The rights historically failed ideas proven failure

[Truthmatters]

My apologies. I missed the link, or was that edited in. I started reading the thread an hour or so ago and had to go out. I could sweat there was no link when I read the op.

It was always there

 

[Conservative]

TM is the 'Plan 9 from Outer Space' of USMB posters.

can you prove this study wrong?

can you prove the 173 studies were all Republican ideas?

 

[Avorysuds]

It must be hard when you make threads and posts that people simply mock you due to your bias hateful repetitiveness. It takes a lot of work that only a few on these boards have managed to achieve and TM is one of them.

Grats TM, so full of hate and owned by the Democrat party that most people don’t even care what you have to say anymore, you’re like USMB’s comedy relief.

 

[Truthmatters]

TM is the 'Plan 9 from Outer Space' of USMB posters.

can you prove this study wrong?

can you prove the 173 studies were all Republican ideas?

What austerity is is explained right in the article.

 

[Truthmatters]

TM is the 'Plan 9 from Outer Space' of USMB posters.

can you prove this study wrong?

can you prove the 173 studies were all Republican ideas?

IMF: Austerity boosts unemployment, lowers paychecks - The Washington Post
read at least the first three paragraphs




These past few years, the Republican line on job creation has been simple: Cut government spending, tame the deficit, and unemployment will fall. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not the day after, but soon. “To put it simply,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R- Va.) said last spring, “less government spending means more private-sector jobs.” But that’s not exactly a rigorous study. So here’s a rigorous study.

In a new paper for the International Monetary Fund, Laurence Ball, Daniel Leigh and Prakash Loungani look at 173 episodes of fiscal austerity over the past 30 years—with the average deficit cut amounting to 1 percent of GDP. Their verdict? Austerity “lowers incomes in the short term, with wage-earners taking more of a hit than others; it also raises unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment.”

More specifically, an austerity program that curbs the deficit by 1 percent of GDP reduces real incomes by about 0.6 percent and raises unemployment by almost 0.5 percentage points. What’s more, the IMF notes, the losses are twice as big when the central bank can’t cut rates (a good description of the present.) Typically, income and employment don’t fully recover even five years after the austerity program is put in place.

 

[FA_Q2]

Your links provide zero specifics on what was considered as an austerity measure and how the impacts were measured, what time frames for the events were the measures taken place and all around lack anything that can be used as a specific. You need more than general austerity measures to work with. Also, you're looking at impacts in the 0-1 percent range, something that is wholly acceptable given the collapse of the country from massive debt if nothing is done.


One thing you seem to miss is the fact that they are not saying austerity measures should not be taken or even that they are not required. The conclusion was that they need to be taken at times when the economy is in better shape, like the shape it was in 10 years ago. The fact is that it IS a bad time to be taking this on but there is no other time. We failed to do this when the time was right. Now we are stuck doing it when the conditions are not right. To fail to do anything about it at all though will continue this economy until there is no economy left to draw upon.


Also, successes have been pointed out to you a thousand times, usally you simply ignore them. No point in going down that road again...

 

[Conservative]

can you prove this study wrong?

can you prove the 173 studies were all Republican ideas?

IMF: Austerity boosts unemployment, lowers paychecks - The Washington Post
read at least the first three paragraphs




These past few years, the Republican line on job creation has been simple: Cut government spending, tame the deficit, and unemployment will fall. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not the day after, but soon. “To put it simply,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R- Va.) said last spring, “less government spending means more private-sector jobs.” But that’s not exactly a rigorous study. So here’s a rigorous study.

In a new paper for the International Monetary Fund, Laurence Ball, Daniel Leigh and Prakash Loungani look at 173 episodes of fiscal austerity over the past 30 years—with the average deficit cut amounting to 1 percent of GDP. Their verdict? Austerity “lowers incomes in the short term, with wage-earners taking more of a hit than others; it also raises unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment.”

More specifically, an austerity program that curbs the deficit by 1 percent of GDP reduces real incomes by about 0.6 percent and raises unemployment by almost 0.5 percentage points. What’s more, the IMF notes, the losses are twice as big when the central bank can’t cut rates (a good description of the present.) Typically, income and employment don’t fully recover even five years after the austerity program is put in place.

Please be specific. Show us which of the 173 WORLD-WIDE instances being discussed apply to the United States, and specifically to Republicans.

 

[Truthmatters]

It must be hard when you make threads and posts that people simply mock you due to your bias hateful repetitiveness. It takes a lot of work that only a few on these boards have managed to achieve and TM is one of them.

Grats TM, so full of hate and owned by the Democrat party that most people don’t even care what you have to say anymore, you’re like USMB’s comedy relief.

and look at the pack of you silly cons flailing to avoid these cold hard facts.


History is proving your ideas wrong and you try your damnedest to make me sad because I told you the truth.

major fail= I love giving you facts even if you refuse them, it makes me happy.

Major fail= Your ideas are historically proven failures.

 

[Truthmatters]

can you prove the 173 studies were all Republican ideas?

IMF: Austerity boosts unemployment, lowers paychecks - The Washington Post
read at least the first three paragraphs




These past few years, the Republican line on job creation has been simple: Cut government spending, tame the deficit, and unemployment will fall. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not the day after, but soon. “To put it simply,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R- Va.) said last spring, “less government spending means more private-sector jobs.” But that’s not exactly a rigorous study. So here’s a rigorous study.

In a new paper for the International Monetary Fund, Laurence Ball, Daniel Leigh and Prakash Loungani look at 173 episodes of fiscal austerity over the past 30 years—with the average deficit cut amounting to 1 percent of GDP. Their verdict? Austerity “lowers incomes in the short term, with wage-earners taking more of a hit than others; it also raises unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment.”

