 | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Dave Schuler
|
| | | (...) 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)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) "Half-wit" I'd say, but that would be too easy! >:-D (...) Well, my point is that it has been consistently used through the decades and therefore is a sort of standardized snapshot of our economy, if only one part. Though it doesn't reflect (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) That would be nice if it were true, but despite two administrations espousing that view, it has yet to work as promised. It fails for a number of reasons. First, you can't build a business if there isn't a demand to support it, and if the (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) Well, let's be honest here. If your product is too expensive for the masses in the USA, it probably doesn't stand much of a chance in an even MORE empoverished world market overseas, especially with foreign governments' market-protection (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | (...) Not quite true any more. The EU is providing a balanced offset against the US nowadays (look at the strength of the Euro). From a world markets point of view the US is playing less of a role. And I wouldn't whinge about tariffs. Check how much (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) What about all of this rubbish about the US being 5% of the world's population (300,000,000 strong now, thankyouverymuch) and yet consuming 75%-ish of the world's resources? Balance that! (...) It's a wonder we are even able to dress ourselves (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | (...) I've never heard it said that the US consumes 75% of the worlds resources. I've heard it consumes 25%. Are you learning percentages from Dave Schuler? (...) To be honest it kind of is. Your rates of literacy and numeracy are incredibly poor by (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) I find that offensive and insulting. I've worked long and hard to foul up my understanding of percentages, and I won't have you casting aspersions on my diligent efforts! Do you think dim-wittedeness like this comes easily? No way! Besides, (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) Hey, I think I was just sucker-punched.... JOHN (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
