18

The roots of economic chaos

Posted by $ sjatkins 9 years, 4 months ago to Economics
62 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

What Will Rogers said was once funny: "Thank God we don't get all the government we pay for!"

It isn't funny today. We get not only the government paid for by massive takings by force from all of us but even more government paid for by putting our children for generations in debt, massive borrowing and running the money printing presses like mad.

Worse this is supported by officially sanctioned economic doctrine. Keynes and latter day disciples like Krugman claim that spending and "demand" are the engines of wealth and that the only investment in production ta actually helps is from government. You couldn't make this crap up.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 4 months ago
    "Keynes and latter day disciples like Krugman claim that spending and "demand" are the engines of wealth and that the only investment in production ta actually helps is from government. "
    We really need two different words for what they teach Keynesianism means in school and what it means here. I haven't read the primary soruces. I just know the two are nothing alike. If it means gov't spending results in growth, I disagree. If it means paying off debt or going into debt affects aggregate demand, which affects the economic cycle, I agree with it strongly. We need two words.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I invented a supply-demand tool made of heavy paper
    which I used to teach others, later, in the certified manager
    program out of ICPM in Virginia. -- j
    .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That'll teach you. So, what did you learn? Not Economics, but Public relations.
    I did very poorly in school because I would rather fail than suck up to most of the asshole teachers.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The underlying assumption that you do not state is that the gov thinks it knows 'what to demand' on behalf of the poor. Climate Change is a good example of that: whilst the Paris talks are going on, surveys are showing that <20% of the people in third world countries consider it to be important, and <50% in most developed countries. Long concatenation of several articles -(http://www.rationaloptimist.com/blog/....

    The paternalistic assumption that the gov 'knows what is right for us' is upstream from its assertion that 'therefore it can take the money from whomever it wants to make that happen'.

    Jan
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I got a C instead of the A I deserved from an ORNL economist
    who was teaching grad school on the side. . I begged to
    differ with him about Keynes. . he was not amused. -- j
    .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 4 months ago
    and it is criminal what they're doing to the kids. . nothing but
    sh!t for education, and punishment for having a thought. -- j
    .
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by samrigel 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Thanks for saying it, now I don't need to. Sex, drugs and rock n roll --- great slogan. It is total insanity as the totalitarian minded keep doing the same thing expecting different results.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 4 months ago
    Keynes and Krugman - now there is a pair. Add my high school economics teacher and you'd have the three stooges. The trouble is that the first two are given credence and the third controls your grade. Her definition of socialism was "That's when the top and bottom of the economic ladder is cut off." When I tried to tell her that her definition was incomplete and had the temerity to argue, I was sent to the principal, but I got instead the Administrative Assistant. We called him Admiral Ass. When he asked me why I was there, I told him Miss Whatever said I was being smart. Then I crossed my eyes and let my tongue loll out and said "But I'm all right now." He called my parents to come down for a little get-together. He didn't serve tea.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    his name came up in a polling group I was asked to join. The question do you read articles by any of the following and another was news source. BLOGs were listed for the first time as they also ask if the poll is one sided or slanted or missing viewpoints etc.

    Kinda like asking who are the number one shyster businesses and not mentioning Cingular ATT. Some of us , me included took them to task for not recognizing the disenfranchised 35% to 50% nor the existence of undervoting and None of the Above. Some of that is starting to work. Interesting work covers a wide category of poltiical and consumer oriented questions. They also were leaving out purchasing by internet and that's been added.

    I also kicked them about using wrong definitions etc. just like I do here. Why? Why not? The one's we've been spoon fed for years do not work....my personal system does.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Then the only answer left is the only way to win is don't play their game. That's automatic enabling.

    Not voting on that particular line is 'undervote' = No Confidence vote in parliamentary systems and for us translates to "None of the Above."

    Currently runs 35 or so percent in Presidential cycles and right at 50 percent in non Prez elections.

    Unless they start counting all those who didn't vote and those who didn't register as winner take all. A step I wouldn't put past the left for half second.

    That 35 to 50 percent is a source of real power but there is no one or no one entity to lead that sort of cooperation. Still the rule remains

    First - cease enabling.
    Second - regain control
    Third - Make changes of common ground agreed areas
    Fourth - then deal with the rest of it....

    The other option is learn to say We Serve The Party!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Finish the equation. If there is Gross Domestic Product what is Net Domestic Product and where did the difference go? I always hate to get to the half way point and then find someone decided to tear out the final pages...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It was first laid prior to 1900 in the eastern Universities. The drug culture of the 60's who are now Secretaries of State and adviser theoreticians to the progressive movement turned it from peace to socialism to progressivism to the same place it always leads and has always led to a fascist totalitarian conclusion. Just what Soros said he wanted all along. The current phase exactly duplicating Germany in the late 20's to early 30's is preparing college level non-students for duty with the protective echelon. Not a pfennigs difference. The iron curtain goes down the economic curtain goes up using that springboard and another of the lefts old strategies cycle or circle of repression this time economic repression. Right wing of left or left wing of left it's still the same ending. Seig Heil Comrade I serve the party.

    So much for the flower children....where have all their lineage gone? Gone to jackboots everyone. Looks like they'll never learn.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ HeroWorship 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    And, I will take semantic issue with the idea that a millionaire (American or not) has the same demands as a poor person. (also, that wealth is associated with slobbery :-) )

    The more wealth you have, the more likely you are to think from an investment mentality. The less wealth you have, the more likely you are to think with a consumption mentality.

    It is the people who think investment that produce things, vs. consuming them.

    The demands are different. Teaching people to invest, even when they are poor, is the road to wealth, the American Dream. Not consumption.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Solver 9 years, 4 months ago
    I'm not a mystically brilliant person like Krugman. but I would disagree that my spending and my credit card are engines of wealth. That disagreement expands to any level.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by blackswan 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    There is no place for innovation in any of the modern economic schemes. Demand and re-distribution are the only mantras.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by blackswan 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Flower power laid the groundwork for this barely hidden extremely angry socialist running the country. So, no, it wasn't better.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ HeroWorship 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. - Madison, Fed #51
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It is so far worse than that. It is not free people seeking what they value. It is the government claiming that it can demand and demand and thus make the people rich. Claiming it can demand on their behalf and better than they can after stealing their wealth and economic vote away wholesale. They despise retained profits. They are not their control.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Flower power, as much as it sucked, was much better than this barely hidden extremely angry socialist running the country.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 9 years, 4 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It is not "thanks to me". My one vote in a the huge number of zombies that have not escaped their conditioning barely registers. It is unfortunately very difficult to get a 3rd party with real traction. The Libertarian Party? I lost all belief they would or were even aiming at making the right kind of difference ages ago.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo