Economic Argument for Austerity Based on Excel Error?

[Berkut]

Man, free spending liberals get really pissy when you criticize their religion. 

Indeed. What is sad is how you can't tell the qualitiative difference anymore between posts from DG and Raz and Seedy. They all basically have the same one trick pony as a response. ZOMG BERKUT IS SO ANGRY!!!LOLOLOLOL!!!!

  Seriously?  This is the first time I made a "Berkut is so angry" post in probably many months, and it's instantly part of the pattern?  Yeah, I'm not buying what you're selling.

So far that is the entirety of the responses you've made to my posts in this thread. I didn't say it was a pattern, I said all three of you are basically responding with standard bullshit personal attacks that you all know perfectly well are completely inaccurate. Which says a lot about the quality of your position, and a standard level of integrity for Raz, but a disappointing level for you.

I am not some kind of Paul Ryan/Tea Party dumbass, and you know it. I am, however, a fiscal conservative who is not buying into what YOU are selling. That doesn't put me in the radical right Grover Nordquist camp though.

[CountDeMoney]

I am not some kind of Paul Ryan/Tea Party dumbass, and you know it.

Your anti-debt militancy says otherwise.  And unless I've missed it, you still haven't given any indication as to what level of debt is acceptable other than ZOMG DEFASITS IS TEH EVUL, so it looks like we have to assume that level is zero--in which case you have become a Paul Ryan/Tea Party dumbass.

So please; what level of debt is acceptable to you?

[Admiral Yi]

And you still haven't given any kind of indication as to what level of debt is unacceptable.  What does that make you?

[CountDeMoney]

I would say the 10% of GDP at its worst point of 2009 was unacceptable.  Fortunately, we're not at that point anymore.   
And we're seeing government spending per capita at the slowest rates since Eisenhower, which should make all you let's-go-back-to-the-50s types nice and happy.

[Razgovory]

The Austrian school is notorious for it's dislike of mathematical models.  That's what I was getting at.

This is a change from your previous characterization.  Before you were claiming that members of the Austrian school disregarded empirical observations that contradicted their theories.

Your stuff about Glenn Beck and Applebaum (She's an economist?  I thought she was just a poor historian), is lost on me.  The failure I was talking about the deficit cutting scheme that failed in Britain and similar schemes pushed pushed by people like Paul Ryan.

You may be right.  Either way, someone in the White House (Goolsby?) made that prediction and it didn't come true.

Not really sure how you can describe a budget proposal that was never enacted (Ryan's) as a failure in terms of maintaining American credit-worthiness.  Are we talking about an alternate universe?

Your description of British austerity as a failure is a little puzzling as well.  The testable hypothesis is whether there is a causal relationship between national indebtedness and risk premia.  You seem to be claiming that since Britain cut spending and the deficit increased as a % of GDP that "disproves austerity." 

As a side note, the usage of the term austerity has become sort of ridiculous.  If you're spending 10% more than you earn and you drop that to "only" 6% more than you earn, that's not "austere."  That's spending more than you earn.

It is?  I thought I was always maintaining that the Austrian school didn't like mathematical models.  And I would think that a defict cutting scheme that fails to actually cut deficit is a failure.  It's my impression that similar schemes failed across Europe, is there a reason to believe that the US would be any different?  Seems like we dodged a bullet there, and that people who argued we should take that bullet should take a good long look at their ideas.

[Razgovory]

Man, free spending liberals get really pissy when you criticize their religion. 

Indeed. What is sad is how you can't tell the qualitiative difference anymore between posts from DG and Raz and Seedy. They all basically have the same one trick pony as a response. ZOMG BERKUT IS SO ANGRY!!!LOLOLOLOL!!!!

  Seriously?  This is the first time I made a "Berkut is so angry" post in probably many months, and it's instantly part of the pattern?  Yeah, I'm not buying what you're selling.

So far that is the entirety of the responses you've made to my posts in this thread. I didn't say it was a pattern, I said all three of you are basically responding with standard bullshit personal attacks that you all know perfectly well are completely inaccurate. Which says a lot about the quality of your position, and a standard level of integrity for Raz, but a disappointing level for you.

I am not some kind of Paul Ryan/Tea Party dumbass, and you know it. I am, however, a fiscal conservative who is not buying into what YOU are selling. That doesn't put me in the radical right Grover Nordquist camp though.

Don't read my posts or stop being such a fucking coward.  

[Admiral Yi]

It is?

Yes.

And I would think that a defict cutting scheme that fails to actually cut deficit is a failure.  It's my impression that similar schemes failed across Europe, is there a reason to believe that the US would be any different?  Seems like we dodged a bullet there, and that people who argued we should take that bullet should take a good long look at their ideas.

This makes little to no sense Raz.  If your criticism of British deficit reduction is that it failed to reduce the deficit, then yes, it has been a failure.  But your previous insinuation that I should feel bad about it, and your current question whether the US's results would be any different, strongly suggest that you see the British experience as a proof that the entire "austerity" argument is flawed.  Raz, we *have* reduced the deficit in the US.  It's not a hypothetical. 

[Razgovory]

It is?

Yes.

And I would think that a defict cutting scheme that fails to actually cut deficit is a failure.  It's my impression that similar schemes failed across Europe, is there a reason to believe that the US would be any different?  Seems like we dodged a bullet there, and that people who argued we should take that bullet should take a good long look at their ideas.

This makes little to no sense Raz.  If your criticism of British deficit reduction is that it failed to reduce the deficit, then yes, it has been a failure.  But your previous insinuation that I should feel bad about it, and your current question whether the US's results would be any different, strongly suggest that you see the British experience as a proof that the entire "austerity" argument is flawed.  Raz, we *have* reduced the deficit in the US.  It's not a hypothetical.

[Admiral Yi]

I guess that means we're done.

[DGuller]

So far that is the entirety of the responses you've made to my posts in this thread. I didn't say it was a pattern, I said all three of you are basically responding with standard bullshit personal attacks that you all know perfectly well are completely inaccurate. Which says a lot about the quality of your position, and a standard level of integrity for Raz, but a disappointing level for you.

I am not some kind of Paul Ryan/Tea Party dumbass, and you know it. I am, however, a fiscal conservative who is not buying into what YOU are selling. That doesn't put me in the radical right Grover Nordquist camp though.

The reason I responded in such a way is that your post wasn't just attacking a strawman;  it was a My Lai of strawmen.  There was no reasoning with that, so I didn't even bother.

[CountDeMoney]

it was a My Lai of strawmen. 

Heavy.

[Berkut]

I am not some kind of Paul Ryan/Tea Party dumbass, and you know it.

Your anti-debt militancy says otherwise.  And unless I've missed it, you still haven't given any indication as to what level of debt is acceptable other than ZOMG DEFASITS IS TEH EVUL, so it looks like we have to assume that level is zero--in which case you have become a Paul Ryan/Tea Party dumbass.

So please; what level of debt is acceptable to you?

So if I don't state a number, then the reasonable assumption is that the number is zero?

Not much point in even engaging in discussion, is there?

[Berkut]

I would say the 10% of GDP at its worst point of 2009 was unacceptable.  Fortunately, we're not at that point anymore.   
And we're seeing government spending per capita at the slowest rates since Eisenhower, which should make all you let's-go-back-to-the-50s types nice and happy.

How can government spending per capita be measured as a speed?

[CountDeMoney]

How can government spending per capita be measured as a speed?

Whether it rises or drops over a specific period of time, perhaps?

[Berkut]

So far that is the entirety of the responses you've made to my posts in this thread. I didn't say it was a pattern, I said all three of you are basically responding with standard bullshit personal attacks that you all know perfectly well are completely inaccurate. Which says a lot about the quality of your position, and a standard level of integrity for Raz, but a disappointing level for you.

I am not some kind of Paul Ryan/Tea Party dumbass, and you know it. I am, however, a fiscal conservative who is not buying into what YOU are selling. That doesn't put me in the radical right Grover Nordquist camp though.

The reason I responded in such a way is that your post wasn't just attacking a strawman;  it was a My Lai of strawmen.  There was no reasoning with that, so I didn't even bother.

Ahh, so the only possible way to respond to a post that doesn't agree with you is to make a personal attack and accuse me of being angry?

So in fact this is just you aping Raz, right?