- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 2, 2013 at 1:12 am #780475
waterworldParticipantDBP: Is this question
Would you say that our American form of government (and thus, national policy) reflects our aspirations as individuals in some way? Or are we strictly herd animals?
intended to be a restatement of the first one —
Do you think it possible that national economics reflects personal economics to any degree? Or are those two things completely divorced from each other, as you see it?
or is it a follow-up question? And why are these options presented as mutually exclusive options? [Objection: leading, lack of foundation, and assuming facts not in evidence.]
If wakeflood doesn’t mind the input of eavesdroppers, I would add that our organized and bureaucratic government attempts to address national economic issues using economic models based on supposedly well-developed economic theories, which is quite different from what the vast majority of individual participants in the economy do, as is demonstrated by a fair amount of research into behavioral economics. Individuals often do not make economic decisions by thinking rationally and act in their own best interests; instead, we respond to various influences that have nothing to do with what is “best” for us.
That’s not to say the government has succeeded in its attempts to either adopt or employ a wise economic model. It seems quite the opposite, but for very different reasons.
February 2, 2013 at 1:32 am #780476
DBPMemberJan, thanks for your question. (#224) It wasn’t that you answered quickly, it was that you answered snippily, with a snide little put-down at the front end. That’s what I don’t like. The little put-downs.
In #202, I gave an honest answer to dobro’s question, and you came back with something that sounds to me like: “No one was talking to you.”
I didn’t like that.
Have I ever talked to you like that on here? Have I ever said, “No one was talking to you”?
Seems like not. In fact, seems like I’m actually nicer to you, personally, than to anyone else on here.
Didn’t I take your question about NV mass-eviction back to the Mayor’s office and get an answer for you right away? I thought that deserved some special consideration. But then, just a day later, you were snipping at me again, saying something like, “If you had asked someone [about the NV shacks] you’d know better.”
Again, that was snippy, and I didn’t appreciate it.
Like I said: feel free to disagree with me on anything, but please watch it with the put-downs.
I know how to push people’s buttons, too.
February 2, 2013 at 1:49 am #780477
JanSParticipantDBP, you read something into my statement that wasn’t there. I’m sorry if you took it that way.
February 2, 2013 at 1:53 am #780478
DBPMemberwaterworld, thanks. You’re helping move this thing forward. Definitely. But we’re still coming from widely different positions.
I can see that folks here aren’t ready for the Socratic approach yet, so I’ll have to drop that for now. I do want to keep it in the toolbox for later though . . .
***********************
By drilling down a little bit on this, I think the Lefties will be able to make some headway on understanding where the Righties are coming from. I think we need to uncover some deeper understanding of how the two sides view national economic policy.
Lefties tend to view economics like this: We want this economic OUTCOME, so we direct government to take these STEPS to achieve it.
Example: We want to expand the get people shopping again, so we have the Fed lower interest rates.
*************************
Righties, on the other hand, tend to view economic policy as something that should reflect government as a whole.
Which in turn should reflect society as a whole.
Which in turn, should reflect their own personal values.
Righties tend to have a more cautious approach to spending money, and they want government policy to reflect that.
(That’s what I was trying to arrive at with wakeflood, but I was having trouble leading that particular horse to water.)
******************
There are good arguments to made on both sides, I think. But there’s not much hope for people to come to agreement on this until both sides can at least understand where the other side is coming from.
That’s why we’ve got gridlock so bad right now. It’s not just that people aren’t listening to each other. Hell, they’re not even speaking the same language.
Yet.
February 2, 2013 at 2:00 am #780479
DBPMemberJan, I made an in-depth reply to dobro’s question (#201), and this was your exact response to me (#202):
that’s nice…but he wanted an answer from Meg, I believe, since she was the one who made the statement in the first place.
–Am I really reading something into that when I take it as a put-down? To me that sounds like “shut up, he wasn’t talking to you.”
I think just about anyone would infer that.
February 2, 2013 at 2:18 am #780480
dobroParticipant“2) I’ve found that whenever I do try to answer one of your questions, you find fault with my answer. No answer is good enough.”
“That’s one of your favorite things, seems like. To claim that no one answers your questions.”
Man, talk about classic Seattle passive-aggressive! Poor DBP just can’t answer a simple question because, gosh, whenever he tries, its just not good enough for that mean old dobro. So it’s dobro’s own fault he doesn’t answer. So there!
And meg just disappears, so I guess it’s no question answering around here. It’s more subject changing and passive aggressive dissing. And then trying to drag poor old Socrates into it. That sound you hear is him spinning in his grave. See you on another thread.
February 2, 2013 at 4:21 am #780481
megMember(tap tap)
Attention class, it’s Fri nite & I’m baaaacck!
