• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 04:52
CEST 10:52
KST 17:52
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202557RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 What tournaments are world championships? RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond)
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams BW General Discussion [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Does 1 second matter in StarCraft? [G] Mineral Boosting Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Post Pic of your Favorite Food! Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 885 users

President Obama Re-Elected - Page 170

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 168 169 170 171 172 1504 Next
Hey guys! We'll be closing this thread shortly, but we will make an American politics megathread where we can continue the discussions in here.

The new thread can be found here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=383301
Signet
Profile Joined March 2007
United States1718 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-06 22:41:47
July 06 2012 22:41 GMT
#3381
The 538 blog ( http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ ) is the only site I know that calculates a percent odds for each state. He thinks Obama is more likely to lose Michigan or Pennsylvania than Wisconsin...

NH/IA/CO each about 66% odds of going for Obama.
OH/VA closer to 60% each (Ohio a little higher, VA a little lower)
FL basically 50/50.
Romantic
Profile Joined January 2010
United States1844 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-06 23:32:23
July 06 2012 23:23 GMT
#3382
On July 07 2012 07:05 DoubleReed wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 07 2012 06:55 Romantic wrote:
Stimulus won't work because all that matters is the Federal Reserve's actions. If there is a fiscal stimulus, to any extent that it changes Fed behavior it was a useless adventure in wasting the taypayer's money and sucking it out of private markets.


...oh come on. That's the very definition of an oversimplification.

Not really. If the Federal Reserve takes less expansionary policy as a result of a fiscal stimulus, the stimulus is negated by monetary policy. There are lots of economists who find fiscal stimulus at best highly doubtful because of that.
paralleluniverse
Profile Joined July 2010
4065 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-07 05:51:19
July 07 2012 05:44 GMT
#3383
On July 07 2012 04:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 07 2012 04:02 paralleluniverse wrote:
On July 07 2012 03:50 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 07 2012 03:30 paralleluniverse wrote:
On July 07 2012 03:19 DeepElemBlues wrote:
On July 07 2012 02:47 Adila wrote:
I think Obama should highlight why the idea of running the country like a business, such as Bain, is a terrible idea. That would take away some of the "strengths" of Romney's business credentials.


As opposed to running the country as if cost-benefit doesn't exist? I wonder how many people the government could have truly helped if it hadn't spent 1 trillion plus on the "stimulus" and other loans that benefitted the politically connected, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars per job "created or saved" and here we are still at 8%+ "official" unemployment and it's not getting better, it's stagnating at best.

The stimulus created over 3 million jobs according to the CBO: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68965.html

And where's your source for the stimulus being a handout only to the politically connected? Cite it please.

How else did you expect the government to help reduce unemployment, if not by stimulus?

And you think the stimulus wasn't subject to analysis? Here's a 57 page leaked memo prepared for Obama when he was taking office: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/01/the-summers-memo.html Here's a CBO analysis: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/11-22-ARRA.pdf


The stimulus did work but the criticism is that it could have been structured to work better. Moreover, other policies have had the opposite effect - such as increased regulation and the threat of more regulation and higher taxes.

Is there proof that things could have been done better? Not really, yet this particular recovery has sucked. Hard.

[image loading]

Could someone else have done better? I have no idea - nor does anyone else. However, when you are the guy in charge you are responsible, whether it is your fault or not.

If they truly believed that stimulus works, but that it could be structured better (highly dubious that they believe this, as I've never seen a Republican say it), then surely they should be asking for MORE stimulus, but this time done right, not a European pivot to massive austerity. So either they are disingenuous or playing politics.

The comparison to past recessions is unfair. Those previous recessions were not caused by a financial crisis where the Fed has hit the zero lower bound. For example the 80s recession was self-induced by the Fed's (successful) attempt to end stagflation, and the economy recovered when the Fed decided to loosen monetary policy.

In this case, the recession was caused by the GFC, where households built up a lot of debt, mostly through housing, and when the economy crashed households were forced to pay down that debt, and so aggregate demand collapses. Thus the paradox of thrift applies: spending = income, so when everyone stops spending everyone's income falls.

These factors of massive household debt build up, forced deleveraging, and Fed at the ZLB make this recession principally unique.


