Post Reply  Post Thread 
Pages (4): « First < Previous 1 2 3 [4] Last »

Wall Street Journal abandons Trump for Hillary (b/c he's to her left)

Author Message
Lord Alexander
Comrade
*


Posts: 1,585
Words count: 238,210
Group: Basic
Joined: Feb2009
Status: Offline
Reputation: 61
Experience: 616
Glory Points: 146
Medals: 4

Post: #31
RE: Wall Street Journal abandons Trump for Hillary (b/c he's to her left)

yangusbeef Wrote:

Lord Alexander Wrote:

yangusbeef Wrote:
4. Renegotiate Iran deal

This will become a receipt for disaster and will cause USA to eventually organize the invasion into Iran. Only Saudians will truly benefit from this, though I am certain that Israel's political elites will misguidedly believe that it is good for them as well.

Unlike you, I do not see any reasons to believe that he will try to fulfill most of his electoral promises, but if you are right and he will really try to do this, then Trump is not better than Hillary even in the Foreign policy matters.


Better now than later when they wipe Israel off the face of the earth using ballistic missiles. Trump's foreign policy is great, and is the main reason I like him.

Khamenei has strong sense of self-preservation, so he will not launch military attacks against Israel if he will know that right after the attack the USA will destroy his regime.

We already have seen in Iraq and Libya what is happening when Americans invade Middle Eastern countries. These countries are becoming the playgrounds for the insane Islamic terrorist groups that are genuinely ready to give away everything to destroy Israel and other enemies. I see no benefits for the USA or Israel if Iran will join the list of such countries.


Helsworth Wrote:
@LordAlexander
Some dems & independents said, fuck Gore, I'm voting Bush because I can use the tax cut. So in the end, it's possible for a politician to both win votes & enact the promised legislation, even if the mainstream analysts are against said legislation. The Bush tax cuts are the very proof that you don't need the ok from the establishment academia in order to get your election pledges signed into bills of law.

To begin with, Bush has "won" these elections only because the votes were counted incorrectly. Neither Trump nor Sanders have any reasons to expect that they will receive similar help.

But what is more important, the very essence of the approach of the deficit doves is that even big deficit can be good for the economy if it is implemented at the right time and for a limited time, but that it will eventually lead to massive economic troubles in case it will be maintained far too long. The details are constantly debated, but the core principle is undeniable part of the modern mainstream economic thought. The majority of the mainstream economists opposed Bush's tax cuts, but very considerable minority of them was still ready to defend his decision.

On the other hand, the deficit owls defend the assumption that deficits themselves are not a problem at all. No one in the mainstream camp will support this, so unlike the Bush's tax cuts the open advocacy of such position will meet universal opposition from all corners of the mainstream.

15.05.2016 13:34
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,451
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #32
RE: Wall Street Journal abandons Trump for Hillary (b/c he's to her left)

Lord Alexander Wrote:
On the other hand, the deficit owls defend the assumption that deficits themselves are not a problem at all. No one in the mainstream camp will support this, so unlike the Bush's tax cuts the open advocacy of such position will meet universal opposition from all corners of the mainstream.

That's a strawman. Deficit owls say "deficits don't matter they way you think they do." Deficit owls know that the bad consequence of too high fiscal deficits is the risk of demand-side inflation, not bankruptcy. Owls know that the way to handle inflation is with fiscal policy, not with monetary policy (i.e. interest rates). The hawks wreck the economy regardless of the cycle. While the doves wreck the economy in the upturn, because they think that the Government is supposed to run surpluses in the upturn in order to "pay down the national debt". They don't realize that by doing that or that by pursuing balanced budgets, they're making the private debt structure unsustainable. You can't pursue balanced budgets or surpluses during a private expansion, when you're also running a CAD without a recession happening in the near future.
Authentic doves favor deficit spending in the downturn. They would not attack a Government who pursues this policy, when the economy suffers from so much idle capacity, due to depressed levels of Aggregate Demand.
Whatever pretexts you're trying to find for Sanders' campaign not vocalizing the truth of the matter are exactly that pretexts. Pretty much the whole media machine is against him anyway. The new-keynesians (like Krugman) are against him. Are against his stance on WS & the banks. Why cater to these fools? Sanders supporters don't look up to them anyway. He would have been able to transform the whole debate by changing the backwards logic of it. It's idiotic to state that the Government must first tax the rich before it can afford to spend on the poor, on the middle class, or for the country's other needs. He is not even attacking the "Oh, we'll be like Greece" mantra vis-a-vis the debt. Apparently, you can be Greenspan (a former ass-licker of Ayn Rand), you can be Bernanke, you can be any other establishment monetarist, hawk, dove, even libertarian and get away with saying the truth "The US can't default." But if you're a politician that's saying that, you somehow automatically lose? Excuse me if I don't buy into this bullshit defeatist narrative. How is Trump getting away with it? It made sense to play it "cool" at the beginning when he (Sanders) had no chances, but now the context is totally ripe for him to start telling the truth.

