The ultimate vindication of Republican supply-side economics

[EdwardBaiamonte]

See you're calling his fiscal stimulus "liberal", and you frequently call me "liberal", yet I disagree with fiscal stimulus. Do you see the inconsistency? An astute mind might suspect that you don't actually know what liberalism is; you just call anybody who disagrees with you "liberal". In which case the word is meaningless.

There are two positions; conservative and liberal. All conservatives know that supply side economics. All liberals incorrectly believe that fiscal stimulus works. All conservatives know that fiscal stimulus does not work. All liberals incorrectly believe that supply side economics does not work.

If you do not believe in supply side economics then you are a liberal. All liberals believe in fiscal stimulus. Therefore, if you do not believe in supply side economics, you are a liberal.

You cannot not believe in fiscal stimulus and also not be a liberal. There is no such thing as a non-liberal that does not believe in fiscal stimulus.

Therefore, you do not exist.

Well that's bad news.

you have a Nazi-like faith in the Fed. Drop that uber liberal BS and you can be forgiven

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

And that's the end result of economics, always the attempt to bend it to the left or right, and that's because it is mostly theories, terminology, politics, economists and textbooks.

mostly theories? Yes but we have made huge progress. We just averted a Depression here, Asian crisis was solved well short of depression, China has been a steady long term miracle, Japan lost 2 decades but never had depression. We may be at a turning point in central banking history. The answer seems to be, liquidity, and lots of it.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

“What is the best way to reduce unemployment?” is explained in great detail.

I don't want great detail. I want the general concept. For example, we can create 15 million jobs overnight by simply sending 15 million illegals home. See how simple it can be?

Or, we can create another 15 million jobs by making unions illegal again. Catching on??

You want detail so you can hide your liberal BS in it. Sorry.

 

[itfitzme]

See you're calling his fiscal stimulus "liberal", and you frequently call me "liberal", yet I disagree with fiscal stimulus. Do you see the inconsistency? An astute mind might suspect that you don't actually know what liberalism is; you just call anybody who disagrees with you "liberal". In which case the word is meaningless.

There are two positions; conservative and liberal. All conservatives know that supply side economics. All liberals incorrectly believe that fiscal stimulus works. All conservatives know that fiscal stimulus does not work. All liberals incorrectly believe that supply side economics does not work.

If you do not believe in supply side economics then you are a liberal. All liberals believe in fiscal stimulus. Therefore, if you do not believe in supply side economics, you are a liberal.

You cannot not believe in fiscal stimulus and also not be a liberal. There is no such thing as a non-liberal that does not believe in fiscal stimulus.

Therefore, you do not exist.

Well that's bad news.

I am beginning to understand it. Perhaps this will work.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So I recommend that we presently try to follow Germany’s economic policies of the pre-war period as best we can.

Ah, sadly, you are a liberal whack job after all. You want to make planes, tanks, and guns and dump them into the sea! Or, do you have to kill people with them before they magicially and liberally stimulate the economy?

It so perfectly liberal. The economy is slow so you order people to make weapons and, like magic, our problems magicially disappear.

Here's a question. Why make weapons at all. Why not have people just show up at the factory to collect a paycheck? I mean, if the weapons will be thrown into the sea anyway why bother to make them at all. But maybe I misunderstood. Did we pay the Nazis for the weapons they used against us?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Rather, you consider NGDP targeting through monetary policy of managing bank reserve amounts, discount window interest rates, and the reserve ratio.

So, what is the mechanism by which the money in reserves affects the amount of money used for purchases (or affects spendable income), assuming the velocity of money is constant? And, how do we measure it?

The "hot potato" effect. Base money is (normally) a non-interest bearing asset. If you include inflation, it has a negative real return. ...Compare with the Riksbank. They expanded their balance sheet to 25% of GDP and charged their banks 25 basis points of interest on reserves. Surprise, surprise, the Swedes managed to restore nominal spending.

Perhaps I should be more specific. I think like a reporter, "who, what, where, when and how." When the Federal Reserve increases reserves, reduces the discount rate, and reduces the reserve requirement, who borrows the money and for what purpose? How do we determine how much has been borrowed, when, by whom, and for what purpose?

Reserve requirements haven't been reduced lately, have they?
Capital requirements have increased.

 

[rdean]

Our economy would boom if BO eliminated the corporate tax altogether as Ireland proved by just lowering it. Its the ultimate vindication of supply-side economics.

