Some ideas on economics up for discussion

[Robert A Whit]

Just to forewarn you all, the following is for discussion and not all items are fully worked out. Any comments on the below? What I often do is have Word handy and jot down ideas.

====================

Mechanic buys tools and worker buys food
<o:p></o:p>
What impact on the economy? I am thinking that producing has more value than consumption. Same dollars are involved.
<o:p></o:p>
Rich man puts capital into company
<o:p></o:p>
Middle class holds cash in order to not be poor
<o:p></o:p>
Who is most valuable
<o:p></o:p>
Man digs up gold
<o:p></o:p>
Man drills for oil
<o:p></o:p>
Oil is used to produce’
<o:p></o:p>
What is more valuable, $1,000 of oil or $1,000 of gold?
<o:p></o:p>
2008
<o:p></o:p>
We know that the rich suffered huge losses when things soured.
<o:p></o:p>
Does that help them cause a recovery?
<o:p></o:p>
What would you do if you suddenly lost a lot of money? Would you want to spend?
<o:p></o:p>
If you had no confidence somebody would buy from you, would you create more of anything?

[gabosaurus]

Is this some type of class project?

[Robert A Whit]

Is this some type of class project?

Not at all.

For more information, currently I am reading the book

KEYNES

the clash that defined modern economics

HAYEK


by Nicholas Wapshott

I have long believed a lot more in the concepts of Hayek over Keynes. Milton Friedman is my guru. I like the Austrian economics concepts a lot.

Reading the book stimulates my thinking processes.

Hayek did not believe in the equality of money.

Tio give you an example, say you discovered a huge gold vein.

We do not spend gold in the economy. Money is not on the gold standard. Gold does not produce many products that then produce something else.

Oil for instance as one more example produces energy and that is work. When you get a tank full of gasoline, and if you work out how far you go in one tank of gasoline, you soon learn that a tank of gasoline represents a huge amount of work or energy.

Take the taxi driver who carries a person in NY City. per gallon, he can earn a lot.

Take the common brick. Once it becomes part of the building, it simply exists. Some things humans do keep production going. Autos for instance when made keep the economy going. They need service. They use fuel. They carry people to work.

Anyway, maybe that helps you get going so you stop posting photos of yourself with silly remarks on them.

[Robert A Whit]

When we look at the efforts of Obama and declare him to be wrong, all one needs do is look at his list of things he shoves money at.

When he shoved cash at the clean energy area, did he get his money's worth>

When you fund a plant that has at most 1,000 people, and though the Feds push a lot of cash at the project, it is in addition to private funding, then the enterprise fails, the funding did very little good. I can't say it did no good since the funds kept families in food and goods. But when you study the dollars spent by Obama then realize that per worker, on average he spent something like $222,000 per worker, it seems to me he would have been better off to hand each of us that money and let the natural market go to work.

Say you normally get $50,000 per year. And you get a check from Obama for double that. Don't you think you could afford to spend that cash on economy boosting things?

When materials are the highest item, rather than on humans, one has to evaluate the bang for the buck.

Tell you why Obama is having such trouble.

He follows Keynes. Keynes is old school economics. Keynes was a decent economist yet he had some wierd ideas. He fought nature.

Nature will win every time.

[fj1200]

KEYNES

the clash that defined modern economics

HAYEK

Cliff notes:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc

And


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk

[red states rule]

It is amazing how libs never learn from their mistakes and how they refuse to follow basic economic principals




snip

1) Keynesian stimulus doesn't work. As Walter Williams has pointed out (http://rightwingnews.com/uncategorized/rwns-walter-williams-interview-2/), the whole idea of revving up the economy via a government stimulus is doomed from the start.
…Where does Congress get the resources for the spending? Well, there is no Tooth Fairy and there is no Santa Claus. So, the only way Congress can get one dollar to spend is to take that one dollar from Americans, borrow that one dollar from Americans, or inflate that one dollar from Americans.So, it’s very much like the visual image of a swimming pool. A person notes there is a shallow end, so he takes the water out of the deep end and pours it in the shallow end, hoping to raise the height of the water in the pool — and you would call that person stupid.


