 | | Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) Why is that, exactly? Compare and contrast the unemployment rate in Germany to that in Ireland. Factor of 4 difference. Why? What's different, exactly? Discuss. (...) I'll bite. What? Why? (25 years ago, 15-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) Umm... A slowly fading rumble? -- Terry K -- (25 years ago, 16-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) I thought we was comparing the US Economy to that of Europe's. Ireland's economy is improving because of the peace agreement - money is flooding in because it won't get blown up by terrorist ground strikes. Germany however and to squeeze it's (...) (25 years ago, 18-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) I'm not sure you can really compare the US economy to Europe's since Europe still doesn't really have a single economy - after all isn't that one of the problems the Euro is having? We've got some countries doing well and some countries not (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What happened?
|
|
You were getting on about how great Europe is compared to the US. My point is that the US economy, having just went through a period of some deregulation, and a period in which a number of new industries sprang up faster than the government could (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) OK. (...) The Republic of Ireland has always been poorer than Northern Ireland, one of the reasons people in NI want to stay part of the UK. Bombings appeared both sides of the border, just because none have occured in the last year doesn't (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) I'd strongly dispute that. Business cycles have been happening for centuries, since long before Governments started interventionist economic policies. To a large extent those interventionist policies in many countries started in response to (...) (25 years ago, 20-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What happened?
|
|
On Mon, 19 Jul 1999 12:05:48 GMT, Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote: You know, up til now, what you said made at least a modicum of sense. (...) Business cycles have _nothing_ to do with government interventions. There have been documented (...) (25 years ago, 26-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) That's one of us, anyway. <zing> Just kidding. (...) Sorry, I forgot. There wasn't government back in 1503, and it didn't meddle in the economy either. How silly of me. (...) Trust me, government intervention wasn't done for god's sake, it was (...) (25 years ago, 26-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) So you are arguing that if you remove all Government intervention, then there won't be any business cycles? You are also apparently arguing that there has always been Government intervention? You appear to have argued yourself into a corner, (...) (25 years ago, 27-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) No empirical evidence that's definitive, but theoretical proofs exist, (and not based on invisible heat sorting demons or market information communicators). Further, the less intervention there is, the longer the booms last and the less severe (...) (25 years ago, 27-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: What happened?
|
|
(...) Well if you believe you can point us to a theoretical proof I'd be interested to see it (seriously). I'd have to say however that I'd be extremely sceptical of any proofs, because. (1) The theory of the free market relies on a number of (...) (25 years ago, 27-Jul-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
