Hayek and the Keynesian's 3 Big Mistakes

Quote from Tsing Tao:

Sorry, that's a nice try and it would be the case had all commodities not shown spikes and upward trajectories beginning when QE was inferred, twice of which occurred at the Jackson Hole speech for Bernanke in August of the year in question. QE wasn't implemented until October of that year.

Nice try, however.

Posting income levels in $$ is all fine and dandy, but if the Y/Y increase isn't keeping up with inflation, then wages aren't really gaining. They're falling behind. Surely you grasp the difference between real and nominal.

Feel free to argue either of these points. But you're incorrect on both accounts.

If you'd like, I can go back and find Bernanke's own words that QE has the desired effect of causing the stock market to rise. He didn't say commodities, but all asset prices behave the same under monetary expansion.
More...
The income chart is adjusted for inflation.
 
Quote from Ricter:

The income chart is adjusted for inflation.
More...

First, I guess you conceded the QE-commodity point. Second, please post me the link for your chart.

Edit, never mind. By the link of the chart, your data only goes up to 2007, so it is worthless in the context of this argument of wages going up in the last 5 years.
 
Quote from Tsing Tao:

First, I guess you conceded the QE-commodity point. Second, please post me the link for your chart.

Edit, never mind. By the link of the chart, your data only goes up to 2007, so it is worthless in the context of this argument of wages going up in the last 5 years.
More...
I've conceded nothing, you do not know how to read a simple chart. The "last 5 years" comment does not change that, you missed the axis label.
 
Quote from Ricter:

I've conceded nothing, you do not know how to read a simple chart. The "last 5 years" comment does not change that, you missed the axis label.
More...

We're talking about inflation caused by QE, and you comment that "it's ok, because wages are going up too". But QE wasn't pre 2008, and your chart is labeled:

"800px-United_States_Income_Distribution_1947-2007.svg.png"

1947 to 2007, making it irrelevant for your point. Who doesn't know how to read a simple chart? Just because the axis label goes to 2010, doesn't mean the data does. Wanna try again?
 
Basically all you need to know about how keynesian economics has worked out for us is right here, we are actually in the exact same spot we were in 09, we just chopped the dollar in half to create the illusion of growth.

chart-of-the-day-sp-500-to-gold-rati-aug-2011.jpg
 
Quote from Max E. Pad:

Basically all you need to know about how keynesian economics has worked out for us is right here.

chart-of-the-day-sp-500-to-gold-rati-aug-2011.jpg
More...

Hah...go back 50 years and post a long term of that.
 
Quote from Tsing Tao:

We're talking about inflation caused by QE, and you comment that "it's ok, because wages are going up too". But QE wasn't pre 2008, and your chart is labeled:

"800px-United_States_Income_Distribution_1947-2007.svg.png"

1947 to 2007, making it irrelevant for your point. Who doesn't know how to read a simple chart? Just because the axis label goes to 2010, doesn't mean the data does. Wanna try again?
More...
You have everything backwards, and correlations are, in your mind, causes. You've been beat down repeatedly, not just by me, and yet you blather on. Why? Because this is the internet and there is no way to make you shut up.

You're in Randroid hell, and can't get out. No one is listening to you guys. I'm sorry, that's just the way it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top