Blah blah blah. Smaller government. Free markets forever. End the Fed. Go back to a gold standard. Ron Paul repeats his hackneyed talking points and tries hard to talk over Paul Krugman, but a few words from Krugman expose just how intellectually bankrupt Ron Paul really is.
14 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 37 previous comments
- you missed my point. But i see what you are trying to say. You are saying, The fed prints money and gives it to the government and spend it on "infrastructure, education, and preventative healthcare" which is a good investment and so the economy gets better and homeless children are saved. Sounds nice, but is not how it works.
Our health care system, education system, banking system, and housing market are all in shambles thanks to the government. Not only has government spending and regulations not produced the value you claim. It is in the process of destroying those industries it claims to be helping.
You really can't deny that our banking, housing, health care, and education are horrible. Nor can you deny the government has gone to great lengths to manage those industries. Accept it, they failed and they are bankrupt. Let the losers accept their losses and lets try another way.
Printing money only keeps the losers in power for longer . . . but not forever because losers are losers and they will not turn things around no matter how much money is printed and handed to them.Aug 11, 2012
- is our infrastructure horrible because of some intrinsic reason, or because we've been neglecting it? And horrible relative to what? We're still in the top 30 in most measures of quality of life and achievement, and we're still the richest nation in the world. Do you really think things are so screwed up that they are beyond repair? What is the evidence?Aug 12, 2012
- Our Federal government and many states have trillions in promises and debt that they can not pay and those debts grow daily. Calling the US is rich is like saying some guy with a good job who is spending lots of money but has 12 credit cards maxed who will never pay them off is super rich. Lets see when the banks figure out he won't pay the cards off and how they react before we call him rich.
The US has many strong corporations and a great infrastructure from our rich history, but our government is beyond repair because it has trillions of promises that it can not keep and people like you don't even realize 1/10 of the size of this problem.
Like I said before, i don't have time to teach you economics, but stop listening to politicians and study the math. Its just numbers.
the government has income of 2 and spending of 3. and they owe 15. Each year the 15 gets higher because neither dems nor repubs have a plan to balance the budget at all.
The other issues is that the 15 is borrowed mostly on short term rates that are artificially low (0-2%). I doubt the Fed can keep rates low for that much longer (they print money to keep rates low, but printing eventually causes inflation which increases rates). It is a financial time bomb of major proportions.
The fact the government is a poor manager of housing, banking, telecom, post office, etc is really a side show to the real disaster in the markets collapsing under too much phoney paper printed by the Fed.Aug 12, 2012
- I just can't take seriously the idea that debt less than a third relative to the GDP of what it was after WWII -- and before the longest period of US overall growth and prosperity -- is somehow crippling. Is there any evidence in support of that position which doesn't depend on nominal instead of real figures for slight-of-hand?Aug 13, 2012
- We got into this argument originally when I pointed out that Krugman is wrong. Your defense for him was that spending income and spending debt are the same thing. This makes it clear that you don't even understand basic economic terms.
The difference between the US situation now and the US in 1950 is enormous on many levels, But I am not going to be able to explain that to you through this thread without you having a basic understanding of economics nor finance. Sorry :)Aug 13, 2012
- I agree, you are unable to explain your position. I doubt we agree on the reason why.Aug 13, 2012