An Economic Stimulus I can Support

Giving people money won't stimulate the economy. Earning money with a slight excess to save and buy non-essentials will stimulate the economy a little while spending money to make consumables that are in demand will stimulate the economy a lot.

As for buying voter's rights - it may not stimulate the economy but it would reduce the non-participatory members of society from altering its course. (aside from the fact that you cannot buy, sell or relinquish your rights)
 
Were those checks effective stimulus? No.
You fail.

Prove that it failed. It was a raging success for Palin that helped put her on the national scene as "America's favorite governor".

But aside from that, prove that it failed in Alaska. Show me another student paper from some obscure 4th ranked college like you did in your previous post, the esteemed nationally recognized economist, Samantha Sterba. You are a joke.


The buirden is on you to prove they succeeded. I have already posted proof that these things fail.

No, you have not. You posted an obscure paper written by a 20-year-old college student.

Here, read this: http://www4.ncsu.edu/~ladare/eac595/readings/scanlon-neumann.pdf
Since you are a sucker for anything you find on the internet, regardless of who wrote it, just as long as it supports your opinion.
 
Giving people money won't stimulate the economy. Earning money with a slight excess to save and buy non-essentials will stimulate the economy a little while spending money to make consumables that are in demand will stimulate the economy a lot.

As for buying voter's rights - it may not stimulate the economy but it would reduce the non-participatory members of society from altering its course. (aside from the fact that you cannot buy, sell or relinquish your rights)

Actually giving nonsavers money is proved beyond a shadow of a doubt to stimulate economies because the money goes back into the economy immediately. Getting cash to Main Street to buy (demand) is the REAL Keynesian Economics, not the bastardized permanent dark night voodoo idiocy version pumping money in at the top and so renamed "supply side" and "trickle down" depending on who is reading the fantasy to troubled disciples.

Junebug sent small checks to low income folks in his terms. Those were the smartest decisions of his presidency and the liberal press worked overtime to discredit them. FACT: Without those checks the crash would have happened within a year of either round.

For about a third of what Obama has pissed down the drain giving welfare to corporations including the finance sector and state and local governments, the government could have restored faith from the bottom up. There is still going to be a reckoning that guts state and local governements; all that moron in the white house did was delay it.

And around 2017-2020, when the economy gets to its more or less permanent "new normal" without a middle class with paid leisure time, the recovery SHALL start at the bottom and build faith from the bottom. But the bottom 67% won't have paid leisure time and will continue to be a drag on the economy, so the "new normal" won't look or feel like anything people my age (63) remember as "normal". It will be a hybrid between Asian scut-economies and Euro-socialist economies, mainly because Reagan expanded corporate welfare programs like EITC and opened the borders to create a throw-away labor class intended to bounce back and forth between low paying jobs and government support.

Massive expansion of ReagaNUT economic and labor policy is going to be the new normal.
 
Last edited:
Prove that it failed. It was a raging success for Palin that helped put her on the national scene as "America's favorite governor".

But aside from that, prove that it failed in Alaska. Show me another student paper from some obscure 4th ranked college like you did in your previous post, the esteemed nationally recognized economist, Samantha Sterba. You are a joke.


The buirden is on you to prove they succeeded. I have already posted proof that these things fail.

No, you have not. You posted an obscure paper written by a 20-year-old college student.

Here, read this: http://www4.ncsu.edu/~ladare/eac595/readings/scanlon-neumann.pdf
Since you are a sucker for anything you find on the internet, regardless of who wrote it, just as long as it supports your opinion.

And you still cannot refute a paper written by a college student. What does that say about you?
Much less an artiicle by Marti Feldstein, who makes exactly the same points. And you cannot find one economist who believes those checks worked.
You fling accusations you yourself are guilty of. You don't have the intellectual heft to debate me. You are a joke.
 
Were those checks effective stimulus? No.
You fail.

Prove that it failed. It was a raging success for Palin that helped put her on the national scene as "America's favorite governor".

But aside from that, prove that it failed in Alaska. Show me another student paper from some obscure 4th ranked college like you did in your previous post, the esteemed nationally recognized economist, Samantha Sterba. You are a joke.


