Keynsian spending

Mott the Hoople said:
Ill split the middle with you on Keyensian vs. monetarist approach. Obviously the Keynesian approach was appropriate once we were in a liquidity trap. Now that we're not managing the money supply to prevent us from entering another is fine by me.

Having said that the recovery has not reached evenly across the board and TARP, though preventing a total crash and burn, assured that most of the economic recovery would go to the top economic tier.

With that being the case the public investment in infrastructure is appropriate because it would provide a grass roots economic stimulus but, point in fact, it is sorely needed on its own merits. Pretty hard to do business with crappy roads and collapsing bridges and an antiquated power grid. It simply good business.
Click to expand...
Public investment in infrastructure is a Libertarian fantasy. There are a handful of publicly owned highways. They are all failing.
 
Althea said:
Are you serious? Do you think the private sector is going to repair our crumbling infrastructure? And...the point you are no doubt failing to make....Wall St does NOT reflect the true economy. Corps. have record profits, much of it stashed overseas. Manufacturing is gone, which doesn't bode well for the real economy.

As such, there is nobody left to create jobs but the taxpayer.

Win/Win. Fix the disastrous infrastructure, and put people to work
Click to expand...

Whoa. First off I said nothing about Wall St nor wall st creating jobs. That is very random.

Nobody but the gov't can create jobs? If that were the case then Trump really is correct that our country is fvcked. Fortunately that isn't the case.

It is the private sector that when unleashed is the greatest growth engine this country has. Instead it looks as if you would rather strangle it and then claim it not sufficient enough and this call upon the gov't. If gov't were so great at creating economic growth many of the socialist countries around the world would be the exononic superpowers, not the U.S.
 
Althea said:
Yea....like puberty leads to V.D.

The bubble was caused by a number of factors. Wall St. was the biggest player.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I take it you probably didn't read King Keynesian Paul Krugman write the Fed could create a housing bubble in the early '00's as a way to soften the dot com bust and get consumers soending again.
 
cawacko said:
If it's the state's job why a massive federal gov't plan?
Click to expand...
Wacko....you drive me nuts with this free market religiosity. I love the free market. It's phenomenal at creating economic opportunity and growth but it cannot solve all problems nor is the answer to everything. You fail to understand the incredible importance of public and private sector partnerships.

Let's look at the technology field. Where would it be without government funding, that is public funding of the basic research that has made it possible? We'd still be talking on mechanical phones, that's where we would be.

Look at Quantum physics for example. Back in the first quarter of the 20th century industry laughed at the physicist who did basic research on quantum mechanics. They saw no hope for any practical application for the field. Even luminaries in the field of physics, like Einstein, criticized the field with critical comments like "God doesn't play dice with the universe.". It was exclusively a field of basic science research limited to the egg heads in the hallowed ivory towers of academia.

Now fast forward to today. Virtually all of modern computer and information technology we take for granted today wouldn't even be possible if not for the basic research these visionary scientist did in quantum physics. None of it would exist as it is all based on applied quantum physics and it now accounts for roughly 30% of US GDP. None of the great technology firms who have created all these fantastic products and services we use would exist because the foundational basic science that made the materials and electronics possible would simply not exist.

And who paid for that basic research? It wasn't Bell Labs or Microsoft or any of the other great tech firms. The basic research was paid for by the public through our government.

I can make a similar analogy with the great advances in medicine. None of the great medical technologies and modern drugs we have today would not exist without the basic research on fields like genetics, molecular biology, bio-physics, pharmacueticals, etc., if it were not for the scientist who did the basic scientific research funded by public/government support that are the foundation of applied medical science.

The interconnectedness of technology transfer between the public and private sectors is a symbiotic relationship in which the flow of technology transfer is depended on both public support and investment and free market entrepreneurship.

Now, and I don't mean to be patronizing, since you don't work in a science or technology field, I can understand why you don't see this but I'm telling you that we need both to continue to advance in both public and private sector life. That includes infrastructure investment too as much of the advancement of our nation in science, technology, education and business are critically dependent on public investment to build and maintain our public infrastructure. We'd get no where fast without it.

We need these kinds of public investment in basic science, education and infrastructure because are important foundations upon which the free market depends upon to grow and develop new products, services and markets.

In this respect free-market religiosity is self defeating as the free market can't do it all by itself. It needs public investment in these areas. Particularly in fields like basic science where there is no immediate or short term pay off for the investment, as my example of the field of quantum physics demonstrates.

This is why we need government involvement. Not to replace or compete with the free market but in a mutually beneficial partnership that makes technology transfer from the basic, to the applied possible.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Wacko....you drive me nuts with this free market religiosity. I love the free market. It's phenomenal at creating economic opportunity and growth but it cannot solve all problems nor is the answer to everything. You fail to understand the incredible importance of public and private sector partnerships.

Let's look at the technology field. Where would it be without government funding, that is public funding of the basic research that has made it possible? We'd still be talking on mechanical phones, that's where we would be.

Look at Quantum physics for example. Back in the first quarter of the 20th century industry laughed at the physicist who did basic research on quantum mechanics. They saw no hope for any practical application for the field. Even luminaries in the field of physics, like Einstein, criticized the field with critical comments like "God doesn't play dice with the universe.". It was exclusively a field of basic science research limited to the egg heads in the hallowed ivory towers of academia.

Now fast forward to today. Virtually all of modern computer and information technology we take for granted today wouldn't even be possible if not for the basic research these visionary scientist did in quantum physics. None of it would exist as it is all based on applied quantum physics and it now accounts for roughly 30% of US GDP. None of the great technology firms who have created all these fantastic products and services we use would exist because the foundational basic science that made the materials and electronics possible would simply not exist.

And who paid for that basic research? It wasn't Bell Labs or Microsoft or any of the other great tech firms. The basic research was paid for by the public through our government.

I can make a similar analogy with the great advances in medicine. None of the great medical technologies and modern drugs we have today would not exist without the basic research on fields like genetics, molecular biology, bio-physics, pharmacueticals, etc., if it were not for the scientist who did the basic scientific research funded by public/government support that are the foundation of applied medical science.

The interconnectedness of technology transfer between the public and private sectors is a symbiotic relationship in which the flow of technology transfer is depended on both public support and investment and free market entrepreneurship.

Now, and I don't mean to be patronizing, since you don't work in a science or technology field, I can understand why you don't see this but I'm telling you that we need both to continue to advance in both public and private sector life. That includes infrastructure investment too as much of the advancement of our nation in science, technology, education and business are critically dependent on public investment to build and maintain our public infrastructure. We'd get no where fast without it.

We need these kinds of public investment in basic science, education and infrastructure because are important foundations upon which the free market depends upon to grow and develop new products, services and markets.

In this respect free-market religiosity is self defeating as the free market can't do it all by itself. It needs public investment in these areas. Particularly in fields like basic science where there is no immediate or short term pay off for the investment, as my example of the field of quantum physics demonstrates.

This is why we need government involvement. Not to replace or compete with the free market but in a mutually beneficial partnership that makes technology transfer from the basic, to the applied possible.
Click to expand...

Federal government vs state government. Please explain to me why you think the federal gov't is in best position to maintain and determine what's best for the roads, streets etc in your neighborhood, city and state.
 
cawacko said:
Whoa. First off I said nothing about Wall St nor wall st creating jobs. That is very random.

Nobody but the gov't can create jobs? If that were the case then Trump really is correct that our country is fvcked. Fortunately that isn't the case.

It is the private sector that when unleashed is the greatest growth engine this country has. Instead it looks as if you would rather strangle it and then claim it not sufficient enough and this call upon the gov't. If gov't were so great at creating economic growth many of the socialist countries around the world would be the exononic superpowers, not the U.S.
Click to expand...
You're speaking in gross generalizations. You are facetiously referencing a 'good' economy. The only indicator that the economy is flourishing, is Wall St. numbers. It's always been that way, and for the last 4 decades, that's been a sham.

Corporations are doing great. Workers are not. Corporations are creating a lot of jobs.....overseas. As such, the only way to create jobs in this country, is to have the govt. invest.

When you stop drinking on Monday mornings, you'll be able to comprehend basic English
cawacko said:
I think you mixed a few words up in your above statement
Click to expand...
Go ahead....specify. You aren't aware that some states sold highways to investors?

cawacko said:
Interesting. I take it you probably didn't read King Keynesian Paul Krugman write the Fed could create a housing bubble in the early '00's as a way to soften the dot com bust and get consumers soending again.
Click to expand...
That lead to an increase in new home starts. 'Bubble' refers to an economic creation via outside stimuli that simply cannot be sustained. In essence, a false economy.

An increase in housing starts is a good way to stimulate the sluggish economy. Increased lending for the sole purpose of creating trading vehicles for Wall St investors, creates a bubble that cannot be sustained.

I really don't know how many times, in how many ways this needs to be explained to you. When profit motive bilks the economy dry, the govt. steps in to create jobs.
 
Capitalism always and inevitably produces slumps, and the only way to get out of them is deficit spending, normally paid for the people the rich were robbing to cause the slump. Anyone who believes capitalism has now recovered is a nut-case.
 