CBO's estimates table 1:
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/100xx/doc10008/03-02-macro_effects_of_arra.pdf

Things that had a higher estimated multiplier didn't always get prioritized. Infrastructure spending got the shaft (big time) despite the fact that it has a very high multiplier and was and still is sorely needed. Infrastructure spending would have also been targeted where the economy need it most. Construction was at the core of the recession and infrastructure spending could have put those people to work.

Comparing to past recessions may not be fair but the stimulus from the Federal government has been the largest since WW2 so it is reasonable to expect a lot out of it.

On the first point I don't think we are in disagreement. Slightly less than half of the stimulus was in tax cuts which are not very stimulative. But they were added in an attempt to get Republican support.

Infrastructure spending is desperately needed, and it's part of Obama's stalled jobs bill. Yet you don't ever see a Republican calling for infrastructure spending.

On the second point, no the comparison isn't fair, but as I've said, the stimulus wasn't near large enough here. The output gap was almost $2 trillion and the stimulus was only $700 billion. Many economist argued that it should have been larger, at least twice the size, and they are right.
paralleluniverse
Profile Joined July 2010
4065 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-07 05:53:57
July 07 2012 05:49 GMT
#3384
On July 07 2012 06:55 Romantic wrote:
Stimulus won't work because all that matters is the Federal Reserve's actions. If there is a fiscal stimulus, to any extent that it changes Fed behavior it was a useless adventure in wasting the taypayer's money and sucking it out of private markets.

That is completely untrue.

Stimulus doesn't work when the economy isn't in a recession because the Fed will raise interest rates to offset the inflationary and expansionary effects of the stimulus.

But stimulus does work in a recession, because the Fed will lower interest rates, reinforcing the stimulative effects.

The Fed has now hit the zero lower bound, it has lowered interest rates all it can, it's essentially out of ammo, and anything more it can do will have only very minimal effects in stimulating the economy. Fiscal policy, i.e. more stimulus, is the only option left as the Fed can't really do anything.

In a depressed economy, when the Fed has hit the ZLB, stimulus is even more effective than normal: http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/03/delong-and-summers-fiscal-policy-in-a-depressed-economy-conference-draft.html
Last
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
July 07 2012 06:10 GMT
#3385
On July 07 2012 14:44 paralleluniverse wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 07 2012 04:42 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 07 2012 04:02 paralleluniverse wrote:
On July 07 2012 03:50 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On July 07 2012 03:30 paralleluniverse wrote:
On July 07 2012 03:19 DeepElemBlues wrote:
On July 07 2012 02:47 Adila wrote:
I think Obama should highlight why the idea of running the country like a business, such as Bain, is a terrible idea. That would take away some of the "strengths" of Romney's business credentials.


As opposed to running the country as if cost-benefit doesn't exist? I wonder how many people the government could have truly helped if it hadn't spent 1 trillion plus on the "stimulus" and other loans that benefitted the politically connected, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars per job "created or saved" and here we are still at 8%+ "official" unemployment and it's not getting better, it's stagnating at best.

The stimulus created over 3 million jobs according to the CBO: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68965.html

And where's your source for the stimulus being a handout only to the politically connected? Cite it please.

How else did you expect the government to help reduce unemployment, if not by stimulus?

And you think the stimulus wasn't subject to analysis? Here's a 57 page leaked memo prepared for Obama when he was taking office: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/01/the-summers-memo.html Here's a CBO analysis: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/11-22-ARRA.pdf


The stimulus did work but the criticism is that it could have been structured to work better. Moreover, other policies have had the opposite effect - such as increased regulation and the threat of more regulation and higher taxes.

Is there proof that things could have been done better? Not really, yet this particular recovery has sucked. Hard.

[image loading]

Could someone else have done better? I have no idea - nor does anyone else. However, when you are the guy in charge you are responsible, whether it is your fault or not.

If they truly believed that stimulus works, but that it could be structured better (highly dubious that they believe this, as I've never seen a Republican say it), then surely they should be asking for MORE stimulus, but this time done right, not a European pivot to massive austerity. So either they are disingenuous or playing politics.

