Sometimes I am flabbergasted
- Thread starter dragonfliet
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
No, I complained that a growing fringe group that associates themselves with the tea party is insane and the motivating force for a great many of them is the hyperbolic rhetoric used in debates. I even made note that not all Tea Party people are in this camp, that many of them are opposed to even Republican policies, etc. I even mocked my source as left wing.
The problem is that people in their partisan fighting are using increasingly absurd language which inflates the direness of the situation so that it seems that if the right wins our country will die and if the left wins we will be living in a dictatorship. It is ridiculous because only an idiot would believe this--the problem is that a lot of idiots ARE believing it and going off and getting together to say that civil war is needed, the other party must be opposed at all costs, etc. This isn't about politics so much as it is about common flipping sense. For example, me and Brizz disagree VERY much about health care but we are able to state our opinions, argue through them in a logical manner and in the end realize that the other has good points that we simply cannot agree with. Larkin believes that the left wants to destroy the constitution, the SC is in on it and that our country is headed for a dictatorship and when you make a point he will deny it with inflated language and change the point. Kiff isn't QUITE that bad. The first example is GOOD political disagreement, the second example is the problem that creates/supports the nutjobs and has made our current political climate one in which things are not getting done as they should be.
And it is the left as well as the right. I mean, Nanci Pelosi is probably the biggest bitch in the country.
~Jason
But see now you are trying to change the subject. Remember that I stated that as long as it stays in line with the GDP it's not a problem right? If it was 90% of the budget then it would certainly be a problem. However, that would mean that we haven't kept it in step with the GDP like I stated.
That's great that you have all these facts and statistics, but I'd appreciate it if you could actually discuss the central thesis of my argument which is "as long as debt remains below a certain percentage of GDP it's not a problem". This is the third post now that you have failed to even address the point.
I personally do not appreciate being insulted in such a way simply because you cannot argue the actual point. I would point out that I am intimately engaged in the financial industry. In fact I'll be starting a job at the world's leading financial company this summer. Just because you read a few things on Ron Paul's website does not make you any more of an expert than the rest of us. It does not make your opinion so "obviously correct", and it does not give you the right to insult my intelligence.
Last edited:
1. I don't believe its just the left. The constitution has been and will continue to be destroyed by both sides of the aisle.
2. I don't believe it is headed for a dictatorship.
3. Don't jump to conclusions about what I say. Understand them, then put them out there. If you want to paint me as an idiot or rant about how horrible I am then at least get things right.
We've seen worse. I know we've been talking about 90% but just looking at historical levels even that isn't the end of the world.
The point is just that we're far from critical mass, and things will start to improve if GDP ends up being good in 2010/2011. Even if we passed healthcare we'd probably live through it, although it's not advisable.
Correction: It's near 100% gdp deficit, not debt, but the debt will get there around 2020. That said, what about the doubling of our paper currency? It that's not handled brilliantly (lol) we could have some very, very serious inflation.
Your the one insulting everyones intelligence by simply stating all is well "as long as debt remains below a certain percentage of GDP it's not a problem". This is just an untested theory. Stating it as fact is not at all honest and reflects very poorly on you and anything you have to say.
Economics is not an actual science and does not use the scientific method. Modern economic theory is sometimes referred to as voodoo science. Economics is a social science which attempts to predict how an economy will react. There always seems to be at least 2 different explanations, one from the supply siders and the other Keynesian. These are nearly diametrically opposing schools of thought of how and why the economy does what it does. These diametrically opposite theories can each explain the how and why, but only after the fact. But which is correct, hah, that's the kicker, both and neither. This is why it's a waste of time to debate. You cannot have a reasonable debate with diametrically opposing views. Even after the fact, the explanations they give typically still reflect these opposing views. Modern economic theory has a very spotty record of predicting what will happen and when. There are too many variables including human behavior that tend to be unpredictable and difficult, if not impossible, to model.
The WWII era debt cannot be likened with todays. There will not be anything like the post war boom to deliver us out of debt. Anyone who argues this is blowing smoke out their hole. That time was very different from today in so many categories. Economists can say very little for certain, all they can do is guess. That is the bottom line, All they can do is guess based on an imperfect models and assumptions. How will you know who is right? You won't, not unless an economic disaster happens and blame is obvious.
Certain things can be said that could happen. If the rates on the T-Bills start to rise, so does the interest we have to pay on the debt. That's right, if the rates go up so will our debt interest payment. This can happen very fast due to the size of the debt and the extremely low current rates. Say if the rates double from the current <0.2% to 0.4%, the interest will double. So what would happen if it jumps to 1.0% or 2.0%? Do the math and you come up with crazy huge numbers that will cause the debt to sky rocket.
FYI, I do not go to any political web sites to get my info. All economic data is available on .gov web sites.
Last edited:
lol... that's cute, but we both know it's the other way around
Religious belief is a decision made by a person. Therefore blaming the belief is backwards.
