Fiscal Cliff MEGATHREAD: Wile E. Economy falls off, lands in cloud at bottom

Started by CountDeMoney, November 13, 2012, 10:03:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Berkut

I can't help but think that it appears that there are no "real" circumstances under which it can ever be appropriate to not spend more and more and more and more and more.

Considering that every economist I've seen has clearly stated that the debt crisis cannot be solved simply by raising taxes, this strikes me as something of a problem.

The Republicans have really epically failed at getting their message across. They've let the Dems successfully make the entire thing all about taxes on the wealthy, which is very unfortunate, since the problem cannot even be solved solely by higher taxes on the wealthy (or even on the middle class). It is something like, at best, 8% of the solution.

This has always been my problem with the Dems. No matter what the circumstances are, the answer is always to spend more money than last year. Things are going well, spend more. Things are going ok, spend more. Things are going badly? Holy shit, now we REALLY have to spend more!
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Valmy

Quote from: Berkut on December 12, 2012, 03:14:54 PM
This has always been my problem with the Dems. No matter what the circumstances are, the answer is always to spend more money than last year. Things are going well, spend more. Things are going ok, spend more. Things are going badly? Holy shit, now we REALLY have to spend more!

Paul Krugman just came.  Well actually he would be furious because they did not spend enough money.

Deficit spending seems to be like a drug for governments.  The withdrawal symptoms will be severe if we ever try to go clean.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

frunk

Economists are almost always in favor of cutting spending when things are booming, but nobody listens because "things are going well, and we don't want to mess with what works".  The problem is that cutting the deficit/debt is only ever discussed when the deficit/debt start skyrocketing.  This happens when tax revenues go down and/or gov't spending goes up, which can be an indication of recession.  If it is a recession that's the worst time to cut gov't spending. 

So yeah, there's always people saying it's the wrong time to cut spending, but it's different people at different times.

I'd like it if target gov't spending would be reduced year to year whenever the economy is doing well, but freed up again when things went south.

MadImmortalMan

Or if we kept it the same all the time, then the deficit would automatically go positive and negative as the economy fluctuates and effects revenues. Probably everyone on both sides would hate that plan though.
"Stability is destabilizing." --Hyman Minsky

"Complacency can be a self-denying prophecy."
"We have nothing to fear but lack of fear itself." --Larry Summers

Admiral Yi

Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 12, 2012, 04:34:58 PM
Or if we kept it the same all the time, then the deficit would automatically go positive and negative as the economy fluctuates and effects revenues. Probably everyone on both sides would hate that plan though.

That would tend to make booms boomier and busts bustier (cue Caligula).  Not a good thing.

Razgovory

Quote from: Berkut on December 12, 2012, 03:14:54 PM
I can't help but think that it appears that there are no "real" circumstances under which it can ever be appropriate to not spend more and more and more and more and more.

Considering that every economist I've seen has clearly stated that the debt crisis cannot be solved simply by raising taxes, this strikes me as something of a problem.

The Republicans have really epically failed at getting their message across. They've let the Dems successfully make the entire thing all about taxes on the wealthy, which is very unfortunate, since the problem cannot even be solved solely by higher taxes on the wealthy (or even on the middle class). It is something like, at best, 8% of the solution.

This has always been my problem with the Dems. No matter what the circumstances are, the answer is always to spend more money than last year. Things are going well, spend more. Things are going ok, spend more. Things are going badly? Holy shit, now we REALLY have to spend more!


What an odd post.  The Dems have said consistently they are willing to cut spending. :huh:
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

derspiess

Quote from: Razgovory on December 12, 2012, 04:46:13 PM
What an odd post.  The Dems have said consistently they are willing to cut spending. :huh:

Yeah, cuts that won't take effect until 5-10 years from now or longer.  Pretty easy to throw shit like that on the table without any intention of actually making it become a reality.  And they won't even talk about cutting entitlement spending. 