It's already at historic lows. Many companies don't pay now.

So we lower it to zero across the board and nothing happens, then what? If you have only a single failed policy and it fails, then what? What is the "contingency" plan?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Our economy would boom if BO eliminated the corporate tax altogether as Ireland proved by just lowering it. Its the ultimate vindication of supply-side economics.

It's already at historic lows. Many companies don't pay now.

So we lower it to zero across the board and nothing happens, then what? If you have only a single failed policy and it fails, then what? What is the "contingency" plan?

actually its 35% about the highest in the world which is why even BO wants to lower it

If you eliminate it then many corporations have no incentive to move jobs offshore. Liberals are slime. They created unions even though they move jobs off shore, and they love high corporate taxes to punish corporations even though it too moves even more jobs off shore.

 

[DSGE]

There are two positions; conservative and liberal. All conservatives know that supply side economics. All liberals incorrectly believe that fiscal stimulus works. All conservatives know that fiscal stimulus does not work. All liberals incorrectly believe that supply side economics does not work.

If you do not believe in supply side economics then you are a liberal. All liberals believe in fiscal stimulus. Therefore, if you do not believe in supply side economics, you are a liberal.

You cannot not believe in fiscal stimulus and also not be a liberal. There is no such thing as a non-liberal that does not believe in fiscal stimulus.

Therefore, you do not exist.

Well that's bad news.

you have a Nazi-like faith in the Fed. Drop that uber liberal BS and you can be forgiven

Drop the "colossal moron" BS and you can be forgiven.

 

[DSGE]

Rather, you consider NGDP targeting through monetary policy of managing bank reserve amounts, discount window interest rates, and the reserve ratio.

So, what is the mechanism by which the money in reserves affects the amount of money used for purchases (or affects spendable income), assuming the velocity of money is constant? And, how do we measure it?

The "hot potato" effect. Base money is (normally) a non-interest bearing asset. If you include inflation, it has a negative real return. ...Compare with the Riksbank. They expanded their balance sheet to 25% of GDP and charged their banks 25 basis points of interest on reserves. Surprise, surprise, the Swedes managed to restore nominal spending.

Perhaps I should be more specific. I think like a reporter, "who, what, where, when and how." When the Federal Reserve increases reserves, reduces the discount rate, and reduces the reserve requirement, who borrows the money and for what purpose? How do we determine how much has been borrowed, when, by whom, and for what purpose?

I'm not... entirely sure what you're asking. From the gist of it, I'm also not sure why it matters. We know people want to borrow, since securities get issued and borrowing happens. Is your question "why does credit happen?"? I don't know how this is relevant...

 

[DSGE]

There are two positions; conservative and liberal. All conservatives know that supply side economics. All liberals incorrectly believe that fiscal stimulus works. All conservatives know that fiscal stimulus does not work. All liberals incorrectly believe that supply side economics does not work.

If you do not believe in supply side economics then you are a liberal. All liberals believe in fiscal stimulus. Therefore, if you do not believe in supply side economics, you are a liberal.

You cannot not believe in fiscal stimulus and also not be a liberal. There is no such thing as a non-liberal that does not believe in fiscal stimulus.

Therefore, you do not exist.

Well that's bad news.

I am beginning to understand it. Perhaps this will work.

Ah. That clears things up.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Well that's bad news.

you have a Nazi-like faith in the Fed. Drop that uber liberal BS and you can be forgiven

Drop the "colossal moron" BS and you can be forgiven.

excuse me but you're the one with the liberal, Nazi-like faith that the Fed has "gotten its act together"- despite the Fed induced current Great Recession- and so can easily restore GDP and full employment.

 

[DSGE]

you have a Nazi-like faith in the Fed. Drop that uber liberal BS and you can be forgiven

Drop the "colossal moron" BS and you can be forgiven.

excuse me but you're the one with the liberal, Nazi-like faith that the Fed has "gotten its act together"- despite the Fed induced current Great Recession- and so can easily restore GDP and full employment.

And now we're telling people what their opinions are despite not making an effort to listen to or understand them. That makes you an idiot and a dickhole.

 

[stans]

So I recommend that we presently try to follow Germany’s economic policies of the pre-war period as best we can.

Ah, sadly, you are a liberal whack job after all. You want to make planes, tanks, and guns and dump them into the sea! Or, do you have to kill people with them before they magicially and liberally stimulate the economy?

