NationStates Jolt Archive

The Fierce Urgency of Pork
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, February 6, 2009; A17
"A failure to act, and act now, will turn crisis into a
catastrophe."-- President Obama, Feb. 4.
Catastrophe, mind you. So much for the president who in his inaugural address two weeks earlier declared "we have chosen hope over fear." Until, that is, you need fear to pass a bill.

And so much for the promise to banish the money changers and influence peddlers from the temple. An ostentatious executive order banning lobbyists was immediately followed by the nomination of at least a dozen current or former lobbyists to high position. Followed by a Treasury secretary who allegedly couldn't understand the payroll tax provisions in his 1040. Followed by Tom Daschle, who had to fall on his sword according to the new Washington rule that no Cabinet can have more than one tax delinquent.

The Daschle affair was more serious because his offense involved more than taxes. As Michael Kinsley once observed, in Washington the real scandal isn't what's illegal, but what's legal. Not paying taxes is one thing. But what made this case intolerable was the perfectly legal dealings that amassed Daschle $5.2 million in just two years.

He'd been getting $1 million per year from a law firm. But he's not a lawyer, nor a registered lobbyist. You don't get paid this kind of money to instruct partners on the Senate markup process. You get it for picking up the phone and peddling influence. At least Tim Geithner, the tax-challenged Treasury secretary, had been working for years as a humble international civil servant earning non-stratospheric wages. Daschle, who had made another cool million a year (plus chauffeur and Caddy) for unspecified services to a pal's private equity firm, represented everything Obama said he'd come to Washington to upend.

And yet more damaging to Obama's image than all the hypocrisies in the appointment process is his signature bill: the stimulus package. He inexplicably delegated the writing to Nancy Pelosi and the barons of the House. The product, which inevitably carries Obama's name, was not just bad, not just flawed, but a legislative abomination. It's not just pages and pages of special-interest tax breaks, giveaways and protections, one of which would set off a ruinous Smoot-Hawley trade war. It's not just the waste, such as the $88.6 million for new construction for Milwaukee Public Schools, which, reports the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, have shrinking enrollment, 15 vacant schools and, quite logically, no plans for new construction.

It's the essential fraud of rushing through a bill in which the normal rules (committee hearings, finding revenue to pay for the programs) are suspended on the grounds that a national emergency requires an immediate jobcreating stimulus -- and then throwing into it hundreds of billions that have nothing to do with stimulus, that Congress's own budget office says won't be spent until 2011 and beyond, and that are little more than the back-scratching, special-interest, lobby-driven parochialism that Obama came to Washington to abolish. He said. Not just to abolish but to create something new -- a new politics where the moneyed pork-barreling and corrupt logrolling of the past would give way to a bottom-up, grass-roots participatory democracy. That is what made Obama so dazzling and new. Turns out the "fierce urgency of now" includes $150 million for livestock (and honeybee and farm-raised fish) insurance.

The Age of Obama begins with perhaps the greatest frenzy of old-politics influence peddling ever seen in Washington. By the time the stimulus bill reached the Senate, reports the Wall Street Journal, pharmaceutical and high-tech companies were lobbying furiously for a new plan to repatriate overseas profits that would yield major tax savings. California wine growers and Florida citrus producers were fighting to change a single phrase in one provision. Substituting "planted" for "ready to market" would mean a windfall garnered from a new "bonus depreciation" incentive.

After Obama's miraculous 2008 presidential campaign, it was clear that at some point the magical mystery tour would have to end. The nation would rub its eyes and begin to emerge from its reverie. The hallucinatory Obama would give way to the mere mortal. The great ethical transformations promised would be seen as a fairy tale that all presidents tell -- and that this president told better than anyone.

I thought the awakening would take six months. It took two and a half weeks.
I don't think Obama is a bad guy, I think he's just a bit over his head. I think he simply didn't understand how difficult it would be to carry out much of his promises. Anyway, I don't think he's to blame as much as the Democrats loading bullshit into that package. Here's what I think the Republicans should do:

Posted at 8:41 AM ET, 02/ 5/2009
The Republicans' Opportunity“This plan is more than a prescription for short-term spending -- it's a strategy for America's long-term growth andopportunity in areas such as renewable energy, health care and education.”

With this key sentence from his op-ed in the Washington Post today, President Obama has given Republicans a golden opportunity: Insist on splitting the legislation being debated on the Senate floor into a true short-term stimulus, which can pass quickly, and long-term policy proposals, which require serious debate.

Republicans should stop trying to improve the unimproveable with small-bore amendments to the current legislative package. Instead, they can point out that Obama is supporting under the guise of emergency legislation a bloated catchall of stimulus, pork and (often bad) policy. They can make clear that Republicans will support a real short-term stimulus (pro-growth tax cuts, housing measures and a few targeted spending provisions unemployment and COBRA extensions) that meets Larry Summers’s criteria of being targeted, timely and temporary. They should introduce such a measure as a substitute -- “The Emergency Economic Growth Bill of 2009” -- and trumpet their vigorous support of it. And they should insist that all the “energy, health care and education” proposals be debated in an orderly and serious way in the regular legislative process -- not jammed through as part of an emergency “stimulus.”

