To those who voted for Oama

[Old Rocks]

The good ol' boy farmer anti-federalist Thomas Jefferson, who is worshipped by Libertarians and Republicans everywhere, had very strong opinions about the dangers of allowing wealth to become unnaturally concentrated in the hands of the wealthy.

Funny how they are ignorant of that.

However, the solution is not higher taxes on the wealthy, although that would mitigate the problem to a small degree.

The solution is to remove the existing legislative thumbs which tilt the scale to the rich man's advantage.

.

Well said. A change in the tax structure is needed to do that.

 

[Old Rocks]

It appears that very few of those responding were able to explain Keynesian Economics.
The socialist ass wipes as always resorted to senseless off topic responses.

"After observing the economic failures occurring in Spain, Ireland, England, Italy, Greece, and even here in the U.S. with the failure to increase growth, despite an extra $800B being pumped into the economy, one pertinent question is apparent – where in the world has Keynesian economics ever worked to grow and sustain an economy for the long term, with so much evidence that proves exactly the opposite?"
Where in the world is Keynesian economics working? – Ted Biondo - Rockford, IL - Rockford Register Star

G20 leaders have finally realized that too much government spending is not sustainable.
"Government finances of Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain -- and now possibly Hungary -- are shaky. And despite a bailout of nearly $1 trillion to keep Greece afloat, global investors continue to worry about whether the region can contain its debt crisis and prevent a default."
After Europe, does Keynesian economics make sense? - Jun. 10, 2010
France has moved from left to right to save their economy.

French President François Hollande has vowed to trim public spending and simplify France's huge public sector during a speech in which he told a pessimistic nation "decline is not our destiny". He has also stated: We should be capable of doing better in spending less," he said. "We have to show - France more than others, and more than Germany - seriousness and competitiveness."
French President Francois Hollande defiant in face of criticism | South China Morning Post

Is it rational for our government to expect a different outcome?

Dumb ass. These nations have invoked austerity budgets to weather the economic crisis we created. And our President has, as much as the obstructionists will let him, done the opposite. So we are prospering relitive to these nations. Perhaps they should have followed our example.

 

[usmcstinger]

It appears that very few of those responding were able to explain Keynesian Economics.
The socialist ass wipes as always resorted to senseless off topic responses.

"After observing the economic failures occurring in Spain, Ireland, England, Italy, Greece, and even here in the U.S. with the failure to increase growth, despite an extra $800B being pumped into the economy, one pertinent question is apparent – where in the world has Keynesian economics ever worked to grow and sustain an economy for the long term, with so much evidence that proves exactly the opposite?"
Where in the world is Keynesian economics working? – Ted Biondo - Rockford, IL - Rockford Register Star

G20 leaders have finally realized that too much government spending is not sustainable.
"Government finances of Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain -- and now possibly Hungary -- are shaky. And despite a bailout of nearly $1 trillion to keep Greece afloat, global investors continue to worry about whether the region can contain its debt crisis and prevent a default."
After Europe, does Keynesian economics make sense? - Jun. 10, 2010
France has moved from left to right to save their economy.

French President François Hollande has vowed to trim public spending and simplify France's huge public sector during a speech in which he told a pessimistic nation "decline is not our destiny". He has also stated: We should be capable of doing better in spending less," he said. "We have to show - France more than others, and more than Germany - seriousness and competitiveness."
French President Francois Hollande defiant in face of criticism | South China Morning Post

Is it rational for our government to expect a different outcome?

Dumb ass. These nations have invoked austerity budgets to weather the economic crisis we created. And our President has, as much as the obstructionists will let him, done the opposite. So we are prospering relitive to these nations. Perhaps they should have followed our example.

Your statement makes sense only in the delusional world you live in. In the real world, you are a moron trying to explain something that you do not understand.

 

[Cassandro]

Do any of you understand Keynesian Economics?
If you can't explain it, don't bother to post anything.