I know some of you are here a lot; I can’t be as much, that’s just life. Now, for more on austerity and an example:
West Germany did it. After the Berlin wall fell in order to build up East Germany, they implemented austerity for almost 20 years. They have a ‘debt brake’ in their constitution, a requirement to maintain a balanced budget because of their huge national debt after WW1 that triggered Nazism. So in 1989 Germany needed reforms *first*, they had to implement austerity first, in order to take on more spending.
What is bad, what IS unacceptable about a certain kind of austerity currently implemented, for example in Greece, is that spending cuts are done to the public realm even as minimum monthly payments go to lenders who continue lending, zero-collateral, back to Greece. It’s a form of theft – as debt always is. The last of the peoples’ wealth and revenue streams out of the country. Greece badly needs to default, and if they had their own currency they could. They could pay off their debt just by hugely devaluing it, spreading the much-needed poison to bankers and lenders. Of course, that would bring yet another great austerity upon the people, in the form of currency devaluation. And, if Greece needed to issue new debt after that, they would probably be required to have collateral, in that process losing some of their national resources, public lands, etc. That requirement by itself might be the brake needed to stop the insanity and finally force people to keep their spending in balance with their revenues, and endure the tremendous pain of austerity.
Austerity. What is it but living within your means. It is a Poison that strengthens & intensifies it’s painfulness, the longer you delay. But it can never be avoided. And that’s why war becomes inevitable when delaying drags on. In 1989, Germany took their poison at the very best time: before indebtedness, when the poison’s pain was fairly tolerable. However, they did miss the fun times at the drunken punch bowl that was Europe’s spending frenzy “we can live like this… Forever!”
It might be a long time before I can read through all the comments.
I’d suggest doing some reading of your own. Research it. Investigate. Take off the blue shades, take off the red shades. You won’t die, doing it! :)
February 2, 2013 at 4:33 am #780482
megMemberOh LOL, reading a few back, so many seem to have been waiting & waiting & waiting… for me.
Well, I am honored! (I think) It’s just like my ducks that wait by the fence for me – they wait for me alone, to come home and give them food. Feed from anybody else.. just. won’t. do. too funny. :)
February 2, 2013 at 4:39 am #780483
dobroParticipantFirst of all, thanks for your return and reply to the actual question I asked.
Second, would you agree that this example does not remotely apply to our current situation? It looks like a very specific set of circumstances in which West Germany was forced to institute these programs not because of indebtedness but, as you say, constitutional prohibitions on their actions.
If you’re still around, you might take a crack at my other question which involved your criticism of gov’t…
Can you point us at some society that, in your opinion, avoided these pitfalls and created a system that spread joy, wealth, and the pursuit of happiness with very limited gov’t?
BTW, I read a lot. Thanks for your concern, tho.
February 2, 2013 at 4:45 am #780484
megMemberdobro, please restate your other question about criticism. I have only a few minutes left to stay here.
February 2, 2013 at 4:49 am #780485
dobroParticipantThis was it…
Can you point us at some society that, in your opinion, avoided these pitfalls and created a system that spread joy, wealth, and the pursuit of happiness with very limited gov’t?
It came after many critical statements of yours on big gov’t practices.
February 2, 2013 at 4:55 am #780486
megMemberNo it’s the same poison, just a different timing in taking it, therefore a different intensity in the poison’s pain. Take heed. A recession is what Germany avoided. Think about it.
Oh, I see you already asked it:
The beginning of our country, when govt was small. As govt. has grown, so has decreased our wealth and joy. In the US until the last century, the average citizen had very little if any contact with govt in a lifetime. As this country aged, however, govt. grew large and the lives of individuals are much more impacted and in contact with govt.
February 2, 2013 at 4:59 am #780487
megMemberWell, I would like to say Germany avoided the kind of full blown recessions that are plaguing us and the rest of the world. However, their up-front austerity measures, and overall belt-tightening, gave them a recession-like drop in GDP.
February 2, 2013 at 5:38 am #780488
dobroParticipant“The beginning of our country, when govt was small…As this country aged, however, govt. grew large and the lives…”
This, of course, ignores the fact that gov’t isn’t the only thing that has grown. As the country aged, our population has grown enormously, our engagement thruout the world, for good or bad, has grown enormously,the transition from a rural to urban orientation and our expectations of what gov’t can/should do has grown as well. So this example is a pretty flawed one in terms of “the good old days when gov’t was small” and current reality.
February 2, 2013 at 5:49 am #780489
dobroParticipant“No it’s the same poison, just a different timing in taking it, therefore a different intensity in the poison’s pain. Take heed. A recession is what Germany avoided. Think about it.”
Think about this. We’ve already been in/are still in a recessionary situation. Austerity doesn’t solve that. Sure it would have been nice to have thought ahead, avoided the bubbles, the boom-bust…hey, maybe some gov’t oversight of the financial markets would have helped!
But we are where we are. I think the solution is borrow the cheapest money we’ll ever have available, put people to work, get tax revenue coming back into the coffers, tax the wealthy at rates much closer to Reagan-era figures, and when things are humming again revisit the austerity biz.
February 2, 2013 at 4:02 pm #780490
redblackParticipantmeg/dobro: you’re also overlooking government’s lack of revenue. for 200 years the united states collected tariffs and protected our industries. capital was formed in america, circulated in america, and taxed in america. the money largely stayed home. and we made our own consumer goods.
at the same time that we made “free” trade our policy, we also started down this weird an anti-taxation road and slashed government revenues to the bone.
the worst part is that those who wanted their taxes cut the most convinced the majority of americans that everyone’s taxes were too high. it’s high time for americans to face the truth: that our tax burden is damned low for the value we get from our government.
the bottom line is what obama keeps repeating: you can’t cut your way out of debt. such a notion assumes you can cut $1.1 trillion from the $3.6 trillion 2013 budget. that’s not austerity. that’s draconian. and that doesn’t even consider service on the existing debt.
February 2, 2013 at 4:48 pm #780491
DBPMemberAny spending that the US government does now is on borrowed money. It’s borrowing.
And not short-term borrowing either, because whatever debt we take on now just gets added to the enormous debt we’ve already got, which will be there waiting for our great-great-grandchildren.
********************
dobro, can you name a case where a country has borrowed its way out of debt?
–Classically passively-aggressively yours,
DBP
February 2, 2013 at 5:11 pm #780492
JoBParticipanti think some people are too obsessed with red/blue blinders and filter all responses through them.
How many years have we lived with the myth of the welfare queen.. cutting public benefits to control our debt.. while the debt soared?
The American people don’t need an austerity program. We already have one.
Corporations need an austerity program because they along with the rich have sucked the American tit dry.
February 2, 2013 at 5:45 pm #780493
dobroParticipant“dobro, can you name a case where a country has borrowed its way out of debt?”
Pretty clever…lessee…no, of course I can’t cuz when you borrow you incur debt.
but I can name a country that managed their economy using the tools of debt and revenues to maintain a healthy GDP and produce surplus revenue…take a guess.
It’s the good ol US of A in the year 2000 the last year of Bill Clinton’s reign.
See how I answered your question and then elaborated on my answer? that’s called “discussion”.
February 2, 2013 at 6:15 pm #780494
DBPMember>>See how I answered your question and then elaborated on my answer? that’s called “discussion”.
Passively-aggressively spoken, Grasshopper. You have learned well . . .
*************************************
Speaking of Clinton, yes, debt did not go up as much under him. But I’m not sure what you mean when you say “tools of debt and revenues.” Is that a high-falutin’ way of saying “the government collected more tax money?”
Oh yeah, I’ll grant you that. The government made more money during Clinton, all right. And there were more jobs to go around, too. [Sigh] Yeah . . .
I’m afraid that was all on account of the Great Tech Bubble, though, rather than anything the government might have done.
And that bubble done popped, my friend.
Just like your argument.
Your Humble & Obt. Servant,
–DB P-A
February 2, 2013 at 6:22 pm #780495
dobroParticipant“I’m afraid that was all on account of the Great Tech Bubble, though, rather than anything the government might have done.”
So when things turn out well, the impotent gov’t had no effect. When things go poorly, the all powerful gov’t is to blame.gotcha, Socrates.
February 2, 2013 at 6:27 pm #780496
dobroParticipant“But I’m not sure what you mean when you say “tools of debt and revenues.”
It’s kind of what happens if your house needs a new roof but you don’t have enough money to get it fixed. Using debt as a tool, I put it on my credit card so I can make an investment that will help my situation, knowing full well I’ll have to pay it back. I then use the tool of revenue to save money from my paycheck to pay my debt while giving the bank some interest in return for letting me use their money to make a wise investment in my future even tho I had a shortfall in revenue at the time I needed my roof fixed. Make sense now, grasshopper?
February 2, 2013 at 7:16 pm #780497
DBPMemberOhhhhhh. Borrowing and spending?
Well why didn’t you just say so?
OK . . . fix the roof with a credit card. I get that. Cuz the roof is an emergency, right.
So, if our whole country was like a house with a falling-down roof . . .
. . . and the government’s money-printing machine is like a bank . . .
Why, that’s even better, right? Because that’s one loan we NEVER have to pay back, ‘cuz Mr. Krugman says it’s really just money we owe to ourselves.
So why dafuq would we even WORRY about paying it back? And why dafuq would we worry about the interest rate either?
Hey. I really like this system, dobro! Sign me up for a few billion! After the roof’s done, my dog house needs a jacuzzi.
Hey, waaaaaait a minute. Wait just a dang minute!
I don’t HAVE a dog.
February 2, 2013 at 7:20 pm #780498
dobroParticipantNever mind.
February 2, 2013 at 11:01 pm #780499
WorldCitizenParticipantYou all sound like an old married couple bickering. Except you’re not married. And there’s more than two of you.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.