reason there hasn't been the usual number of threads about economy

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by oldgator, Jul 6, 2013.

  1. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    I should posit, of course, this excludes military expenditures, although they certainly can and do contribute to deficits. Even military expenditures come with the benefit of private sector, although any industry propped up by the federal government is essentially an arm of the public sector.

    We can assume "deficit spending" in this case means not generalized spending but that intended to benefit the economy's growth.
  2. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    32,555
    Likes Received:
    2,455
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,274
    Wrong, If we invest in technology (DARPA, Los Alimos, Oak Ridge, Lawrence Livermore etc, etc..) there are spinoffs that create even more jobs in the private sector.

    But give someone free money to sit on his/her a$$ all day just to make more babies that do the exact same thing. This is a one way trip to government assisted existence. And this deficit spending is bad.

    There is a difference, but I'd like all deficit spending to end forever.
  3. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    Yeah, ok, but then your anger is entirely misdirected. Stimulus money - by very definition - is an injection into the private sector. Welfare, etc., is handled by congress and is, of course, the tiniest drop in the bucket when it comes to our deficit.

    BTW, DARPA, Oak Ridge, etc. have some of the least private sector involvement for obvious reasons. Construction and maintenance projects, on the other hand, area almost entirely private sector, so would therefore be the "best" by this measure.

    And further, how can someone set the bar at "benefits the private sector" and then turn around and complain about investment into green companies? That's contradictory.
  4. g8trjax
    Offline

    g8trjax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    2,925
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +290
    Thought you may like this.


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2AvU2cfXRk
  5. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    To reiterate, I'm 100% against any QE, but there's a lot of confusion about what happens when you inject money directly into an economy, and how much would be actually needed to keep one afloat. It's a lot more than $85B.
  6. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    Also that video makes as much an argument against QE as it does against fiat in general.
  7. g8trjax
    Offline

    g8trjax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2007
    Messages:
    2,925
    Likes Received:
    74
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +290
    So what did the econ inclined folks think of Bernanke's remarks yesterday? The perpetuation of QE good news, or bad? If we were truly improving, it seems he would just go ahead and taper, just get it over with.
  8. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    56,508
    Likes Received:
    556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,515
    1. QE is never good news

    2. This isn't actually a shift in plans. The Fed has set benchmarks for reduction and he's discussed them in the past.

Share This Page