How Obamanomics will bring us to prosperity!

libertad · Dec 29, 2008

One day Johnny Joe Businessman had to make a choice as to where he was to start a business....He had two choices....

1) The first choice was a world whereby the governments took over 50% of all incomes....and spent their take on non-productive activities....

2) The second choice was a world whereby the governments took 10% of the price of all physical products sold by businesses....and the government only spent revenues on assets that helped businesses become more productive....

No monopolies or oligopolies were allowed....

Which choice will Johnny Joe Businessman make ?

........................................................................................

The Obama Admin makes the first choice....

And Obama is a self made lawyer....to be admired as a self made man....and not to be admired as making the right choice with respect to making the US a stronger nation....

Anaconda · Dec 29, 2008

Quote from RiceRocket:

On this video it talks about the government borrowing from the economy. But fails to talk about the government borrowing from overseas, or directly from the Fed. If the government borrows from the fed, it creates inflation from the printed money, and does not contract the money supply by taking money from investors.

Most borrowing still occurs from the Fed, hence printed money. Just look at M3 for evidence.
He does fail to address foreign borrowing. But if he did, it would not be pretty. That money has to actually be repaid, and the reality is that there are no funds for it. If there were projects viable enough for the investment, the government would not need to be involved. The truth is that Keynesian economics (aka central planning) injects money into unfruitful projects.

You know who loves Keynesian economics? Bureaucrats & government contractors. It's the money faucet, lots of funds to embezzle.

Anaconda · Dec 29, 2008

Quote from mschey:

Your data, assumptions, and conclusions are simply wrong.

Maybe, but yours aren't any closer either.

I suggest you expand your time horizon a bit, maybe include the last 200 years or so,

More...

You have to separate the last 100 years from the previous 100 years. Then you take the previous 100 years and take detailed looks at the periods with central banks and Andrew Jackson's battles with them.

and then, maybe then, you might be able to understand how the US has become the largest economic power in the world.

More...

I know this is hard to accept, but USA is finished. Yeah, hard reality to accept for those in denial, but it is over and it has been over for quite a while. Just a matter of the final act to unfold as the play has been written long before.
2009 will make it apparent to the masses. And even after that, it's how the saying goes: "You ain't seen nothing yet"

bellman · Dec 29, 2008

What? I thought Reagan had long been established the greatest American president of all time!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from Random.Capital:

*cough* Reagan *cough*
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote from dinoman:

Yes.

Angrycat · Dec 29, 2008

Quote from jamis359:

I'm a big believer in the scientific method. Observe and measure, then try to form conclusions around the data. OK, if we observe and measure, we see that since the Bush administration applied trickle-down, high tax cut, high deficit supply-side economics, the economy has become bloated with debt that has dragged the GDP into negative territory (a recession).

So, now that we know that Republican supply-side "freemarket" economics don't work, let's try Obamanomics. Obamanomics is more demand side, although it's incremental and not as strongly demand side as I think it needs to me to counteract the many evils that supply-side brought us. Let's try Obamanomics for four years and see what the data and our observations say.

What mystifies me are people who insist on continuing to support low tax supply-side economics despite overwhelming evidence it doesn't work. Forget the propaganda and the politics, just look at the data. Supply-side in, recession out. So why keep pushing on a string?

Your ignorance is vast. There's no such economic theory as "trickle-down". You would know that if you knew the very first thing about economics.

Bush's policies were ANYTHING but free market and they were most certainly not supply-side. You would also know that if you had the smallest clue about economics. "obamanomics" will be a continuation of Bush's interventionist, big government, demand side, socialist policies. How's that been working for you?

Since you know absolutely nothing, you are can't understand what you observe and you have no competence to measure and understand, rendering your post useless. Thanks for the drivel.

Random.Capital · Dec 29, 2008

Quote from mschey:

I suggest you expand your time horizon a bit, maybe include the last 200 years or so, and then, maybe then, you might be able to understand how the US has become the largest economic power in the world.

During most of those 200 years, the US had very protectionist trade policies.

Unhommefou · Dec 29, 2008

Quote from Angrycat:

Your ignorance is vast. There's no such economic theory as "trickle-down". You would know that if you knew the very first thing about economics.

Bush's policies were ANYTHING but free market and they were most certainly not supply-side. You would also know that if you had the smallest clue about economics. "obamanomics" will be a continuation of Bush's interventionist, big government, demand side, socialist policies. How's that been working for you?

Since you know absolutely nothing, you are can't understand what you observe and you have no competence to measure and understand, rendering your post useless. Thanks for the drivel.

Here's the problem:

When you have guys in the papers (like Krugman) saying that the free market has failed...

When you have people like Greenspan -- you know Ayn RAND students -- saying that the free market has failed...

When you have people like Cramer and Kudlow, etc, saying that "free market" has been in effect for years...

When none of that shit has been true, of course you are going to have the uninformed asking if the free market has failed!

People are being lied to, saying that the free market has failed when it was not given a chance due to government intervention.

Oh well...

Angrycat · Dec 29, 2008

Quote from Unhommefou:

Here's the problem:

When you have guys in the papers (like Krugman) saying that the free market has failed...

When you have people like Greenspan -- you know Ayn RAND students -- saying that the free market has failed...

When you have people like Cramer and Kudlow, etc, saying that "free market" has been in effect for years...

When none of that shit has been true, of course you are going to have the uninformed asking if the free market has failed!

People are being lied to, saying that the free market has failed when it was not given a chance due to government intervention.

Oh well...

I agree with you. However, if someone is going to claim to "analyze the data" then this person is essentially saying that he knows more than the average monkey. Then, he goes on to prove that he is a below average monkey. Sad.

This does bring up another point though: these monkeys vote and this is how they reason. I bet they also think that America is not a republic but a democracy and that's a problem because the political class has far less constraints on it in a democracy (the very reason the founding fathers chose to make this country a republic). We're screwed.

dinoman · Dec 29, 2008

Nice to see others that can see through the lies of "we have been living in a free market".

BVM88 · Dec 29, 2008