Quote :

"Let me guess, to cock-jockey and cheerlead?"

There you go "guessing" again

Between that and the "I understand economics and you do not"; i.e.) nana-nana-boo boo

IT IS ENTERTAINMENT, COMMIE-SON, ENTERTAINMENT



ADD: page 47 will have Kris-ism's throughout which WILL make the educated reader LAUGH

[Edited on January 18, 2011 at 9:04 AM. Reason : Kris-ism's ]

1/18/2011 9:02:07 AM

Quote :

"No Kris, this isn't correct."

So then in this deflationary environment, what is the most obvious oppurtunity cost to investing, and how is it different from that same oppurtunity cost in an inflationary environment?

I would argue that the oppurtunity cost of investing is not investing. This cost is higher in a deflationary environment, and lower in an inflationary environment.

Quote :

"The original scenario was one asset that gains 5% and one asset that gains 13.16%"

You just argued through your teeth that it was 7.5% and I was forced to explain how the return you were describing was incorrect.

Quote :

"and you think your work as a computer scientist somehow attains you a higher level of understanding of economics"

I only bring it up when what I do or what I have studied is pulled into question.

Quote :

"how much economics are you really using to do your job and how much of it is code monkeying after the econ and finance PhDs around you tell you what to do?"

Depends on the day. I know you're doing your best to look down on me for it, but to say that a developer only knows programming is like saying that a carpenter only knows hammers. But I will say that I don't work with any finance or economics PhDs, only other engineers and a few MBA's. This stuff is more about statistics and math than anything learned in finance or econ.

Quote :

"There you go "guessing" again "

Do you plan on contributing to the debate with an actual argument?

1/18/2011 9:24:43 AM

Quote :

"So then in this deflationary environment, what is the most obvious oppurtunity cost to investing, and how is it different from that same oppurtunity cost in an inflationary environment? "

Kris, the inflation rate is but one component that you'd use to calculate opportunity cost, but as the rate is always reasonably close to zero, it simply isn't even close to the deciding factor. Sure, you could argue that in a strongly deflationary environment capital projects wouldn't go forward, but no one knows at what point (and we'd likely not know until we were well past it) this would be. We've had official inflation near zero with all sorts of worry that it's going negative and yet businesses outside of housing have been going about business as usual.

Quote :

"I would argue that the oppurtunity cost of investing is not investing. This cost is higher in a deflationary environment, and lower in an inflationary environment"

Holy shit, you're a damn genius. The problem is, you set up an example, did the math wrong, and then tried to cover up your error with misdirection. No one in here is arguing that the capital won't be worth more one year later in a deflationary environment and this affects the calculated real rate of return. What we're arguing is doing nothing with your cash = 5% greater purchasing power and doing something with your cash = 5% greater purchasing power, it's just in one example you have $1000 after year 1 and in the other example you have $1075.

Quote :

"You just argued through your teeth that it was 7.5% and I was forced to explain how the return you were describing was incorrect. "

Come on Kris, I figure even an idiot like you could spot the difference between real and nominal.

Quote :

" know you're doing your best to look down on me for it"

Not at all. I'm trying to ascertain just what it is you do and have done that lets you think you can appeal to yourself as some kind of authority as your training is in computer science, not economics.

Quote :

"but to say that a developer only knows programming is like saying that a carpenter only knows hammers."

It's more like a carpenter saying he knows HVAC systems because he works on houses.

Quote :

"This stuff is more about statistics and math than anything learned in finance or econ"

Fair enough. Then stop referring to yourself as an economics authority just because you happen to work for the Vanguard group and read a couple books in your day.

[Edited on January 18, 2011 at 5:28 PM. Reason : .]

1/18/2011 5:27:02 PM

One thing i forgot to put on here (or maybe i did) is that we have been exporting our inflation to China due to the Yuan currency peg.

As they allow their currency to float upwards we will see the effects of inflation here rather than the rampant inflation in China right now.

They have no choice but to allow their currency to rise before their citizens start starving.

The evil Chinese government likes to keep their currency low so they maintain all the power over the country, but given that their citizens are close to unrest they will let it rise.

Its hilarious to hear our govt say we need them to re-value their currency so our exports do well. What exports? They cant afford healthcare yet. Technology okay... but what the hell else do we make that they will buy?

In reality when China revalues their currency the ones harmed will be the USA. We will face severe inflation on the goods we import from China, our interest rates will rise, etc.

It will fuck us right in the goat ass, bank on it.

And thats why all my money is in commodities, materials, etc.

1/18/2011 7:28:41 PM

Personally, it seems like U.S. leaders/advisors are engaging in some kind of reverse psychology. The peg is great for us, that's what allows to get all this cheap shit. Without the currency peg, our standard of living goes down, and theirs is allowed to rise.

1/18/2011 8:09:48 PM

Quote :

"but what the hell else do we make that they will buy"

Automobiles, airplanes, heavy equipment, and food. All well represented by deep lobbying power.

Think about it, eventually, after China has managed to steal all our knowledge they'll just be able to produce all of these things on their own and our mfgs will get shut out of those markets and eventually shut out of the ones here in the US.

1/18/2011 8:35:28 PM

^^ that is correct.

Our govt blames Chinese currency pegs as the problem even though they HAVE to know thats the only thing keeping the little guy and our government afloat right now.

This shit is going to get ugly.

I have like 60 canned goods in my house. But I'm thinking i should get 6,000.

And i don't even own a gun. Let alone enough guns to necessitate an entire rack.

1/18/2011 9:59:22 PM

Quote :

"Do you plan on contributing to the debate with an actual argument?"

I'd rather watch the debate's on CNBC with people who actually know how finances work, and come here to watch you backpedal as someone else makes you look silly

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/sr/sr331.pdf

teach yourself something in your spare time

1/18/2011 10:44:52 PM

Quote :

"Kris, the inflation rate is but one component that you'd use to calculate opportunity cost, but as the rate is always reasonably close to zero, it simply isn't even close to the deciding factor."

In my example I simplified it so it was the only component, also I set the deflation at a rate that would focus on its effect.

Quote :

"The problem is, you set up an example, did the math wrong, and then tried to cover up your error with misdirection."

I've explained my math using the stable widget, which you have yet to try to debate, you made the mistake of confusing now dollars with next year dollars.

Quote :

"appeal to yourself as some kind of authority"

I do not. As I stated before, I only bring it up when what I do or have studied is brought up.

Quote :

"It's more like a carpenter saying he knows HVAC systems because he works on houses."

Funny coincidence, growing up I built houses. I knew about everything from electrical wiring to plumbing, and in fact, even HVAC systems.

Quote :

"referring to yourself as an economics authority just because you happen to work"

Again, I haven't, I only bring it up when someone mentions my education or vocation.

Quote :

"after China has managed to steal all our knowledge they'll just be able to produce all of these things on their own and our mfgs will get shut out of those markets and eventually shut out of the ones here in the US"

That sounds like a protectionist's argument.

Quote :

"It will fuck us right in the goat ass, bank on it."

Quote :

"This shit is going to get ugly."

So when it doesn't happen, are you just going to take a page out of William Miller's book and change the date?

Quote :

"I'd rather watch the debate's on CNBC with people who actually know how finances work"

You'd be better off reading, or debating yourself, either would be better than CNBC, which is either a day-trader's sport's book or a shouting match between partisan pundits.

1/19/2011 12:44:13 AM

Quote :

"In my example I simplified it so it was the only component, also I set the deflation at a rate that would focus on its effect."

So, an argument not even worth contemplating.

Quote :

"I've explained my math using the stable widget, which you have yet to try to debate"

Because you crafted something that will never happen in reality to illustrate a point.

Quote :

" you made the mistake of confusing now dollars with next year dollars."

Just...no. You're trying to say the dollars received at the end of year 1 via investment didn't gain in value because of deflation. THATS WRONG. If you want attempt to show how that isn't feel free. I have math on my side. What do you have?

1/19/2011 6:54:00 AM

Quote :

"So, an argument not even worth contemplating."

No, this is how a science works, modeling. Otherwise it's history.

Quote :

"Because you crafted something that will never happen in reality to illustrate a point."

No, I used math to prove how you were confusing two different units. Widgets were nothing more than a elementary algebraic variable.

Quote :

"You're trying to say the dollars received at the end of year 1 via investment didn't gain in value because of deflation."

I see where you are getting confused, you don't directly gain dollars from an investment, an investment is not interest. In an investment, in the simplest terms, you trade US dollars for some item, wait some time, and then trade that item for back for US dollars, right? That item does not experience deflation, those dollars you traded DO. Do you understand now?

[Edited on January 19, 2011 at 10:36 AM. Reason : ]

1/19/2011 10:11:16 AM

Quote :

"I see where you are getting confused"

Stop being a snide little fuck. You don't know the real rate of return and how it relates to inflation. I've engaged you on it multiple times now and you ignore it. I'd say once you figure it out let me know and we can keep having a discussion, but once you figure it out you'll realize how dead fucking wrong you are about everything.

Do us all a favor, and stop making up scenarios that will never happen in reality in an attempt to illustrate a point. What you're doing isn't science, it isn't modeling, and frankly, its insulting to the people who engage in those two activities.

1/19/2011 7:57:01 PM

Quote :

"You don't know the real rate of return and how it relates to inflation."

No, I know exactly where you went wrong, I apologize for not seeing it earlier. You have attempted to calculate returns on an investment as interest. The difference is that the return is in year later dollars, rather than today dollars in terms of the item you invested in. This is why most of the concern you would see is in inflation, because inflation destroys returns on interest. In the same respect, inflation helps investments, as the decreasing dollar value assists the true value of your investment. The exact reverse is true in cases of deflation, which is the exact point I attempted to point out in my OP. Initially I was confused when you brought up the "real vs. nominal" considering that is generally an interest concern rather than an investment one.

Quote :

"What you're doing isn't science, it isn't modeling, and frankly, its insulting to the people who engage in those two activities."

Normally I would point out that I do both of those, but instead I would like to take a tongue-in-cheek approach by pointing out how little being an engineer and day trader has to do with macro economics.

1/19/2011 11:44:30 PM

Quote :

"You have attempted to calculate returns on an investment as interest."

You cute little troll you.

You haven't and won't show why this is incorrect. The entire premise in your highly specific entirely disconnected from reality example is that this mythical widget, or algebraic construct or whatever it is you want it to represent so you can continue to troll, is that because of deflation the product will sell for less one year from now. AND YOU SIMPLY HAVEN'T SHOWN HOW THAT WILL HAPPEN. No one in here is interested in having a debate where we remove every other variable from an economic situation because it will never happen in reality.

It isn't as if someone says "hey, we had deflation this year so we're going to sell these widgets for less money".

Quote :

"Initially I was confused when you brought up the "real vs. nominal" considering that is generally an interest concern rather than an investment one"

Are you mentally deficient (rolf, don't answer that). It concerns investment, too. And if you'd like to disagree with that, you're going to have to start posting something that isn't your own words to back up your statement.

Quote :

"In the same respect, inflation helps investments, as the decreasing dollar value assists the true value of your investment."

It aids those that have debts, of which an investment is not. Your analysis hasn't made it past the point where the amount of cash exchangeable for the mythical widget also buys either less or more depending on the inflation rate. Using this logic, the government should print all the money they want and then some.

Quote :

"but instead I would like to take a tongue-in-cheek approach by pointing out how little being an engineer and day trader has to do with macro economics"

Hey, but this engineer does know what the real rate of return is. But I humbly submit that my education in economics grows ever so slowly by the day. I don't know that I've ever seen you admit wrongness, and why would you when its obvious your MO is to stroll stroll stroll your boat gently down the thread.

[Edited on January 20, 2011 at 6:45 AM. Reason : .]

1/20/2011 6:34:09 AM

Quote :

"You haven't and won't show why this is incorrect."

