Subject:
|
Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 16 Oct 2006 20:31:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2239 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
All things considered, I’m more annoyed that you didn’t riff on my rating
system than that you questioned the methodology of the study!
|
I give your weak attempt at humor a 2.5 out of 5 (whoopie-cushions).
|
Hey, I’ll take that. That’s 25% of perfect, after all.
|
How’s that math working for you lately, Dave!? Looks like half of perfect
from here the obstructed-view seats....
| |
| |
As for the study, I was under the impression that the whole debate WRT
supply-side economics was all but over.
|
That’s right--it’s a disastrous policy divorced from reality and favored only
by the very wealthy who understand its implications and the not-so-wealthy
who don’t. End of debate!
|
Well, that certainly was easy....:-)
| |
| |
It worked fabulously for Reagan (spending did him in). It is working
likewise for GWB now.
|
But it’s not really working for GWB now, either, except in terms of painting
a falsely rosy picture of this disastrous, unsustainable economy he’s
wrought. The tiny trickle of jobs, coupled with the accelerating carefree
spending, is doing horrible, long-term damage to the economy on a scale that
will actually wind up making Reagan look like a good President, if you
can imagine such a thing!
| |
To be economically where we are now after having absorbed the catastrophes
of 9-11 and Katrina is nothing less than miraculous (as the Dow inches
towards 12,000).
|
Feh. If you walk down the street, less than one person in a hundred will be
directly affected by the DOW’s breaking of the 12,000 mark. Maybe their
401K’s will do a little better, and maybe they’ll eventually pay only a
nickel more for something instead of a dime more, but beyond that the DOW is
a clumsy instrument for measuring the real strength of the economy,
especially when so many other measurements (personal debt, personal savings,
etc.) exist.
|
But it is the metric by which we have consistently gauged the economy. I
realize that there will always be people in any boom who are not affected, but
overall, booms favor everyone, if for no other reason than the commonwealth
becomes greater, allowing even the lazy and ne’er-do-wells to benefit.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
| --snip-- (...) But that's true in any developed country at any time since WWII. The standard of living of the developed world has increased consistently (albeit faster or slower at times) because science and technology has allowed it to. It's a true (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
| (...) Whoops! Not a failing of math, but of reading comprehension. I totally blew past your maximum of five and read a ten in its place. But half-perfect is nifty, too! (...) But it's accurate only inasmuch as an IQ test accurately measures IQ. (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
| (...) Hey, I'll take that. That's 25% of perfect, after all. (...) That's right--it's a disastrous policy divorced from reality and favored only by the very wealthy who understand its implications and the not-so-wealthy who don't. End of debate! (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
