Fiscal responsibility: suppose the govt "doesn't spend money it doesn't have."

[NAOS]

You can ask Franklin if you'd like, he'll confirm that I'm genuinely torn on this issue. I actually have more in common with Babe (who is to the "right" of many of you), then I do with the so-called left.

But, yeah, parables are for the weak. Really, spazz, it was a weak attempt. drivel, actually.

 

[NAOS]

Of course you do. Let's completely ignore the 800 lb gorilla in the room that is the greatest spender in the history of the United States.

But why would you dismiss spending out-of-hand? This is the worst economic crisis since the last time we spent our way out of ****.

There is also debt forgiveness.... but I think only Jesus can do that in this country. I'm only sorta kidding.

 

[Dr. Jones]

You can ask Franklin if you'd like, he'll confirm that I'm genuinely torn on this issue. I actually have more in common with Babe (who is to the "right" of many of you), then I do with the so-called left.

But, yeah, parables are for the weak. Really, spazz, it was a weak attempt. drivel, actually.

Just curious why you have twice mentioned 'asking Franklin' about you in recent posts .. why Frank?

 

[NAOS]

I pretty much agree with your take on this, not necessarily on which side is worse. When a Repub is in office it is the other side that is "poisoning the well". We are in a tough situation as a country and I only see it getting worse before something big has to happen to try and salvage things and fix things. As things are currently, not much positive will happen because of the McCoy's and the Hatfields.

So, you really don't have much of a positive political program. It seems you can say a lot about what is WRONG, and a lot about what we SHOULDN'T DO. If both "sides" are broken, then why not think of an alternative? Does that flirt with the law in uncomfortable ways?

 

[NAOS]

Just curious why you have twice mentioned 'asking Franklin' about you in recent posts .. why Frank?

because it's usually him that actually engages in conversations like this, so we've gotten into it a few times and have a basic understanding of each others positions. Babe, too.

When I started this thread the Right Wing Daddies just assumed I was looking for a fight. Go ask him if you'd like.... I wasn't; I was looking for your forecast. I'm still waiting.

 

[Dr. Jones]

because it's usually him that actually engages in conversations like this, so we've gotten into a few times and have a basic understanding of each others positions. Babe, too.

When I started this thread the Right Wing Daddies just assumed I was looking for a fight. Go ask him if you'd like.... I wasn't; I was looking for your forecast. I'm still waiting.

If we stopped spending more than we have, right now, all at once .. we would be on the path to recovery with a quickness. In fact, we should completely ignore the fact that we're spending a brazillian dollars more than is necessary because of poor mgmt, and just start cutting, now.

I predict that we will have sub 5% unemployment (because no more food stamps), no more abortions (because condoms are cheaper .. and the gov't can't afford the procedure), and churches will be full with people desperate for God to help a dieing country. But, within 5 - 10 years, all is well in America. People will be fixing the roads with their own hands, crops shared amongst neighbors, total eutopia.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

You can ask Franklin if you'd like, he'll confirm that I'm genuinely torn on this issue. I actually have more in common with Babe (who is to the "right" of many of you), then I do with the so-called left.

But, yeah, parables are for the weak. Really, spazz, it was a weak attempt. drivel, actually.

I disagree, yea... surprise.

13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:

15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed

I have to say if you think I speak in parables, I find myself in the best company. If I speak to you in parables, and you don't get it, it means your heart is waxes gross, and your ears are dull of hearing, and your eyes have closed.
It's tough to show someone the light when their eyes are closed.
It's hard to get someone to hear when they are busy talking, or thinking of the next thing they want to say.
It is impossible to open somebody's heart when they already know everything and know where they want to be, no matter what.

Don't be surprised if the only time I chime in on one of your posts is if I am bored out of my mind or in a mood for an argument.

Weak is you not actually responding to anything in my post, not understanding it, and still acting like you are a smart guy. Weak is not understanding how morals, and ideals play into what our government and society are. Weak is not understanding how the big picture is contained in every single detail that exists. Weak is you not addressing any details in my post, yet being so focused on "the details". Weak is you pretending you want a conversation, and not even attempting to have one.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

So, you really don't have much of a positive political program. It seems you can say a lot about what is WRONG, and a lot about what we SHOULDN'T DO. If both "sides" are broken, then why not think of an alternative? Does that flirt with the law in uncomfortable ways?

I am not running for office. I don't have a political program at all. I vote for people I believe will best help our country at the time. Yes I think both sides are broken for the most part, and the only way an alternative will happen is if the bulk of the citizens in this country get active, get involved, and do something about it. This country is so full of apathy that I don't realistically see it happening. I am not concerned with flirting with laws, I am more concerned with obeying laws we have that are good, and obeying laws we have that are bad until we can get them changed.

I vote and can say what is wrong, and what we shouldn't do... I also have my ideas of what we should do. I have plenty of ideas of what we can and should do. How about I reword it for your sensitive soul.

We should spend as a government to a limit of what we bring in in tax dollars.

