Some are more equal than others...

[Dr Kynes]

I do so love it when Kynes is posting. Our two resident idiots spouting off about his stupidity as he destroys them in plain sight. Hey, let's drop a few posts agreeing with each other and desperately state anyone who agrees with him is in the fringe. THAT will cleverly disguise the painfully obvious truth he embarrasses you repeatedly.

You two really are dim bulbs.

nah, rapesey just decided to join in the Thread Derailment Party bucklefuckle had been trying to start for like 8 pages now.

their little dutch rudder party was goin nowhere fast, since neither one can produce anything substantive, in this thread, or in life.

and he thinks he "Owns" me...

i have decided my Human Chattel's old name "Rapesey" isnt very fitting, so from now on his name is Toby.

 

[UncleBuck]

I do so love it when Kynes is posting. Our two resident idiots spouting off about his stupidity as he destroys them in plain sight. Hey, let's drop a few posts agreeing with each other and desperately state anyone who agrees with him is in the fringe. THAT will cleverly disguise the painfully obvious truth he embarrasses you repeatedly.

You two really are dim bulbs.

yeah, he really embarrassed me by trying to claim that he posted about egg prices when in fact it was me who had to inform him about the prices of eggs in his own damn town.

of course you admire that type of complete reality inversion, skewed polls douche.

and i'm just damn sure that you love it when he calls north america's foremost white supremacist a "respected academic", because you sure as shit are too much of a pussy to ever own up to your racist beliefs.

 

[UncleBuck]

nah, rapesey just decided to join in the Thread Derailment Party bucklefuckle had been trying to start for like 8 pages now.

their little dutch rudder party was goin nowhere fast, since neither one can produce anything substantive, in this thread, or in life.

and he thinks he "Owns" me...

i have decided my Human Chattel's old name "Rapesey" isnt very fitting, so from now on his name is Toby.

i believe the thread derailment started after you failed to cite the words you claim krugman said (still waiting for that timestamp), started yelling once again about marxism and black people (your own prediction came true, but only because of you), then started going full reality denial mode.

funny that you chose to put me on ignore rather than address how keynesian economics worked in my own life.

even funnier that you cannot deny the fact that every single capitalistic company in america has a line of credit for debt spending that they then pay off during more prosperous times, just as krugman and keynesian economics prescribes.

if keynesian economics is so mysterious to you, that speaks more to your idiocy than your understanding, since every single business in america employs keynesian economics.

 

[Padawanbater2]

milton freidman took exactly the same evidence, and developed an economic theory that is 100% counter to Kruggie's but BOTH have prestigious ivy league phd's, both have nobel prizes in the same field, but both cannot be right.

Friedmans economics brought us Reagonomics, ie, trickle down economics, and look where we are today, nearly 30 years later, economic inequality not seen since the 1930's. Keynesian economics brought us economic growth seen during the 40's, 50's & 60's. It doesn't take a genius to figure out which one is better

and of course you prolly think you have "Owned" me in this thread.
too bad youre the one out there picking cotton

Dude is so racist he even turns an economic debate into "picking cotton". That's hilarious

 

[UncleBuck]

Friedmans economics brought us Reagonomics, ie, trickle down economics, and look where we are today, nearly 30 years later, economic inequality not seen since the 1930's. Keynesian economics brought us economic growth seen during the 40's, 50's & 60's. It doesn't take a genius to figure out which one is better


Dude is so racist he even turns an economic debate into "picking cotton". That's hilarious

nah, he's not racist.

he lovingly refers to obama as a "halfrican". haven't you noticed all the positive things he has had to say about africa and black people?

you should just listen to muyloco because that guy is always right, hence why romney won 54-40.

 

[Padawanbater2]

neither one can produce anything substantive

1940's, 1950's & 1960's

I can hear you now... "But but.. that's because of WW2"

Sure it was Keynesey.. The economic boom that lasted 3 decades was all because of the second world war.. Except we were rationing throughout the early 40's and taxes were @ around ~80% throughout the 50's & 60's for the upperclass. It's weird, whenever taxes are high on the rich and low on the poor, our economy sees increased growth, and when it's the opposite, like you support, high on the poor, low on the rich, we're in a decline, recession or depression, and economic inequality reaches unprecedented levels.. What a crazy coincidence!

 

[ChesusRice]

Friedmans economics brought us Reagonomics, ie, trickle down economics, and look where we are today, nearly 30 years later, economic inequality not seen since the 1930's. Keynesian economics brought us economic growth seen during the 40's, 50's & 60's. It doesn't take a genius to figure out which one is better


Dude is so racist he even turns an economic debate into "picking cotton". That's hilarious

You are just impatient.
The money will trickle down eventually. The rich just have to get their share first

 

[NoDrama]

Keynesian economics brought us economic growth seen during the 40's, 50's & 60's. It doesn't take a genius to figure out which one is better

By that logic then Communism is even better. China will soon be #1 economy in the world, which by your logic means it is the better system.

