How is austerity doing in Europe

[itfitzme]

Yep. They seem to have forgotten that just do nothing was practiced perfectly in the years prior to the fdr inauguration. And the us watched the unemployment rate go from under 3% to over 24%. And they want to do it again, and again, and again.

Eventually, someones money gets put where their bs mouth is.

 

[Rshermr]

Yep. They seem to have forgotten that just do nothing was practiced perfectly in the years prior to the fdr inauguration. And the us watched the unemployment rate go from under 3% to over 24%. And they want to do it again, and again, and again.

Eventually, someones money gets put where their bs mouth is.

Problem is, they read it in the con web sites, and they believe it. Because they want to. Sad.

 

[itfitzme]

Yep. They seem to have forgotten that just do nothing was practiced perfectly in the years prior to the fdr inauguration. And the us watched the unemployment rate go from under 3% to over 24%. And they want to do it again, and again, and again.

Eventually, someones money gets put where their bs mouth is.

Problem is, they read it in the con web sites, and they believe it. Because they want to. Sad.

I actually cheated you out of a longer thought. i often hold back, for some reason I am unaware of. Probably because I don't feel it has sufficient evidentiary suppot. So, this is the full thought;

History often must repeat itself a number of times before the lesson becomes part of the general public's mindset. *Although the conservative christian fundamentalists continue to push their mindset (why do groups that conspire accuse the rest of us as being part of some conspiracy?), the movement of written history that we leverage to understand our world isn't going to go backwards.

While the majority of people do report believing in "god", the meaning of that continues to wane. *More and more people report being "spiritual" while not reporting being "religious". *I am sure that the general understanding remains that religion considered the Earth to be the center of the Universe and fought hard against Copernicus, Galaleo, and the onward progress of science, science that is deeply rooted in our culture.

Most, I hope, are aware of both sides of the historical argument of the Great Depression. *Most people are not stupid enough to not get that the economy was headed South, and fast, before the stimulus packages. *Bush made sure everyone new where that stimulous refund came from and why. *I remember receiving a pre-stimulus check notice, telling me that George Bush would be sending me a stimulus check. I can only hope that most people recall.

I also recall that the freefall began, the huge bailout occured, in a couple of forms, it stabilized, then nothing major came out of Washington except a fiscal cliff and austerity. *

It was getting worse, stimulus, it stopped. *"Austerity", nothing changed. *It isn't all that hard. *We have traded growth and recovery here for deficit reduction. *In Europe, they have traded stability for debt reduction.*

That is twice in history that austerity has failed.

It is a hard sell to rewrite the history books when parents and grandparents look at it and say, "That isn't how I remember it went down." *

At some point, you simply can't rewrite the Spanish Inquisition. *And at this point, you can't rewrite the Great Depression when people look around and the story is playing out exactly like the history book said it did. Grandma says, "Yeppers, that's what my dad told me." The history book says, "Yep, that's what grandma says." And mom and dad are reading the news saying, "Yep, that's what is going on now."

Half the population has a below average IQ, but they don't all tend to end up all the same family. *It is a little more mixed up than that with only a third being made up by nothing but complete morons.* The idea being that the thoughtfullness morons is elevated by their closest associated smarter aquaintence.

Hey, I can always hope.

Spiritual but not religious - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Simple Concept: You have to spend less than you take in at some point (minus very responsible credit spending; which we know never happens). The OP is a fucking retard and he knows it.

Confusing macro economics with home economics and ignoring investent.

Many people take out an auto loan, student loan, or buy a house, spending beyond their take home pay and savings, on an investent which, done right, decreases their future monthly outlays, or increasing their future income, by incurring debt and paying interest.

It is a simple concept, really.

I'm not confusing anything, a-hole. There has to be a considerable return on investment and proper fiscal management to justify any budget. If you think that these politicians are anything but glorified crooks, then you're sorely mistaken and total butt fucking moron.

 

[Rshermr]

Simple Concept: You have to spend less than you take in at some point (minus very responsible credit spending; which we know never happens). The OP is a fucking retard and he knows it.

Confusing macro economics with home economics and ignoring investent.

Many people take out an auto loan, student loan, or buy a house, spending beyond their take home pay and savings, on an investent which, done right, decreases their future monthly outlays, or increasing their future income, by incurring debt and paying interest.

It is a simple concept, really.

I'm not confusing anything, a-hole. There has to be a considerable return on investment and proper fiscal management to justify any budget. If you think that these politicians are anything but glorified crooks, then you're sorely mistaken and total butt fucking moron.