The comparison to past recessions is unfair. Those previous recessions were not caused by a financial crisis where the Fed has hit the zero lower bound. For example the 80s recession was self-induced by the Fed's (successful) attempt to end stagflation, and the economy recovered when the Fed decided to loosen monetary policy.

In this case, the recession was caused by the GFC, where households built up a lot of debt, mostly through housing, and when the economy crashed households were forced to pay down that debt, and so aggregate demand collapses. Thus the paradox of thrift applies: spending = income, so when everyone stops spending everyone's income falls.

These factors of massive household debt build up, forced deleveraging, and Fed at the ZLB make this recession principally unique.


CBO's estimates table 1:
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ftpdocs/100xx/doc10008/03-02-macro_effects_of_arra.pdf

Things that had a higher estimated multiplier didn't always get prioritized. Infrastructure spending got the shaft (big time) despite the fact that it has a very high multiplier and was and still is sorely needed. Infrastructure spending would have also been targeted where the economy need it most. Construction was at the core of the recession and infrastructure spending could have put those people to work.

Comparing to past recessions may not be fair but the stimulus from the Federal government has been the largest since WW2 so it is reasonable to expect a lot out of it.

On the first point I don't think we are in disagreement. Slightly less than half of the stimulus was in tax cuts which are not very stimulative. But they were added in an attempt to get Republican support.

Infrastructure spending is desperately needed, and it's part of Obama's stalled jobs bill. Yet you don't ever see a Republican calling for infrastructure spending.

On the second point, no the comparison isn't fair, but as I've said, the stimulus wasn't near large enough here. The output gap was almost $2 trillion and the stimulus was only $700 billion. Many economist argued that it should have been larger, at least twice the size, and they are right.


I appreciate it when Democrats completely ignore or fight Republicans when they are being stupid. Ex. when they were against infrastructure spending and for crap tax cuts or when the threw a temper tantrum over the debt ceiling (totally stupid).

I agree that the stimulus should have been bigger but I would have also preferred that it was quicker. I wasn't a fan of the 'stimulus over a period of time' program. A quick shot in the arm is better IMO. Ex. TARP vs the EU's solution to the financial crisis. Quick and dirty then move on with your life...
Romantic
Profile Joined January 2010
United States1844 Posts
July 07 2012 08:32 GMT
#3386
On July 07 2012 14:49 paralleluniverse wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 07 2012 06:55 Romantic wrote:
Stimulus won't work because all that matters is the Federal Reserve's actions. If there is a fiscal stimulus, to any extent that it changes Fed behavior it was a useless adventure in wasting the taypayer's money and sucking it out of private markets.

That is completely untrue.

Stimulus doesn't work when the economy isn't in a recession because the Fed will raise interest rates to offset the inflationary and expansionary effects of the stimulus.

But stimulus does work in a recession, because the Fed will lower interest rates, reinforcing the stimulative effects.

The Fed has now hit the zero lower bound, it has lowered interest rates all it can, it's essentially out of ammo, and anything more it can do will have only very minimal effects in stimulating the economy. Fiscal policy, i.e. more stimulus, is the only option left as the Fed can't really do anything.

In a depressed economy, when the Fed has hit the ZLB, stimulus is even more effective than normal: http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/03/delong-and-summers-fiscal-policy-in-a-depressed-economy-conference-draft.html
Last


It is completely true. You'll note Delong does not say they are out of tools, he hedges his bet by saying they cannot or are unwilling to act further. If anyone believes the Fed is out of tools when they can't lower interests rates then they forgot the Fed can print as much money as it would like.

If you are going to argue the Fed could be won't do anything, fiscal stimulus still doesn't pass the test. If the Fed was unwilling to generate higher output or employment because they were committed to a lower target, why would they sit back and let Congress ruin their target? Delong's paper http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/Programs/ES/BPEA/2012_spring_bpea_papers/2012_spring_BPEA_delongsummers.pdf says he just doesn't think it will happen. Apparently the Fed will not expand due to the consensus being against expansion beyond what they have currently done, but they will sit back and watch Congress do it.