This is how Sanders could win over all independents.
"I want to abolish FICA taxes & keep FICA spending. How do you like that?"
"But senator where will the money come from?"
"From Federal Government fiscal debits."
"So you'll increase the fiscal deficit."
"That's right."
"But won't that burden our children with higher taxes & inflation?"
"Look. Deficit spending IS money printing. We've been doing deficit spending for much of our history. No hyperinflation. And no, we're not burdening our children by deficit spending. We're depriving them of a future worth living in if we don't deficit spend today to create the infrastructure, education, capital goods, and preserve the environment for them to inherit."
(The audience roars & achieves climax)

Even fucking Mises' position regarding war-debt is so close to that of your standard Keynesian.

A good case can be made out for short-term government debts under special conditions. Of course, the popular justification of war loans is nonsensical. All the materials needed for the conduct of a war must be provided by restriction of civilian consumption, by using up a part of the capital available and by working harder. The whole burden of warring falls upon the living generation. The coming generations are only affected to the extent to which, on account of the war expenditure, they will inherit less from those now living than they would have if no war had been fought. Financing a war through loans does not shift the burden to the sons and grandsons. It is merely a method of distributing the burden among the citizens. If the whole expenditure had to be provided by taxes, only those who have liquid funds could be approached. The rest of the people would not contribute adequately. Short-term loans can be instrumental in removing such inequalities, as they allow for a fair assessment on the owners of fixed capital.” (Mises 1998: 213).

http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogsp...would.html


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache

This post was last modified: 15.05.2016 15:47 by Helsworth.

15.05.2016 15:13
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
yangusbeef
Unregistered


Post: #33
RE: Wall Street Journal abandons Trump for Hillary (b/c he's to her left)

You keep claiming that the debt does not matter, and that is absolutely false. The larger debt is causing our credit rating to degrade, making it harder and more to buy on credit and maintain discretionary spending, so much so that the US will soon have to stop discretionary funding. This will lead to a humongous increase in liabilities and interest payments, inevitably leading to hyper inflation. Why? because people will stop buying US securities, and the currency will become unstable. As soon as the debt his twenty trillion or higher, the hammer will start to come down on us, in more ways than one. Not to mention the US wastes half of every dollar, not really rocket science when it comes to balancing the budget, or at least greatly reducing it.

19.05.2016 00:02
Quote this message in a reply
yangusbeef
Unregistered


Post: #34
RE: Wall Street Journal abandons Trump for Hillary (b/c he's to her left)

Lord Alexander Wrote:

yangusbeef Wrote:

Lord Alexander Wrote:

yangusbeef Wrote:
4. Renegotiate Iran deal

This will become a receipt for disaster and will cause USA to eventually organize the invasion into Iran. Only Saudians will truly benefit from this, though I am certain that Israel's political elites will misguidedly believe that it is good for them as well.

Unlike you, I do not see any reasons to believe that he will try to fulfill most of his electoral promises, but if you are right and he will really try to do this, then Trump is not better than Hillary even in the Foreign policy matters.


Better now than later when they wipe Israel off the face of the earth using ballistic missiles. Trump's foreign policy is great, and is the main reason I like him.

Khamenei has strong sense of self-preservation, so he will not launch military attacks against Israel if he will know that right after the attack the USA will destroy his regime.

We already have seen in Iraq and Libya what is happening when Americans invade Middle Eastern countries. These countries are becoming the playgrounds for the insane Islamic terrorist groups that are genuinely ready to give away everything to destroy Israel and other enemies. I see no benefits for the USA or Israel if Iran will join the list of such countries.


Helsworth Wrote:
@LordAlexander
Some dems & independents said, fuck Gore, I'm voting Bush because I can use the tax cut. So in the end, it's possible for a politician to both win votes & enact the promised legislation, even if the mainstream analysts are against said legislation. The Bush tax cuts are the very proof that you don't need the ok from the establishment academia in order to get your election pledges signed into bills of law.

To begin with, Bush has "won" these elections only because the votes were counted incorrectly. Neither Trump nor Sanders have any reasons to expect that they will receive similar help.

But what is more important, the very essence of the approach of the deficit doves is that even big deficit can be good for the economy if it is implemented at the right time and for a limited time, but that it will eventually lead to massive economic troubles in case it will be maintained far too long. The details are constantly debated, but the core principle is undeniable part of the modern mainstream economic thought. The majority of the mainstream economists opposed Bush's tax cuts, but very considerable minority of them was still ready to defend his decision.

On the other hand, the deficit owls defend the assumption that deficits themselves are not a problem at all. No one in the mainstream camp will support this, so unlike the Bush's tax cuts the open advocacy of such position will meet universal opposition from all corners of the mainstream.