Not that it has anything to do with manufacturing or the fact the USA did so well in the 40's 50's and 60's was because everything the world needed was manufactured here because we were the only modern country left standing after WW2.

Who is the world largest manufacturer now?

China.

You sure it has to do with debt spending by the government? You sure about that?
I think whichever country produces the most things to sell to others is going to be the richest country every time.

 

[ChesusRice]

By that logic then Communism is even better. China will soon be #1 economy in the world, which by your logic means it is the better system.

Not that it has anything to do with manufacturing or the fact the USA did so well in the 40's 50's and 60's was because everything the world needed was manufactured here because we were the only modern country left standing after WW2.

Who is the world largest manufacturer now?

China.

You sure it has to do with debt spending by the government? You sure about that?
I think whichever country produces the most things to sell to others is going to be the richest country every time.

China has a better economy for a vast number of factors.
1 the goverment doesn't have lobbiests fighting to change laws.
2 with over a billion people a lucrative market. Chinese laws says to sell there you need to find a partner who is Chinese and manufacture there.
3 intellectual theft
4 currency manipulation
5 lack of labor and environmental laws

Do you really admire China?
BTW
China isn't communist unless you are one of the poor there

 

[NoDrama]

4 currency manipulation

All countries manipulate their currency, its what current accounts and capital accounts (which every country has) are based on. When the US bails out banks and the Fed prints up the money, well that would be currency manipulation. When Shinzo Abe directs the Japanese central bank to issue another 800 billion Yen per year, that is currency manipulation. When Draghi says the ECB will engage in QE, well that's currency manipulation of the Euro.


Just so ya know, China has their currency pegged to ours, so every time the USA manipulates its currency, China does the exact same.

China has the better economy because they are making things and selling them, all the USA makes is dollars (Not really). You can't become a wealthy country by doing each others taxes and selling each other hamburgers no matter how much Krugman says so.

 

[NoDrama]

China isn't communist unless you are one of the poor there

I will agree with you there, but I am probably the only person on this board who has actually been to China, have you been there? I went to Hong Kong and then went to Kowloon in China.
They have capitalism and freer markets than we do and much less regulation.

They have a ton of air pollution too.

Bustling city, like a giant arcade with wares being sold everywhere. The greatest thing about other countries is haggling, I never pay full price. I try to haggle in the stores here, but most salespeople have no authority so its useless most of the time.

 

[ChesusRice]

I will agree with you there, but I am probably the only person on this board who has actually been to China, have you been there? I went to Hong Kong and then went to Kowloon in China.
They have capitalism and freer markets than we do and much less regulation.

They have a ton of air pollution too.

Bustling city, like a giant arcade with wares being sold everywhere. The greatest thing about other countries is haggling, I never pay full price. I try to haggle in the stores here, but most salespeople have no authority so its useless most of the time.

i ahve been a lot of places in Asia but not China. Next year I will be in Japan, Korea adn back in the Philippines

 

[ChesusRice]

China has the better economy because they are making things and selling them, all the USA makes is dollars (Not really). You can't become a wealthy country by doing each others taxes and selling each other hamburgers no matter how much Krugman says so.

The service economy is what Ronald Fucking Reagan Championed

 

[ChesusRice]

A service economy? I think you mean SERVANT
by gbgasser

I was in college when I first heard the term service economy. President Ronald Reagan used the term to describe the changes our nation was going through following the 70s. It described a situation where, due to globalization and cheap and abundant oil, "we" could afford to have China or any other number of populous low wage nations build stuff cheaply and then ship it to us. We could then focus on service industries and knowledge industries, using our superior resources in those areas to accomplish this. America would become a net importer of finished manufactured goods and a net exporter of ideas, know-how and financialization schemes.
It actually wasn't a bad idea, in and of itself. Viewing the world as one big marketplace, why not let each country focus on what it does best, not worrying about individual countries trade balances but simply realizing that some countries will be net producers while others will be net consumers? So what is the problem with it?
The problem was not really the plan but the execution of the plan and the model of the world by those executing the plan. The plan, along with the cult of supply side economics, combined to create a world where our middle class is slowly disappearing and only private markets and owners are considered worthwhile. All public sector workers are leeches sucking off the productivity of others, denying the true entrepeneurs of profitable opportunities.
The rising influence of our finance sector is a direct result of this supply side religion where capital is king and workers are just another "cost" to businesses.
Looking at the ideas coming out of the modern GOP its clear they have moved even further away from an idea that we all matter. That we all have something important to add to our economy. No, today only the rich matter,only THEIR TAXES must be cut, only THEIR COSTS must be reduced and only THEIR PROFITS will be protected. They see the economy as serving the needs of the rich. They see the ideal economy as one where a very few players control all the resources and the rest of us "compete" to curry favors from them. We will all just undercut each other by agreeing to work for less and less as long as they just pick us. Its like the "Americas Got Talent" view of our world. They will sit back and choose those of us who impress them the most, and we'll just be ecstatic that they picked us!
Many of us would rather see the people with plenty of buying power while businesses compete to meet our needs. Those that do well get lots of customers and make lots of money,those that dont.............. back to the drawing board to figure out what sells.
In this world businesses are the servants to the people, the people arent servants to the rich.