I specifically said it was my "thesis". You can call it an "untested theory" if you'd like, but that doesn't mean that it's not correct. Besides I'm not the only person stating theories as fact. If you are correct about me, then you are just as dishonest. The difference is that all your comments do is spread fear and confuse the public.
Then let me blow smoke out of my hole. The post war boom is child's play compared to what the US economy is capable of producing. Just look at the entire boom during the 90's. There is more than enough potential out there to pay this back. All that is required is for us to take advantage of that boom to pay down the debt. Sure the WWII era was a different time. However, I don't think it makes the point any less valid. They went well over 100% debt, and nothing catastrophic happened. Your argument makes a good point as to why we might not turn it around, but it does not prove that where we're at now is already doomsday. Chances are few have a few presidencies to figure it out.
The key word here is that it "could" happen. There's lots of things that could happen. All it takes is one days look at a financial newspaper to see all sorts of theories about what "could" happen that never actually come to pass.
It's true that there's a lot of uncertainty about how economics works. It's just far too complicated to predict accurately. However, your argument is just as much theory. Personally I don't think it's a good idea to throw out the entire economic system that has worked for decades because of "theory". Especially a theory that up until the rise of populist anger was considered ludicrous, and still isn't taken too seriously by the majority of the financial community. This isn't the end of the world. It is an issue that can be solved without throwing out the entire system. We just need to start cutting back a little on the spending, that's all.
Last edited:
And the monetary/inflation situation?
I understand that we've had worse debt situations, but we're on course to getting right up there. Sure, we can dig ourselves out of it, but it will be a huge burden on us. And for what? So they can piss away trillions upon trillions on crap.
Also paying the debt with the "next boom" is assuming we have clear sailing ahead. What about when social security and medicare go belly up? That's coming up fairly soon. What if there's another war? We'll be in a pretty craptastic position.
I understand that we've had worse debt situations, but we're on course to getting right up there. Sure, we can dig ourselves out of it, but it will be a huge burden on us. And for what? So they can piss away trillions upon trillions on crap.
Also paying the debt with the "next boom" is assuming we have clear sailing ahead. What about when social security and medicare go belly up? That's coming up fairly soon. What if there's another war? We'll be in a pretty craptastic position.
Last edited:
so then what the hell am I supposed to blame?
the religion itself?
that's kind of the same thing.
ignorant people?
you can't blame them for that. religious framework often precedes any other base of logical reasoning, thus even the smartest people can be "fooled" into believing.
help a brother out.
Are you telling me that ideas are responsible for people rather than people responsible for ideas?
Imagine I were to tell you right now that gravity is imaginary. Oh dear, you're a captive of a concept and shall now die needlessly because I said some words.
Smart people believe stupid things only when they have a reason to want to. That's all anyone's doing -- what they want to.
Imagine I were to tell you right now that gravity is imaginary. Oh dear, you're a captive of a concept and shall now die needlessly because I said some words.
Smart people believe stupid things only when they have a reason to want to. That's all anyone's doing -- what they want to.
I like to think that you and I choose not to believe the hype because we favor reality over comfort. But who knows, maybe I'm fooling myself into not believing because I just don't want to.
Last edited:
but now you're making the issue black and white; A or B.
I was not trying to say that it is always one or the other.
the most common case (at least in the United States, it seems) is that ideas are often responsible for people. I'm talking about the masses. I'm talking about the average person you see at Wal-Mart.
they wouldn't know how to get around without their crutch.
but you're also right when you say that people are often responsible for those ideas. I think we are all well aware of the people who are intentionally exploiting ideas for their gain.
I was not trying to say that it is always one or the other.
the most common case (at least in the United States, it seems) is that ideas are often responsible for people. I'm talking about the masses. I'm talking about the average person you see at Wal-Mart.
they wouldn't know how to get around without their crutch.
but you're also right when you say that people are often responsible for those ideas. I think we are all well aware of the people who are intentionally exploiting ideas for their gain.
It's true that we have a culture of unquestioning ignorance that's easy to get swept up in, but it's still possible to question and know things if one just wants to. And so it's still, I think, always the individual's fault if he chooses to believe utter nonsense.
You are also right about exploitation, of course. There will always be those who are ready to sell the placebo to anyone who believes they need one.
You are also right about exploitation, of course. There will always be those who are ready to sell the placebo to anyone who believes they need one.
Last edited:
In terms of long term sustainability I believe you are right, America will eventually need to strengthen its own manufacturing sector. But a standard economic analysis comes to the opposite conclusion; Chinese Yuan devaluation actually helps Americans and hurts Chinese citizens.
This is from a letter to the editor explaining the reasoning by analogy (which is much easier to understand compared to a technical explanation):
Also, here's a slightly more technical explanation of the games that the US and Chinese governments are both playing. The conclusion is that they are both trying to have their cake and eat it too.
Last edited: