alexey Posted January 28, 2009 Author Share Posted January 28, 2009 Ok, everyone made the exact same conclusion, but it's everyone else's fault, you are still right. Gotcha. People who have similar mindsets tend to make similar mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 People that have the same mindset tend to make same mistakes. Funny, since Popeman & I just discussed on opposite sides a similar economic question earlier today. http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=279307 But it must be us, you're right. Couldnt possibly be you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 To be fair tax cuts is the solution republicans offer to everything. It's their go to solution and it doesn't matter if it would work or not because at the end of the day many will WANT IT TO BE TRUE because they like the idea of paying less in taxes. Also government spending has shown itself to have the largest short term positive impact. Higher than simply slashing taxes or writing rebate checks (that mostly find their ways to pay debt). Once the situation is made better after years of neglect by those pushing lower taxes and higher spending, I'm sure we'll see a good history rewrite telling us that the down turn in the economy was made worse by the government and it all would have been fine had we just cut taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 wow, there's some almost cultish behavior going on here. Same language, same syntax, same mantra, same inability to listen. Kinda frightening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 "The government which governs best, governs least."--Thomas Jefferson http://www.quotedb.com/quotes/1993 You can find a Thomas Jefferson quote for both sides of any issue. Dude was not at all consistent in his statements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Also government spending has shown itself to have the largest short term positive impact. It has? The past eight years have seen the biggest explosion in government spending in American history. Am I missing the short-term boom that's going on somewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 You can find a Thomas Jefferson quote for both sides of any issue. Dude was not at all consistent in his statements. That's true, but he was right when he said that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Also government spending has shown itself to have the largest short term positive impact. Actually, history shows that "stimulus" plans tend not to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Because you started this whole thread with the premise that the government is better at generating economic growth than individuals. Not once in all of history has this proven to be true. Fortune Magazine. Post #33 in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMarcus1914 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Do you think the Great Deal was a good government program? We tried the tax cut program, and in the end we all end up spending our money on gas and food. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 It has? The past eight years have seen the biggest explosion in government spending in American history. Am I missing the short-term boom that's going on somewhere? Turn on the logic switch real quick. Take the current economic environment and remove that government spending. ... ... ... Thought about it? None of that spending caused the problem at the moment. Much of it created employment in the private sector via the thousands of contracts generated by the explosion in spending. What would today look like if we took all that spending away? What would today look like without the bailout? You think things would be better? Really? You actually think that? I hope not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted January 28, 2009 Author Share Posted January 28, 2009 You can find a Thomas Jefferson quote for both sides of any issue. Dude was not at all consistent in his statements. I think the impression of inconsistency is because "sides" were different back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I think the impression of inconsistency is because "sides" were different back then. Party. And partly because quotes can be taken out of context. But also partly because Jefferson's views shifted over the years and even were internally inconsistent at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted January 28, 2009 Author Share Posted January 28, 2009 Funny, since Popeman & I just discussed on opposite sides a similar economic question earlier today.http://www.extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=279307 But it must be us, you're right. Couldnt possibly be you. I am not sure what your point is. Certainly I played a role in this somehow. I do not think, however, that I have argued for benefits of central planning. I have argued for benefits of government spending. I would be very interested in seeing your argument that government spending = central planning, if you'd like to make one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenaa Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I know, thats why its such a sweet political move. Every one of those 58% has a vote. Frightening, isn't it. The majority of those being pandered too aren't even able to earn enough to be able to pay their own way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Actually, history shows that "stimulus" plans tend not to work. That certainly happens when the history is being written by people who ideologically oppose stimulus plans. Like revisionists who try to claim that FDR prolonged the Great Depression. :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Frightening, isn't it. The majority of those being pandered too aren't even able to earn enough to be able to pay their own way. Ahh... so you favor an increase in the minimum wage then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 That certainly happens when the history is being written by people who ideologically oppose stimulus plans.Like revisionists who try to claim that FDR prolonged the Great Depression. :whoknows: LOL BS and you know it. EDIT: Arthur Schlesinger Jr isn't alive anymore to whitewash the history. It's not going to happen this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 That certainly happens when the history is being written by people who ideologically oppose stimulus plans.Like revisionists who try to claim that FDR prolonged the Great Depression. :whoknows: :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMK9973 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 We have to differentiate between what we "Want to be true" and the question at hand. We have to be sure not to confuse our core beliefs with "facts on the ground". Most of us think if the private sector couldn't do it, then that business, or bank, or person should fail and Government should not bail them out. Most of us think that Government over spends and while has good intentions, things would be better if the private sector can handle. However - there is a Reality. The reality is that the economy is in trouble. There are things, and many psychological things at work here. Is giving tax breaks to millions of people who are being told that the economy is crashing the best thing? Is giving billions to companies that have already lost billions the smart thing? We can argue if it's even Government's role to get involved to shorten a natural business cycle or not, however, what shouldn't be argued is that only Government has the ability and resources to massly effect a economy. I think there can be NO doubt that Government involvement will lessen the impact of the bad economy for the next 2 to 3 years. Now - Will that be the best thing long term? Would it be better for America to suffer now in the hopes that once it turns it will be better longer? Or is it to much of a risk that years of a hugely weaken economy will forever effect the economy, even when the business cycle does turn? That is a legitimate debate. But simply saying that a bailout won't help short term is just silly. It will. And it will more then tax cuts, which, would go directly to savings or small spending. http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/Economic_Stimulus_House_Plan_012109.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Fortune Magazine.Post #33 in this thread. Oh, I saw it. Then I chuckled, because I already know that "a majority of economists" think the stimulus package is a good thing, just a like "a majority of economists" laughed at those who saw this coming several years ago. I'm saying that "a majority of economists" are wrong, not because I have more training in analyzing business models, but because economists have the annoying habit of living in a world of theory, rather than a world of practice, a problem that government shares. There's a reason that a certain old joke about economists developed: "Economists look at what works in practice and ask whether or not it works in theory." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Oh, I saw it. Then I chuckled, because I already know that "a majority of economists" think the stimulus package is a good thing, just a like "a majority of economists" laughed at those who saw this coming several years ago. I'm saying that "a majority of economists" are wrong, not because I have more training in analyzing business models, but because economists have the annoying habit of living in a world of theory, rather than a world of practice, a problem that government shares. There's a reason that a certain old joke about economists developed:"Economists look at what works in practice and ask whether or not it works in theory." I share your opinion about the economists community right now, but it is important to note that a lot of economists ( the amount who are is growing) are pushing back against the stimulus package right now. Some heavy hitters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 Turn on the logic switch real quick. Take the current economic environment and remove that government spending. ... ... ... Thought about it? None of that spending caused the problem at the moment. Much of it created employment in the private sector via the thousands of contracts generated by the explosion in spending. What would today look like if we took all that spending away? What would today look like without the bailout? You think things would be better? Really? You actually think that? I hope not. Turn on the logic switch real quick. You just made an argument for ever-increasing government spending. You want to try to mock me about logical fallacies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I share your opinion about the economists community right now, but it is important to note that a lot of economists are pushing back against the stimulus package right now. Some heavy hitters. Oh, I know, and I side with them. They're the minority right now, though - too many economists are diehard Keynesians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hailskinz1991 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I buy into it. 1000 percent. Name one time where the government has done anything better than the private market? Why do you think the government knows how to spend money better than the american consumer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.