This strategy depends on GOP willingness to slow the process down and to challenge Obama’s arbitrary Presidents’ Day deadline. The Republican position should be: We’ll pass on this emergency timetable a real stripped-down emergency stimulus. But if Obama insists on legislation incorporating an alleged “strategy for America’s long-term growth,” then the country deserves hearings and debate that obviously will take some time. And Republicans should make clear they cannot agree to limiting debate to a couple of days on such momentous long-term legislation.

In other words: If Obama wants a stimulus, Republicans will give it to him tomorrow. It’s the president’s and the
Democrats’ insistence on incorporating a huge and problematic policy agenda in this one bill that’s delaying action. Why
then, Republicans can ask, is President Obama delaying a necessary, short-term, emergency growth package?
I couldn't agree more with the above.

I have to say that this does seem like politics as usual by the Democrats. Obama may really beleive in his own message of reforming Washington, but his friends in his party seem not to. President Obama just seems to be in over his head.

And also..if anyone here likes rap, this song is excellent and I cannot stop listening to it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMoUuf9fwkM&feature=PlayList&p=BFE10238B86F46E5&index=29

And also..if anyone here likes rap, this song is excellent and I cannot stop listening to it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMoUuf9fwkM&feature=PlayList&p=BFE10238B86F46E5&index=29

What does that have to do with the topic?

I am curious. So what is the so called bullshit?

It's funny to hear the Republicans being concerned for the common man. Probably motivated since they were pasted in the last election.....

I think Obama has been in office less than a month, and that it is ridiculous to say he has failed to carry out promises on policies that have not even been implemented yet and which anyway will take more than a month to produce results after they are implemented.

I think both parties in Congress are acting like 4-year-olds fighting over their favorite toys, completely ignoring the reality of the issues facing them. This adds to the difficulty of Obama's job in implementing new policy.

But that does not change the fact that it is way too early to be critiquing his performance, either positively or negatively.

Agreed. Obama said very clearly in his inauguration speech that change would not come quickly.

What does that have to do with the topic?
Nothing at all..I was just enjoying the song and thought of sharing it with others. :)

I am curious. So what is the so called bullshit?
Well, if you would have read the entire OP you would have seen that according to the articles this so called "bullshit" is anything that is not deemed short term stimulus but anything else the Democrats are just trying to throw in there to get carried out....aka, politics as usual.

It's funny to hear the Republicans being concerned for the common man. Probably motivated since they were pasted in the last election.....It's funny that this has 99% to do with Obama and the Democratic party (except where I am listing what Republicans should think) and you ignore that totally and start flaming Republicans. Talk about ignoring the issues....

From a political and strategic point of view, the Republicans should definitely support Obama's stimulus package. The stimulus package will do massive damage to the economy and delay recovery, which will allow Republicans to capitalize during elections by blaming Obama and the Democrats.

Well, if you would have read the entire OP you would have seen that according to the articles this so called "bullshit" is anything that is not deemed short term stimulus but anything else the Democrats are just trying to throw in there to get carried out....aka, politics as usual.


Ok what is the so called pork?

It's funny that this has 99% to do with Obama and the Democratic party (except where I am listing what Republicans should think) and you ignore that totally and start flaming Republicans. Talk about ignoring the issues....

You are the one who didn't answer the question....

From a political and strategic point of view, the Republicans should definitely support Obama's stimulus package. The stimulus package will do massive damage to the economy and delay recovery, which will allow Republicans to capitalize during elections by blaming Obama and the Democrats.

Yes yes. Some Libertarian preacher on the internet knows more then economists.

Ok what is the so called pork?


According to congressional Republicans, anything that isnt a tax cut.

Because, you know, those worked so well the past eight years.

I think Obama has been in office less than a month, and that it is ridiculous to say he has failed to carry out promises on policies that have not even been implemented yet and which anyway will take more than a month to produce results after they are implemented. Right, but some things he's very cleary had to go back on....like the thing about lobbyists. The point I was just making was that he's finding it hard to keep some of his promises when having to deal with reality....which is normal. I am still supportive of the President, but a rational supporter who does not think of him as the Messiah.

I think both parties in Congress are acting like 4-year-olds fighting over their favorite toys, completely ignoring the reality of the issues facing them. This adds to the difficulty of Obama's job in implementing new policy. This is mostly the fault of his party, not him. I truley beleive he beleives what he preaches, but his party his acting very 'politics as usual' and loading pork into this package, which has his name on it, thus tarnishing him by association.

But that does not change the fact that it is way too early to be critiquing his performance, either positively or negatively.
Obama, simply because of who he is and the time period that he has come into power, will be critiqued from day 1 until long after his death. He knew that when he took the job.

Agreed. Obama said very clearly in his inauguration speech that change would not come quickly.
Yes but his party, the people he needs to get under control, are making sure that 'change' never comes.

From a political and strategic point of view, the Republicans should definitely support Obama's stimulus package. The stimulus package will do massive damage to the economy and delay recovery, which will allow Republicans to capitalize during elections by blaming Obama and the Democrats.
I'd like to think, that atleast some Republicans are good people who not only care about politics but also about the health of their economy and country.

From a political and strategic point of view, the Republicans should definitely support Obama's stimulus package. The stimulus package will do massive damage to the economy and delay recovery, which will allow Republicans to capitalize during elections by blaming Obama and the Democrats.

Question: what position are you in to make such a claim?

Right, but some things he's very cleary had to go back on....like the thing about lobbyists.

I know youre not throwing this around like some of your cohorts have been as proof that this means Obama is a failure and a fraud, but I feel like addressing it anyway...

How hard do you think it is to find experianced experts in Washington that arent lobbiests in some form or another?

Ok what is the so called pork?



You are the one who didn't answer the question....

I will not be playing your game. I posted two articles filled with information and you hardly addressed any of it, instead taking shots at the Republican Party. Either contribute to my thread, or you shall be ignored.

I will not be playing your game. I posted two articles filled with information and you hardly addressed any of it, instead taking shots at the Republican Party. Either contribute to my thread, or you shall be ignored.

You copied an article bitching about Polosi, the democrats and Obama with the package being bad because of Pork.

I asked you what is bad about it?

Do you even know what is in the package or are you simply listening to talking heads?

I know youre not throwing this around like some of your cohorts have been as proof that this means Obama is a failure and a fraud, but I feel like addressing it anyway...
I don't think he's a failure. I am not yet disappointed with him, though I am with the House Democrats.
How hard do you think it is to find experianced experts in Washington that arent lobbiests in some form or another?
Impossible. Or close to it. It's just, he should have known that instead of going super populist, that's all. :p I mean you know that. I know that. It's safe to say he knew that. Thus, he was just being a populist. It's meh, though :p

To me it's much more of a non-issue though, compared to him allowing his party to, in my opinion, almost hijack this stimulus package.

I read up until I saw "By Charles Krauthammer"


Then I stopped, because I knew I'd have to get my hip waders on to get through all the bull crap he would spew in the article.

I don't think he's a failure. I am not yet disappointed with him, though I am with the House Democrats.

Theres that old Mark Twain quote, "Suppose you are an idiot. Now suppose you are a member of Congress. But I repeat myself."

Funny how 19th century quotes are still relevent.

Impossible. Or close to it. It's just, he should have known that instead of going super populist, that's all. :p

To me it's much more of a non-issue though, compared to him allowing his party to, in my opinion, almost hijack this stimulus package.

This this thiiiiiiiiis.

I know youre not throwing this around like some of your cohorts
Who are my cohorts. :p???

Right, but some things he's very cleary had to go back on....like the thing about lobbyists.
So? Haven't you ever implemented a plan? Everything gets adjusted in the process of moving from plan to action. I am less interested in zero lobbyists than I am in zero conflict of interest and cronyism in appointments and allocation of resources and policy decisions.

I guess I'm more interested in results than rhetoric, but hey, I'm impractical and unrealistic that way. /sarcasm.

The point I was just making was that he's finding it hard to keep some of his promises when having to deal with reality....which is normal.
Promises he has not even started to try to keep, but is still in the process of finding the best way to implement. My point stands -- wait till he actually fails at something, why don't you?

I am still supportive of the President, but a rational supporter who does not think of him as the Messiah.
You're in good company, because there is nobody who does think he is the Messiah. There are plenty of rightwingers who claim that the masses are worshipping him like the second coming, but the masses seem rather conspicuously not to be doing that.

This is mostly the fault of his party, not him. I truley beleive he beleives what he preaches, but his party his acting very 'politics as usual' and loading pork into this package, which has his name on it, thus tarnishing him by association.
So are the Republicans. Their tax cut mantra is little more than pork for their corporate campaign donors. And all of it is nothing but partisan sniping for public image points. These idiots need to grow up.

Obama, simply because of who he is and the time period that he has come into power, will be critiqued from day 1 until long after his death. He knew that when he took the job.
Yeah, by jackasses with the patience level of bored 4-year-olds and by bitter rightwingers.

Who are my cohorts. :p???

It was a term I use to loosely describe people who politically agree with you.

I realize now the term may have been an unfair one to use, lumping you in with them and all, considering who some of them are.

Do you even know what is in the package or are you simply listening to talking heads?

I shal forget more about everything you could possibly imagine than you shall ever learn.

http://blog.mises.org/archives/009373.asp

I read up until I saw "By Charles Krauthammer"


Then I stopped, because I knew I'd have to get my hip waders on to get through all the bull crap he would spew in the article.
Heh, that's why I didn't even read the article. He combines the whiny 4-year-old with the bitter rightwinger. Gods, Krauthammer is an idiot.