Deflation doesn't cause investments to directly gain value as it does money. This is why you cannot calculate return on interest and return on investment in the same way in respect to real value.

Quote :

"The entire premise in your highly specific entirely disconnected from reality"

No it's not. The premise is "deflation discourages investment". The reasoning is that deflation reduces return on investments.

Quote :

"that because of deflation the product will sell for less one year from now"

That's the VERY definition of deflation, you realize that, right?

Quote :

"It isn't as if someone says "hey, we had deflation this year so we're going to sell these widgets for less money"."

But that is what happens. As deflation occurs, prices drop, how are you possibly arguing that deflation occurs and prices do not go down? That's what deflation IS!

Quote :

"It concerns investment, too"

Sure it is, but it isn't as widely discussed as the inflationary effects on interest.

Quote :

"Your analysis hasn't made it past the point where the amount of cash exchangeable for the mythical widget also buys either less or more depending on the inflation rate."

That's irrelevant to the return on investment. If you are an investor, you chose to change your liquid money into something else. If that liquid money becomes worth more during that period you had it in something else then you have forgone that return. It's the same as changing from one stock to another.

Quote :

"Hey, but this engineer does know what the real rate of return is."

Unfortunately you do not understand the difference between return on interest and return on investment.

1/20/2011 11:01:47 AM

Quote :

"Deflation doesn't cause investments to directly gain value as it does money. This is why you cannot calculate return on interest and return on investment in the same way in respect to real value."

This might be one of the dumbest statements I've ever seen posted. Seriously, think about what you said for a moment.

Quote :

"The premise is "deflation discourages investment""

You need to be clear with your arguments (where have I posted that before?). I don't think anyone would disagree that clear and strong hyperdeflation would stop people from releasing their cash. But the reality is the inflation rate changes so slowly in both directions that its actual effect on investing is nil. We only find out later that our investment either was or wasn't as profitable as we originally forecast. If you want to continue with the idea that deflation discourages investment, then I'd like to introduce you to the Reconstruction era.

Quote :

"That's the VERY definition of deflation, you realize that, right?"

Sure, if we remove every other aspect of the economy as if it doesn't exist and focus only on the change in relative value of the currency, you're right. But as I've been pointing out for awhile now, that argument is a waste of time.

Quote :

"Sure it is, but it isn't as widely discussed as the inflationary effects on interest."

Says who?

Quote :

"That's irrelevant to the return on investment."

You just invalidated everything you've been trying to say. Are you really just trolling? Do you have no idea how to craft an argument that you can't easily copy pasta?

Quote :

" If that liquid money becomes worth more during that period you had it in something else then you have forgone that return."

So in other words, investment still happens, which is what you've been saying won't happen for a couple pages now.

Quote :

"Unfortunately you do not understand the difference between return on interest and return on investment."

You're referring to "investment" as some ephemeral thing bound only by the laws of the money supply which is just pigheaded, but that's kind of how you tend to argue points, ignoring reality. Investments can be of many different forms, of which contracts very often specify the terms and these may (or likely) may not include CPI in their terms. It's just that they get renegotiated after the actors have felt the effects of (de)inflation with new terms. INVESTMENT CONTINUES.

1/20/2011 7:33:46 PM

Quote :

"This might be one of the dumbest statements I've ever seen posted."

I've explained this on the quotes page. Deflation causes DOLLARS to gain value, and in doing so causes NON-DOLLAR ASSETS to go down in relative value. Interest a return on loaned DOLLARS. An investment is when you convert DOLLARS to some NON-DOLLAR ASSET, then convert back to DOLLARS. That NON-DOLLAR ASSET loses value during inflation while the loan in DOLLARS gains value. Do you understand?

Quote :

"I don't think anyone would disagree that clear and strong hyperdeflation would stop people from releasing their cash."

You would, that was the exact example I gave which you disagreed with.

Quote :

"If you want to continue with the idea that deflation discourages investment, then I'd like to introduce you to the Reconstruction era."

It discouraged it then as well, with a fiat currency the reserve could have reduced inflation to increase bolster the economy even further. I said it discouraged investment, not that it eradicates it completely.