Althea said:
You're speaking in gross generalizations. You are facetiously referencing a 'good' economy. The only indicator that the economy is flourishing, is Wall St. numbers. It's always been that way, and for the last 4 decades, that's been a sham.

Corporations are doing great. Workers are not. Corporations are creating a lot of jobs.....overseas. As such, the only way to create jobs in this country, is to have the govt. invest.

When you stop drinking on Monday mornings, you'll be able to comprehend basic English
Go ahead....specify. You aren't aware that some states sold highways to investors?


That lead to an increase in new home starts. 'Bubble' refers to an economic creation via outside stimuli that simply cannot be sustained. In essence, a false economy.

An increase in housing starts is a good way to stimulate the sluggish economy. Increased lending for the sole purpose of creating trading vehicles for Wall St investors, creates a bubble that cannot be sustained.

I really don't know how many times, in how many ways this needs to be explained to you. When profit motive bilks the economy dry, the govt. steps in to create jobs.
Click to expand...

Please point to a time when the federal government has stepped in and spent the country into prosperity. You can point to WWII in a certain sense but I do not think anyone is looking for a repeat of that.

How has the profit motive bilked the econony dry over the past eight years?
 
Althea said:
You're speaking in gross generalizations. You are facetiously referencing a 'good' economy. The only indicator that the economy is flourishing, is Wall St. numbers. It's always been that way, and for the last 4 decades, that's been a sham.

Corporations are doing great. Workers are not. Corporations are creating a lot of jobs.....overseas. As such, the only way to create jobs in this country, is to have the govt. invest.

When you stop drinking on Monday mornings, you'll be able to comprehend basic English
Go ahead....specify. You aren't aware that some states sold highways to investors?


That lead to an increase in new home starts. 'Bubble' refers to an economic creation via outside stimuli that simply cannot be sustained. In essence, a false economy.

An increase in housing starts is a good way to stimulate the sluggish economy. Increased lending for the sole purpose of creating trading vehicles for Wall St investors, creates a bubble that cannot be sustained.

I really don't know how many times, in how many ways this needs to be explained to you. When profit motive bilks the economy dry, the govt. steps in to create jobs.
Click to expand...

It's interesting to you think the gov't has played no role in creating the environment where companies would ship jobs overseas.
 
cawacko said:
If it's the state's job why a massive federal gov't plan?
Click to expand...
Cause they have the greater resources....and the States do pay the lion share for State Highways and local roads. It would be incredibly short sighted not to have the federal government invest in our transportation infrastructure. How much has business and industry invested in our roads outside of their fair share of taxes?
 
cawacko said:
Federal government vs state government. Please explain to me why you think the federal gov't is in best position to maintain and determine what's best for the roads, streets etc in your neighborhood, city and state.
Click to expand...
Who said they were but it's awfully short sighed of you to think that the Federal government should not invest in our public roads and highways as they benefit us all.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Who said they were but it's awfully short sighed of you to think that the Federal government should not invest in our public roads and highways as they benefit us all.
Click to expand...

They invest in our federal highway system which what they are tasked to do.

Going into even more debt for what amounts to essentially political boondoggles is not my idea of wise and smart investments.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Who said they were but it's awfully short sighed of you to think that the Federal government should not invest in our public roads and highways as they benefit us all.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly think that spending on roads and bridges is why we are $20 trillion in debt?

When Bush racked up the debt it was a crisis. Obama doubles it and not a peep from you guys
 
cawacko said:
Federal government vs state government. Please explain to me why you think the federal gov't is in best position to maintain and determine what's best for the roads, streets etc in your neighborhood, city and state.
Click to expand...
Funding...not minutia
 
cawacko said:
Please point to a time when the federal government has stepped in and spent the country into prosperity. You can point to WWII in a certain sense but I do not think anyone is looking for a repeat of that.
Click to expand...
Well...Hoople did a fine job of laying out the symbiotic relationship between the public/private sector. I would add to that the fact that every form of energy....many extremely profitable....have been funded by the taxpayer. I don't know of any large scale power plants that were funded privately.

This isn't about a permanent program to create 'prosperity'. You asked about infrastructure spending.

How has the profit motive bilked the econony dry over the past eight years?
Click to expand...

Over the past 30 years? Simple. Offshoring of jobs in the name of profits, to the detriment of the taxpayer.

Low paying Walmart jobs, with employees who are also on public assistance.

Same with fast food jobs, or any other retail job.

With manufacturing gone, only service industry jobs are safe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top