You can post people like Delong simply stating they are correct in their assumptions fiscal policy will not be offset by different monetary policy, I can post people who think it will be offset, that the stimulus money will be wasteful as compared to leaving it in private hands, and that self financed borrowing is silly even now - all within the mainstream.
paralleluniverse
Profile Joined July 2010
4065 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-07 09:16:50
July 07 2012 08:51 GMT
#3387
On July 07 2012 17:32 Romantic wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 07 2012 14:49 paralleluniverse wrote:
On July 07 2012 06:55 Romantic wrote:
Stimulus won't work because all that matters is the Federal Reserve's actions. If there is a fiscal stimulus, to any extent that it changes Fed behavior it was a useless adventure in wasting the taypayer's money and sucking it out of private markets.

That is completely untrue.

Stimulus doesn't work when the economy isn't in a recession because the Fed will raise interest rates to offset the inflationary and expansionary effects of the stimulus.

But stimulus does work in a recession, because the Fed will lower interest rates, reinforcing the stimulative effects.

The Fed has now hit the zero lower bound, it has lowered interest rates all it can, it's essentially out of ammo, and anything more it can do will have only very minimal effects in stimulating the economy. Fiscal policy, i.e. more stimulus, is the only option left as the Fed can't really do anything.

In a depressed economy, when the Fed has hit the ZLB, stimulus is even more effective than normal: http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/03/delong-and-summers-fiscal-policy-in-a-depressed-economy-conference-draft.html
Last


It is completely true. You'll note Delong does not say they are out of tools, he hedges his bet by saying they cannot or are unwilling to act further. If anyone believes the Fed is out of tools when they can't lower interests rates then they forgot the Fed can print as much money as it would like.

If you are going to argue the Fed could be won't do anything, fiscal stimulus still doesn't pass the test. If the Fed was unwilling to generate higher output or employment because they were committed to a lower target, why would they sit back and let Congress ruin their target? Delong's paper http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/Programs/ES/BPEA/2012_spring_bpea_papers/2012_spring_BPEA_delongsummers.pdf says he just doesn't think it will happen. Apparently the Fed will not expand due to the consensus being against expansion beyond what they have currently done, but they will sit back and watch Congress do it.

You can post people like Delong simply stating they are correct in their assumptions fiscal policy will not be offset by different monetary policy, I can post people who think it will be offset, that the stimulus money will be wasteful as compared to leaving it in private hands, and that self financed borrowing is silly even now - all within the mainstream.

Have you been living in a cave?

Fiscal stimulus would be offset?

Did the Fed offset the Obama stimulus? No. They reinforced it, by setting rates to 0. If they wanted to offset it, they would have raised rates.

Your argument that fiscal stimulus doesn't work because the Fed will offset it is an admission that fiscal stimulus DOES work if the Fed doesn't offset it, because if stimulus does nothing then the Fed wouldn't need to do anything to offset it. So the logical conclusion, given the fact the Fed did not offset the Obama stimulus, is that the Obama stimulus did work to increase employment and increase demand, which it did.

The Fed is essentially out of tools, they can print money, they did it twice with QE1 and QE2, it had negligible effects on both inflation and demand.

And here's what DeLong actually says:

We are here to say that, as a matter of arithmetic, in a depressed economy like the present, if a long deep recession casts even a small shadow on future potential output, with interest rates in the range at which the U.S. has been able to borrow, there is a substantial likelihood that expansionary fiscal policy right now would be self-financing, and an overwhelming likelihood that it would pass a benefit-cost test.

In normal times expansionary fiscal policy as a stabilization policy will flunk its benefit-cost test. In normal times the multiplier μ will be close to zero. Either way, expansionary fiscal policy as stabilization policy has only costs and no stabilization-policy benefits.

In a depressed economy, however, there is less increase in inflationary expectations following from higher output, and less reason for the monetary authority to fully offset the effects of expansionary fiscal policy.

And none of this is controversial: Fiscal stimulus doesn't work in a nondepressed economy because the Fed would offset it, while it does work in a depressed economy because the Fed won't offset it. Monetary policy from the Fed is always the first stabilization tool of choice. When it is out of ammo, fiscal policy is needed. This is what is taught in macroeconomics 101. It's basic, conventional, mainstream macroeconomics.