Besides, Obama is pushing for a new round of stimulus spending.
"If you can play a guitar and harmonica at the same time, like Bob Dylan or Neil Young, you're a genius. But make that extra bit of effort and strap some cymbals to your knees, suddenly people want to get the hell away from you."  --Rich Hall

Razgovory

Quote from: derspiess on December 12, 2012, 04:57:34 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 12, 2012, 04:46:13 PM
What an odd post.  The Dems have said consistently they are willing to cut spending. :huh:

Yeah, cuts that won't take effect until 5-10 years from now or longer.  Pretty easy to throw shit like that on the table without any intention of actually making it become a reality.  And they won't even talk about cutting entitlement spending. 

Besides, Obama is pushing for a new round of stimulus spending.

You know, I seem to recall Republican plans to cut the budget a few years ago using the same gimmick.  Along with tax cuts that take effect right now.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

garbon

Quote from: Razgovory on December 12, 2012, 05:11:40 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 12, 2012, 04:57:34 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 12, 2012, 04:46:13 PM
What an odd post.  The Dems have said consistently they are willing to cut spending. :huh:

Yeah, cuts that won't take effect until 5-10 years from now or longer.  Pretty easy to throw shit like that on the table without any intention of actually making it become a reality.  And they won't even talk about cutting entitlement spending. 

Besides, Obama is pushing for a new round of stimulus spending.

You know, I seem to recall Republican plans to cut the budget a few years ago using the same gimmick.  Along with tax cuts that take effect right now.

I'm not sure about the relevance. Der didn't say in his post that the Repubs do it better than Dems.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

merithyn

Quote from: Razgovory on December 12, 2012, 05:11:40 PM

You know, I seem to recall Republican plans to cut the budget a few years ago using the same gimmick.  Along with tax cuts that take effect right now.

Two wrongs don't make a right. :mellow:
Yesterday, upon the stair,
I met a man who wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
I wish, I wish he'd go away...

garbon

Quote from: merithyn on December 12, 2012, 05:19:44 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 12, 2012, 05:11:40 PM

You know, I seem to recall Republican plans to cut the budget a few years ago using the same gimmick.  Along with tax cuts that take effect right now.

Two wrongs don't make a right. :mellow:

Do two Wongs make a Wright?
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Razgovory

Quote from: garbon on December 12, 2012, 05:18:13 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 12, 2012, 05:11:40 PM
Quote from: derspiess on December 12, 2012, 04:57:34 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on December 12, 2012, 04:46:13 PM
What an odd post.  The Dems have said consistently they are willing to cut spending. :huh:

Yeah, cuts that won't take effect until 5-10 years from now or longer.  Pretty easy to throw shit like that on the table without any intention of actually making it become a reality.  And they won't even talk about cutting entitlement spending. 

Besides, Obama is pushing for a new round of stimulus spending.

You know, I seem to recall Republican plans to cut the budget a few years ago using the same gimmick.  Along with tax cuts that take effect right now.

I'm not sure about the relevance. Der didn't say in his post that the Repubs do it better than Dems.

No, but this was the implied in Berkut's post.  If Speiss's post didn't imply a superiority in Republican plans compared to Democratic plans then what was the fucking point?
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

garbon

Quote from: Razgovory on December 12, 2012, 05:26:20 PM
No, but this was the implied in Berkut's post.  If Speiss's post didn't imply a superiority in Republican plans compared to Democratic plans then what was the fucking point?

Watch your language.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.


Admiral Yi

Quote from: The Minsky Moment on December 12, 2012, 12:21:36 PM
No I did not propose that.
Reread post 39.

You're right.  But close to it.  I believe someone posted some historical data here a long time ago (around the debate on Obamastimulus) that showed the fiscal multiplier in the US is around 2.  So since we're not at full employment, the most we can do right now is decrease the deficit by 1% of GDP without going into recession.  The remaining 7% of deficit will have to wait for the reoccurence of growth.