Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Your glorious supply siders based their whole theory off of Keynes.
Arthur Laffer even admitted taking the idea from Keynes
However, back on planet earth, if we analyze the supply-side Reagan era,
First of all, consumers create demand, and without consumers, businesses goes nowhere.
Your glorious supply siders based their whole theory off of Keynes.
Arthur Laffer even admitted taking the idea from Keynes
of course as a liberal you will be very very brainless!!
Laffer: The supply-side approach stands in sharp contrast to economic theories that held sway from the 1930s through the 1970s which were preoccupied with boosting demand, ideas most closely associated with economist John Maynard Keynes and his publication of The General Theory.
However, back on planet earth, if we analyze the supply-side Reagan era,
Of course as a liberal you will be totally brain dead, totally!! Reagan raised taxes 5 times!!!!!!!! How is such perfect ignorance possible?????
My point is, the deficit reflects the net savings of the private sector. .
so what???????? does this make deficits a good thing??? Should we run a 10trillion deficit each year????? Do you have any idea what you are saying??
Deficts can be a good thing, because they create net financial assets. If you want the government sector to run a budget surplus, then the domestic private sector will have to run a deficit, which is what happened during the Clinton Administration. This caused the domestic private sector to borrow in order to fund consumption, which helped to create the housing bubble among other things.
The deficit equals the total net increase in the holdings (financial assets of the US) of the American people, such as households, firms, etc., which is referred to as the non-government sector. In other words, the deficit equals an increase in the total aggregate savings for all of us down to the last penny.
Sure, government spending can cause inflation, that's not what I'm saying. We have an unemployment glut which needs to be solved. We could literally increase the debt significantly, because there's a ton of excess capacity, excess labor and low industrial output. If we were at full employment and the economy was at full capacity, then I'd be worried about inflation, but we're nowhere near that happening on our current path.
You can't spend and burrow yourself into prosperity.
Canadian Explains U.S. Debt Crisis
Yes. There is no US Debt crisis. It's all make-believe.
That’s quite a trick considering there’s no ‘crisis.’
so what???????? does this make deficits a good thing??? Should we run a 10trillion deficit each year????? Do you have any idea what you are saying??
Deficts can be a good thing, because they create net financial assets. If you want the government sector to run a budget surplus, then the domestic private sector will have to run a deficit, which is what happened during the Clinton Administration. This caused the domestic private sector to borrow in order to fund consumption, which helped to create the housing bubble among other things.
The deficit equals the total net increase in the holdings (financial assets of the US) of the American people, such as households, firms, etc., which is referred to as the non-government sector. In other words, the deficit equals an increase in the total aggregate savings for all of us down to the last penny.
Sure, government spending can cause inflation, that's not what I'm saying. We have an unemployment glut which needs to be solved. We could literally increase the debt significantly, because there's a ton of excess capacity, excess labor and low industrial output. If we were at full employment and the economy was at full capacity, then I'd be worried about inflation, but we're nowhere near that happening on our current path.
This is classic example of one of those posts that try to analyze things in a stupid way. Kinda like doctor explaining why cancer can be beneficial because it increases white blood cell production, with few fancy words thrown in.
The deficit does not merely reflect increase in savings in the private sector, and if it did it I would argue that it would not be a good thing that they were used to finance consumption (which is what the govt mostly does). The problem is that the deficit is made possible not merely with private sector's savings but with printed money and savings of the chinese people. In other words the trade deficit and inflation(which means decrease in savings of the private sector).
Trade deficit is not good or bad. It just means you are using resources that you don't have and must pay them back later. However, if trade deficit is used to finance consumption you are going to get bleaker times in the future. And that is where you are at. US with the lead of the government and FED is spending all the money, and then the trade deficit that results is invested back into the USA to... finance even more government spending.
And then the government promises even more benefits, which means people think they are wealther and, will most likely run to the mall to buy some more chinese products. To finance this the FED has to step in and lower interest rates, and people will abandon even more savings and instead burrow money to finance some more consumption.
This won't continue forever to be sure. At some point the world will wake up. Maybe the lesson that everybody already knows will be remembered again. You can't spend and burrow yourself into prosperity.
That’s quite a trick considering there’s no ‘crisis.’
$140,000 per family in America is no crisis??? So maybe $280 per family would be no crisis too??. Why not explain or admit as a liberal you lack the IQ to do so? Did you think the Girl Scouts were going to pay back the money?
Most families struggle to pay for one house, but now thanks to libturd government they have, in effect, 2 houses to pay for, one of which they don't even get to use!! No crisis??? Pure liberal stupidity.
Therefore, when we have a discussion about the 'debt', it's not about what we owe, but rather about what we own, at least far as the public should be concerned. This is all double-entry accounting, plain and simple.The US national debt can never become a burden for future generations because the US literally has an unlimited credit card to obtain new debt at interest rates of its own choosing, or, if the US so chooses, it can create all the money it needs .
Deficts can be a good thing, because they create net financial assets. If you want the government sector to run a budget surplus, then the domestic private sector will have to run a deficit, which is what happened during the Clinton Administration. This caused the domestic private sector to borrow in order to fund consumption, which helped to create the housing bubble among other things.
The deficit equals the total net increase in the holdings (financial assets of the US) of the American people, such as households, firms, etc., which is referred to as the non-government sector. In other words, the deficit equals an increase in the total aggregate savings for all of us down to the last penny.
Sure, government spending can cause inflation, that's not what I'm saying. We have an unemployment glut which needs to be solved. We could literally increase the debt significantly, because there's a ton of excess capacity, excess labor and low industrial output. If we were at full employment and the economy was at full capacity, then I'd be worried about inflation, but we're nowhere near that happening on our current path.
This is classic example of one of those posts that try to analyze things in a stupid way. Kinda like doctor explaining why cancer can be beneficial because it increases white blood cell production, with few fancy words thrown in.
The deficit does not merely reflect increase in savings in the private sector, and if it did it I would argue that it would not be a good thing that they were used to finance consumption (which is what the govt mostly does). The problem is that the deficit is made possible not merely with private sector's savings but with printed money and savings of the chinese people. In other words the trade deficit and inflation(which means decrease in savings of the private sector).
Trade deficit is not good or bad. It just means you are using resources that you don't have and must pay them back later. However, if trade deficit is used to finance consumption you are going to get bleaker times in the future. And that is where you are at. US with the lead of the government and FED is spending all the money, and then the trade deficit that results is invested back into the USA to... finance even more government spending.
And then the government promises even more benefits, which means people think they are wealther and, will most likely run to the mall to buy some more chinese products. To finance this the FED has to step in and lower interest rates, and people will abandon even more savings and instead burrow money to finance some more consumption.
This won't continue forever to be sure. At some point the world will wake up. Maybe the lesson that everybody already knows will be remembered again. You can't spend and burrow yourself into prosperity.
The US isn't dependent on China, Japan, OPEC countries or anyone else to 'finance consumption'. All government spending is by its very nature 'money printing' because there's an increase in reserve balances. In point of fact, the government creates money ex nihilo under a fiat system. The value of your dollar in your pocket is the product of seigniorage, production, taxes, regulation and laws.
Oh yeah, so what would happen if the US ceases to be the world's currency? Nothing. It's a non-issue. The only way for the rest of the world to get rid of dollar holdings is to exchange said dollars for real goods and services produced by Americans. For example, every foreigner that possesses said dollars, would have to hand their dollars back over to Americans who worked to produce the real goods and services which they would have to purchase. The is only feasible way for the rest of the world to reach zero dollar holdings. So if an Irishman exchanged his dollars with a South Korean, that wouldn't work, because the world would still posses said dollars, and they would simply be changing hands. The 3 trillion or so held by foreigners would be the hugest shopping spree in the history of the world. Our 500 billion dollar trade deficit would would vanish and we'd have a 3 trillion dollar trade surplus.
On the other side the coin, China, Japan and the OPEC countries, which have historically run huge surpluses with the US, would simply have deficits of a similar proportion, that's about it, plain and simple. Americans would get dollars and foreigners would get the real goods and services produced by Americans, such as technology, software, cloths, medicine, automobiles, motorcycles, planes, a very large chunk of the US produces. The problem is, retards like Peter Schiff, Jim Rogers and the doomsday crowd hasn't thought this one through.
I bet you tell a guy who has financed his luxorious lifestyle with a million dollar debt that it's "No problem" when the money runs out and you have to start paying it back. No change of lifestyle... Same ole good.
The US national debt can never become a burden for future generations because the US literally has an unlimited credit card to obtain new debt at interest rates of its own choosing, or, if the US so chooses, it can create all the money it needs .
so then we should elect candidates who don't tax us at all, but instead use the credit card or "create" money. We have been such fools to put up with taxaction all these years!!
A liberal will be too stupid for words!! And now all have to agree. A liberal is like a Nazi. He's a totally illiterate liberal and totally free to make up anything at all as he goes along.
of course as liberal you're too stupid for words. Taxes just change who spends the money but have little or nothing to do with aggregate demandTaxes simply serve to regulate aggregate demand.
If all things remained equal, then taxes would constantly have to rise with spending to control inflation.
If the US government kept spending without taxing, you would eventually see inflation.
