America's second bill of rights

[havanacat]

Agree with Arthur~

Arthur didn't fulfil the thread's OP either.

We wouldn't even be Canada, maybe more like UK or France.

Yes, but how?

Welfarestatist government.

These are not "rights" under the Constitution

Obviously. No one said they were, it's a what if.
That's why I said "not even Canada". I don't see the point of the what if scenario.

and founding fathers would have found FDR repugnant, as many do.

Repugnant? And this is based upon what...?
Founding Fathers wanted limited govt...even flaky Jefferson would have puked on the New Deal and forthwith 4th branch of govt. called "agencies".

His policies prolonged fiscal crisis (thanks Keynes) much longer than it needed to be. A free market would have self~corrected the problem much more quickly.

:lol: The free market: humanity's biggest hindrance the solution to all of life's problems.
Don't follow what you're saying. I said the Depression would have self~corrected more quickly.

These "rights", implemented at that time would have us speaking German or,Japanese at this point.

What a stinking pile of fetid wank remnants. Of course, you're more than welcome to justify the above statement
with anything other than shite.

Nothing to justify...it is what it is...are you always so rude?

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

Nothing to justify...it is what it is...are you always so rude?

You must be new here -
Welcome to the League Of Reason

 

[havanacat]

thanks Keynes

How much macroeconomics have you taken? Forgive the skepticism, but I've found that macroeconomics is a lot like biology: those who criticize it tend to not understand it.

I took one class of econ in college. FDR used Keynes' work for his policies and Obama is trying to use FDR's. A terrible disorder passed through the democrat dna...

 

[RichardMNixon]

His policies prolonged fiscal crisis (thanks Keynes) much longer than it needed to be. A free market would have self~corrected the problem much more quickly.

[citation needed]

Nothing to justify...it is what it is

No, it is not self-evident that ensuring the poor receive health care and work would have allowed Hitler to conquer America. Far from it.

I took one class of econ in college. FDR used Keynes' work for his policies and Obama is trying to use FDR's. A terrible disorder passed through the democrat dna...

Whoa, a whole class?! Here, contact Krugman and let him know Keynes was wrong.
While you're at it, maybe you can explain why Reaganomics tripled the national debt. Neat thing about simple, objective facts: you can't refute them with pure chutzpah.

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Havanacat, always nice to have a conservative buddy amid this group of aggressively liberal folks. But, dude, you're not helping. I know you're right, you know you're right, but you need to at least put up a decent argument. Come on, it's not even that hard to poke holes in proposals of massive government spending projects. Here's an easy one; the US debt is about 14 trillion, or about 3.5 times as much as the value of all the physical cash in the entire world.

edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png

Notice the sharp spike since 2008? Not a huge fan of big government conservatives either, but pot, meet kettle.

 

[RichardMNixon]

Not a huge fan of big government conservatives either, but pot, meet kettle.

Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of big government conservatives like Obama either. The big reason I like to point out the debt increase in the 80's is the heaps of baseless Reagan hero worship.

For the purposes of contrarianism however, I ought to point out that tax cuts certainly aren't helping anything. You'll note we handled the debt just fine in the 60s with a ~90% top marginal tax rate.

 

[borrofburi]

FDR used Keynes' work for his policies and Obama is trying to use FDR's. A terrible disorder passed through the democrat dna...

And there are plenty that would argue that what FDR did was good for the economy, and that Obama's only failure is not doing enough of the things you consider "bad" (like the macro econ professor for the macro econ class I took at an ivy league university).

 

[ArthurWilborn]

FDR used Keynes' work for his policies and Obama is trying to use FDR's. A terrible disorder passed through the democrat dna...

And there are plenty that would argue that what FDR did was good for the economy, and that Obama's only failure is not doing enough of the things you consider "bad" (like the macro econ professor for the macro econ class I took at an ivy league university).

Appeal to authority. If he's so wise about the economy why's he teaching instead of making millions on the stock market? :roll:

 

[televator]

Appeal to authority. If he's so wise about the economy why's he teaching instead of making millions on the stock market? :roll:

Pretty sure it was said jokingly to counter her hilariously petty "I once took a class on economics" appeal. Still itching to call out fallacies where ever it isn't needed or applicable, I see.

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Appeal to authority. If he's so wise about the economy why's he teaching instead of making millions on the stock market? :roll:

Pretty sure it was said jokingly to counter her hilariously petty "I once took a class on economics" appeal. Still itching to call out fallacies where ever it isn't needed or applicable, I see.

Sorry, I'm annoyingly compulsive like that. Ummm... boo excessive government spending!

 

[Aught3]

Actually since the Bretton-Woods system of currency exchange was done away with, the US needs to run deficits in order to fulfill overseas demand for US dollars. As long as that demand remains, and it's hard to imagine that it will disappear anytime soon, the system is stable. The source of these dollars can either be in the form of public or private debt (or both), but public debt is much more stable than the private equivalent.

So, since Nixon, deficits don't matter. Of course other countries need to have balanced budgets over the medium term in order to be stable, the US is an exception.

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Actually since the Bretton-Woods system of currency exchange was done away with, the US needs to run deficits in order to fulfill overseas demand for US dollars. As long as that demand remains, and it's hard to imagine that it will disappear anytime soon, the system is stable. The source of these dollars can either be in the form of public or private debt (or both), but public debt is much more stable than the private equivalent.

So, since Nixon, deficits don't matter. Of course other countries need to have balanced budgets over the medium term in order to be stable, the US is an exception.

This is only true as long as foreign currencies are pegged to the dollar; which is looking less and less likely as time passes. The fact you haven't hit the ground yet doesn't mean you're safe.

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

Appeal to authority. If he's so wise about the economy why's he teaching instead of making millions on the stock market? :roll:

I never thought it would be physically possible to facepalm so hard that my hand actually extrudes through the back of my skull.

Atop the ad hominem remark, if you had even stepped within the bounds of a decent economics class you would know that the major flaws are the things that you seemingly protest against - except instead of Uncle Sam regulation it is regulation by the top-notch CEOs who own everything from production of a product to it's distribution and buy out the competition through shitty business practices.
Then there's no "Free Market" anymore, since there's no competition. You have a single company with complete reign over multiple areas of commerce and business, and without accountability to anyone. They can raise the prices, they can lower the prices - they can raise wages, they can lower wages.

The only way a Free Market stays Free is when you have a Big Brother making sure everyone plays fair by not having monopolies.

And, no, it's not the Government's fault that it's failing recently. Little Johny has a bad habit of spending fuck-all into a hole for candy, and when payday comes he has nothing to give back. Big Brother can't let him go broke, so he has to keep handing off Little Johny cash to pay off the massive amounts of debt accumulated because Little Johny's a fucking twat.

The economy can only be truly fixed when we stop blaming the government, and start recognizing that MAYBE we shouldn't spend money that we don't have to commerce between one another, and then maybe our government won't have to bail us out every time we dig our own graves.
Recent events have shown the corruption of corporate America that would have worked under a "Free Market" anyhow - if they had the money, then while the rest of the world fell apart around them they would have given themselves bonuses.

Welcome, my friend, to the world of a mixed Economy.

 

[havanacat]

Yes, mixed economy. Still, for those statists that think spending public sector funds improves this mixed economy, well, come over here and try to get a job. Try to get a loan, consumer or business.
Guess I am a realist. I'm a banker (sort of), ugh!!!
I see what's happening to small businesses, and medium sized businesses, it isn't pretty.
Obama's economic policies have made a bad situation worse.
Also, I rarely give citations...I expect people to do their own research...that's the way I was taught in my non~Ivy League private college...

 

[havanacat]

Appeal to authority. If he's so wise about the economy why's he teaching instead of making millions on the stock market? :roll:

Pretty sure it was said jokingly to counter her hilariously petty "I once took a class on economics" appeal. Still itching to call out fallacies where ever it isn't needed or applicable, I see.

Just because I took one class in economics doesn't change the fact that current US economic policies are detrimental and will continue to be so.
It's sad that so many think government is better equipped to determine the economy than the people actually participating in the economy.

 

[televator]

Yes, mixed economy. Still, for those statists that think spending public sector funds improves this mixed economy, well, come over here and try to get a job. Try to get a loan, consumer or business.
Guess I am a realist. I'm a banker (sort of), ugh!!!
I see what's happening to small businesses, and medium sized businesses, it isn't pretty.
Obama's economic policies have made a bad situation worse.
Also, I rarely give citations...I expect people to do their own research...that's the way I was taught in my non~Ivy League private college...

The increase in expenditures took place AFTER the crash that lead to the loss of jobs. How the heck would investing in creating jobs lose jobs? You know what did lose a lot of jobs recently? The massive "anything but defense" government spending cuts that the republicans held the government hostage over.

Just because I took one class in economics doesn't change the fact that current US economic policies are detrimental and will continue to be so.
It's sad that so many think government is better equipped to determine the economy than the people actually participating in the economy.

The first part of that makes no sense and you clearly missed the boat on the fun. As for the second part.... You say you are for a mixed economy, but turn around and say that it should be left solely in the hands of "the people actually participating in it?" Make up your mind.

So the people participating in the economy know better... They have perfect character traits and could never possibly fall into making morally ambiguous decisions, or giving into greed. Like the people of Citibank who joyfully declared that the US was a plutonomy. How about the Koche Brothers who've spent good money on destroying things like union bargaining rights. Then there's the exemplary people at Lehman Brothers who knowingly sold bad assets and then turned around and bet against them, and of course the private rating firm that was given good money to rate those assets with high ratings....

Yeah, we should totally leave it up to these guys. What could possibly go wrong?

 

[Aught3]

This is only true as long as foreign currencies are pegged to the dollar; which is looking less and less likely as time passes. The fact you haven't hit the ground yet doesn't mean you're safe.

In fact the exact opposite is true. Under Bretton-Woods all currencies were pegged against the US dollar, under that system the US could not run a sustained deficit. At least, without eating into their gold reserves. After currencies were allowed to float, central banks around the world needed to hold reserves to protect themselves from attacks by currency traders. For various reasons, including economic dominance and safety of the currency, the US dollar and US treasury bonds were and are still the best choice for this role.

If you think central banks are going to move away from the US dollar on the medium to short term I'd be interested to know what you think they are going to carry instead. Euros? Pound sterling? Yen? What? We're certainly not going back to a worldwide pegged system any time soon.

 

[RichardMNixon]

Yes, mixed economy. Still, for those statists that think spending public sector funds improves this mixed economy, well, come over here and try to get a job. Try to get a loan, consumer or business.

For those who think Pluto's declassification as a planet doesn't cause a deficit, come over here and try to get a job. Correlation does not imply causality chief, the economy was heading for rock-bottom before the stimulus. As an aside, I did get an auto-loan last year.

Also, I rarely give citations...I expect people to do their own research...that's the way I was taught in my non~Ivy League private college...

:facepalm: Please, please, please tell me this is a joke and not folksy anti-elitism. And if it is a joke, would you like to start providing evidence for your outrageous claims?
Can we have a Poe's law emoticon?

It's sad that so many think government is better equipped to determine the economy than the people actually participating in the economy.

Are you suggesting that the government doesn't participate in the economy? Rubbish.
The government also spends a great deal more time analyzing and planning the economy than Joe the Plumber does. What the fuck does he know?

 

[Demojen]

The only way a Free Market stays Free is when you have a Big Brother making sure everyone plays fair by not having monopolies.

Governments fail at preventing monopolies. Bigger companies just expand outside of the country and jurisdiction of single governments and create a global monopoly by exploiting exchange rates, trade agreements, embargoes and market values to keep overhead low and profits high.

One of the biggest retail monopolies on the planet works that way.

Wal-Mart

 

[ArthurWilborn]

Appeal to authority. If he's so wise about the economy why's he teaching instead of making millions on the stock market? :roll:

I never thought it would be physically possible to facepalm so hard that my hand actually extrudes through the back of my skull.

Atop the ad hominem remark, if you had even stepped within the bounds of a decent economics class you would know that the major flaws are the things that you seemingly protest against - except instead of Uncle Sam regulation it is regulation by the top-notch CEOs who own everything from production of a product to it's distribution and buy out the competition through shitty business practices.
Then there's no "Free Market" anymore, since there's no competition. You have a single company with complete reign over multiple areas of commerce and business, and without accountability to anyone. They can raise the prices, they can lower the prices - they can raise wages, they can lower wages.

The only way a Free Market stays Free is when you have a Big Brother making sure everyone plays fair by not having monopolies.

This is only an ad hominem if I think there's something wrong with teaching. I don't, I'm in the education system myself. I just realize that teaching about something doesn't mean I'm an authority on it. I structure it right into my lessons, in fact; any student who can demonstrate an error I've made gets praised. Also, I'm not against some form of anti-trust legislation. Stop playing with the straw.

And, no, it's not the Government's fault that it's failing recently. Little Johny has a bad habit of spending fuck-all into a hole for candy, and when payday comes he has nothing to give back. Big Brother can't let him go broke, so he has to keep handing off Little Johny cash to pay off the massive amounts of debt accumulated because Little Johny's a fucking twat.

The economy can only be truly fixed when we stop blaming the government, and start recognizing that MAYBE we shouldn't spend money that we don't have to commerce between one another, and then maybe our government won't have to bail us out every time we dig our own graves.

Have you ever heard of something called "enabling"? When you protect people from the negative consequences of their behavior, you're encouraging the negative behavior. There's all kinds of research on this. If little Johnny wasn't blithely confident the government would bail him out of his own mistakes, he wouldn't be doing (as much) dangerous stuff to begin with.

Also, I don't care for the tone of this argument. You're arguing that people are too stupid to manage their own affairs without government intervention; that's a straight line right to dictatorship.

How the heck would investing in creating jobs lose jobs?

Quite easily! Firstly, the taxes required to pay for this "investment" discourages hiring. Secondly, the subsidized jobs created make whatever service they're in too expensive and/or inept to use by anyone except the government. Thirdly, when these created jobs are challenged by other forces protectionist measures are put into place that discourage whatever change is happening. Come on, don't tell me you haven't done something that's had the exact opposite effect of the one you intended.

If you think central banks are going to move away from the US dollar on the medium to short term I'd be interested to know what you think they are going to carry instead. Euros? Pound sterling? Yen? What? We're certainly not going back to a worldwide pegged system any time soon.

I'd say the Chinese yuan. China's economy could very easily supplant the US as the dominant economic force in the world. I could accept that other countries would want an every-increasing amount of US dollars to back their own currency, but not a geometrically increasing amount that this thread would propose to use for providing massive entitlements to US citizens. Also, when someone actually starts calling the debts (which history has shown us is inevitable), I could far better believe China's government would be able to enforce the massive austerity measures required to pay up.

One of the biggest retail monopolies on the planet works that way.

Wal-Mart

Wal-Mart isn't a monopoly. :roll: