Three Economic Things that Do Not Exist.

Post #342,421 by Another Scott 5/8/11 2:45:15 PM Reply	Three Economic Things that Do Not Exist. http://delong.typepa...do-not-exist.html But!!!!1111 Cheers, Scott.
Post #342,428 by boxley 5/9/11 9:21:20 AM Reply	no such thing as printing too much money, got it Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #342,429 by drook 5/9/11 9:23:27 AM Reply	BS Krugman is saying that a man is dying of thirst, and someone has all the water in the world available. You are saying Krugman wants to drown him. -- Drew
Post #342,430 by boxley 5/9/11 9:32:53 AM Reply	bad analogy krugman is saying loaning more money to my brother who owes more money than he can repay in several lifetimes in the hopes he will get off his ass and do something instead of making my brother sell his suv and move to an apartment and get a real job Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #342,450 by Another Scott 5/9/11 2:59:58 PM Reply	Countries are different from people. Countries are different from individuals. The family budget analogy is stupid (and I wish Obama would stop using it, too). A lack of overall demand in the economy won't be fixed by telling Bubba to get off the couch and get a job. Not when there are 5+ people looking for every job opening. Look at Japan. They went through (and in some ways are still going through the results of) an asset and property bubble. It burst. Remember Nikei 39,000 in 1989? Remember the $600M Grand Wailea hotel in Hawaii? http://factsanddetai...d=16&subcatid=110 What was the result? The Lost Decade - http://en.wikipedia....ecade_%28Japan%29 The BOJ dumped lots of money into firms and banks to keep them from collapsing. Did hyperinflation result? Did inflation result? No. Japan's been flirting with deflation since then. While one can argue that they actually muddled through pretty well (5% unemployment isn't horrible), growth has been stagnant for many years while they were used to 5% GDP growth. When things are very bad in the economy and the people who have money want to buy safe assets above everything else, then normal "printing money == inflation" doesn't apply. There's too little demand in the US now. This can either be fixed with time (a very long time if Japan is any guide), or by the government stepping in and creating demand. That's it. HTH. Cheers, Scott.
Post #342,452 by beepster 5/9/11 3:24:06 PM Reply	Re: Countries are different from people. How much more demand can the government >really< create? In addition, how does that create >sustained< demand? box points out that the gov has been growing significantly for some 30 years. At what point is that no longer possible??? Many of us think we are already there. At minimum, our government (not this admin specific) seems to have a real problem in putting the money to effective use (also a point of the box)...instead adding to the disparity problem by putting spending it in all the wrong places (and you and I have had this go around too many times to count ;-) Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #342,454 by Another Scott 5/9/11 3:56:36 PM Reply	Evidence, please. Feelings aren't an argument. :-) This graph seems to show your feeling is wrong. http://en.wikipedia....e-%2875-05%29.JPG Show me some actual evidence that the pre-Great-Recession US state and local government spending was at a tipping point. (OpEds from CATO, Heritage and the WSJ don't count. Go get some data from FRED or the IMF, or actual analysis from a real economics outfit or something.) There's a difference between the government being stymied by a schlerotic ideology that says that we can't spend any money, and government actually being able to do something to build demand. What can it do? Lots. Your favorite - infrastructure - for example. It can also do things like hire people to do things that need to be done. And stop firing people who are already working. Change policy to drive the economy in new directions and put real resources there. Stuff like that. You seem to think that Government spending is more inefficient than Private Sector spending. I guess you missed the Housing Bubble and the Great Recession. Or how Medicare is has more efficient administration than private medical insurance. It's been pretty big news around here... ;-p Cheers, Scott.
Post #342,458 by beepster 5/9/11 5:49:06 PM Reply	Re: Evidence, please. http://www.businessi...dp-revenue-2010-8 if we're on about charts..and since you think yours matters...take a look at mine :-) our total debt load as percentage of the economy is some 25-30% worse than what it was during the great depression. (350% vs 260%). While a good chunk of that is currently financial sector...the government is catching...and trading one debt for the other (which is all they did with the bailouts) doesn't really fix the problem. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #342,459 by Another Scott 5/9/11 6:17:04 PM Reply	Um, then why can the Treasury sell 10 yr notes at 3.2%??? If that ratio is so important, and things are so dire, why aren't the bond vigilantes attacking? Maybe that ratio isn't important after all? More later. Cheers, Scott.