We should get the government agencies up with technology and get them to communicate with each other way better than they do. We should get our government agencies to be much more efficient. Specifically all of these programs that are helping people around the country have poor efficiencies and do not share information with each other. They send out boatloads of duplicate paperwork to people, and most of it is useless. The Food stamp program gives people way too much money per month for food, they could cut it in half and use the rest of the cash to get more people help while the others are still just fine. ( I know people that are on food stamps that brag about how much they get and how much they end up throwing away every month). The bureaucracy and level after level of government employees could be cut down enormously to save millions/billions in unnecessary payroll. The government can use that money in other ways. There are tons of ways the government can be more efficient in their contracts, and in their spending in probably all departments. The contracts they make with companies pay way more for a service than that company would get doing business with other companies.

I have more, but I think I will wait for you to start hacking.

 

[Scat]

For what it's worth, FDR was probably top 10 worst president ever material. Not even Obama has tried to stack the SC... yet.

Plus he let Pearl Harbor get leveled.

 

[NAOS]

I disagree, yea... surprise.



I have to say if you think I speak in parables, I find myself in the best company. If I speak to you in parables, and you don't get it, it means your heart is waxes gross, and your ears are dull of hearing, and your eyes have closed.
It's tough to show someone the light when their eyes are closed.
It's hard to get someone to hear when they are busy talking, or thinking of the next thing they want to say.
It is impossible to open somebody's heart when they already know everything and know where they want to be, no matter what.

Don't be surprised if the only time I chime in on one of your posts is if I am bored out of my mind or in a mood for an argument.

Weak is you not actually responding to anything in my post, not understanding it, and still acting like you are a smart guy. Weak is not understanding how morals, and ideals play into what our government and society are. Weak is not understanding how the big picture is contained in every single detail that exists. Weak is you not addressing any details in my post, yet being so focused on "the details". Weak is you pretending you want a conversation, and not even attempting to have one.

^ this made me LOL so hard I thought I sprained something. Amazing economics here.

You've demonstrated my suspicion: you have no ****ing clue what TO DO, so you just default to moralizing principles. You displayed that in technicolor. brilliant.

Thanks for the passages. It seems the Hebrews thought very little of people with an actual opinion....

 

[NAOS]

We should get the government agencies up with technology and get them to communicate with each other way better than they do. We should get our government agencies to be much more efficient. Specifically all of these programs that are helping people around the country have poor efficiencies and do not share information with each other. They send out boatloads of duplicate paperwork to people, and most of it is useless. The Food stamp program gives people way too much money per month for food, they could cut it in half and use the rest of the cash to get more people help while the others are still just fine. ( I know people that are on food stamps that brag about how much they get and how much they end up throwing away every month). The bureaucracy and level after level of government employees could be cut down enormously to save millions/billions in unnecessary payroll. The government can use that money in other ways. There are tons of ways the government can be more efficient in their contracts, and in their spending in probably all departments. The contracts they make with companies pay way more for a service than that company would get doing business with other companies.

I have more, but I think I will wait for you to start hacking.

Thank you.

It's still not an answer to my question, but this is the first bit substance to the issues.

For the most part, the government HAS been streamlining and becoming more accountable to bottom-dollar corporate logics since the 1980s (and, yes, that includes Clinton... in a big way... in fact he's sorta the champion of this). If this process is taking "too much time", then that is probably because not all state programs are amenable to profit-based logics (e.g. caring for schizophrenics... they aren't institutionalized easily; they don't recover predictably; programs can't show statistics of their efficacy... so they get cut... schizophrenics roam the street because the State can prove something to fit a bottom dollar).

I must say, I'm very against the second half of this statement I've quoted. You come out against the poor. Look at the disparity of wealth in this country created DURING THIS SAME SPAN OF TIME and I think you'd see that it's the Fat Cats that need to be reigned in.

 

[NAOS]

For what it's worth, FDR was probably top 10 worst president ever material. Not even Obama has tried to stack the SC... yet.

Plus he let Pearl Harbor get leveled.

See, Scat is the righty with actual political principles. He'll go with Henry Ford over FDR 8 days a week and doesn't need a limerick to explain why.

 

[Stoked]

Do any of you understand all the BS that goes on in something like...say moving a federal office? You cannot move the copy machine or the company it is from will not come fix it. So that's $300. We can ignore the fact that we do not have a service plan with them and have a 3rd party repair it. Or the fact that we now need a new one regardless of the fact that the one we have has not had a single problem in over 2 years. Works perfectly.

How about the floor plans have to go thru DHS, FPS, OIG, GSA...all of them have different needs and often times they conflict with anothers. So the floorplans get redone about 15 times. There are meetings about meetings. Then when you get here you are told that your mail machine no longer i sup to code regardless of the fact that it is perfectly fine, just like that copier. What happens to the old ones? Trashed.

So after wasting thousands you finally get to your place then have to spend another 5-10 grand fixing all the crap that wasn't done right becasue all the oversite micro managed to the point that nothing was done right.

So ok, you figure 25-35k was just wasted on one government office and a small one at that. Now imagine all the government offices that move around from all the agencies, (IRS, FPS, EPA, OIG, DHS, NSA, ICE, SSA, OPM, BLM, GSA, NFS...) That is a few million a year on just simply wasted money.