Deficits and inflate don't always correlate so to speak. For example, we could have a very high savings rate, because if people are saving and not buying goods and services, we could see deflation.
Secondly, and perhaps equally as critical, taxes create demand for the currency.
This is classic example of one of those posts that try to analyze things in a stupid way. Kinda like doctor explaining why cancer can be beneficial because it increases white blood cell production, with few fancy words thrown in.
The deficit does not merely reflect increase in savings in the private sector, and if it did it I would argue that it would not be a good thing that they were used to finance consumption (which is what the govt mostly does). The problem is that the deficit is made possible not merely with private sector's savings but with printed money and savings of the chinese people. In other words the trade deficit and inflation(which means decrease in savings of the private sector).
Trade deficit is not good or bad. It just means you are using resources that you don't have and must pay them back later. However, if trade deficit is used to finance consumption you are going to get bleaker times in the future. And that is where you are at. US with the lead of the government and FED is spending all the money, and then the trade deficit that results is invested back into the USA to... finance even more government spending.
And then the government promises even more benefits, which means people think they are wealther and, will most likely run to the mall to buy some more chinese products. To finance this the FED has to step in and lower interest rates, and people will abandon even more savings and instead burrow money to finance some more consumption.
This won't continue forever to be sure. At some point the world will wake up. Maybe the lesson that everybody already knows will be remembered again. You can't spend and burrow yourself into prosperity.
The US isn't dependent on China, Japan, OPEC countries or anyone else to 'finance consumption'. All government spending is by its very nature 'money printing' because there's an increase in reserve balances. In point of fact, the government creates money ex nihilo under a fiat system. The value of your dollar in your pocket is the product of seigniorage, production, taxes, regulation and laws.
Oh yeah, so what would happen if the US ceases to be the world's currency? Nothing. It's a non-issue. The only way for the rest of the world to get rid of dollar holdings is to exchange said dollars for real goods and services produced by Americans. For example, every foreigner that possesses said dollars, would have to hand their dollars back over to Americans who worked to produce the real goods and services which they would have to purchase. The is only feasible way for the rest of the world to reach zero dollar holdings. So if an Irishman exchanged his dollars with a South Korean, that wouldn't work, because the world would still posses said dollars, and they would simply be changing hands. The 3 trillion or so held by foreigners would be the hugest shopping spree in the history of the world. Our 500 billion dollar trade deficit would would vanish and we'd have a 3 trillion dollar trade surplus.
On the other side the coin, China, Japan and the OPEC countries, which have historically run huge surpluses with the US, would simply have deficits of a similar proportion, that's about it, plain and simple. Americans would get dollars and foreigners would get the real goods and services produced by Americans, such as technology, software, cloths, medicine, automobiles, motorcycles, planes, a very large chunk of the US produces. The problem is, retards like Peter Schiff, Jim Rogers and the doomsday crowd hasn't thought this one through.
So you see no problem in trillions of dollars coming back to USA, and as significant amount of goods flowing out?
Well, it IS going to decrease standard of living significantly. Instead of financing consumption on foreign credit, you will not only be getting products from them, you will have to produce things for them. Of course, this is not even counting the huge shifts in the structure of economy that would have to take place and lead to a recession. If this change of flows happened in short period of time (which like all bubbles - I think it would), there are going to be even more problems.
What will the FED do, if dollars are flowing in (inflationary), goods flowing out (more inflation) and the government can't get more debt as no one wants dollars. It's either a banktrupcy, or hyperinflation. Of course neither of those is really a problem at all.
I bet you tell a guy who has financed his luxorious lifestyle with a million dollar debt that it's "No problem" when the money runs out and you have to start paying it back. No change of lifestyle... Same ole good.
Anyway no one knows what will happen for sure, but that said, I think these facts are worriesome.
Again, for a second time, you can't compare the finances of a household to that of a sovereign government which issues its own currency.
of course as liberal you're too stupid for words. Taxes just change who spends the money but have little or nothing to do with aggregate demandTaxes simply serve to regulate aggregate demand.
If all things remained equal, then taxes would constantly have to rise with spending to control inflation.
again too stupid for words. Inflation is a function of the quanity of money printed or put into circulation by the Federal Reserve. Taxes have nothing to do with it.
If the US government kept spending without taxing, you would eventually see inflation.
only if the Fed agreed to print the money to make the spending and inflation impossible. THe Fed is independent so they don't have to do what the President and Congress say. Over your head???????
Deficits and inflate don't always correlate so to speak. For example, we could have a very high savings rate, because if people are saving and not buying goods and services, we could see deflation.
Secondly, and perhaps equally as critical, taxes create demand for the currency.
idiotic gibberish from a libturd fool who has never taken econ 101!!!