Few military weapons were produced in the time period I'm talking about (1933-36). Why not try learning about the subject at hand before responding? In some posts you make good points while others that you make are based on misinformed claptrap. Also, I recommend that you bite your tongue and tone down the name calling before eveyone starts to ignore you. I notice that fewer and fewer people are responding to your posts.

 

[stans]

[excuse me but you're the one with the liberal, Nazi-like faith that the Fed has "gotten its act together"- despite the Fed induced current Great Recession- and so can easily restore GDP and full employment.

In post # 262 of this thread you said,

"We just averted a Depression here, Asian crisis was solved well short of depression, China has been a steady long term miracle, Japan lost 2 decades but never had depression. We may be at a turning point in central banking history. The answer seems to be, liquidity, and lots of it."

Why do you believe that the Fed induced the "current Great Recession"? In your opinion, did the Fed create too much or too little money to induce the current recession?

 

[editec]

The misinformation that gets a pass on this board is simply astounding.

Either some of you are getting your data from the bad-data shitpile or you are propagandists yourselves.

If lower Corporate taxes had been the marcro-economic prophylatic some of you imagine it is, then Ireland wouldn't have suffered from the meltdown in the first place, as it already had the lowest corporate tax rate in the EU.

In fact , in the decades leading up to the meltdown, Ireland's economic policies looked like something designed by todays American conservatives.

They did everything American conseratives suggest we ought to be doing.

STill their economy melted down because corporation taxation had NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO with the economic meltdown ---not in Ireland, not in the USA, not in the EU , either.








Do some reading kiddies, your lack of data on this subject is making you look like complete idiots.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The misinformation that gets a pass on this board is simply astounding.

Either some of you are getting your data from the bad-data shitpile or you are propagandists yourselves.

If lower Corporate taxes had been the marcro-economic prophylatic some of you imagine it is, then Ireland wouldn't have suffered from the meltdown in the first place, as it already had the lowest corporate tax rate in the EU.

In fact , in the decades leading up to the meltdown, Ireland's economic policies looked like something designed by todays American conservatives.

They did everything American conseratives suggest we ought to be doing.

STill their economy melted down because corporation taxation had NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO with the economic meltdown ---not in Ireland, not in the USA, not in the EU , either.








Do some reading kiddies, your lack of data on this subject is making you look like complete idiots.

STill their economy melted down because corporation taxation had NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO with the economic meltdown

That's true. It sure helped contribute to their earlier growth.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Most companies that moved to Ireland openly said one of the big reason was lower taxes. All agree now , even BO, that our corporate taxes , the highest in world, need to be lowered. Democrats are scum who resist because they want to punish corporations even when the high tax makes corporations move and take jobs.

Irish melt down, and world melt down, was caused by liberal central bank policies. All agree by now.
Who can disagree with a straight face?

 

[itfitzme]

The misinformation that gets a pass on this board is simply astounding.

Either some of you are getting your data from the bad-data shitpile or you are propagandists yourselves.

If lower Corporate taxes had been the marcro-economic prophylatic some of you imagine it is, then Ireland wouldn't have suffered from the meltdown in the first place, as it already had the lowest corporate tax rate in the EU.

In fact , in the decades leading up to the meltdown, Ireland's economic policies looked like something designed by todays American conservatives.

They did everything American conseratives suggest we ought to be doing.

STill their economy melted down because corporation taxation had NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO with the economic meltdown ---not in Ireland, not in the USA, not in the EU , either.

Do some reading kiddies, your lack of data on this subject is making you look like complete idiots.

I thought we cleared this up. It's not Ireland's fault that they have high unemployment, it is the fault of the Liberal central banks in the US and the EU.

It must be, companies refuse to make $7 if they could make $10 but are taxed $3. That is only common sense. If they were not punished for trying to make money, they would. And it's that $3 that they were going to pay in wages that is the reason they can't. They need the $7 for other stuff.

The Heritage Foundation's failure of prediction of the debt being effectively paid off by 2010 is not because the Bush Tax cuts didn't work, it's because of the recession that Obama made worse. They were going to be paid off in full by record surpluses in 2009. Besides, The Heritage Foundation hasn't had a change to revise it. They are busy, you know. Besides, everyone makes a mistake. You spelled "prophylatic" wrong. How come you get to make mistakes but not them?

We cannot prove that the tax cuts work because the GDP data is a lie. In fact, all data is a lie. It is especially a lie if you put it into a graphs. Graphs, by their very nature are a lie. They learn it from their liberal parent graphs. Graphs are a creation by the Liberal education system and ivory tower college professors that never worked in private industry. No college professor ever worked in private industry. They don't even know people in private industry.

This lying data includes the CPI and unemployment which are far worse then reported. During Liberal control, the numbers are adjusted to show how great things are when the incumbent is a Liberal and made to make the Republican president look worse. The only time the data is correct is when there is a conservative congress and president.

China implementing freedom stands as a testament to the the greatness of Supply Side. After all, if you ignore all the rural population, they are doing great. You can't include the rural population because they aren't part of FREEDOM.

Oh, by the way, those surveys asking questions like "Did the US military find WMDs in Iraq?" were biased. I asked and it was explained to me. They didn't ask Democrats questions that they would get wrong. Besides, it wasn't important anyways.

And, when in doubt, English is a second language.

See how it all connects? Liberal, Macs, Gold Standard, Fed Koolaid, it all connects.

Besides, didn't I already prove, in another thread, that a 1% decrease in taxes causes employment to increase by .02%. No, you don't need to know what the p-value and t-stat is. I'm not going to do the work for you. Do you own work.

What don't you understand?

Moron!!!!

"Democrats are scum who resist because they want to punish corporations" See......

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The misinformation that gets a pass on this board is simply astounding.

Either some of you are getting your data from the bad-data shitpile or you are propagandists yourselves.

If lower Corporate taxes had been the marcro-economic prophylatic some of you imagine it is, then Ireland wouldn't have suffered from the meltdown in the first place, as it already had the lowest corporate tax rate in the EU.

In fact , in the decades leading up to the meltdown, Ireland's economic policies looked like something designed by todays American conservatives.

They did everything American conseratives suggest we ought to be doing.

STill their economy melted down because corporation taxation had NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO with the economic meltdown ---not in Ireland, not in the USA, not in the EU , either.

Do some reading kiddies, your lack of data on this subject is making you look like complete idiots.

I thought we cleared this up. It's not Ireland's fault that they have high unemployment, it is the fault of the Liberal central banks in the US and the EU.

It must be, companies refuse to make $7 if they could make $10 but are taxed $3. That is only common sense. If they were not punished for trying to make money, they would. And it's that $3 that they were going to pay in wages that is the reason they can't. They need the $7 for other stuff.

The Heritage Foundation's failure of prediction of the debt being effectively paid off by 2010 is not because the Bush Tax cuts didn't work, it's because of the recession that Obama made worse. They were going to be paid off in full by record surpluses in 2009. Besides, The Heritage Foundation hasn't had a change to revise it. They are busy, you know. Besides, everyone makes a mistake. You spelled "prophylatic" wrong. How come you get to make mistakes but not them?

We cannot prove that the tax cuts work because the GDP data is a lie. In fact, all data is a lie. It is especially a lie if you put it into a graphs. Graphs, by their very nature are a lie. They learn it from their liberal parent graphs. Graphs are a creation by the Liberal education system and ivory tower college professors that never worked in private industry. No college professor ever worked in private industry. They don't even know people in private industry.

This lying data includes the CPI and unemployment which are far worse then reported. During Liberal control, the numbers are adjusted to show how great things are when the incumbent is a Liberal and made to make the Republican president look worse. The only time the data is correct is when there is a conservative congress and president.

China implementing freedom stands as a testament to the the greatness of Supply Side. After all, if you ignore all the rural population, they are doing great. You can't include the rural population because they aren't part of FREEDOM.

Oh, by the way, those surveys asking questions like "Did the US military find WMDs in Iraq?" were biased. I asked and it was explained to me. They didn't ask Democrats questions that they would get wrong. Besides, it wasn't important anyways.

And, when in doubt, English is a second language.

See how it all connects? Liberal, Macs, Gold Standard, Fed Koolaid, it all connects.

Besides, didn't I already prove, in another thread, that a 1% decrease in taxes causes employment to increase by .02%. No, you don't need to know what the p-value and t-stat is. I'm not going to do the work for you. Do you own work.

What don't you understand?

Moron!!!!

"Democrats are scum who resist because they want to punish corporations" See......

The Heritage Foundation's failure of prediction

Yeah, that single paper was terrible. So what?

Companies don't take tax rates into consideration when they open factories.
Excess regulations never hurt businesses.
That's why California's high rates have helped the state.
That's why the recent increase in Illinois business taxes has caused businesses to rush into the state to create new jobs.
And they paid off the Illinois budget deficit too.