Quote :

"Sure, if we remove every other aspect of the economy as if it doesn't exist and focus only on the change in relative value of the currency, you're right."

Is this a snide way of admitting you were incorrect?

Quote :

"Says who?"

I'll start with Irving Fisher, and keep naming more people who devoted a great deal of focus on the relationship between inflation and interest rates.

Quote :

"Do you have no idea how to craft an argument that you can't easily copy pasta"

Show me one argument I've posted that has even been close to plagiarist. I frequently cite well known economic theories and concepts, but hardly copy and paste.

Quote :

"You're referring to "investment" as some ephemeral thing bound only by the laws of the money supply which is just pigheaded"

No, I am only using the definitions of interest and investment and the effects of inflation/deflation on the value of money versus goods.
An investment is now-money traded for a now-good, which is later sold for then-money. Interest is a trade of now-money for later-money, goods don't fit anywhere into interest, thus deflation doesn't have the same effect.

Quote :

"Investments can be of many different forms"

Investment always involves the buying and subsequent selling of some GOOD, while interest will always be rent on MONEY.

1/20/2011 8:44:53 PM

Quote :

"That NON-DOLLAR ASSET loses value during inflation while the loan in DOLLARS gains value. Do you understand?"

In theory. It's almost as if today widget is priced at X and tomorrow when it is revealed the days deflation will be 5% then the widget is priced at .95X. Only someone hell bent on winning a very banal argument they have crafted on the internets would care about this.

Quote :

"You would, that was the exact example I gave which you disagreed with. "

Forgive me if I missed it amid all the diarrhea you're passing as posts, but I don't remember seeing you claim anything related to hyperdeflation in this thread.

Quote :

"It discouraged it then as well"

Yes, it discouraged because Kris said it did. Get the fuck out of here. GDP averaged 4% in the face of strong deflation. Nothing was discouraged, not a fucking bit. If you'd like to disagree, find one person in history that supports your viewpoint.

Quote :

"with a fiat currency the reserve could have reduced inflation to increase bolster the economy even further"

To increase bolster, huh? Alrighty then.

Quote :

"Is this a snide way of admitting you were incorrect?"

You should probably add the meaning of snide to the list of things you need to study.

Quote :

"I'll start with Irving Fisher"

You mean, this Irving Fisher:

Quote :

"The stock market crash of 1929 and the subsequent Great Depression cost Fisher much of his personal wealth and academic reputation. He famously predicted, a few days before the crash, "Stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau." Irving Fisher stated on October 21 that the market was "only shaking out of the lunatic fringe" and went on to explain why he felt the prices still had not caught up with their real value and should go much higher."

Quote :

"Show me one argument I've posted that has even been close to plagiarist. I frequently cite well known economic theories and concepts, but hardly copy and paste."

How about every one of them? Thats exactly the point, you don't seem to have the ability to actually critically think about anything. You post a theory from some academic and when we challenge that theory you can't respond in any cogent way other than to restate the theory and be a real fucking dick like we don't understand what you're posting. Well...sometimes I guess we don't understand because of your copy pastas don't make sense as a response to the argument we've presented.

Quote :

" Investment always involves the buying and subsequent selling of some GOOD, while interest will always be rent on MONEY."

Where contracts are involved, and an interest bearing account is typically a contract except for demand accounts, they are mathematically equivalent.

1/20/2011 9:46:22 PM

Quote :

" It's almost as if today widget is priced at X and tomorrow when it is revealed the days deflation will be 5% then the widget is priced at .95X."

You've got it backwards, the widget's perfectly competitive price would drop to .95X, this would contribute to a change in CPI and we would determine the deflation to be 5% from that change. How did you think inflation was calculated? I know that you are aware that price is determined by supply and demand and not inflation.
I know your hatred for the dismal science, but bear with me, imagine there are only two stocks in the world "goods and services" and "money". As people begin to demand more of one, the value of the other goes down. Inflation/deflation only represents this balance between the two. As demand shifts towards money and away from widgets, the price of widgets goes down, inflation reflects this shift, it doesn't cause it.