Question: what position are you in to make such a claim?

From the position of having knowledge of economics. The current economic turmoil and its resolution are absolutely mystifying to people without knowledge of economics, but to those who are educated in economics there are no mysteries regarding the causes of the economic collapse, and regarding its solutions.

I shal forget more about everything you could possibly imagine than you shall ever learn.

http://blog.mises.org/archives/009373.asp

Ok. So again what do you define as pork?

From the position of having knowledge of economics.

Did you attend University of Wikipedia?

From the position of having knowledge of economics.

Where have you got this knowledge? Just from reading newspaper articles? Reading economists? Have you been taught economics? Is there a particular economic school of thought you subscribe to?

Yes yes. Some Libertarian preacher on the internet knows more then economists.
Obama's court economists (who are the same men who served Bush) are the economics equivalent of the neocons and yellowcake peddlers who advised Bush to pursue such disastrous foreign policies.

Where have you got this knowledge?

Just from reading newspaper articles? Reading economists? Have you been taught economics?

Yes, yes, and yes.

Is there a particular economic school of thought you subscribe to?

Austrian school of economics.

Did you attend University of Wikipedia?

No, I alienated the interviewer during the interview process so I was denied admission to U of W.

From a political and strategic point of view, the Republicans should definitely support Obama's stimulus package. The stimulus package will do massive damage to the economy and delay recovery, which will allow Republicans to capitalize during elections by blaming Obama and the Democrats.

You don't understand politics any more than you don't understand economics. How would supporting the stimulus package allow the Republicans to blame it all on the Democrats?

Obama's court economists (who are the same men who served Bush)

:confused:

No, I alienated the interviewer during the interview process so I was denied admission to U of W.

Did you quote Rushton?

You don't understand politics any more than you don't understand economics. How would supporting the stimulus package allow the Republicans to blame it all on the Democrats?

The same way Democrats could blame Bush for the Patriot Act even though so many Democrats voted for it. Besides, you don't understand English any more than you don't understand politics and economics. I was making a point that the stimulus package is a horrible mistake. What the Democrats and Republicans do with the politics of the whole sorry affair is really just minor trivia.

:confused:



Did you quote Rushton?

No, I accidentally sneezed on him multiple times.

Yes, yes, and yes.


You've been taught? To what level?


Austrian school of economics.

You don't sound like it.

You've been taught? To what level?

To the expert level. :rolleyes:

You don't sound like it.

I don't sound like it? Why not? (Your point genuinely fascinates me)

The same way Democrats could blame Bush for the Patriot Act even though so many Democrats voted for it. Besides, you don't understand English any more than you don't understand politics and economics. I was making a point that the stimulus package is a horrible mistake. What the Democrats and Republicans do with the politics of the whole sorry affair is really just minor trivia.

So your point was that, in order to best capitalize on the impending disaster that this stimulus package supposedly will be, the Republicans should tie their names and their party to it? And that's a good strategic move from which point of view exactly?

To the expert level. :rolleyes:


Which is what? Undergrad? Masters? PHD?


I don't sound like it? Why not? (Your point genuinely fascinates me)

Unless I'm mixing you up with someone else, you sound more like a Chicago school economist. You seemed to use a very neoclassical approach (edit: in other threads I've seen you in that is).

So your point was that, in order to best capitalize on the impending disaster that this stimulus package supposedly will be, the Republicans should tie their names and their party to it? And that's a good strategic move from which point of view exactly?

The internet isn't the best medium to convey such things but my comment was a tongue-in-cheek condemnation of the stimulus package. Don't take it as advice for the Republican party. On a serious note, my advice to both the Democratic and Republican parties is to bury any and all government stimulus packages.

Which is what? Undergrad? Masters? PHD?
I don't have a degree in economics.


Unless I'm mixing you up with someone else, you sound more like a Chicago school economist. You seemed to use a very neoclassical approach.

Austrian and monetarist schools are superficially similar, which may be the source for your confusion. To begin with (and this is possibly the most important and relevant point in light of the current particular economic collapse) Austrians heartily disagree with monetarists' attempts at price-fixing in the credit market.

Which is what? Undergrad? Masters? PHD?

how could he be any clearer? he already told you, to the expert level!

I don't have a degree in economics.


So in what sense have you been taught?


Austrian and monetarist schools are superficially similar, which may be the source for your confusion. To begin with (and this is possibly the most important and relevant point in light of the current particular economic collapse) Austrians heartily disagree with monetarists' attempts at price-fixing in the credit market.

Yes, I know. Actually, I think I might be mixing you up with bluth corporation.

So in what sense have you been taught?


I've read economics books and literature including F.A. Hayek's "Monetary Theory and the Trade Cycle," Mises' "Theory of Money and Credit," and Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression".

I've read economics books and literature including F.A. Hayek's "Monetary Theory and the Trade Cycle," Mises' "Theory of Money and Credit," and Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression".

