or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › The Keynesian Dead End
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Keynesian Dead End - Page 3

post #31 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post
Does anyone not believe 95-99% of the populace make the vast majority of their economic decisions on there here and now and that 99.9999% of all politicians do not make economic decisions based on re-election calculus? Or am I just being my usual cynical bastard self?

I'd go with that. This is what makes a lot of economic theory so laughable.
It is thought up by rational people (with a math bias) to explain an irrational world (or at least so complicated by conflicting incentives as to be un-mappable). Far better to have an understanding of Chaos Theory, Mandlebrot, Psychology etc.
At least then you'll appreciate that you don't know much, as opposed to thinking you know plenty.

Buffett and the other smart money realised this a long time ago...
post #32 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan View Post
You need to think about more than a defense budget. The whole budget here is growing like crazy. Welfare is projected up something like 14% per annum for three years. It's crazy.

And still, welfare spending is a small fraction of defense spending.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinW View Post
AND if the govt has the balls to raise taxes and cut spending proportionately when economic times are good.

Completely agree.
post #33 of 127
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLMountainMan View Post
And still, welfare spending is a small fraction of defense spending.

Not in terms of growth. Look at Chart 3 on the Heritage link.
post #34 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan View Post
Not in terms of growth. Look at Chart 3 on the Heritage link.

That wasn't the point. Welfare spending is STILL a fraction of the defense budget.
post #35 of 127
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConcernedParent View Post
That wasn't the point. Welfare spending is STILL a fraction of the defense budget.

So what? We have lots of national security issues that need addressing. What do you propose to do with the defense budget? What is your plan?
post #36 of 127
America's allocation to the military is far and beyond several times of even the next biggest spending nation. Cut it down to size. No, you do not need 30+ aircraft carriers to fight against a guerilla enemy, you need more eyes and ears on the ground. You do not need a massive increase in troop numbers on the ground to create a sense of safety, you need a smaller force that can speak arabic and act as interim police. Fact is, belligerent states are no longer military giants and the military has to adapt to more effectively combat with their brains, and not more bombs.
post #37 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nereis View Post
America's allocation to the military is far and beyond several times of even the next biggest spending nation. Cut it down to size. No, you do not need 30+ aircraft carriers to fight against a guerilla enemy, you need more eyes and ears on the ground. You do not need a massive increase in troop numbers on the ground to create a sense of safety, you need a smaller force that can speak arabic and act as interim police. Fact is, belligerent states are no longer military giants and the military has to adapt to more effectively combat with their brains, and not more bombs.

Why should the US military act as interim police? Stop spending US taxpayer money on these losing ventures. The world survived without the US for centuries and will survive if the US stops acting like the world's traffic cop too. Bring the troops home.
post #38 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan View Post
Not in terms of growth. Look at Chart 3 on the Heritage link.

Also not if you include entitlements.
post #39 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by iammatt View Post
Before Etienne says something, I know "IT IS ALL ABOUT ZERO BOUND!!!"
Thanks. Also, it would be refreshing if we stopped discussing things based on WSJ op-eds and Heritage pieces. We know both sources are about useless.

It's much more interesting to start looking at proper estimates and models and criticizing them, the way Matt did during our latest CBO discussion.
post #40 of 127
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Étienne View Post
Thanks. Also, it would be refreshing if we stopped discussing things based on WSJ op-eds and Heritage pieces. We know both sources are about useless.

This is typical of your bullshit analysis on the CE. Impugn the source but offer nothing compelling in return. It's really tired Etienne and does not add to the debate.
post #41 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artisan Fan View Post
Impugn the source but offer nothing compelling in return.
I have debunked the kind of bullshit found in those pieces countless times on CE. Yet you continue linking to them. I don't think it necessary to do it anymore.

While it is true that I haven't had much time to devote to SF (or CE) in the past few months, I would say that accusing me in general of not linking to enough data or not offering long analytical posts is pretty rich.
post #42 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post
Why should the US military act as interim police? Stop spending US taxpayer money on these losing ventures. The world survived without the US for centuries and will survive if the US stops acting like the world's traffic cop too. Bring the troops home.

Because power vacuums will only result in another civil war, with a government hostile to western powers likely to gain popular support. You throw up all over someone's carpet, you pay to clean it up.
post #43 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post
Why should the US military act as interim police? Stop spending US taxpayer money on these losing ventures. The world survived without the US for centuries and will survive if the US stops acting like the world's traffic cop too. Bring the troops home.

Exactly. Is the US spending to defend their economic interests? At least historical empires managed to extract resources from the states they occupied but the US seems to be filling theirs with money. Unless we're considering the perpetual state of war as merely an industry itself... in which case they should just be outright with it.

Regardless, if fiscal conservatives in the states are constantly preaching that there needs to be fat cut, the first place to look would be the biggest cash sinkhole in the government: Defense. Healthcare, Education, Welfare, Infrastructure, they're all drops in the bucket.
post #44 of 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBrown85 View Post
Exactly. Is the US spending to defend their economic interests? At least historical empires managed to extract resources from the states they occupied but the US seems to be filling theirs with money. Unless we're considering the perpetual state of war as merely an industry itself... in which case they should just be outright with it.

Regardless, if fiscal conservatives in the states are constantly preaching that there needs to be fat cut, the first place to look would be the biggest cash sinkhole in the government: Defense. Healthcare, Education, Welfare, Infrastructure, they're all drops in the bucket.
They are all drops in the bucket compared to entitlements, which is why the defense defense is basically a liberal red herring. Fwiw, defense needs to be cut as well IMO, but entitlements are THE issue.
post #45 of 127
Well there's spending to the benefit of society and there's spending to the detriment of it. With my political ideology, which differs from yours, spending on social security, education, healthcare, assistance to the poor, among other things are for the betterment of people, while bullets, fighter jets, humvees, and carpet bombs are not. Edit: or at least to the degree at which the cash is being spend. Mind you, not my country so I couldn't really care whether they do or don't, but presumably, better services in the US would probably equal better services in Canada via cheaper supply prices/fewer Americans taking advantage of our system, etc.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › The Keynesian Dead End