Post #342,468 by Another Scott 5/9/11 8:44:37 PM Reply	Selective numbers. Here's the full report - http://www.google.co...1otxK0tow&cad=rja (8 page .pdf). That "scary" chart shows federal revenue at 14.8% of GDP. During the Great Recession. If one assumes that federal revenue recovers as the recovery gains strength, then the 358% ratio drops substantially. What is it for Japan? Let's see: government is 28% of GDP, Debt is 225% of GDP, giving a ratio of 804%. Oooh. Scary. It's a good thing that the Japanese government has a monopoly on the creation of Yen, isn't it? Japan's 10-year bonds yield about 1.14% at the moment. On the other hand, Russia's debt is 9.5% of GDP. They're an economic paradise, huh. http://en.wikipedia...._financial_crisis Russia's 10 year bonds are paying around 6% - http://www.tradingec...rnment-bond-yield IOW, the M-S report is scaremongering. Comparing historical debt to income data, when currencies were tied to gold, to the present situation in the US is not enlightening. The US isn't Greece. Greece uses the Euro and has no control over the currency. The US has a monopoly on the creation of dollars. My $0.02. Cheers, Scott.
Post #342,474 by beepster 5/9/11 10:49:37 PM Reply	Re: Selective numbers. So Japan has a lower uncertainty that the US according to investors..to the tune of some 60%? As for Russia, the risk factor is simple. What do you do if they do not pay? That will carry a premium..a substantial one. Let alone the issues of currency and conversion. Your previous post...you talked about things the gov could do...hire more people (um..are we talking about temporary stimulus???). What will they >make<? Gov is NOT a producer. Plus, they've been doing that since the end of WW2 (gov worker per 1k pop is nearly double). At the same time, Mfring jobs have gone from 40% to about 9. And on infrastructure. Yes they could spend on infrastructure. But they don't. And they won't. And you know it. So sure, we could put out another 2T stimulus package. And it will go to the street as bonuses and real unemployment would still be 20%. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #342,475 by Another Scott 5/9/11 11:34:48 PM Reply	You've drunk too much kool-ade. The point in my bringing up Japan and Russia was to show that the debt to income ratios have nothing to do with what's happening in the US. Single ratios aren't indicative of the economy as a whole. If that ratio was what mattered, then Japan would be a basket case and Russia would be paradise. They aren't. And now you change the subject again... Teachers are not Producers? Firemen are not Producers? Researchers at national labs and NIST are not Producers? Forest rangers are not Producers? People at the DOD who write and oversee contracts with Boeing and Lockheed-Martin and Northrop-Grumman and Xe and ... are not Producers? Lawyers and patent examiners at the USPTO are not Producers? People who regulate industry as a result of laws written by the Congress are not Producers? The People at the MSA and the CDC and the EPA and the Coast Guard are not Producers? Tax examiners and lawyers at the IRS who work to efficiently collect money based on the laws written by Congress are not Producers? You think there are too many Air Traffic Controllers? People who maintain government buildings and keep the vast infrastructure from crumbling even more aren't Producers? NASA doesn't Produce anything? DARPA doesn't Produce anything? The NSF doesn't Produce anything? They're just web sites that hand out money to contractors? Really? Only non-government jobs are worthy of being called Producers? Are you really that brain-washed? Really?!? Who is going to manage this vast stimulus package that you think would solve all our problems? Does the Hoover Dam run itself? If you think the only jobs that government creates are temporary Census jobs and the like, then you need to get out more. Many government agencies have shrunk over the last 30 years, and many more are facing losing a critical mass of expertise with upcoming retirements. If you think government is bad now, wait until it's even more underfunded, understaffed, and demonized so that nobody with any talent and sense of service wants to work for it. Yeah, it'll be great then.... Sheesh. :-( Cheers, Scott.