Quote :

"anything related to hyperdeflation"

My example had 5% which I illustrated was enough to have an impact.

Quote :

"GDP averaged 4%"

Think of what the growth could have been, and imagine the stability that could have been achieved with a managed currency.

Quote :

"To increase bolster, huh? Alrighty then."

Oh sick burn!

Quote :

"You mean, this Irving Fisher"

Nice, you read the first paragraph of wikipedia. I guess you didn't bother to continue reading about how he was a great influence on Milton Friedman. But I didn't bring him up as a great economist, I merely brought him up as someone who did extensive study on the relationship between inflation and interest. I can give you a lot more if you like.

Quote :

"How about every one of them?"

Don't give me a copout. You accused me of plagiarism, I am asking you for an example, put up or shut up. I pride myself on the fact that I know the concepts moreso than the books, and I know that you will not be able to find any examples.

Quote :

"Where contracts are involved, and an interest bearing account is typically a contract except for demand accounts, they are mathematically equivalent."

They are if you ignore the reality of inflation and deflation. Try as you might, you will not change the definitions of interest and investment.

[Edited on January 20, 2011 at 10:39 PM. Reason : ]

1/20/2011 10:35:31 PM

Kris, do you just intentionally make shit up so you can practice this whole "control the population" shit you think can work eventually? Every time you respond to a post that should have shut you the hell up because you're beyond dead wrong, it has this same sort of subtle "bleh" to it. Every post.

1) Start out with a calm tone.
2) Politely point out that someone is wrong or misunderstanding (whether they are or aren't, this is essential to controlling them)
3) And then begin to just make up whatever it is you need to in an attempt to win a point whether it is correct or not often just repeating yourself over and over again.
4) Along the way ignore past errors or mistakes you've made in your replies (this is also essential to control).

This is in a nutshell what a Kris post is.

I've dominated you on the idea that deflation discourages investment. Your rebuttal is backed up by Clownsian economists who have offered us nothing but a big ole bucket of fail. Respond if you wish, but please take it to the deflation thread so you'll stop shitting up this one and people who want to discuss the broader economy can do it without stepping in your stinky posts.

1/21/2011 6:25:00 AM

Quote :

"you can practice this whole "control the population""

What does that have to do with this thread?

Quote :

"it has this same sort of subtle "bleh" to it"

Would it help if I called you insults and cursed more?

Quote :

"1) Start out with a calm tone. 2) Politely point out that someone is wrong or misunderstanding (whether they are or aren't, this is essential to controlling them) 3) And then begin to just make up whatever it is you need to in an attempt to win a point whether it is correct or not often just repeating yourself over and over again. 4) Along the way ignore past errors or mistakes you've made in your replies (this is also essential to control)."

Steps to losing and being butthurt
✓ 1. Get progressively more hostile and insulting as your argument becomes less and less defensible
✓ 2. Post something from the debate in the quotes thread citing it as "so stupid it's funny"
✓ 3. Start a new thread so you can avoid actually defending your failing argument in the original
✓ 4. (MOST IMPORTANT) Make one final post that ignores any argument posted, declare yourself the winner, and claim you are too good to continue the debate.

Seems like you followed the list to the 'T'. No hope you would actually respond the arguments I've posted either in this thread or the other, is there?

[Edited on January 21, 2011 at 1:20 PM. Reason : ]

1/21/2011 1:19:08 PM

Keep trollin away little guy.

1/21/2011 6:16:26 PM

A troll would be more like if you engaged someone in an argument in which they frequently insulted the other and wouldn't finish it, right?

1/21/2011 6:31:35 PM

bumpsky

2/15/2011 10:58:41 PM

House to Hold Vote to Avoid Shutdown

Quote :

"NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- The House of Representatives is expected to vote Tuesday on a bill that would keep the government running through March 18, effectively forestalling a government shutdown that will take occur on Friday if lawmakers are unable to agree on a new measure. The proposal, which was crafted by the Republican-led House of Representatives' Committee on Appropriations, includes $4 billion in spending reductions, most of which correspond with requests made in President Barack Obama's federal budget proposal. It would eliminate funding for eight programs, achieving a total savings of $1.24 billion, The New York Times reported. The programs targeted for elimination include $650 million in additional funding for highways, $250 million for the Striving Readers program, and $88 million for the smaller learning communities program."

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11027631/1/house-to-hold-vote-to-avoid-shutdown.html

Government shutdown? Sounds like my cup of tea.

3/1/2011 2:29:58 PM

Quote :

"The programs targeted for elimination include $650 million in additional funding for highways, $250 million for the Striving Readers program, and $88 million for the smaller learning communities program.""

3/1/2011 2:34:10 PM

^^ my kneejerk reaction agrees, but the costs would far outweigh any benefit

^ that doesn't mean they're cutting the education budget. i'm not even going to try to count how many "programs" they probably have now under the education umbrella. the same goes for new highways.

the spending needs to stop somewhere, and to be honest i'm a little surprised there isn't more uproar about the current state of the budget. it was supposed to be in effect last october, and they're still getting an extension even now. until today, they had till this friday or a shutdown would occur. considering the costs of the last time it happened, and how many more people would be sent home without pay (and not getting anything done)... the costs would be insane. likely, i'd be one of those people. we actually found out today that in all likelihood if the shutdown occurred my entire development team would be sent home without pay with the "option" to burn the paid time off that we've earned.

[Edited on March 2, 2011 at 12:25 AM. Reason : ]

[Edited on March 2, 2011 at 12:26 AM. Reason : ]

3/2/2011 12:25:42 AM

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/03/budget_cuts

snippet

Quote :

" The technocratic Keynesian recommendation was to run deficits in bad times and surpluses in good times. But except for one stretch during the Clinton administration, this notion has been broken since the early 1980s. In the United States, at least, Keynesian economics has failed to find the necessary political institutions to enact and sustain a wise version of the theory. Now that fiscal constraints are starting to bite, many politicians are afraid to reform or even to discuss changes in the largest problem areas: Medicare and Medicaid. Yes, some laudable cost controls on Medicare are embedded in the new health care law, but they’re not enough. Most likely, we will end up making other spending cuts that won’t solve our fiscal problems—and in areas that could instead benefit from Keynesian employment stimulus. These kinds of knee-jerk, poorly reasoned decisions are what happens when fiscal illusion reigns."

I'm rather hoping that more and more people will start to pick up on the BS that is going on with these spending cuts.

3/9/2011 8:55:04 PM

whooooooooooooo's ready for the next rollercoaster drop?!?!?!



First, frozen crops from canada to mexico fucked up the produce market (paying $32 for green peppers [reg. $13.95] and $2.99 lb for roma tomatos [reg $1.29] )

That'll ripple into meat and milk prices for cost of feeding animals.

Then the middle east decides to overthrow themselves. Shit hits the fan.

Then gas prices go fucking through the roof for no fucking reason.

Then rent and shit goes up across the board.

Then Fucking Wisconsin pisses off everyone in America.

Then the DOW tanks just as a report that said investors are feeling comfortable again.

Then a big ass tsunami and earthquake destroys northern japan and lowers their already fleeing stock market prices.

Fuck man.

[Edited on March 11, 2011 at 3:22 AM. Reason : .]

3/11/2011 3:21:48 AM

AHA, so after participating in our most recent economic disaster, Standard & Poor's is tagging the US with a negative outlook.

How do they even exist at this point?

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-04-18/standard-poor-s-puts-negative-outlook-on-u-s-rating.html

[Edited on April 18, 2011 at 7:55 PM. Reason : RIGHT THREAD!]

4/18/2011 7:54:06 PM

because they get paid to predict the past.

Our outlook has been negative for almost the past decade so they were 10 years too late predicting this.

Which means if they are predicting the government to go insolvent in 2025 you can bet it will be 2015 or sooner.

4/18/2011 8:10:07 PM

AHAHA

4/18/2011 8:31:57 PM