EPTOn February 26 2016 13:19 Draconicfire wrote:
First time watching an American political debate.
That was uh, interesting.
First time watching an American political debate.
That was uh, interesting.
You've seen the worst of the worst haha
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3049
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45348 Posts
You've seen the worst of the worst haha | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23713 Posts
TV Pundits Praise Hillary Clinton On Air, Fail to Disclose Financial Ties to Her Campaign Source | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
We could instead go back to what I posted before the debate: Christina D. Romer (Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers from 2009 to 2010) and David H. Romer (Professor of Economics at Berkeley) have released an analysis of Friedman's work on Sanders' policies. The bottom line of our evaluation of Professor Friedman’s analysis is that it is highly deficient. The estimated demand-induced effects of Senator Sanders’s policies are not just implausibly large but literally incredible. Moreover, even if they were not deeply flawed, Freidman’s enormous estimates of demand-fueled growth could not and would not come to pass. Even very generous estimates of the amount of slack still present in the American economy would not be enough to accommodate demand-driven growth of anything near what Friedman is estimating. As a result, inflation would soar and monetary policy would swing strongly to counteract them. Finally, a realistic evaluation of the impact of Senator Sanders’s policies on productive capacity (something that is neglected in Friedman’s analysis) suggests that those impacts are likely small and possibly negative.Though we have been frankly critical of Professor Friedman’s analysis, he has provided a service to public debate by posting his analysis so that other economists can evaluate its validity. We are posting our evaluation in the same spirit. Source (.pdf) | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23713 Posts
Her campaign in a nutshell | ||
|
Hexe
United States332 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23713 Posts
On February 26 2016 13:37 Hexe wrote: She has one good point though. Sanders is a one trick pony candidate. Yeah the one trick just happens to be wanting the best for the American people the country/government can provide. It's a pretty good trick. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Hexe
United States332 Posts
| ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On February 26 2016 14:21 kwizach wrote: xDaunt, you've never actually answered this question: among the five people on stage, who would you like to see become president? I haven't made up my mind as to who my preferred candidate is. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23713 Posts
On February 26 2016 14:14 Hexe wrote: government can provide? socialist fiend Yeah, Anarchy Rules! | ||
|
ErectedZenith
325 Posts
On February 26 2016 13:26 kwizach wrote: ...aaaand GH's back to his Hillary bashing. We could instead go back to what I posted before the debate: Christina D. Romer (Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers from 2009 to 2010) and David H. Romer (Professor of Economics at Berkeley) have released an analysis of Friedman's work on Sanders' policies. Source (.pdf) Nothing wrong with Hillary bashing when she deserves it. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On February 26 2016 13:26 kwizach wrote: ...aaaand GH's back to his Hillary bashing. We could instead go back to what I posted before the debate: Christina D. Romer (Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers from 2009 to 2010) and David H. Romer (Professor of Economics at Berkeley) have released an analysis of Friedman's work on Sanders' policies. Source (.pdf) This is a couple of economists making a couple of wild assumptions about another economist's wild assumptions. So, for example, their first point is that the spending fades after the first year. That's easily fixable. And so on, and so on. I for one put almost zero stock in Bernie's proposed "plan" as such because I don't think it matters. The direction is what matters, the rest is just details, and none of these critiques address the possibilities, mostly because their own tools are deficient. Why are we discussing this like it's Science with Theories that give us Answers? Predicting economic output in 2026 is like predicting the weather in 2026. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On February 26 2016 10:50 CannonsNCarriers wrote: It didn't end well when I started pasting in the charts. They ended up running to the argument that they didn't understand it, so why should the Average Voter understand it? Thus it doesn't matter right? If you are engaged enough in politics to learn about Bernie, you ought also be engaged enough in politics to wonder if his plans are functional. I feel like this is just lethal to Bernie though. His big meme is addressing income inequality in America. Thus his plan on addressing it needs to be airtight. For people who like charts this is a good one: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/DBT2JpW.png) Why do you put so much stock in Romer's analysis? | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
again are you really hanging onto this idea that all 'standard model' is the same. answer is no | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
And I'm not criticizing the stimulus per se. I'm criticizing a consistent 5% projection that never materialized. It's not the same, but it's funny that Bernie's (Friedman's) projection was ~5% and now that's outlandish. | ||
|
Soap
Brazil1546 Posts
| ||
| ||
