800 Peer Reviewed Papers Deny Man Made CC

[Guest]

Stimulus spending is based on economic illiteracy as it does nothing but inefficiently redistribute wealth. Governments have no wealth they simply take it from the private sector and squander it on nonsense,

Budget papers fudged to boost Rudd's stimulus effect (IPS)
Does fiscal stimulus work? What Nobel Price winners say (IPA)

Tax cuts increase the amount of capital available in the economy for investment and spending thus increasing employment related to these activities. Your confusion is that tax cuts can be unfunded, that is illogical. Only government spending can be unfunded and dealing with that is simply a matter of cutting spending.

Last I checked a poor man never gave me a job.

I look at things simply. Is Australia suffering or did it go through what a lot of the rest of the world did in this Wall st meltdown? To me it appears not hence the govt's policies including stimulus spending were successful. As for unfunded tax cuts they are revenue foregone to put more money in the hands of the wealthy. This has to be covered in your world by cutting services for the poor. I have never had a job given to me by any man jobs come from demand for goods and sevices. No boss hires people just because he got a tax cut.The following is one of many that doesn't agree with you but is probably also an economic illiterate.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_666549.html

[Guest]

This has to be covered in your world by cutting services for the poor.

Which is fantastic as the government should not provide entitlements to anyone.

The following is one of many that doesn't agree with you but is probably also an economic illiterate.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_666549.html

You mean the person who helped fuel the crisis?

Yes, Greenspan Did It (Stefan Karlsson, Economist, December 31, 2008)

...and incase you doubt his opinion,

America's Unsustainable Boom (Stefan Karlsson, Economist, November 08, 2004)

[Guest]

Which is fantastic as the government should not provide entitlements to anyone.


You mean the person who helped fuel the crisis?

Yes, Greenspan Did It (Stefan Karlsson, Economist, December 31, 2008)

...and incase you doubt his opinion,

America's Unsustainable Boom (Stefan Karlsson, Economist, November 08, 2004)

PTS if the government should not provide entitlements for anyone why then do we need governments at all and why do we pay any tax lets return to primeval times where only the strong survive and if I want your possessions and am strong enough in the economic sense I can just take them. Under who's watch did Greenspan operate when he was "fuelling the crisis" good to see he has seen the error of the "tax cuts for the wealthy" ways. You could take a leaf out of his book. Funny how right wingers dont want government involved in anything but when something like the gulf oil spill occurs they are the first to cry that the government isn't doing enough. You can't have it both ways. Sitting on the fence like that only leads to splinters in the ass. Hang on thats probably why right whingers are so mean

[Guest]

PTS if the government should not provide entitlements for anyone why then do we need governments at all and why do we pay any tax lets return to primeval times where only the strong survive and if I want your possessions and am strong enough in the economic sense I can just take them.

You are confused, entitlements and government are two different things. The existence of a government system of law and order (Courts, Police, Military) has nothing to do with entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare, Welfare ect...) that are based on an emotional and irrational understanding of economics.

Under who's watch did Greenspan operate when he was "fuelling the crisis" good to see he has seen the error of the "tax cuts for the wealthy" ways. You could take a leaf out of his book. Funny how right wingers dont want government involved in anything but when something like the gulf oil spill occurs they are the first to cry that the government isn't doing enough. You can't have it both ways. Sitting on the fence like that only leads to splinters in the ass. Hang on thats probably why right whingers are so mean

The Federal Reserve is not controlled by the executive branch of the US government and operates autonomously. Greenspan has nothing to do with the tax cuts. Your jealously of those who create wealth is typical of someone who does not understand economics. Funny how I am not right-wing and never called for more government action on the oil spill. I don't have it both ways because my position has nothing to do with the strawman argument you attempted to assign me.

You still fail to realize there are more than merely two political ideologies of right or left.

[Guest]

You are confused, entitlements and government are two different things. The existence of a government system of law and order (Courts, Police, Military) has nothing to do with entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare, Welfare ect...) that are based on an emotional and irrational understanding of economics.


The Federal Reserve is not controlled by the executive branch of the US government and operates autonomously. Greenspan has nothing to do with the tax cuts. Your jealously of those who create wealth is typical of someone who does not understand economics. Funny how I am not right-wing and never called for more government action on the oil spill. I don't have it both ways because my position has nothing to do with the strawman argument you attempted to assign me.

You still fail to realize there are more than merely two political ideologies of right or left.

I now understand the free market position as espoused by the right thanks to the following clip. Why couldn't you make it so simple PTS. For all your education your communication of simple ideas is very lacking


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_679694.html

This is an earlier clip on the same theme http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_679694.html

[Guest]

I now understand the free market position as espoused by the right thanks to the following clip. Why couldn't you make it so simple PTS. For all your education your communication of simple ideas is very lacking.

If you want to understand the free market position I suggest watching the following videos,

Free To Choose (Milton Friedman, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Economics, Nobel Prize in Economics, 1976)

[Guest]

kobber read about the 1921 depression and it may change your mind a bit

http://amconmag.com/article/2009/may/04/00024/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1921_recession

http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods125.html

[Guest]

Wall St. unteathered? What? Lack of regulation does not cause a financial crisis and there was plenty of regulation, thousands of pages of regulations. Financial regulations simply distort markets and restrict growth. Regulations benefit big businesses at the expense of smaller ones because they have the money and manpower to comply with them. All economic illiterates think regulations solve problems, wrong they simply cause new ones. The Bush tax cuts were not a problem, they helped fuel economic growth. Now I agree Bush was irresponsible with spending which caused a deficit but that did not cause the financial crisis. Bush did contribute to the problem by pushing for distortions in the housing market and home ownership. It is simply impossible however for the housing bubble to have happened without the existence of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Reserve. Without socialized losses no one would have risked their money on housing and thus no bubble. The government subsidized losses through F. Mae and F. Mac and the Fed provided the easy money to do it via low interest rates.

Obama is the most economically illiterate president since Richard Nixon, that idiot gets a deficit and makes it ten times larger! Then of course the sheep blame Bush for him increasing the deficit? Absolutely clueless.

What socialists do not understand is you balance the budget by reducing spending, entitlements and government employees not raising taxes. But for a socialist to understand these things they would first have to have had a proper economic education and likely run a successful business.

Another socialist economic illiterate who seems to agree with my thoughts about the myth of tax cuts for the wealthy PTS and she does run a business as well.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ariann..._b_682201.html
"Turns out the Republicans were against raising the deficit until they were for it -- at least when it comes to extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans (a move that comes with a budget price tag of $700 billion over the next decade). Whenever they are asked to explain the contradiction, the suddenly-plucked deficit hawks -- led by John Boehner -- fall back on the canard that if the Bush cuts are allowed to expire, more jobs will be lost. This reveals a total lack of understanding about how jobs are -- and aren't -- created. Hint: it has nothing to do with the personal tax rate of the people running the business. It has everything to do with demand -- from consumers, advertisers, government contracts, etc. When businesses have more demand, they hire more people. Simple. Maybe Boehner can skip a few rounds of golf and take an Economics 101 class"
I'll stick with the socialist economic illiterates at this stage since they make more sense to my simple mind than the arguement you put forward.

[Guest]

If you want to understand the free market position I suggest watching the following videos,

Free To Choose (Milton Friedman, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Economics, Nobel Prize in Economics, 1976)

Maybe you should forward this info to the coalition PTS after treasury analysis of their grand economic plan to return to surplus has exposed them to be "economic illiterates"

[Guest]

Maybe you should forward this info to the coalition PTS after treasury analysis of their grand economic plan to return to surplus has exposed them to be "economic illiterates"

This would be the same treasury that's filled with labor stooges, right?

[Guest]

This would be the same treasury that's filled with labor stooges, right?

Treasury bureaucrats dont change with the Govt Marmaduke but if you like the head in the sand approach call RSVP he will give you plenty to copy and paste

[Guest]

Be one of the useful idiots Kobber. When you're paying out the arse for electricity for absolutely no gain to the environment then we'll discuss this again.

Unless your parents pay the bills, of course.

To clarify, I pay my bills.

[Guest]

Be one of the useful idiots Kobber. When you're paying out the arse for electricity for absolutely no gain to the environment then we'll discuss this again.

Unless your parents pay the bills, of course.

To clarify, I pay my bills.

Well done Marmaduke you've learnt well from RSVP. Avoid the issue of the conservatives' BS costings and mov on to another issue.

[Guest]

I wholeheartedly agree with the concern over coalition costings. But I'd rather have a coalition government that cannot make fundamental changes to a like minded far left ALP (of which I was a member until Julia Gillard took over) having a senate filled with a group of people with a hold over them and with a bad, bad agenda for the country.

Check out this 7:30 Report transcript.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s2968227.htm

Look at the very bottom at what Christine Milne, the Green's deputy leader has to say. You'll see why I fear the Green/ALP alliance

[Guest]

I find it bery strange that People who support this Climate Change bullshit, also beleive in Evolution????

So mankind changes through evolvolution but the planet only changes and evolves due to mankind.

Am i missing something????????