More specifically, an austerity program that curbs the deficit by 1 percent of GDP reduces real incomes by about 0.6 percent and raises unemployment by almost 0.5 percentage points. What’s more, the IMF notes, the losses are twice as big when the central bank can’t cut rates (a good description of the present.) Typically, income and employment don’t fully recover even five years after the austerity program is put in place.

Please be specific. Show us which of the 173 WORLD-WIDE instances being discussed apply to the United States, and specifically to Republicans.

They all apply to the US and the US is one of the countries listed.

You see your Ideas dont work in any democracy goober

 

[Truthmatters]

Its done.

No more pretending your plan for the country will create jobs.


Its failed ideas.


Why do you cling to historically failed ideas?

 

[Conservative]

IMF: Austerity boosts unemployment, lowers paychecks - The Washington Post
read at least the first three paragraphs




These past few years, the Republican line on job creation has been simple: Cut government spending, tame the deficit, and unemployment will fall. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not the day after, but soon. “To put it simply,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R- Va.) said last spring, “less government spending means more private-sector jobs.” But that’s not exactly a rigorous study. So here’s a rigorous study.

In a new paper for the International Monetary Fund, Laurence Ball, Daniel Leigh and Prakash Loungani look at 173 episodes of fiscal austerity over the past 30 years—with the average deficit cut amounting to 1 percent of GDP. Their verdict? Austerity “lowers incomes in the short term, with wage-earners taking more of a hit than others; it also raises unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment.”

More specifically, an austerity program that curbs the deficit by 1 percent of GDP reduces real incomes by about 0.6 percent and raises unemployment by almost 0.5 percentage points. What’s more, the IMF notes, the losses are twice as big when the central bank can’t cut rates (a good description of the present.) Typically, income and employment don’t fully recover even five years after the austerity program is put in place.

Please be specific. Show us which of the 173 WORLD-WIDE instances being discussed apply to the United States, and specifically to Republicans.

They all apply to the US and the US is one of the countries listed.

You see your Ideas dont work in any democracy goober

your source said 173 instances, and listed a number of different countries.

YOU, on the other hand, are claiming that all 173 instances are in the US, and are Republican. I know you're a little slow, but do you see the difference between what your source says, and what you are claiming?

Again, please list all 173, US and Republican instances.

 

[Truthmatters]

No that is not what I said.

I said your ideas have been proven to have failed by history its self.

Then I gave you cold hard proof that austerity does not work.

 

[Truthmatters]

Please be specific. Show us which of the 173 WORLD-WIDE instances being discussed apply to the United States, and specifically to Republicans.

They all apply to the US and the US is one of the countries listed.

You see your Ideas dont work in any democracy goober

your source said 173 instances, and listed a number of different countries.

YOU, on the other hand, are claiming that all 173 instances are in the US, and are Republican. I know you're a little slow, but do you see the difference between what your source says, and what you are claiming?

Again, please list all 173, US and Republican instances.

Go read the study and quit trying to pretend that that study did not prove Austerity fails to create jobs.


Go get your proof its works.

 

[Avorysuds]

It must be hard when you make threads and posts that people simply mock you due to your bias hateful repetitiveness. It takes a lot of work that only a few on these boards have managed to achieve and TM is one of them.

Grats TM, so full of hate and owned by the Democrat party that most people don’t even care what you have to say anymore, you’re like USMB’s comedy relief.

and look at the pack of you silly cons flailing to avoid these cold hard facts.


History is proving your ideas wrong and you try your damnedest to make me sad because I told you the truth.

major fail= I love giving you facts even if you refuse them, it makes me happy.

Major fail= Your ideas are historically proven failures.

TM, why do you support a President that hates poor people and the middle class while making the rich, richer?

 

[Avatar4321]

173 episodes of fiscal austerity over the past 30 years


Now you claim your ideas work based on WHAT evidence?

Tell me, when in the last 80 years have we ever tried to live within our means?

How on earth can you honestly say that something that hasnt been tried for over a 80 years is a failure?

 

[Truthmatters]

there are times to be frugal.

during an historic downturn is not one of them and the history of the world proves it.

 

[Avatar4321]

denying facts make you dumber and dumber each day you do it.

Your ideas have been PROVEN beyond a shred of doubt to be failures.

The republican party champions lies

Then, please, stop denying facts.

Cite one example of us living within our means in the past 80 years? Can you name a single year where we didn't spend more than we took in?

 

[Avatar4321]

there are times to be frugal.

during an historic downturn is not one of them and the history of the world proves it.

So what your saying is that when you have no money that's the time to carelessly spend more, not less.

 

[Truthmatters]

MAYBE you should read the study and you will understand EXACTLY what I mean.

 

[Truthmatters]

IMF: Austerity boosts unemployment, lowers paychecks - The Washington Post


These past few years, the Republican line on job creation has been simple: Cut government spending, tame the deficit, and unemployment will fall. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not the day after, but soon. “To put it simply,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R- Va.) said last spring, “less government spending means more private-sector jobs.” But that’s not exactly a rigorous study. So here’s a rigorous study.


In a new paper for the International Monetary Fund, Laurence Ball, Daniel Leigh and Prakash Loungani look at 173 episodes of fiscal austerity over the past 30 years—with the average deficit cut amounting to 1 percent of GDP. Their verdict? Austerity “lowers incomes in the short term, with wage-earners taking more of a hit than others; it also raises unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment.”

More specifically, an austerity program that curbs the deficit by 1 percent of GDP reduces real incomes by about 0.6 percent and raises unemployment by almost 0.5 percentage points. What’s more, the IMF notes, the losses are twice as big when the central bank can’t cut rates (a good description of the present.) Typically, income and employment don’t fully recover even five years after the austerity program is put in place.

Austerity doesnt work