2) You can't fund the whole country on the backs of the rich. Remember the Buffet Rule that liberals hyped endlessly for months? It turns out it would only raise 45 billion dollars over a decade. All of that money combined will amount to about 2 weeks’ worth of this year's Obama deficit. That hearkens back to the dirty little secret that liberals don't want the American people to find out. America already has the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world and the most progressive tax code in the Western world (http://rightwingnews.com/taxes/america-already-taxes-the-rich-more-than-any-other-western-nation/). That means the rich are already almost tapped out and since they can afford high dollar accountants, tax shelters, and lobbyists and they can just move out of the country or stop working if that isn't enough, there's just not that much more revenue to be had from the wealthy.

3) Liberals incentivize failure. If I were willing to pay anyone and everyone $500 who would send me proof that they hit themselves in the face with a hammer hard enough to leave a bruise, YOU might not do it, but you could safely predict a 10,000% increase in the number of people hitting themselves in the face with a hammer over the next few months. So, if that's true, what are liberals incentivizing with food stamps, welfare, 99 weeks on unemployment insurance, and other giveaway programs? Only liberals would be surprised when they produce more failure by rewarding people for failing.

4) They create a hostile business environment. When Uday Hussein used to run Iraq's soccer team, players who performed poorly were slapped, spit on, and beaten with electric cables until the blood flowed. This is similar to how liberals treat American businesses. They demonize them, raise their taxes, bury them in new regulations, make it easier to sue them, and harass them with regulatory agencies at every turn. Then, they become puzzled as to why those same businesses aren't creating jobs or are looking to move more of their business overseas. You can't cut the sparrow's throat and fry it up for dinner and listen to it sing at the same time.

5) The business environment becomes unpredictable. Because liberals believe in routing as much of American life through the hands of government bureaucrats as humanly possible, businesses never know what to expect. They could lose profits via new taxes, have huge new expenses because of regulations, have projects shut down by the EPA, face huge lawsuits for spurious reasons, be crippled by labor union strikes, and on and on it goes. When businesses fear the unexpected, they tend to become cautious. They don't hire, they don't expand, and they horde cash to make sure they don't get wiped out by some arbitrary decision made by a government official who has never so much as run a lemonade stand in his life.

6) Liberals cause businesses to focus on government instead of the product. In Ayn Rand's classic Atlas Shrugged (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0452011876/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=linkiest-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0452011876)http://www.assoc-amazon.com/e/ir?t=linkiest-20&l=as2&o=1&a=0452011876, Hank Rearden's company could outperform his competitors, but they were still able to hamstring him using their allies in government. That's the environment liberals encourage today and it's why we're spending increasingly larger sums on elections. For many businesses, lobbying and greasing palms in D.C. has become just as important as their performance. Chrysler, Solyndra, Bank of America, Citigroup, and (A.I.G.) among many, many others could tell you all about that.

7) Government is inherently slow, stupid, and inefficient. Saying that government doesn't do anything very well is like noting that it's easier to get a suntan at noon than at midnight. Yet, because liberals have a totalitarian impulse to control as many aspects as possible of their fellow citizens’ lives, they never stop working to transfer as much power as possible to Washington, D.C. Since there is absolutely nothing that the government can run better, cheaper, and more efficiently than the private sector, anything the government takes over from the market degrades in quality and increases in price. As Ann Coulter has noted,

http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2012/05/08/7_reasons_liberal_economic_policies_dont_work/page/full/

[Robert A Whit]

It is amazing how libs never learn from their mistakes and how they refuse to follow basic economic principals

That article by Hawkins in Town Hall is dead on.

He said it so well. If you did not yet read that link posted by Red States, go back to read it.

Bear in mind this FACT.

So called Liberals, reward failure to take action.

Conservatives reward those who will work and make plans.

[red states rule]

http://antzinpantz.com/kns/images/SEP11/bors%20fg56gfh.jpg