Wow. Profound.
You did INDEED prove that you are confusing macro economics with home economics.

It is a very, very common malady. It does not suggest you are stupid. It does suggest you are ignorant.

 

[Oldstyle]

You're STILL here pretending to know something about economics, Tommy? Too funny...

 

[Rshermr]

Eventually, someones money gets put where their bs mouth is.

Problem is, they read it in the con web sites, and they believe it. Because they want to. Sad.

I actually cheated you out of a longer thought. i often hold back, for some reason I am unaware of. Probably because I don't feel it has sufficient evidentiary suppot. So, this is the full thought;

History often must repeat itself a number of times before the lesson becomes part of the general public's mindset. *Although the conservative christian fundamentalists continue to push their mindset (why do groups that conspire accuse the rest of us as being part of some conspiracy?), the movement of written history that we leverage to understand our world isn't going to go backwards.

While the majority of people do report believing in "god", the meaning of that continues to wane. *More and more people report being "spiritual" while not reporting being "religious". *I am sure that the general understanding remains that religion considered the Earth to be the center of the Universe and fought hard against Copernicus, Galaleo, and the onward progress of science, science that is deeply rooted in our culture.

Most, I hope, are aware of both sides of the historical argument of the Great Depression. *Most people are not stupid enough to not get that the economy was headed South, and fast, before the stimulus packages. *Bush made sure everyone new where that stimulous refund came from and why. *I remember receiving a pre-stimulus check notice, telling me that George Bush would be sending me a stimulus check. I can only hope that most people recall.

I also recall that the freefall began, the huge bailout occured, in a couple of forms, it stabilized, then nothing major came out of Washington except a fiscal cliff and austerity. *

It was getting worse, stimulus, it stopped. *"Austerity", nothing changed. *It isn't all that hard. *We have traded growth and recovery here for deficit reduction. *In Europe, they have traded stability for debt reduction.*

That is twice in history that austerity has failed.

It is a hard sell to rewrite the history books when parents and grandparents look at it and say, "That isn't how I remember it went down." *

At some point, you simply can't rewrite the Spanish Inquisition. *And at this point, you can't rewrite the Great Depression when people look around and the story is playing out exactly like the history book said it did. Grandma says, "Yeppers, that's what my dad told me." The history book says, "Yep, that's what grandma says." And mom and dad are reading the news saying, "Yep, that's what is going on now."

Half the population has a below average IQ, but they don't all tend to end up all the same family. *It is a little more mixed up than that with only a third being made up by nothing but complete morons.* The idea being that the thoughtfullness morons is elevated by their closest associated smarter aquaintence.

Hey, I can always hope.

Spiritual but not religious - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Still comes back to that effort by the far right to throw billions of dollars at the population in order to get them to believe what they want them to believe.

The article in Playboy a couple years ago about an interview with consultants writing talking points for the tea party is illustrative: "Strategists deliberately try to stir up rage among average Americans, calculating that it's much easier to push a political movement if it's deeply frightened than if it's entirely hopeful. "We're playing to the reptilian brain rather than the logic centers, so we look for key words and images to leverage the intense rage and anxiety of white working-class conservatives," the consultant writes. "In other words, I talk to the same part of your brain that causes road rage."
NSFW: Anonymous Playboy Author Lifts The Veil On The Tea Party | Political Correction
The consultants were KStreet consultants. Well paid by right wing organizations. Kind of explains why we see the type of talk we see from the far right. They care nothing about truth. They only care about agenda.

So, while hundreds of millions were spent in the last election, the payback for those bucks was awful. It will be interesting to see what happens next.

 

[Rshermr]

So, while this thread is about austerity in EUROPE, we could look around a bit to see how it worked elsewhere. Japan, for instance. Which attempted austerity measures and watched things get worse and worse over time.

"Japan can finally breathe a sigh of relief. After more than a decade of economic stagnation, the country's economy is growing again, fueled by the massive stimulus measures taken by new Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
German Press Says Extended EU Recession Shows Austerity Ineffective - SPIEGEL ONLINE

So, in trying to find a case where austerity seems to be actually working, everyone has failed. All the non partial information out there says austerity is not working in europe.
And it did not work in Japan. Japan has now changed to Keynesian principles of economic stimulus, and is getting good results.

Does someone out there have different data???

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Confusing macro economics with home economics and ignoring investent.

Many people take out an auto loan, student loan, or buy a house, spending beyond their take home pay and savings, on an investent which, done right, decreases their future monthly outlays, or increasing their future income, by incurring debt and paying interest.

It is a simple concept, really.

I'm not confusing anything, a-hole. There has to be a considerable return on investment and proper fiscal management to justify any budget. If you think that these politicians are anything but glorified crooks, then you're sorely mistaken and total butt fucking moron.

Wow. Profound.
You did INDEED prove that you are confusing macro economics with home economics.

It is a very, very common malady. It does not suggest you are stupid. It does suggest you are ignorant.

I confuse nothing. You want to believe that fiscal principles stop existing when the government blank checks spends. It's f'ing nonsense. It does suggest you are stupid and ignorant.

 

[Rshermr]

I'm not confusing anything, a-hole. There has to be a considerable return on investment and proper fiscal management to justify any budget. If you think that these politicians are anything but glorified crooks, then you're sorely mistaken and total butt fucking moron.

Wow. Profound.
You did INDEED prove that you are confusing macro economics with home economics.

It is a very, very common malady. It does not suggest you are stupid. It does suggest you are ignorant.

I confuse nothing. You want to believe that fiscal principles stop existing when the government blank checks spends. It's f'ing nonsense. It does suggest you are stupid and ignorant.

And, if you would only take an econ class, it would be so helpful. So, who should I send a check to to pay back the national debt when it comes due, as you seem to think it will?
Look, sorry you are so angry with me. You should be angry with whoever has told you that the national economy operates like a personal checking account. Honest, it was they that lied to you, not me.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Wow. Profound.
You did INDEED prove that you are confusing macro economics with home economics.

It is a very, very common malady. It does not suggest you are stupid. It does suggest you are ignorant.

I confuse nothing. You want to believe that fiscal principles stop existing when the government blank checks spends. It's f'ing nonsense. It does suggest you are stupid and ignorant.

And, if you would only take an econ class, it would be so helpful. So, who should I send a check to to pay back the national debt when it comes due, as you seem to think it will?
Look, sorry you are so angry with me. You should be angry with whoever has told you that the national economy operates like a personal checking account. Honest, it was they that lied to you, not me.

I've taken plenty of economic classes, asshole. And a predominant point is that government should only spend what it needs to spend and upon what the private sector is unwilling to spend upon. Otherwise, it's called 'waste.' You should take an economics class instead of pretending that you have taken them.

 

[Old Rocks]

The main reason for economic problems in Europe is the world wide recession, not EU economic policies.

The world wide recession is caused by world wide liberal economic policies of which Europe is among the foremost exemplars. Did you think the Girl Scouts caused the recession?

No, the repeal of Glass-Steagal did. Pushed by the GOP, and then the banks played a ponzi scheme with derivitives world-wide. The GOP owns the world wide recession. Simple as that. And they would go once again down exactly the same path were we to let them.

 

[Old Rocks]

I confuse nothing. You want to believe that fiscal principles stop existing when the government blank checks spends. It's f'ing nonsense. It does suggest you are stupid and ignorant.

And, if you would only take an econ class, it would be so helpful. So, who should I send a check to to pay back the national debt when it comes due, as you seem to think it will?
Look, sorry you are so angry with me. You should be angry with whoever has told you that the national economy operates like a personal checking account. Honest, it was they that lied to you, not me.

I've taken plenty of economic classes, asshole. And a predominant point is that government should only spend what it needs to spend and upon what the private sector is unwilling to spend upon. Otherwise, it's called 'waste.' You should take an economics class instead of pretending that you have taken them.

Taken lots of political classes also, I take it. That is what makes you so great at predicting the outcomes of elections

 

[jasonnfree]

I'm not confusing anything, a-hole. There has to be a considerable return on investment and proper fiscal management to justify any budget. If you think that these politicians are anything but glorified crooks, then you're sorely mistaken and total butt fucking moron.

Wow. Profound.
You did INDEED prove that you are confusing macro economics with home economics.

It is a very, very common malady. It does not suggest you are stupid. It does suggest you are ignorant.

I confuse nothing. You want to believe that fiscal principles stop existing when the government blank checks spends. It's f'ing nonsense. It does suggest you are stupid and ignorant.

Stimulus spending. It worked in ww2. The greatest stimulus in history probably. Full employment. I always ask the name of a major country that pulled itself out of a slump using austerity. No answers yet.

 

[Misty]

"Latvia, feted by fans of austerity as the country-that-can and an example for countries like Greece that can’t, has provided a rare boost to champions of the proposition that pain pays.

Hardship has long been common here — and still is. But in just four years, the country has gone from the European Union’s worst economic disaster zone to a model of what the International Monetary Fund hails as the healing properties of deep budget cuts. Latvia’s economy, after shriveling by more than 20 percent from its peak, grew by about 5 percent last year, making it the best performer in the 27-nation European Union. Its budget deficit is down sharply and exports are soaring.

But in Latvia, where the government laid off a third of its civil servants, slashed wages for the rest and sharply reduced support for hospitals, people mostly accepted the bitter medicine. Prime Minister Valdis Dombrovskis, who presided over the austerity, was re-elected, not thrown out of office, as many of his counterparts elsewhere have been."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/02/w...y-and-its-pain-eases.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Wow. Profound.
You did INDEED prove that you are confusing macro economics with home economics.

It is a very, very common malady. It does not suggest you are stupid. It does suggest you are ignorant.

I confuse nothing. You want to believe that fiscal principles stop existing when the government blank checks spends. It's f'ing nonsense. It does suggest you are stupid and ignorant.

Stimulus spending. It worked in ww2. The greatest stimulus in history probably. Full employment. I always ask the name of a major country that pulled itself out of a slump using austerity. No answers yet.

 

[Rshermr]

I confuse nothing. You want to believe that fiscal principles stop existing when the government blank checks spends. It's f'ing nonsense. It does suggest you are stupid and ignorant.

And, if you would only take an econ class, it would be so helpful. So, who should I send a check to to pay back the national debt when it comes due, as you seem to think it will?
Look, sorry you are so angry with me. You should be angry with whoever has told you that the national economy operates like a personal checking account. Honest, it was they that lied to you, not me.

I've taken plenty of economic classes, asshole. And a predominant point is that government should only spend what it needs to spend and upon what the private sector is unwilling to spend upon. Otherwise, it's called 'waste.' You should take an economics class instead of pretending that you have taken them.

Right. I think you are economically illiterate. But, perhaps you can suggest when cutting gov spending has ever helped out economy when we have had high unemployment.

 

[jasonnfree]

"Latvia, feted by fans of austerity as the country-that-can and an example for countries like Greece that can’t, has provided a rare boost to champions of the proposition that pain pays.

Hardship has long been common here — and still is. But in just four years, the country has gone from the European Union’s worst economic disaster zone to a model of what the International Monetary Fund hails as the healing properties of deep budget cuts. Latvia’s economy, after shriveling by more than 20 percent from its peak, grew by about 5 percent last year, making it the best performer in the 27-nation European Union. Its budget deficit is down sharply and exports are soaring.

But in Latvia, where the government laid off a third of its civil servants, slashed wages for the rest and sharply reduced support for hospitals, people mostly accepted the bitter medicine. Prime Minister Valdis Dombrovskis, who presided over the austerity, was re-elected, not thrown out of office, as many of his counterparts elsewhere have been."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/02/w...y-and-its-pain-eases.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I confuse nothing. You want to believe that fiscal principles stop existing when the government blank checks spends. It's f'ing nonsense. It does suggest you are stupid and ignorant.

Stimulus spending. It worked in ww2. The greatest stimulus in history probably. Full employment. I always ask the name of a major country that pulled itself out of a slump using austerity. No answers yet.

Thanks, but I asked what major country has pulled itself out of the slump using auserity.

 

[Rshermr]

"Latvia, feted by fans of austerity as the country-that-can and an example for countries like Greece that can’t, has provided a rare boost to champions of the proposition that pain pays.

Hardship has long been common here — and still is. But in just four years, the country has gone from the European Union’s worst economic disaster zone to a model of what the International Monetary Fund hails as the healing properties of deep budget cuts. Latvia’s economy, after shriveling by more than 20 percent from its peak, grew by about 5 percent last year, making it the best performer in the 27-nation European Union. Its budget deficit is down sharply and exports are soaring.

But in Latvia, where the government laid off a third of its civil servants, slashed wages for the rest and sharply reduced support for hospitals, people mostly accepted the bitter medicine. Prime Minister Valdis Dombrovskis, who presided over the austerity, was re-elected, not thrown out of office, as many of his counterparts elsewhere have been."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/02/w...y-and-its-pain-eases.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

I confuse nothing. You want to believe that fiscal principles stop existing when the government blank checks spends. It's f'ing nonsense. It does suggest you are stupid and ignorant.

Stimulus spending. It worked in ww2. The greatest stimulus in history probably. Full employment. I always ask the name of a major country that pulled itself out of a slump using austerity. No answers yet.

Well, latvia is interesting. There is no common oppinion on latvia at this point from what I see out there. Lots of different opinions. Even in the link you used, to the ny times, the conclusion was not that things were great in Latvia as a result of austerity:

"Alf Vanags, director of the Baltic International Center for Economic Policy Studies here, is skeptical. “The idea of a Latvian ‘success story’ is ridiculous,” he said. “Latvia is not a model for anybody.”

A better and more equitable way out of Latvia’s troubles, he believes, would have been a devaluation of the currency, an option closed to Greece and 16 other countries that use the euro. Latvia kept its currency pegged to the euro, putting itself in much the same straitjacket as euro zone nations.

But Latvia’s high pain threshold and unusually open economy set it apart, enabling a relentless squeezing of wages, said Morten Hansen, head of the economics department at the Stockholm School of Economics in Riga.

“You can only do this in a country that is willing to take serious pain for some time and has a dramatic flexibility in the labor market,” he said. “The lesson of what Latvia has done is that there is no lesson.”"
From your source above.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

And, if you would only take an econ class, it would be so helpful. So, who should I send a check to to pay back the national debt when it comes due, as you seem to think it will?
Look, sorry you are so angry with me. You should be angry with whoever has told you that the national economy operates like a personal checking account. Honest, it was they that lied to you, not me.

I've taken plenty of economic classes, asshole. And a predominant point is that government should only spend what it needs to spend and upon what the private sector is unwilling to spend upon. Otherwise, it's called 'waste.' You should take an economics class instead of pretending that you have taken them.

Right. I think you are economically illiterate. But, perhaps you can suggest when cutting gov spending has ever helped out economy when we have had high unemployment.

You ever hear of the New Deal? Government tried to spend their way out of The Great Depression and immensely prolonged the suffering. You're clearly unaware or unwilling to accept that government has largely only created many artificial costs to doing business. They are the epitome of waste. My guess is your govt. desk jockey who is just more than happy to suck at the teet. That's fine for you. But, the rest of us have to live in the real world.

 

[Rshermr]

I've taken plenty of economic classes, asshole. And a predominant point is that government should only spend what it needs to spend and upon what the private sector is unwilling to spend upon. Otherwise, it's called 'waste.' You should take an economics class instead of pretending that you have taken them.

Right. I think you are economically illiterate. But, perhaps you can suggest when cutting gov spending has ever helped out economy when we have had high unemployment.

You ever hear of the New Deal? Government tried to spend their way out of The Great Depression and immensely prolonged the suffering. You're clearly unaware or unwilling to accept that government has largely only created many artificial costs to doing business. They are the epitome of waste. My guess is your govt. desk jockey who is just more than happy to suck at the teet. That's fine for you. But, the rest of us have to live in the real world.

Uh, right. The great republican depression of 1929. You seem to be only mildly familiar with it. Here is the actual fact, me boy. First, under repub presidents, from '28 to March 33, the unemployment rate went from under 3% to over 24%. And it was still rising. And fast when fdr was inaugurated that march. Those great repub presidents did just as you would have wanted them to do: Nothing. Worked really well, didn't it. An increase in the ue rate of over 21%. Perfect policy. So, after inauguration in march of 1933, fdr started pushing programs to stop the hemorrhaging. And, me boy, by the end of his first year, his stimulus programs and implementation of the prior president's stimulus program, the ue rate turned around. And it went down, from 25% to 14% in 4 years. In 37, fdr incorrectly decided to stop stimulus spending and see how things would do going forward. And, me boy, embracing the republican congress' wishes, he did indeed stop stimulus spending. And, of course, the result was that the ue rate went up, by 5 points in '38. Seeing this, fdr started spending again, in earnest. And the result was predictable. The ue rate started back down. To 14 % in 1940, and by the time the US entered the war, to 9%. The war, of course, was the great stimulus, and drove ue and production, ending any remaining talk of the depression.

So, I guess if you like high ue rates, doing nothing in the face of high ue rates is a great idea. Is that what you like, me boy? High ue rates???

You know, you should give up guessing what folks did with their life. I was in bus from college until i retired a couple years ago. Never worked for the gov. So, at guessing you loose, me poor ignorant con. Thing is, I like the truth. Not fantasy, like you seem to want to believe in.

You say you took many econ classes?? Where did you go to school??? Perhaps internet college at the school of bat shit crazy con web sites?? Only they teach the version of the great depression you like to believe in. Though there is Liberty University........