EPTThe US debt (proper debate) - Page 29
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
| ||
|
ilovelings
Argentina776 Posts
On July 28 2011 08:48 BestZergOnEast wrote: How? How does paying some bureaucrat to sit in an office and push papers around make the economy grow? He decides to build the Hoover Dam. | ||
|
Diks
Belgium1880 Posts
On July 28 2011 08:39 ilovelings wrote: If you really want to learn about how the fed works, I suggest a Ph D from the London School of Economics. Thank you, but this will take years, I'm also interested in arts, science and philosophy and can't seem to have enough time and money to do that Ph D, this is why I tried to document myself the best I could. Because I don't trust everything I listen, I look to multiplie and various sources and try to see eventual patterns. Now I might be doing this wrong but you're truly not helping me. Listen dude, If you personally can offer some serious reliable informations that condradict "i don't know what", please share. Don't be the selfish genious you pretend to be. Btw I'm out of this thread if this is just about talking 2 bad options that are offered. I was more in the understanding of the debt mechanism and this doesn't seem to be the right thread. I understand that conspiracy posts usually fall to the troll land but I can't pretend that all this Fed bullshit is not happening. | ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
| ||
|
Expurgate
United States208 Posts
On July 28 2011 08:48 BestZergOnEast wrote: How? How does paying some bureaucrat to sit in an office and push papers around make the economy grow? Because when the government gets a dollar, the government spends a dollar, whereas giving a citizen a dollar results in a citizen almost always spending less than a dollar. There are then substantial knock-on effects that you probably don't care about because you have an extremist viewpoint that can't be swayed by evidence, since it's produced by a profession that you do not understand or respect. For people who actually want some interesting reading on this topic, there's a great paper here by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative thinktank, which gives a fairly balanced outline of factors that impact economic performance, although they predictably draw a conservative conclusion from the data. Good reading though if you're not totally up to speed on the particulars. EDIT: On July 28 2011 08:53 BestZergOnEast wrote: Hoover's New Deal prolonged the great depression. If it wasn't for the policies implemented by Hoover, expanded by FDR, the Great Depression would have been only a blip in the radar. Unfortunately because of price controls, paying farmers to kill pigs, etc. the great depression was brutal and crippling and long. Hoover didn't have the New Deal you clown. | ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
| ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
http://mises.org/rothbard/agd/chapter11.asp | ||
|
ilovelings
Argentina776 Posts
gee.. | ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
Many undertakings have been organized and forwarded during the past year to meet the new and changing emergencies which have constantly confronted us . . . to cushion the violence of liquidation in industry and commerce, thus giving time for orderly readjustment of costs, inventories, and credits without panic and widespread bankruptcies. Measures such as Federal and state and local public works, work-sharing, maintaining wage rates ("a large majority have maintained wages at high levels" as before), curtailment of immigration, and the National Credit Corporation, Hoover declared, have served these purposes and fostered recovery. | ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
| ||
|
ilovelings
Argentina776 Posts
| ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
| ||
|
BazookaBenji
United States19 Posts
1) As long central banks (Federal Reserve, IMF, ect..) Exist, they will rob countries and governments for generations to come, because they have the ability to print money out of thin air, and loan it to countries, (essentially laundering it) then they get all the money back plus interest. 2) Many governments do not have the balls or partisanship to abolish these institutions, so they borrow from the recklessly, using the money for their own private gains (raises, bonus's, pensions, benefits) and much of this (stimulus) money never see's the general public. 3) The USA has grown into a country of consumers instead of producers, we live off debt, and buy things made from other countries (china) instead of producing them ourselves, and being self sufficient. 