right thing. Obama should have proposed the right measures for ending the economic crisis. And if Republicans would dare to filibuster, he should have blamed them for turning financial crisis into prolonged depression.

Unfortunately Obama is a lousy leader and a total cretin when it comes to political games. He was never able to choose the right advice either, although it was given to him. Obama is simply not that bright.

Still, US was fortunate not to have a convinced madman at the helm, otherwise it would have fared much worse -- Europe is a good example.

 

[ilia25]

So, why did all the repubs vote against it???

Republicans are against mal-investments, i.e., Solyndra bridges to nowhere that create bubbles( like the housing bubble) that cause depressions.

Bubbles do not cause depressions. It is the incompetence and paralysis of the policy makes in the face of the crisis that cause depressions. And while Obama did too little to help the economy, the Republicans were consistently pushing for the policies that would get the depression worse -- while telling that the suffering is an inevitable payback for the past sins.