Those are some very old works. There was, and has been since then, a huuuuuuge amount of work published on marco-economic policy, you wont really begin to scratch the surface just with that (at least, not to an extent where you can make major macro economic predictions like your original one). Also, you seem to have a very biased selection of works, have you read anything from stuff not written by Austrian libertarians?

Those are some very old works. There was, and has been since then, a huuuuuuge amount of work published on marco-economic policy, you wont really begin to scratch the surface just with that (at least, not to an extent where you can make major macro economic predictions like your original one). Also, you seem to have a very biased selection of works, have you read anything from stuff not written by Austrian libertarians?

Old doesn't make them untrue. I also read Keynes' "General Theory of Employment..." and Hazlitt's refutation of "General Theory." I haven't read Friedman's "A Monetary History..." but I plan to soon, and I have a pretty good idea about what the synopsis of Friedman is. I (like the general reading public) have no choice but to be bombarded by the propaganda articles written by Keynesians and monetarists in the mainstream media intended for the popular audience, but I don't read the macroeconomic journals.

Anyways, all the "huuuge" amount of macroeconomics "advances" in the past decades are illusory and even their authors and instigators admit they have no idea what is ever going on. Only the Austrians are capable of making accurate secular economic predictions and capable of providing satisfactory explanations for all these economic phenomena that completely bedazzle and stupefy the keynesians and monetarists. I suggest you start investigating economics with the tried-and-true Austrian methodology, and give up the pseudo-scientific so-called empirical methodologies. You will find complete coherence, logic, and rationality in the Austrian school rather than the utter confusion that afflicts so many self-styled "mainstream" economists.

I suggest you start investigating economics with the tried-and-true Austrian methodology, and give up the pseudo-scientific so-called empirical methodologies. You will find complete coherence, logic, and rationality in the Austrian school rather than the utter confusion that afflicts so many self-styled "mainstream" economists.

giving up on empiricism means never having to say you're sorry

Old doesn't make them untrue. I also read Keynes' "General Theory of Employment..." and Hazlitt's refutation of "General Theory." I haven't read Friedman's "A Monetary History..." but I plan to soon, and I have a pretty good idea about what the synopsis of Friedman is. I (like the general reading public) have no choice but to be bombarded by the propaganda articles written by Keynesians and monetarists in the mainstream media intended for the popular audience, but I don't read the macroeconomic journals.


That would be a start. But even those books are far too outdated to base anything on these days. There is pretty much no purely Keynsian or purely neoclassical economists, all economists these days tend to be moderate Keynesian or moderate monetarists, or heterodox like Austrians (but even they aren't that different actually).


Only the Austrians are capable of making accurate secular economic predictions and capable of providing satisfactory explanations for all these economic phenomena that completely bedazzle and stupefy the keynesians and monetarists.

Not even the Austrians say this.

I suggest you start investigating economics with the tried-and-true Austrian methodology, and give up the pseudo-scientific so-called empirical methodologies. You will find complete coherence, logic, and rationality in the Austrian school rather than the utter confusion that afflicts so many self-styled "mainstream" economists.

I have studied some of their stuff.

giving up on empiricism means never having to say you're sorry

The Austrian methodology is the only methodology verified by empirical evidence. The self-styled empirical macroeconomic methodologies are the economics equivalent of calling Dinosaur bones empirical proof for the Book of Genesis.

The Austrian methodology is the only methodology verified by empirical evidence.

Verified? By whom? The Austrians?

Note even the Austrians say this.

I don't know what else to say to this statement other than you're wrong. Austrians stress the predictive power of the Austrian theory of business cycles, which is as predictive as the Newtonian theory of gravity.

I don't know what else to say to this other than you're wrong. Austrians stress the predictive power of the Austrian theory of business cycles, which is as predictive as the Newtonian theory of gravity.

Quote a modern Austrian economist who says something like that. Also, I was saying that not even the Austrians dismiss other schools of methodologies as harshly as you, from what I've read, at least not modern ones.

Verified? By whom? The Austrians?

Verified by empirical evidence. Who are you? Do you even know what the Austrian theory of business cycles is? (go ahead, look it up at Wikipedia if necessary)

Verified by empirical evidence. Who are you? Do you even know what the Austrian theory of business cycles is? (go ahead, look it up at Wikipedia if necessary)

Who verified it?

Quote a modern Austrian economist who says something like that. Also, I was saying that not even the Austrians dismiss other schools of methodologies as harshly as you, from what I've read, at least not modern ones.

You must be living in an alternate universe. Today's Austrians are as aware of the explanatory-predictive power of Austrian theory as the early Austrians, and today's Austrians condemn the other schools with the same "harshness" as the early Austrians.

I'm sure you are aware of the Mises.org website which is probably the leading Austrian commentary website on the internet and where many "modern Austrian economists" post and participate. Mises.org publishes many articles written by these modern Austrian economists attacking Keynes, Friedman, and their theories.


Who verified it?

Much empirical research done by the economics community, even Keynesians and monetarists. Even many non-Austrians begrudgingly admit the explanatory power of credit expansion and contraction at the root of business cycles. Clearly you aren't familiar with the field of economics. If necessary, spend a little time on wikipedia first to brush up on your knowledge.

how could he be any clearer? he already told you, to the expert level!

You remind me of this, friend.

MODEDIT - Offensive image removed. User warned.

I'm sure you are aware of the Mises.org website which is probably the leading Austrian commentary website on the internet and where many "modern Austrian economists" post and participate. Mises.org publishes many articles written by these modern Austrian economists attacking Keynes, Friedman, and their theories.


Yes, and I've even used that website as source before. Also, I would still like to see a quote from a modern Austrian economist that says something similar to "predictive power of the Austrian theory of business cycles... as predictive as the Newtonian theory of gravity. "

You remind me of this, friend.

wtf....

MODEDIT - removed the image to be consistent.

wtf....

I believe it's QFT, not wtf.

I believe it's QFT, not wtf.

That stuff is against the rules, I suspect. I'd delete it.

...

you'll last a long time here

That stuff is against the rules, I suspect. I'd delete it.
You guys no have sense of humour? I just call obvious idiot what idiot is.

You guys no have sense of humour? I just call obvious idiot what idiot is.
Calling people unintelligible gibberish speakers + writing the second sentence above = irony.

Calling people unintelligible gibberish speakers + writing the second sentence above = irony.

:hail:

I am Russian, bite me.

Yes, and I've even used that website as source before. Also, I would still like to see a quote from a modern Austrian economist that says something similar to "predictive power of the Austrian theory of business cycles... as predictive as the Newtonian theory of gravity. "

The Newtonian theory is my analogy. Austrians agree that credit expansions lead to malinvestments and a subsequent deflationary correction (crash), 100% of the time. Furthermore Austrians agree that government mandated fiscal stimulus packages (like Obama's) which attempt to re-inflate asset bubbles, are incapable of addressing the underlying problems of the economy, i.e. systemic malinvestments, and just postpone and exacerbate the inevitable and unavoidable deflationary correction. This theory, which has 100% predictive power as shown by every example in economic history, can be analogized to Newton's well-honed theory.

:hail:

I am Russian, bite me.
If you're not an English speaker, maybe you should avoid making fun of how other people speak English. Just a suggestion.

Also :hail:ing me shows good instincts. Keep it up. :D

From a political and strategic point of view, the Republicans should definitely support Obama's stimulus package. The stimulus package will do massive damage to the economy and delay recovery, which will allow Republicans to capitalize during elections by blaming Obama and the Democrats.

There is a point to that. The stimulus is not going to jump start the economy at all.

There is a point to that. The stimulus is not going to jump start the economy at all.

because I, random internet guy, SAID SO!

because I, random internet guy, SAID SO!

Just cause random internet guy said so don't make it untrue, and just cause random internet guy said so don't make it true... cut the ad hominem crap...

because I, random internet guy, SAID SO!
Because he doesn't live in dream world, maybe.

If you're not an English speaker, maybe you should avoid making fun of how other people speak English. Just a suggestion.

Also :hail:ing me shows good instincts. Keep it up. :D

I make fun of his intelligence - just like a negro's, who knows, maybe he is one - not just way he speak. And I hail your delusion, not anything else.

I make fun of his intelligence - just like a negro's, who knows, maybe he is one - not just way he speak. And I hail your delusion, not anything else.

Ebonics is better than you.

Just cause random internet guy said so don't make it untrue, and just cause random internet guy said so don't make it true...

right, so his opinion, standing alone is....say it with me...worthless.

cut the ad hominem crap...

Tsk tsk, temper now.

You guys no have sense of humour? I just call obvious idiot what idiot is.

I have no sense of humour. I have also removed the offending image, and I'm issuing you another warning. Knock it off with the trolling. In fact, you ought to consider yourself on thin ice. Acquaint yourself with the rules before you find yourself not welcomed in these parts.

For the rest... don't encourage this individual.

right, so his opinion, standing alone is....say it with me...worthless.
Not necessarily.



Tsk tsk, temper now.

What's wrong with temper?

I have no sense of humour. I have also removed the offending image, and I'm issuing you another warning. Knock it off with the trolling. In fact, you ought to consider yourself on thin ice. Acquaint yourself with the rules before you find yourself not welcomed in these parts.

For the rest... don't encourage this individual.

Sigh, another Jew ******-lover. You ought to consider yourself puppet for the PC establishment.

Wow. I don't think I have seen a suicide by mod on this site before......

So, how long does it take for someone to get banned around these parts?

you'll last a long time here

Sigh, another Jew ******-lover. You ought to consider yourself puppet for the PC establishment.

going for a record, i see

Just cause random internet guy said so don't make it untrue, and just cause random internet guy said so don't make it true... cut the ad hominem crap...

How about some random internet guy says it's true and he has nameless sources to back up his claims!

I have the empirical evidence to prove it!

