Everyone has been afraid to ask the hard question in this thread. I will, does Cignetti coach basketball?
The Serious Election Day Thread
- Thread starter TheOriginalHappyGoat
- Start date
If he doesn’t, he should.
Running plays through Ballo doesn’t seem to be working.
That’s a bug of fiat based system. You first should ask yourself how does wealth get concentrated? The answer should be they are creating more value to society overall, so who cares because prices are decreasing for all of us. The lower prices benefit all of us, which isn’t happening because the money supply is constantly being increased stealing society’s productivity gains. Also, credit should match savings in a free market.
Yes. You said lowering taxes is a nutty myth that doesn’t increase productivity, which means you’re indirectly arguing governments are better at allocating capital than private businesses. I added the names to prove my point on why you’re wrong.
Lol. Sorry bud I won’t engage in this simpletonian exercise. You know I’m not talking about individual congressmen when I talk about government economic actions.
No, worries. I’m not giving up on you, though. One day you’ll understand Keynes might have known some things, but economics wasn’t one of them.
That’s fine - but I’d love to see examples of where pure free markets and monetarism rescued the economy from recession or depression.
In reality the best mix is adapted to whatever cycle we’re in, but I much more believe in Friedman principles outside of recessions and Keynes during downturns.
People care about the concentration of wealth because people are jealous or don’t think it’s fair. It doesn’t really matter why, just that it happens and leads to uprisings or riots or insurrection and is bad for society.
So I don’t think you’ve explained away the concern, just justified it on a moral level.
I think you have to push back on the notion it is a psychological inevitability.
If the DNC cared about democracy, Bernie would have been the candidate in 2016.
Woodson didn't revamp his schemes? Huh, who would have guessed.
Woodson sucks. 4-5th place in Big, lose on 1st weekend of NCAA with what should be a top 10 ish team.
Keynes’ basic idea was fine. Use short-term government stimulus with deficit spending to infuse demand into a contracting economy….with the debts incurred being paid down with the surpluses during expanding economies.
The problem isn’t Keynes’ idea, but the fact that our policymakers have proven wholly incapable of implementing it. They don’t do short-term infusions. They do permanent ones. As such, there never are any surpluses, so the debt always grows.
But for some reason, Keynesian economics is still promoted based on the merits of his theoretical idea, not the practical reality of fiscal policy of the last 100 years or so.
We can’t attract anywhere near the demand for our Treasuries to finance our debt. So we rely on the lender of last resort: the Fed. More than 2/3 of all of our debt is held by the Fed - which buys them with money they create…solely for the purpose of buying the Treasuries.
Folks, this is a recipe for disaster.
It really depends on the wherewithal of those in the critical middle. Not all inequality is created equal.
I don’t think we can make a great comparison between our situation and the situation in revolution-era France, for instance….let alone some 3rd world nation today.
We have a lot of inequality. But we don’t have a lot of people starving. The Gini of the US (according to the World Bank) is right next to Haiti’s. Ponder that.
As an aside to this, I must point out what Keynes had to say about FA Hayek’s famous book “The Road to Serfdom.”
In my opinion it is a grand book. Morally and philosophically I find myself in agreement with virtually the whole of it: and not only in agreement with it, but in deeply moved agreement.
…
What we need therefore, in my opinion, is not a change in our economic programmes, which would only lead in practice to disillusion with the results of your philosophy; but perhaps even the contrary, namely, an enlargement of them. Your greatest danger ahead is the probable practical failure of the application of your philosophy in the United States.
Heh.
Maybe. But, realistically, what can they do about it?
They’re politically beholden to the people doing the canceling. They can’t shame them out of the party. They can’t talk them out of doing it.
They just have to hope that enough people are sanguine enough to submit to the new terms of social conformity.
Last edited:
Contractions in the economy are good and necessary, It's how markets flush out bad capital allocations.
For some reason the people of 1929 didn't like it too much, they were just short sighted.
The problem is that no one is Kenysian. They are when they want to boost the economy, they aren't when it comes time to pay back. It doesn't really matter the party, look at any graph and one will see that Trump had increasing debts from Obama even excluding the 20 disaster.
I have long been a Keynesian. In great times, we need to tax more and cut spending. In bad times, we need to cut taxes and raise spending. That even includes defense spending, buy our toys during slower times and not during full-employment. Of course some things ammo for one, need bought every year.
They won’t learn anything. Their idiots in MSM and Social Media will scream Trump is Hitler and those who voted for him are racist, misogynist, homophobes. They continue down the same path and wonder why they get their asses beat in 2028.
Been twice. Honolulu in 97 & Maui in 98 for IU bball. And yes it was.
Last edited:
The good bit is that this showed it didn’t matter.
Pelosi crying. Jimmy Kimmel crying. CRY MORE!!!!!
Maui. We lost to Syracuse in the championship game. IU far and away had the majority of the fans there though.
In a free market with sound money savings would match loans over time.
Easily.. Even more in 2002, alot in 2008 but that time was a crapfest, and in 2015 was an all time record. I recall 1990 and 1994 being close to 2015 just by watching on tv. But the one I attended in 1998 was a good time.
I assume the underlining principle is the limitations of labor and resources.
The problem is that politicians do what they do out of their own best interest - not the country’s.
They rarely raise taxes (and when they do they usually try to limit the scope of the burden) and they virtually never cut spending.
Plus, when they do increase spending, do you think they do it where they can get the best multipliers…or do you think they do it to benefit their patrons and supporters?
Keynesian economics has failed us and put us in an untenable position because it relies on the control and influence of a small number of self-interested humans. If we had it done by an untouchable algorithm, maybe it would give us better results.
BTW, this is why I posted Keynes’ comment about Road to Serfdom. In retrospect, it’s ironic.
His critique was basically that Hayekian economics was great in theory, but would not be practical in the real world.
If only he could see the debt we’re swimming in now. I honestly think he’d be aghast.
I wasn't trying to explain the concern, I was explaining a bug in the current system . We do not have a free market, never have. We have a debt based control system. By the way, I agree with your assessment of how people will view it and how politicians will react to it. It's why I am Bitcoiner