If the Fed is god and can offset any demand shock, then why is the US still stuck in a recession?
Lightwip
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States5497 Posts
July 07 2012 08:53 GMT
#3388
The Fed was dealing with the dotcom crisis when the recession kicked in (low interest rates -> bad investments -> credit crisis). I highly doubt this recession is one to be solved with monetary policy.
If you are not Bisu, chances are I hate you.
paralleluniverse
Profile Joined July 2010
4065 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-07 09:33:27
July 07 2012 09:03 GMT
#3389
On July 07 2012 17:53 Lightwip wrote:
The Fed was dealing with the dotcom crisis when the recession kicked in (low interest rates -> bad investments -> credit crisis). I highly doubt this recession is one to be solved with monetary policy.

Monetary policy can do no more. It is at the zero lower bound.

The Fed can and has engaged in unconventional monetary policy (to reinforce stimulus, despite some peoples heads being stuck in the sand), through managing expectations and asset purchases (QE). All of this has some small stimulative effects in increasing demand (not reducing demand to offset the stimulus).

Another thing the Fed should do (but refuses to do), is to increase it's inflation target to, say 4%, which will make real interest rates more negative, and thus stimulate demand. Although it would likely not make too large of a difference. But the Fed refuses to do this because it would undermine it's inflation creditability.
paralleluniverse
Profile Joined July 2010
4065 Posts
July 07 2012 14:18 GMT
#3390
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/pundits-urge-president-obama-to-back-president-obamas-proposals.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

LOL
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18825 Posts
July 07 2012 15:34 GMT
#3391
On July 07 2012 23:18 paralleluniverse wrote:
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/pundits-urge-president-obama-to-back-president-obamas-proposals.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

LOL

Obama needs to campaign on his jobs act more, I feel like not enough people even know it ever existed.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
Savio
Profile Joined April 2008
United States1850 Posts
July 08 2012 23:05 GMT
#3392
On July 07 2012 07:41 Signet wrote:
The 538 blog ( http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ ) is the only site I know that calculates a percent odds for each state. He thinks Obama is more likely to lose Michigan or Pennsylvania than Wisconsin...

NH/IA/CO each about 66% odds of going for Obama.
OH/VA closer to 60% each (Ohio a little higher, VA a little lower)
FL basically 50/50.


Thx for a link to that site. It is fairly awesome.

The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery. – Winston Churchill
Chunhyang
Profile Joined December 2011
Bangladesh1389 Posts
July 08 2012 23:49 GMT
#3393
On July 09 2012 08:05 Savio wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 07 2012 07:41 Signet wrote:
The 538 blog ( http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ ) is the only site I know that calculates a percent odds for each state. He thinks Obama is more likely to lose Michigan or Pennsylvania than Wisconsin...

NH/IA/CO each about 66% odds of going for Obama.
OH/VA closer to 60% each (Ohio a little higher, VA a little lower)
FL basically 50/50.


Thx for a link to that site. It is fairly awesome.



I second this. I heart statistics.

BTW, anyone gonna LR the election?
If you could reason with haters, there would be no haters. YGTMYFT
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18825 Posts
July 08 2012 23:50 GMT
#3394
On July 09 2012 08:49 Chunhyang wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2012 08:05 Savio wrote:
On July 07 2012 07:41 Signet wrote:
The 538 blog ( http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ ) is the only site I know that calculates a percent odds for each state. He thinks Obama is more likely to lose Michigan or Pennsylvania than Wisconsin...

NH/IA/CO each about 66% odds of going for Obama.
OH/VA closer to 60% each (Ohio a little higher, VA a little lower)
FL basically 50/50.


Thx for a link to that site. It is fairly awesome.



I second this. I heart statistics.

BTW, anyone gonna LR the election?

I will if no one with more zeal volunteers.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
eSgTheBear
Profile Joined November 2011
United States47 Posts
July 09 2012 14:27 GMT
#3395
I really like this post, thanks for sharing!

Was interesting seeing the votes.
Poopendale
aksfjh
Profile Joined November 2010
United States4853 Posts
July 09 2012 17:36 GMT
#3396
On July 07 2012 18:03 paralleluniverse wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 07 2012 17:53 Lightwip wrote:
The Fed was dealing with the dotcom crisis when the recession kicked in (low interest rates -> bad investments -> credit crisis). I highly doubt this recession is one to be solved with monetary policy.