So, how long does it take for someone to get banned around these parts?

I'd say 7 posts should just about do it.

Sigh, another Jew ******-lover. You ought to consider yourself puppet for the PC establishment.

Kryzoerkia was part of a Mossad hostage extraction team that saved a Ugandan surgeon and his family at an airport in 2004, so I doubt the appellate bothers him.

I was going to contrast that by pointing out that you, at the time, were huddled in the Michigan woods, hoping to your Christian Identity God that none of the other fellas noticed you were wearing a black mini dress, pearls, and heels underneath your Klan robes, except for the ones you always meet afterwards so you could sobbingly beg permission to fellate them while they drank Pabst Blue Ribbon and called you Cindy, a name you chose for your gender-dysmorphic alter-ego because right before you dropped out of high school, you knew a girl named Cindy with the same color hair as you, and you prayed to white god that you could become her, not just because of the hair, but because she was dating Jimmy Martin, the big black half-back, and longed then, as you do now, to the receptacle of steamy capacino love, and if you can just make the world see that you hate them, the little jewish cheerleaders, they won't see that you want to be them, and if you can just make the negroes see that you hate them, they won't suspect that you desperately want to touch them, but I'm not going to point that out because the mods won't like it.

Sigh, another Jew ******-lover. You ought to consider yourself puppet for the PC establishment.

Since it's obvious you have no respect for authority or anyone else around you, perhaps a 48 hour ban will allow you time to cool off and think about how your comport yourself in these parts.

You may also want to cozy up with a copy of The One Stop Rules Shop (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416023) during your time in the penalty box.

How about some random internet guy says it's true and he has nameless sources to back up his claims!

I have the empirical evidence to prove it!

And a bunch of old dead Austrians!

Yes yes. Some Libertarian preacher on the internet knows more then economists.
To be fair, there are extremely few economists who actually think the current proposal is a good one. Not only are there serious questions about the usefulness of US government spending as a whole (recent research indicates that the multiplier for US fiscal stimuli is somewhere close to zero), but pretty much all economists agree that in the current climate tax cuts aren't going to contribute much to an economic recovery.

So if you asked me what pork there is, I'd point to all the tax cuts. They're there to buy popularity, just as they are everywhere else. The entire point of fiscal spending coming to the rescue in a recession is that people don't just lose income, they change their propensities to spend and save. And as such, the government is proposed as the party that comes in and makes up for it instead of private consumers.

stimulus package sounds dirty.

And a bunch of old dead Austrians!

Hmmmmm

Maybe he is a necromancer!

I will not be playing your game. I posted two articles filled with information and you hardly addressed any of it, instead taking shots at the Republican Party. Either contribute to my thread, or you shall be ignored.

Two unsourced articles TAI. How do we know you didn't write this yourself?

:hail:

I am Russian, bite me.

Saying "bite me!" around Dragons and vampires is on the same level as the charge of the light brigade, the Munich Agreement, and invading Russia during the winter.

From the position of having knowledge of economics. The current economic turmoil and its resolution are absolutely mystifying to people without knowledge of economics, but to those who are educated in economics there are no mysteries regarding the causes of the economic collapse, and regarding its solutions.

Right, and all of these economists are withholding the solutions for shits and giggles. If you think you can exaplain macroenomic forces with certainy I challenge you to do so.

o_O

What did I miss? What is it with certain less-than-tasteful words being thrown around?

Damn, you go fix ONE instant ramen...

MODEDIT - Offensive image removed. User warned.


"What's going on over there? What's in the box? WHAT'S IN THE FUCKING BOX ?!?!?!?!?!" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xG5hSOMGn0&feature=related)

"What's going on over there? What's in the box? WHAT'S IN THE FUCKING BOX ?!?!?!?!?!" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xG5hSOMGn0&feature=related)

Whatever you hear, stay away! The lame troll has the upper hand!

I've read economics books and literature including F.A. Hayek's "Monetary Theory and the Trade Cycle," Mises' "Theory of Money and Credit," and Murray Rothbard's "America's Great Depression".
Excuse me?

I've worked my arse off for 4.5 years to get to the point where I can say "I know economics", and it'll take another year before I can begin to call myself an economist.

Please don't equate that to reading a few, effectively second rate, books.

Excuse me?

I've worked my arse off for 4.5 years to get to the point where I can say "I know economics", and it'll take another year before I can begin to call myself an economist.

Please don't equate that to reading a few, effectively second rate, books.

That's a damn shame. You wasted 4.5 years of your life laboring over pseudo-science and risk management fallacies. I do feel for you.

That's a damn shame. You wasted 4.5 years of your life laboring over pseudo-science and risk management fallacies. I do feel for you.

I feel like I wasted 4.5 seconds of my life reading the utter tripe you blurt out in lieu of rational arguments.

I feel like I wasted 4.5 seconds of my life reading the utter tripe you blurt out in lieu of rational arguments.

Time to hit the books, Trostia. You're way out of your depth.

Time to hit the books, Trostia. You're way out of your depth.

How intimidating. Consider me so intimidated that I will continue laughing at your face. Your idea of economics is little more than worshiping a non-extant free market as God. I have no respect for you and since you are a known liar, I cannot possibly take you seriously.

I'm glad to see you're true to form and very few others here do.

How intimidating. Consider me so intimidated that I will continue laughing at your face. Your idea of economics is little more than worshiping a non-extant free market as God. I have no respect for you and since you are a known liar, I cannot possibly take you seriously.

I'm glad to see you're true to form and very few others here do.

Why are you even in this thread reading my posts if you feel like they're a waste of time? Go debate the definition of "parasite" or whatever subject that strikes your fancy and doesn't waste your time.

That's a damn shame. You wasted 4.5 years of your life laboring over pseudo-science and risk management fallacies. I do feel for you.Right, because people who understand how an economic system works are completely unimportant to the economy actually...you know, working.

Time to hit the books, Trostia. You're way out of your depth.No, I believe that would be you. :rolleyes:

That's a damn shame. You wasted 4.5 years of your life laboring over pseudo-science and risk management fallacies. I do feel for you.
That reminds me...you never did produce this empirical evidence you keep talking about. Did you ever intend to do so?

Why are you even in this thread reading my posts if you feel like they're a waste of time?

4.5 seconds can be spared for sheer entertainment value.

Go debate the definition of "parasite" or whatever subject that strikes your fancy and doesn't waste your time.

Nah, I think I'll continue to laugh at you.

That reminds me...you never did produce this empirical evidence you keep talking about. Did you ever intend to do so?

I think we've been over this in much more detail before. Price fixing of interest rates creates asset bubbles. The evidence is everywhere. Every instance of price fixing of interest rates results in asset bubbles forming.

4.5 seconds can be spared for sheer entertainment value.



Nah, I think I'll continue to laugh at you.

To each his own, I guess.

The evidence is everywhere.
Unfortunately the pseudo-science demands rather more stringent rules of proving a point than a 4-word sentence attempting to make the actual matter of debate look like it's self-evident.

I think we've been over this in much more detail before. Price fixing of interest rates creates asset bubbles. The evidence is everywhere. Every instance of price fixing of interest rates results in asset bubbles forming.

If the evidence is everywhere, then you shouldn't have such difficulty providing us with some.

Excuse me?

I've worked my arse off for 4.5 years to get to the point where I can say "I know economics", and it'll take another year before I can begin to call myself an economist.

Please don't equate that to reading a few, effectively second rate, books.

What? Reading a book or two doesn't make you an expert?

*closes his book on brain surgery*

I read up until I saw "By Charles Krauthammer"


Then I stopped, because I knew I'd have to get my hip waders on to get through all the bull crap he would spew in the article.This, FTW.

"What's going on over there? What's in the box? WHAT'S IN THE FUCKING BOX ?!?!?!?!?!" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xG5hSOMGn0&feature=related)

Schrodinger's cat.

Maybe.

Saying "bite me!" around Dragons and vampires is on the same level as the charge of the light brigade, the Munich Agreement, and invading Russia during the winter.

This might be useful advice if there were such things as dragons or vampires. As there aren't, not so helpful. Among your bad ideas, you could have also mentioned the Edsel, New Coke, or America joining the UN.

Schrodinger's cat.

Maybe.

lol the only potentialcat ever!

Unfortunately the pseudo-science demands rather more stringent rules of proving a point than a 4-word sentence attempting to make the actual matter of debate look like it's self-evident.

I don't agree with trilate here but the most pointed example of price-fixing causing issues is the whole Marie Antoinette let them eat cake bit. The french government of the time attempted to fix the cost of bread in place despite massive scarcities which led to a whole bunch of problems. (I don't claim to be an expert in this field . . .I'm really really not It's just an example of price-fixing not working out that I've seen.)

Kryzoerkia was part of a Mossad hostage extraction team that saved a Ugandan surgeon and his family at an airport in 2004, so I doubt the appellate bothers him.

I was going to contrast that by pointing out that you, at the time, were huddled in the Michigan woods, hoping to your Christian Identity God that none of the other fellas noticed you were wearing a black mini dress, pearls, and heels underneath your Klan robes, except for the ones you always meet afterwards so you could sobbingly beg permission to fellate them while they drank Pabst Blue Ribbon and called you Cindy, a name you chose for your gender-dysmorphic alter-ego because right before you dropped out of high school, you knew a girl named Cindy with the same color hair as you, and you prayed to white god that you could become her, not just because of the hair, but because she was dating Jimmy Martin, the big black half-back, and longed then, as you do now, to the receptacle of steamy capacino love, and if you can just make the world see that you hate them, the little jewish cheerleaders, they won't see that you want to be them, and if you can just make the negroes see that you hate them, they won't suspect that you desperately want to touch them, but I'm not going to point that out because the mods won't like it.

*dingdingdingding!*

Win.