What ET is really seeing is someone saying, come up to city and say that to my face. I said I will, at a time and place of my choosing
Then ET can watch the video.
Romney owns Obama zombie from Peoria
- Thread starter Max E.
- Start date
What ET is really seeing is someone saying, come up to city and say that to my face. I said I will, at a time and place of my choosing
Then ET can watch the video.
Ron, I'm a libertarian. I don't even think you know what a social conservative is. But regardless of what you "think" my politics are, I would sit down and talk with anyone on ET. Even the old Zzz. I would buy Gabby a drink. I would buy Ricter a drink. I would definitely buy Bearice a drink. Come on, it's what we adults do in the "real" world. Message boards are fun. But there is nothing like eye to eye contact, you know the old fashion meeting people for drinks. LOL. Seriously, I would never not talk to someone just because I didn't like their politics or who they were. Hell, if that were the case, I wouldn't have ANY friends.
I believe that John, stay tuned.
Maverick, you are real trader. So you have this skill. What do you want from meeting people on the ET to talk about trading? Nothing is free. I am just curious.
RCG is a loner. He's not comfortable in one on one situations were he is expected to interact with someone. It stems from the inferiority complex he developed in his early teens. He works better in group settings so he can extricate himself if the discussion gets to personal and uncomfortable.
Just my little Freudian analysis of the guy.
You just got caught being a fool again and now you are a tool.
I will stop playing around with you. You are clueless when it comes to econ and I will tell you why. George Bush was a fiscally conservative Keynesian.
A fiscally conservative Keynesian would be calling for deficit spending and putting money in the hands of the people through tax cuts. So you just identified yourself as a George Bush kind of guy.
For those interested, I found this article. I thought this was interesting. Not that I think all that much of Kudlow.
"...
We might dub Bartlett a supply-side Keynesian, and he would not be the only one. In 2008, conservative economics commentator Lawrence Kudlow recalled that when he went to work for President Ronald Reagan in 1981,
One of the architects of supply-side economics, Columbia Universityâs Robert Mundell, [said] that during periods of crisis, sometimes you have to be a supply-sider (tax rates), sometimes a monetarist (Fed money supply), and sometimes a Keynesian (federal deficits). Iâve never forgotten that advice. Mundell was saying: Choose the best policies as put forth by the great economic philosophers without being too rigid.
Perhaps the first supply-side Keynesian was Lord Keynes himself. According to Bartlett, Keynes wrote, âNor should the argument seem strange that taxation may be so high as to defeat its object, and that, given sufficient time to gather the fruits, a reduction of taxation will run a better chance than an increase of balancing the budget.â"
Did you catch that Keynes was a supply sider.
--
Did you read that you "fiscally conservative" Keynesian... Brass?
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2009/apr/20/00022/
"...
We might dub Bartlett a supply-side Keynesian, and he would not be the only one. In 2008, conservative economics commentator Lawrence Kudlow recalled that when he went to work for President Ronald Reagan in 1981,
One of the architects of supply-side economics, Columbia Universityâs Robert Mundell, [said] that during periods of crisis, sometimes you have to be a supply-sider (tax rates), sometimes a monetarist (Fed money supply), and sometimes a Keynesian (federal deficits). Iâve never forgotten that advice. Mundell was saying: Choose the best policies as put forth by the great economic philosophers without being too rigid.
Perhaps the first supply-side Keynesian was Lord Keynes himself. According to Bartlett, Keynes wrote, âNor should the argument seem strange that taxation may be so high as to defeat its object, and that, given sufficient time to gather the fruits, a reduction of taxation will run a better chance than an increase of balancing the budget.â"
Did you catch that Keynes was a supply sider.
--
Did you read that you "fiscally conservative" Keynesian... Brass?
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2009/apr/20/00022/
Another excellent quote:
Despite their differences, conservative Keynesians and supply-siders can resemble each other. In a recession a conservative Keynesian could favor a cut in marginal tax rates to stimulate demand and, thereby, investment, while a supply-sider would favor a cut in marginal tax rates to stimulate investment and thereby demand. The policies look the same from the outside.
Another overlap between Keynesians and supply-siders is their nonchalance about deficit spending and the inflation it prompts. This attitude is revealed in the supply-sidersâ gusto for tax cuts even without offsetting spending cuts. Supply-siders tout the revenue-enhancing effects of slashing marginal tax rates, but the extent of those effects is disputed. As the monetarist Milton Friedman used to point out, the level of government spending, not taxation alone, is the better measure of the burden of government, since one way or another the money is extracted from the private economy.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2009/apr/20/00022/
Despite their differences, conservative Keynesians and supply-siders can resemble each other. In a recession a conservative Keynesian could favor a cut in marginal tax rates to stimulate demand and, thereby, investment, while a supply-sider would favor a cut in marginal tax rates to stimulate investment and thereby demand. The policies look the same from the outside.
Another overlap between Keynesians and supply-siders is their nonchalance about deficit spending and the inflation it prompts. This attitude is revealed in the supply-sidersâ gusto for tax cuts even without offsetting spending cuts. Supply-siders tout the revenue-enhancing effects of slashing marginal tax rates, but the extent of those effects is disputed. As the monetarist Milton Friedman used to point out, the level of government spending, not taxation alone, is the better measure of the burden of government, since one way or another the money is extracted from the private economy.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2009/apr/20/00022/
The trouble with Keynesianism is not only that its focus on macroeconomic aggregates to the neglect of microeconomic human action on the ground âconceal the most fundamental mechanisms of change,â as F.A. Hayek noted. It is also that Keynesianism sanctions politicians in doing what they wish to do already: spend the peopleâs money, debauch the currency, and engineer society in their own imageâall in order to stay in power. All too often, the Rightâs economic program has amounted, in practice, to a variation on Keynesian themesâstimulating demand through tax cuts without spending cuts or military spending rather than the public works favored by the Left. The result, either way, is bigger government, ballooning deficits, inflation, and recession.
Itâs not true that âweâre all Keynesians now.â But enough of us are to justify concern about the future
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2009/apr/20/00022/
Itâs not true that âweâre all Keynesians now.â But enough of us are to justify concern about the future
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/article/2009/apr/20/00022/