How detailed an explanation do you want? I suggest for the purpose of discussion in this forum it will suffice to say J.M. Keynes advocates demand side economics, which promotes robust, horizontal circulation of resources, as opposed to Milton Friedman's torpid supply side economics, which effects vertical deflection of resources.

Demand side economics, in which the Nation's wealth resources are distributed horizontally (i.e., throughout the entire population) keeps those resources in circulation, thus maintaining a healthy economy -- such as existed during the decades between the 40s and 80s.

Supply side economics, in which resources are distributed vertically (i.e., upward toward a tiny percentage of the population) ultimately enables the Nation's wealth to be hoarded by the super-rich rather than circulated among those who actually have produced it and would keep it in circulation.

One example of the effects of supply side economics was seen in Chile wherein Augusto Pinochet followed Friedman's advice after the coup, thereby destroying that nation's economy and subjecting the working class to economic slavery. Another example is that which we are witnessing right here in the U.S.

For a more detailed explanation in non-academic format I highly recommend Naomi Klein's excellent book, The Shock Doctrine. It is extremely educational as well as lively and interesting.

1. What "resources" are you referring to, and is there a fixed or limited supply?

2. What is the process by which they are "distributed?"

3. Exactly where do the super-rich "hoard" these resources?

4. Please define "economic slavery."

Thanks.

 

[MikeK]

Do any of you understand Keynesian Economics?
If you can't explain it, don't bother to post anything.

How detailed an explanation do you want? I suggest for the purpose of discussion in this forum it will suffice to say J.M. Keynes advocates demand side economics, which promotes robust, horizontal circulation of resources, as opposed to Milton Friedman's torpid supply side economics, which effects vertical deflection of resources.

Demand side economics, in which the Nation's wealth resources are distributed horizontally (i.e., throughout the entire population) keeps those resources in circulation, thus maintaining a healthy economy -- such as existed during the decades between the 40s and 80s.

Supply side economics, in which resources are distributed vertically (i.e., upward toward a tiny percentage of the population) ultimately enables the Nation's wealth to be hoarded by the super-rich rather than circulated among those who actually have produced it and would keep it in circulation.

One example of the effects of supply side economics was seen in Chile wherein Augusto Pinochet followed Friedman's advice after the coup, thereby destroying that nation's economy and subjecting the working class to economic slavery. Another example is that which we are witnessing right here in the U.S.

For a more detailed explanation in non-academic format I highly recommend Naomi Klein's excellent book, The Shock Doctrine. It is extremely educational as well as lively and interesting.

1. What "resources" are you referring to, and is there a fixed or limited supply?

In the context of an economic discussion the word resources refers to a nation's cumulative wealth, its GDP (Gross Domestic Product). It is basically all the money generated by commercial activities of and by Americans (including corporations).

2. What is the process by which they are "distributed?"

Wages paid to workers, taxes, social programs, e.g., Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment Insurance, education aid programs, G.I. Bill, etc.

3. Exactly where do the super-rich "hoard" these resources?

In a broad variety of places, including offshore bank accounts which shield them from taxes. Many are heavily invested in metals (gold, silver, platinum), real estate, etc.

4. Please define "economic slavery."

Economic slavery is that which exists in many foreign nations and did in fact exist right here in the U.S. before worker protective laws contained in FDR's New Deal and the rise of the union movement bestowed rights and benefits upon workers which led to living wages, worker benefits (such as you enjoy today) and the rise of the American Middle Class.

You might wish to do some reading (do a Google search) on working conditions in America before and during the Gilded Age, when people were forced to work 12 -14 hour days, six days a week, for whatever meager wage an employer could get away with paying (there was no minimum wage law). There were no vacations or any form of worker benefits and working conditions were often dangerous and/or harmful to a worker's health.

One had the choice of tolerating such abusive conditions or starving in the streets. And that is economic slavery.

Thanks.

You're quite welcome.