Post #342,478 by beepster 5/10/11 7:24:32 AM Reply	Re: You've drunk too much kool-ade. Really? So when you add all the research up, what % of the government workforce is that? As for protective services...well they don't >make< anything. As for gov staff jobs, they really don't make anything... The poor poor fed...understaffed, underfunded...spending how many trillion/year? You're making me weep. Please stop. If you would have rattled off some bridgebuilders, roadbuilders, construction workers, shipbuilders...but no...those are all done by private concerns. (and you brought up gov procurement as productive...I'm going to laugh about that all day) Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #342,481 by Another Scott 5/10/11 7:42:33 AM Reply	Heh. The Army Corps of Engineers and the SeaBees don't make anything? They're "private concerns"? Really? Are you sure you want to keep going down this road? The Galtian Overlords and Masters of the Universe constructed the systems of laws and rules that make all their wealth and Productivity possible? Really? Or do you mean that the system appeared fully-formed from Zeus's head? Really? If you think procurement has problems now, imagine what it would be like without those people who "don't really make anything" over-seeing it. Living in Florida, I would think you would be aware that quite often people and companies try to defraud the government for personal gain. http://articles.sun-...al-giant-columbia But those FBI investigators "don't really make anything" so it's just busy-work that wastes Beep's taxpayer dollars so it's good if they go away. Right? Government's too big!!!!111ONE Should I start calling you Farmer Beep now, to recognize that you "really" produce stuff? Sheesh. I think I'm done. Cheers, Scott.
Post #342,480 by boxley 5/10/11 7:33:39 AM Reply	ROFLMAO If you think government is bad now, wait until it's even more underfunded dude the feckin gov grew 20% in the last 10 years and you claim it is underfunded? Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #342,482 by Another Scott 5/10/11 7:46:13 AM Reply	Yes, the government's underfunded. If you haven't noticed, in the Bush years there were been continuing budget deficits (even when the economy was growing) that were caused by big tax cuts. Of course cuts in spending can be made (getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan will save money). Have fun - I'm done playing for now. Cheers, Scott.
Post #342,491 by beepster 5/10/11 11:04:07 AM Reply	Different flavors of kool-aid I guess when the IRS staff build their own office...I'll be convinced.:-) Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #342,496 by jake123 5/10/11 3:10:51 PM Reply	You and box do realise that when it comes to this stuff, you guys are completely out of your nut, eh? Borrow and spend conservatives. Sheesh.
Post #342,501 by Ashton 5/10/11 4:13:47 PM Reply	Maybe not.. True Disbelievers are always with us and many may not ken the difference between obsession and dedication? (Now, you take My Gramma ... NO! YOU take My Gramma!) and so it goes.
Post #342,502 by boxley 5/10/11 4:48:57 PM Reply	borrow and spend? hardly what you lot going to do when yo can no longer afford to take dollars for your stuff and we will want it anyway? Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #342,503 by beepster 5/10/11 5:12:00 PM Reply	Bit more fundamental of an argument more along the lines of what services should the government perform. Yep...I'm a looney for thinking our gov is untrustworthy and out of control. http://www.msnbc.msn...t-big-government/ joined by 80% of my fellow americans on the trust issue and just over half on the size issue. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #342,504 by drook 5/10/11 5:30:20 PM Reply	Science by survey ... check -- Drew
Post #342,505 by Another Scott 5/10/11 5:46:44 PM Reply	You'll love browsing around the GSS, then. I'm not much of a fan of polls, myself. But if you like them, you should at least looks at one that is done well like the GSS. For example: PreQuestion Text 165. I am going to name some institutions in this country. As far as the people running these institutions are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them? Guess when "A Great Deal" had its highest value, and when "Hardly Any" had its highest value, and think about the state of the US then.... Confidence in Congress since 1973 - http://publicdata.no...&count=2&cases1=4 Have fun. Cheers, Scott.