 

[Dr Kynes]

1940's, 1950's & 1960's

I can hear you now... "But but.. that's because of WW2"

Sure it was Keynesey.. The economic boom that lasted 3 decades was all because of the second world war.. Except we were rationing throughout the early 40's and taxes were @ around ~80% throughout the 50's & 60's for the upperclass. It's weird, whenever taxes are high on the rich and low on the poor, our economy sees increased growth, and when it's the opposite, like you support, high on the poor, low on the rich, we're in a decline, recession or depression, and economic inequality reaches unprecedented levels.. What a crazy coincidence!

you should listen to this track.

and this clown thinks he is a badass rapper. seriously.

thats you right there.

yoiu have been failing miserably at supporting your assertions in this (and every) thread, yet somehow you believe youre winning.

economics theory is like religious theory, every event supports your assertions, and coincidentally supports the other guy's claims too.

of the two main economic theories, ONE can be tested in the real world, and works on economies which range from the personal to national in size

the other one fails miserably over and over and over, but the proponents guarantee that if your economy is big enough... BAM! Prosperity, Hot Chicks And Puppies!

keynesian economics is a 419 scam, with the promised rewards just around the corner, you just gotta pay off a couple more corrupt nigerian officials, then your great uncle's fortune will be wired directly to your bank account.

 

[Dr Kynes]

A service economy? I think you mean SERVANT
by gbgasser

I was in college when I first heard the term service economy. President Ronald Reagan used the term to describe the changes our nation was going through following the 70s. It described a situation where, due to globalization and cheap and abundant oil, "we" could afford to have China or any other number of populous low wage nations build stuff cheaply and then ship it to us. We could then focus on service industries and knowledge industries, using our superior resources in those areas to accomplish this. America would become a net importer of finished manufactured goods and a net exporter of ideas, know-how and financialization schemes.
It actually wasn't a bad idea, in and of itself. Viewing the world as one big marketplace, why not let each country focus on what it does best, not worrying about individual countries trade balances but simply realizing that some countries will be net producers while others will be net consumers? So what is the problem with it?
The problem was not really the plan but the execution of the plan and the model of the world by those executing the plan. The plan, along with the cult of supply side economics, combined to create a world where our middle class is slowly disappearing and only private markets and owners are considered worthwhile. All public sector workers are leeches sucking off the productivity of others, denying the true entrepeneurs of profitable opportunities.
The rising influence of our finance sector is a direct result of this supply side religion where capital is king and workers are just another "cost" to businesses.
Looking at the ideas coming out of the modern GOP its clear they have moved even further away from an idea that we all matter. That we all have something important to add to our economy. No, today only the rich matter,only THEIR TAXES must be cut, only THEIR COSTS must be reduced and only THEIR PROFITS will be protected. They see the economy as serving the needs of the rich. They see the ideal economy as one where a very few players control all the resources and the rest of us "compete" to curry favors from them. We will all just undercut each other by agreeing to work for less and less as long as they just pick us. Its like the "Americas Got Talent" view of our world. They will sit back and choose those of us who impress them the most, and we'll just be ecstatic that they picked us!
Many of us would rather see the people with plenty of buying power while businesses compete to meet our needs. Those that do well get lots of customers and make lots of money,those that dont.............. back to the drawing board to figure out what sells.
In this world businesses are the servants to the people, the people arent servants to the rich.

 

[UncleBuck]

you should listen to this track.

and this clown thinks he is a badass rapper. seriously.

thats you right there.

yoiu have been failing miserably at supporting your assertions in this (and every) thread, yet somehow you believe youre winning.

economics theory is like religious theory, every event supports your assertions, and coincidentally supports the other guy's claims too.

of the two main economic theories, ONE can be tested in the real world, and works on economies which range from the personal to national in size

the other one fails miserably over and over and over, but the proponents guarantee that if your economy is big enough... BAM! Prosperity, Hot Chicks And Puppies!

keynesian economics is a 419 scam, with the promised rewards just around the corner, you just gotta pay off a couple more corrupt nigerian officials, then your great uncle's fortune will be wired directly to your bank account.

how much do a dozen eggs cost in vallejo?

 

[Canna Sylvan]

how much do a dozen eggs cost in vallejo?

Substitute goods.

 

[Padawanbater2]

of the two main economic theories, ONE can be tested in the real world, and works on economies which range from the personal to national in size

American history says you're wrong. Reaganomics doesn't work, todays economic climate is proof of that. It creates and increases economic inequality. Keynesian economics creates growth and prosperity as evident by the 1940's-1960's.

I have hard evidence to back up my point, you have hot air and pissy pants to back up yours.

 

[NoDrama]

The service economy is what Ronald Fucking Reagan Championed

I think there are way more service jobs now than at any point in Reagan's tenure. And by such a wide margin that it pretty much makes Obama look like the service economy KING of the world.