The waste in government is pure insanity. I am sure people can come up with thousands of other examples and we start getting into the billions. You fix all that and close all the exploited tax loopholes and then we can talk about government being worthy of spending my tax dollars.

 

[franklin]

Spazz, here's something that you might help you relate to the monetary aspect of this discussion (which is what I thought it was intended to be):

murder, robbery, and defalcations, scarcity of money, and a thousand other difficulties, would have torn asunder the bonds of the union; destroyed the confidence of man; and left the great body of the people to mourn over misfortunes in poverty, brought on by corrupt legislation in an hour of proud vanity for self aggrandizement.

For the accommodation of the people of every state and territory, let Congress shew their wisdom by granting a national bank, with branches in each state and territory, where the capital stock shall be held by the nation for the mother bank: and by the states and territories, for the branches; and whose officers and directors


shall be elected yearly by the people with wages at the rate of two dollars per day for services; which several banks shall never issue any more bills than the amount of capital stock in her vaults and the interest. The net gain of the mother bank shall be applied to the national revenue, and that of the branches to the states and territories' revenues. And the bills shall be par throughout the nation, which will mercifully cure that fatal disorder known in cities as brokerage; and leave the people's money in their own pockets.

That's from General Smith's presidential platform. Looks to me like he fully understood what happens in deflationary times when money is vanishing and the need for some entity to step in to replace it. (Side note--I've been impressed with the second quote basically calling for a Federal Reserve system 50+ years in advance.) The question is not whether creating new money is necessary but how. Should the central banks lower rates? What happens when that doesn't work? Should the government step in with spending programs? How much? How should it be spent? Should we simply print up money and send out checks to everyone in standard amounts or should we build useful stuff, empower labor, and help the unemployed feel useful? Should we tax the wealthy to a)pay back for saving their businesses, and b)recoup unfair gains from political pull? Should we revise the ever tightening EPA regulations & say "ya know what, we've done enough for now" & should get out of business' way a little bit more? Should we approve Keystone pipelines? Should we have a sound national energy policy?

 

[franklin]

If we stopped spending more than we have, right now, all at once .. we would be on the path to recovery with a quickness. In fact, we should completely ignore the fact that we're spending a brazillian dollars more than is necessary because of poor mgmt, and just start cutting, now.

I predict that we will have sub 5% unemployment (because no more food stamps), no more abortions (because condoms are cheaper .. and the gov't can't afford the procedure), and churches will be full with people desperate for God to help a dieing country. But, within 5 - 10 years, all is well in America. People will be fixing the roads with their own hands, crops shared amongst neighbors, total eutopia.

This is strong on work ethic and horrible on the medium of exchange front.

How does this bottom magically happen? What medium of exchange facilitates recovery? Why hasn't China invaded this collapsed economic power before the recovery? Basically, you're pushing a pseudo-Austrian line that the Austrians disagree with.

 

[Dr. Jones]

This is strong on work ethic and horrible on the medium of exchange front.

How does this bottom magically happen? What medium of exchange facilitates recovery? Why hasn't China invaded this collapsed economic power before the recovery? Basically, you're pushing a pseudo-Austrian line that the Austrians disagree with.

I am so confused in this thread as to who is trolling and who is not .. I hope you know that my post you quoted was an outrageously ridiculous troll on my part, right?

 

[NAOS]

I am so confused in this thread as to who is trolling and who is not .. I hope you know that my post you quoted was an outrageously ridiculous troll on my part, right?

If we have to label a troll, then I'm afraid it fits you and spazz.

 

[larryselbows]

Alright guys, this isn't some kind of exercise in mental masturbation and the US economy shouldn't be treated as some kind of game. I get kind of tired of hearing extreme perspectives from people that follow Milton Friedman/Ayn Randian philosophies. Alternatively, the same goes for extreme egalitarianism. The truth is that practical ideas are the only thing that is going to get the country back to where it needs to be, not some simplistic ideological mantra.

 

[Dr. Jones]

If we have to label a troll, then I'm afraid it fits you and spazz.

Haha .. your claims that everyone is being vague and not answering questions are as pot-meet-kettle as it gets.

You throw around enclosures, Keynesian economics, Austrian economics, FDR .. whatever .. but give nothing in the way of substance, even as it relates to someone else's work. I'm heading out but will check back later .. for now, here's a question, NAOS. How relevant, on a scale of 1 - 10, are these historical theories as they relate to the U.S. today? How does modern neoclassical economics relate? How much difference does geography, our macro, and the different political parties/partisanship play a role in the comparable situations? That, for what it's worth, is a serious question .. rather than a baiting one.

 

[franklin]

I am so confused in this thread as to who is trolling and who is not .. I hope you know that my post you quoted was an outrageously ridiculous troll on my part, right?

Nice. You got me.

I get kind of tired of hearing extreme perspectives from people that follow Milton Friedman

How dare you? That's revisionist history by the ideological right.

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/23/business/23scene.html