Post #342,745 by Another Scott 5/18/11 9:53:09 PM Reply	Jared Bernstein knifes the trope. http://jaredbernstei...overnment-budget/ Heading into work the other day, I heard a Congresswoman on the radio using a common argument that always sticks in my crawÂor it would if I knew what a ÂcrawÂ was. HereÂs the gist: ÂThe federal budget is just like a family budget, and we in government must tight our belts and live within our means just like families do.Â There are similarities which IÂll note below, but itÂs almost always used as an argument for cutting everything to the bone right away, and in that sense itÂs wrong. [...] He says it well. (via Steve Benen - http://www.washingto...dget_an029671.php ) Cheers, Scott.
Post #342,755 by boxley 5/19/11 9:23:52 AM Reply	craw, where your gravel goes to grind your food Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #342,431 by beepster 5/9/11 9:34:50 AM Reply	We don't have unlimited water and what water we do have...the Congress loves to water the grass with instead of using to drink (ie, no/very low infrastructure spending). Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #342,432 by boxley 5/9/11 9:38:47 AM Reply	better answer The government propagated a whole range of new economic policies, introducing a minimum wage and virtually eliminating the right to fire workers.[2] Total spending on education nearly tripled (from $227.6 million to $628.0 million), as did government spending on healthcare (from $66.4 million to $188.6 million), between 1979 and 1990.[1] Expenditure on public-sector employment rose by 60%, and on the civil service by 12% per annum over the course of the 1980s. Central government expenditure tripled and increased its share from 32.5 percent of GDP in 1979 to 44.6% in 1989. Interest rates were artificially capped. all good krugman obama policies right? So what happens next Repressed interest rates discouraged saving and the stateÂs high propensity to borrow reduced the supply of capital to all but favored borrowers you can guess the rest of the story Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #342,434 by Another Scott 5/9/11 10:21:30 AM Reply	Irrelevant to current situation at zero bound. Try again?
Post #342,435 by drook 5/9/11 10:23:33 AM Reply	Wait, you're calling stuff from the 80s Obama's policies? And let's stick to one topic until I know what you're saying about it. You wrote: no such thing as printing too much money, got it You're arguing against the idea that you can never print too much money. I want to know where Krugman (or Obama) suggested that. Barring that -- 'cause you won't find it -- are you arguing that we're already at the upper limit of how much money can be printed before the negative outcome is worse than what we're already facing? We're approaching 10% unemployment, the employment-to-population ratio is at its worst point in decades, foreclosures show no sign of slowing. All of that is already happening. What possible result of printing more money do you fear so much that even the risk of it outweighs the existing, real hardship people are facing? -- Drew
Post #342,436 by Another Scott 5/9/11 10:36:09 AM Reply	Net exports might go up!!!!1111
Post #342,441 by boxley 5/9/11 1:14:10 PM Reply	Re: Wait, you're calling stuff from the 80s it called history and the repeating thereof. Krugman and the current admin are arguing that we should and could do the same types of things. If you notice about the prior example, it didnt melt down all at once, things looked okay for a while then it came apart very quickly. Printing money and handing it out to the already well off doesnt do much for the economy except make the dollar already weaker than it is. Out of all of the money spent, where did it end up? Almost all went straight into the profits of the financial sector which doesnt do a dam thing for the working class Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #342,443 by S1mon_Jester 5/9/11 1:30:05 PM Reply	80's... Wasn't the 80's Reagan? Don't you mean the 70's?
Post #342,445 by boxley 5/9/11 2:04:51 PM Reply	80s in another country trying to execute krugman's model Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #342,446 by drook 5/9/11 2:13:51 PM Reply	Where did I say give it to the already well-off? -- Drew
Post #342,447 by boxley 5/9/11 2:21:52 PM Reply	thats what you have been doing and want more of it Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #342,462 by drook 5/9/11 7:53:23 PM Reply	I have? I do? -- Drew

Welcome to IWETHEY!