Russia will support him, and the US is too afraid to fight anyone who could actually launch an invasion on their empire (IE, east europe and Middle east). Not to mention China, but I dont think they would pick a side, for economic reasons.

19.05.2016 03:52
Quote this message in a reply
Killana Kalita
Council Leader
*


Posts: 3
Words count: 346
Group: Basic
Joined: Feb2016
Status: Offline
Reputation: 0
Experience: 33
Glory Points: 250
Medals: 4

Post: #35
RE: Wall Street Journal abandons Trump for Hillary (b/c he's to her left)

yangusbeef Wrote:
Sanders V Trump is well; The fact alone that so many corporate(oligarch) and union(socialist) controlled organizations that attack him should be evidence enoug that he is out for the American people. I don't like basic income; people would spend the money irresponsibly, society would become hectic. A better system, as I have said, is to promote free market capitalism and better education so that people can take care of themselves, and solely themselves. No handouts. Such a society would be the best in the world, and is, in my view, the American Dream. High GNP, high income, high employment, largely a small producer economy... Without government assistance, or anybody's assistance for matter, and everyone will have private property. Basically Scandinavia, minus the socialistic aspects, and is what trump advocates for. No more illegals, no more terrorists(that we can catch), enormous economic liberty, fair taxation, decentralized(free market) public schooling, ect.

You can't just get rid of government involvement especially in places where government is needed. Capatilism only works well with a government that also has a hand in helping people. If you capitalize everything you're not going to get the outcome you so hope for. You'd make costs rise immensely and people would be begging for some kind of government aid to help pay for high costs from businesses who screw over their consumers and fat cats who take more from their workers who work 5x as harder as the fat cat. Pure capitalism isnt good for a country and neither is pure socialism. You need a little bit of both to create an even handed country where both lower class and upper class have equal chances to reach their desired well being.

19.05.2016 06:31
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,451
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #36
RE: Wall Street Journal abandons Trump for Hillary (b/c he's to her left)

yangusbeef Wrote:
You keep claiming that the debt does not matter, and that is absolutely false. The larger debt is causing our credit rating to degrade, making it harder and more to buy on credit and maintain discretionary spending, so much so that the US will soon have to stop discretionary funding. This will lead to a humongous increase in liabilities and interest payments, inevitably leading to hyper inflation. Why? because people will stop buying US securities, and the currency will become unstable. As soon as the debt his twenty trillion or higher, the hammer will start to come down on us, in more ways than one. Not to mention the US wastes half of every dollar, not really rocket science when it comes to balancing the budget, or at least greatly reducing it.

Apparently, you haven't heard of the automatic stabilizers. When nongovernment spending picks up, welfare spending goes down and tax revenue goes up, due to increased economic activity (and more jobs being offered & taken).


Credit ratings applied to currency sovereigns are absolutely meaningless. The US Federal Government is not like the euro-zone governments or like Ecuador. It's not a currency user, it's a currency issuer.
Government $-liabilities are nongovernment sector $-assets.
US securities are just saving accounts at the FED. How does people changing nrs from their savings accounts to their checking accounts lead to hyperinflation? How does people spending their money on goods & services translate into hyperinflation when there is no supply problem or capacity constraint for the USA?



In 2015, the US domestic private sector's balance was negative. Why do you wish to push that balance more in the negative? It's absolutely insane.


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache

This post was last modified: 19.05.2016 08:42 by Helsworth.

19.05.2016 08:32
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pages (4): « First < Previous 1 2 3 [4] Last »
Post Reply  Post Thread 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Woman refuses to sit beside a Trump-supporter Malone 0 1,025 27.03.2019 17:35
Last Post: Malone
  God Emperor Trump Attempts to bring peace and amicability to the world CommieScum 3 1,792 23.05.2018 01:38
Last Post: Caesar Anubis
  Up is down, Right is left, Violence is peace CommieScum 0 1,118 21.08.2017 15:12
Last Post: CommieScum
  James Comey, FBI director, is fired by Trump CommieScum 1 1,633 10.06.2017 21:44
Last Post: jacoble
  Once proud Donald Trump, bowing like a well trained monkey before his Master Helsworth 14 3,395 05.06.2017 04:50
Last Post: adder
  Trump commits an act of war against Syria Helsworth 9 2,315 13.04.2017 17:50
Last Post: yangusbeef
  Trump Muslim Ban Made Possible By Obama Admin & Media Won't Tell You Helsworth 10 2,488 31.01.2017 16:17
Last Post: Nietzsche
  Steve Hall about the Left Helsworth 0 949 27.01.2017 10:56
Last Post: Helsworth
  Trump to call for six weeks paid maternity leave & Unions are gushing over Trump Helsworth 0 1,361 24.01.2017 17:36
Last Post: Helsworth
  Little hope for Snowden pardon: Trump CIA pick wants "death penalty" Helsworth 0 1,248 05.12.2016 20:48
Last Post: Helsworth

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this Thread | Add Thread to Favorites

Forum Jump: