It's not a matter of insisting. It's a matter of recognizing that something other than supply side economics runs economies. You know, demand...the other half of economics that you like to pretend doesn't exist.
What other way should our economy be run and how would it be implemented?
"What other way should our economy be run and how would it be implemented?
There's your mistake right there, thinking that it's like a machine that can be "run" properly if only the right people are pulling on the right levers.
Note that GD, not me, talked about "running an economy." What would your ideal economy be, Larry? How would it look? What evidence do you have to support your assertions?
And THERE is your problem - the belief that the economy is being run by govt, or someone - maybe God. Now I get your devotion to climate change/AGW - it fits your fundamental need to believe that things are controlled.
An ideal economy is a pretty stupid thing to ask about - no one person gets to design an entire economy. An economy is the product of millions of people - not Top Men pulling levers and twirling knobs.
What's hilarious is you guys bitch about government "running" economies but no one is controlling whether or not consumer spending drives our economy. That's just how it is and we have to live with it. Free market, remember? Unless, of course, you'd like to change that. How would we go about it?
You advocate for reinforcing something that you can't say whether it is good or bad, whether we should have more or less. In short, you advocate without knowledge on what the results would be.
I on the other hand have not advocated for more of something. I have not advocated based upon complete fucking lack of knowledge like you do.
Well, that's nice but nowhere in there do I see what you are advocating....just being against what you think I am advocating. Again, explain what you would prefer in its place.
17 comments:
Maybe if you quit insisting that our economy be ran on consumer spending - then those at the bottom wouldn't incur debt to satisfy that....
It's not a matter of insisting. It's a matter of recognizing that something other than supply side economics runs economies. You know, demand...the other half of economics that you like to pretend doesn't exist.
What other way should our economy be run and how would it be implemented?
"What other way should our economy be run and how would it be implemented?
There's your mistake right there, thinking that it's like a machine that can be "run" properly if only the right people are pulling on the right levers.
Note that GD, not me, talked about "running an economy." What would your ideal economy be, Larry? How would it look? What evidence do you have to support your assertions?
What other way should our economy be run
And THERE is your problem - the belief that the economy is being run by govt, or someone - maybe God. Now I get your devotion to climate change/AGW - it fits your fundamental need to believe that things are controlled.
Same question for you, juris.
An ideal economy is a pretty stupid thing to ask about - no one person gets to design an entire economy. An economy is the product of millions of people - not Top Men pulling levers and twirling knobs.
Umm, noooo, M. The quote I italicized is yours and yours alone. You can't run away from that one.
Guard Duck
you quit insisting that our economy be ran on consumer spending
GuardDuck : you quit insisting...
What's hilarious is you guys bitch about government "running" economies but no one is controlling whether or not consumer spending drives our economy. That's just how it is and we have to live with it. Free market, remember? Unless, of course, you'd like to change that. How would we go about it?
That's just how it is
But you want to reinforce it. Without knowing whether that is good or bad. Shouldn't you know that before you want more of it?
If you don't think that having such a consumption based society is a good thing for economy, GD, then explain what you would prefer in its place.
Wrong.
You advocate for reinforcing something that you can't say whether it is good or bad, whether we should have more or less. In short, you advocate without knowledge on what the results would be.
I on the other hand have not advocated for more of something. I have not advocated based upon complete fucking lack of knowledge like you do.
Oh - and the fucking question is:
SHOULDN'T YOU FUCKING KNOW WHETHER IT IS GOOD OR BAD BEFORE ADVOCATING FOR MORE OF IT?
Answer that before you get all cocky.
Well, that's nice but nowhere in there do I see what you are advocating....just being against what you think I am advocating. Again, explain what you would prefer in its place.
How about advocating that people who don't know what they are doing not doing shit they don't know about....
Yeah, that would be something I could advocate for.
Post a Comment