4) Law makers and Politicians have no real motivation to try and tackle the national debt. The long term strategy has generally been to inflate the currency, in addition as long as our country is in crisis there is a need for them to constantly be working (job security) Not to mention private interest groups and lobbyists continue to stuff their pockets with cash. 5) Here are some video's to help put things into perspective: a) http://www.youtube.com/user/GodGunsnMoney?feature=mhee#p/f/18/NOzR3UAyXao b) http://www.youtube.com/user/GodGunsnMoney?feature=mhee#p/f/10/sEP8cQF-QC4 this one i did: c) http://www.youtube.com/user/GodGunsnMoney?feature=mhee#p/a/u/0/mMZlID_RdqU I hope you all get a chance to educate yourself, the more you do, you will find it's all just a scheme by large global bankers to keep as many things as possible in debt. so that we continue to owe them, and pay interest rates which is how they make money. The solution is for us to all live within our means. To Work for something, earn the money, then pay for it all up front. In addition to not being brainwashed by main stream media into making you believe you need to live like a movie star in order to be a whole complete human being. | ||
|
aristarchus
United States652 Posts
On July 28 2011 08:57 BestZergOnEast wrote: The Hoover New Deal of 1932 http://mises.org/rothbard/agd/chapter11.asp Remember when I asked you what you were reading and you said mises.org and insisted it was a respectable source? Try searching the internet for references to Hoover's New Deal on any other site. Any other site. On the entire internet. Really, try it. The "New Deal" isn't just any government involvement in the economy. It's a specific program of measures passed under FDR. | ||
|
jon arbuckle
Canada443 Posts
On July 28 2011 08:59 ilovelings wrote: Oh, I just realize you are one of those libertarian fanatics. brb. I have some books for you. I can't stop chuckling at this. | ||
|
Expurgate
United States208 Posts
Opinion is divided as to the effects of public policy on the Great Depression. It was almost certainly caused by weak regulation and poor foresight by the Fed, worsened by the Fed and Congress under Hoover, and alleviated moderately under FDR by the New Deal, although the economy did not make a full recovery until the Second World War. While there is broad scope for criticism on both ends of the spectrum, the general consensus is that the New Deal, while not a miraculous panacea for economic woes, certainly helped mitigate unemployment and the confidence crisis that still gripped the banking system. EDIT: On July 28 2011 09:02 aristarchus wrote: Remember when I asked you what you were reading and you said mises.org and insisted it was a respectable source? Try searching the internet for references to Hoover's New Deal on any other site. Any other site. On the entire internet. Really, try it. The "New Deal" isn't just any government involvement in the economy. It's a specific program of measures passed under FDR. Well said. | ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
| ||
|
Expurgate
United States208 Posts
On July 28 2011 09:05 BestZergOnEast wrote: FDR did little but expand upon Hoovers policies. He was a dull, uninspired man who would have never achieved political power if not for the efforts of his rather domineering mother (I highly recommend John T. Flynn's a Country Squire Goes to the White House as an excellent biography of FDR). Any rational definition of the new deal means it was started by Hoover. Please, read what I just posted. While this is no doubt an interesting biographical sidenote, this has almost nothing to do with what has been measured and observed as the actual outcome of public policy during the critical years. Regardless, this is again substantially off-track. Could we get a moderator to help keep this thread on target? | ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
While there is broad scope for criticism on both ends of the spectrum, the general consensus is that the New Deal, while not a miraculous panacea for economic woes, certainly helped mitigate unemployment and the confidence crisis that still gripped the banking system. Yes, there is a broad consensus among the political establishment that this is the case. That doesn't mean they are correct. In order to understand the Great Depression you must first understand the Austrian Theory of the Trade Cycle. | ||
|
TranceStorm
1616 Posts
Mr. Boehner’s troubles piled up late Tuesday afternoon when the Congressional Budget Office said his plan would cut spending by $850 billion during the next decade — about $150 billion less than the $1 trillion increase proposed for the debt ceiling. When discussing Reid's plan: It would save $2.2 trillion over 10 years, less than the $2.7 trillion that the Democrats had claimed. Even discounting the savings allowed from the costs of the wars (about $1.04 trillion) and savings on interest as borrowing declines (about $250 billion), that would mean $900 billion in savings in a side-by-side comparison with the Republicans’ $850 billion as tallied by the budget office. Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/28/us/politics/28fiscal.html?hp Of course this will only push back the deliberations on the budget. I don't doubt that a cohesive plan will be pushed through by the deadline, but it will be a very labored one with many add-ons that will be problematic later on. Now that both parties have to readjust their plans, | ||
| ||