The buirden is on you to prove they succeeded. I have already posted proof that these things fail.

No.

You didn't.

You posted idiotic propaganda.
(and "buirden". Irish, are we, rabbit?)

It is EXACTLY as NTPP wrote. EXACTLY that way.

And NTPP didn't even mention that Palin raised taxes on oil and increased other subsidies to citizens. She was well on her way to being a decent moderate Republican governor before she got tangled up in all this wild-eyed nutball horseshit.

THAT is why she resigned, Professor Vortex. As she revealed herself to be a clueless, classless nutball bullshit artist, Democrats in Alaska cut the cord. When she came back after getting trounced, there was no "there" there. She had pissed off the nutball element before leaving and she was laughing stock to the people she worked most with before her fabulous adventure with Colonel Windsock Simpleton McCain.
 
Last edited:
Yes, indeed it was. But my point still went right over the one on the top of his head.

And indeed, even though the people of Alaska are for the most part conservative Republicans, how many of them do we think returned those $1200 checks?

Were those checks effective stimulus? No.
You fail.

Prove that it failed. It was a raging success for Palin that helped put her on the national scene as "America's favorite governor".

But aside from that, prove that it failed in Alaska. Show me another student paper from some obscure 4th ranked college like you did in your previous post, the esteemed nationally recognized economist, Samantha Sterba. You are a joke.


Nobel laureate Edward Prescott of Arizona State University's W.P. Carey School of Business, argued that "no respectable macroeconomist" believes stimulus works.

Economists Rush to Disagree About Crisis Solutions - Businessweek
 
And NTPP didn't even mention that Palin raised taxes on oil and increased other subsidies to citizens.

'Tis true.

Sarah raised taxes on the oil companies in Alaska and used the money to send bigger checks to Alaska residents.

That gets lost in the Tea Party mythology.

Everything both parties believe is mythology. On the left you have people claiming that slavery existed into the 1950s and everyone has to embrace sexual weirdness, while the right thinks the 1950s were a Kinkadian epoch, only Santa Claus came every day.

Both sides forget people like my grandfather worked the mines starting age nine and for a fucking dollar a week. Both my grandmothers were hotel maids before they were teens. My father never knew showers existed before boot camp in 1942. Tarawa. Peleliu. Philippines. Okinawa. My uncle couldn't enlist until they needed cannon fodder for D Day. 1st wave Omaha. Shot while wounded by SS. Slave laborer in Dresden. 123lbs, 19 yrs old back in the USA. My mother went hungry in a three story mansion. There is more.

What happened that people deny the REAL past? At what fork did it come unglued?

I'm fed up with people who can't get it that there is a bottom to the barrel and that every president since IKE - with the possible exception of old man Bush - has taken the United States closer to it. It's time to get real.
 
Last edited:
Why? We disqualify people from voting for all kinds of reasons. Here it is simply voluntary.

I see. And you are right. But there are certain people I wished that, who under no circumstance should be allowed to vote: Obama supporters.

I can see how you would feel that way given the GOP has lost the last two elections....and badly. McCain-Palin-Romney-Ryan....(LOSERS)

and then you complain about the democrats losing the house in 2010 and couldnt take it in 2012 LOSERS.........
 


So let's start with yours. I'll give you a match.

Sarah Palin would have to disagree with you, though. She taxed the oil companies in Alaska and gave every Alaskan resident a check for $1200 and claims it boosted the economy enormously by helping Alaskans cope with high gas prices.

PolitiFact | Each Alaskan got $1,200

Wow, how did Sarah Palin enter this discussion? My my aren't we obsessed with her?

Oh, I see. Can't handle the facts. OK, I guess I'm obsessed with Ted Cruz, too.


After Calling Sandy Aid Wasteful, Ted Cruz Asks For All Available Resources for Texas


After Calling Sandy Aid Wasteful, Ted Cruz Asks For All Available Resources for Texas

He told the truth....what should that have to do with him asking for resources for Texas? He didn't say the people of Sandy shouldn't have gotten it, he's say it was wasted.
 
So the lefties have crapped all over the thread, raised objections they couldn't sustain, failed to deliver any proof or refute anything I wrote. And now are leaving.
Par for the course.
 
I'd take the money. The dynamics of campaign finance will tell you 2500 is worth a WHOLE lot more than 1 vote. ;)
 
And NTPP didn't even mention that Palin raised taxes on oil and increased other subsidies to citizens.

'Tis true.

Sarah raised taxes on the oil companies in Alaska and used the money to send bigger checks to Alaska residents.

That gets lost in the Tea Party mythology.

Everything both parties believe is mythology. On the left you have people claiming that slavery existed into the 1950s and everyone has to embrace sexual weirdness, while the right thinks the 1950s were a Kinkadian epoch, only Santa Claus came every day.

Both sides forget people like my grandfather worked the mines starting age nine and for a fucking dollar a week. Both my grandmothers were hotel maids before they were teens. My father never knew showers existed before boot camp in 1942. Tarawa. Peleliu. Philippines. Okinawa. My uncle couldn't enlist until they needed cannon fodder for D Day. 1st wave Omaha. Shot while wounded by SS. Slave laborer in Dresden. 123lbs, 19 yrs old back in the USA. My mother went hungry in a three story mansion. There is more.

What happened that people deny the REAL past? At what fork did it come unglued?

I'm fed up with people who can't get it that there is a bottom to the barrel and that every president since IKE - with the possible exception of old man Bush - has taken the United States closer to it. It's time to get real.

Mythology is important in culture.
 
The lefties and those who flunked Econ 101 keep claiming that "getting money into the hands of people who spend it" will revitalize the economy. That's horse hockey, but never mind. Here's an idea to do just that and maybe save the republic while we're at it.
Let's authorize payment of $2500 to every person with a voter registration card who turns in their card and waives their right to vote forever.
How about it?

I thought we already did this. I mean, that was the center of that stupid twitter meme Obama started late last year. #My2K
 
The lefties and those who flunked Econ 101 keep claiming that "getting money into the hands of people who spend it" will revitalize the economy. That's horse hockey, but never mind. Here's an idea to do just that and maybe save the republic while we're at it.
Let's authorize payment of $2500 to every person with a voter registration card who turns in their card and waives their right to vote forever.
How about it?
Who is it that you are expecting to sell their "right to vote"? ... and why do you think it would benefit the republic?
 
The lefties and those who flunked Econ 101 keep claiming that "getting money into the hands of people who spend it" will revitalize the economy. That's horse hockey, but never mind. Here's an idea to do just that and maybe save the republic while we're at it.
Let's authorize payment of $2500 to every person with a voter registration card who turns in their card and waives their right to vote forever.
How about it?
Who is it that you are expecting to sell their "right to vote"? ... and why do you think it would benefit the republic?

Inner city Negroes who basically do it every election. Since they in reality choose the president we can get back to sound governance once we get rid of these leaches.
 
The lefties and those who flunked Econ 101 keep claiming that "getting money into the hands of people who spend it" will revitalize the economy. That's horse hockey, but never mind. Here's an idea to do just that and maybe save the republic while we're at it.
Let's authorize payment of $2500 to every person with a voter registration card who turns in their card and waives their right to vote forever.
How about it?
Who is it that you are expecting to sell their "right to vote"? ... and why do you think it would benefit the republic?

Inner city Negroes who basically do it every election. Since they in reality choose the president we can get back to sound governance once we get rid of these leaches.

Wow.
 
The lefties and those who flunked Econ 101 keep claiming that "getting money into the hands of people who spend it" will revitalize the economy. That's horse hockey, but never mind. Here's an idea to do just that and maybe save the republic while we're at it.
Let's authorize payment of $2500 to every person with a voter registration card who turns in their card and waives their right to vote forever.
How about it?
Who is it that you are expecting to sell their "right to vote"? ... and why do you think it would benefit the republic?

Inner city Negroes who basically do it every election. Since they in reality choose the president we can get back to sound governance once we get rid of these leaches.

Ha! You think you won't have at least an equal number of poor hayseeds out there in... Well, we call it "Fly-over country..." Selling their votes?

I doubt your plan would swing a single state. But if it did, I'd give it 50/50 tops that it swings it the way you're hoping.
 

Forum List

Back
Top