Monetary policy can do no more. It is at the zero lower bound.

The Fed can and has engaged in unconventional monetary policy (to reinforce stimulus, despite some peoples heads being stuck in the sand), through managing expectations and asset purchases (QE). All of this has some small stimulative effects in increasing demand (not reducing demand to offset the stimulus).

Another thing the Fed should do (but refuses to do), is to increase it's inflation target to, say 4%, which will make real interest rates more negative, and thus stimulate demand. Although it would likely not make too large of a difference. But the Fed refuses to do this because it would undermine it's inflation creditability.

Well, an inflation target change would have little effect on anything if the Fed continues to be scared to enact more unorthodox monetary stimulus. The Fed really has to wait for fiscal policy at this point.
BluePanther
Profile Joined March 2011
United States2776 Posts
July 10 2012 01:08 GMT
#3397
On July 09 2012 08:50 farvacola wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 09 2012 08:49 Chunhyang wrote:
On July 09 2012 08:05 Savio wrote:
On July 07 2012 07:41 Signet wrote:
The 538 blog ( http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ ) is the only site I know that calculates a percent odds for each state. He thinks Obama is more likely to lose Michigan or Pennsylvania than Wisconsin...

NH/IA/CO each about 66% odds of going for Obama.
OH/VA closer to 60% each (Ohio a little higher, VA a little lower)
FL basically 50/50.


Thx for a link to that site. It is fairly awesome.



I second this. I heart statistics.

BTW, anyone gonna LR the election?

I will if no one with more zeal volunteers.


I'm sure I'll be all over it. However, more importantly for me, is the Wisconsin Senate race To be quite honest, the news sites are good at presenting the data when it comes to predicting outcomes and reporting on polls.
Epocalypse
Profile Joined December 2011
Canada319 Posts
July 10 2012 13:39 GMT
#3398
O'Reilly compares Obama to Reagan.
Shows video of Obama contradicting himself.
Compares some of Obama's to Romney's plans on taxing.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1727652336001/
bw4life
Recognizable
Profile Blog Joined December 2011
Netherlands1552 Posts
July 10 2012 13:41 GMT
#3399
O'Reilly is the guy that doesn't understand why the sun comes up every day and thinks it's because of god, right?
paralleluniverse
Profile Joined July 2010
4065 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-07-10 13:58:01
July 10 2012 13:57 GMT
#3400
On July 10 2012 22:39 Epocalypse wrote:
O'Reilly compares Obama to Reagan.
Shows video of Obama contradicting himself.
Compares some of Obama's to Romney's plans on taxing.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1727652336001/

The claim that public sector employment only marginally increased during Reagan and increased 10 times that under Obama is simply false.

Public sector employment is actually falling like crazy because of state-level balance budget rules.
[image loading]

More graphs comparing it to Reagan here: http://www.politicususa.com/comparing-employment-levels-government-reagan-obama.html

The comparison of this recession to that under Reagan is an invalid comparison as I've explained, because the Reagan recession was caused by the Fed and ended by the Fed: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=330491&currentpage=168#3360
Prev 1 168 169 170 171 172 1504 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 2h 8m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Creator 96
ProTech81
StarCraft: Brood War
Nal_rA 6351
BeSt 633
ToSsGirL 454
Larva 287
Pusan 102
JulyZerg 73
ggaemo 68
Backho 66
Dewaltoss 58
ZerO 38
[ Show more ]
NotJumperer 14
yabsab 11
ajuk12(nOOB) 10
Britney 0
Dota 2
XaKoH 740
XcaliburYe232
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K1301
Other Games
summit1g7047
ceh9606
singsing296
Fuzer 171
SortOf69
Beastyqt32
ZerO(Twitch)1
Organizations
StarCraft: Brood War
UltimateBattle 30
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 12 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• StrangeGG 47
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Stunt920
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
2h 8m
Serral vs Cure
Solar vs Classic
OSC
5h 8m
CranKy Ducklings
1d 1h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 5h
CSO Cup
1d 7h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 9h
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
4 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.