there's an argument that all the US is greasing the global economic wheels by stepping in and taking advantage of the net saving surplus in the Asian countries.speculawyer said:That was good over seas funding . . . they paid for it. The current funding is all borrowed, that is what sucks. We are going in massive debt to a communist nation.
icarus-daedelus said:you say that citizens were not doing it for free one sentence and the very next sentence you don't question where the US government got the money to pay them
Jesus.
The discussion was started with Mandark saying "BOO-YAH!" because the Federal Government used expansionary fiscal policy (Keynesian policy) to get the US out of the Great Depression by injecting money into the economy (creating manufacturing jobs, much?) to fund the war, which could include Lend Lease if you look at it from whatever perspective you're looking at it from. I thought your opposition was that you didn't think USG was responsible for it, because that doesn't fit your ideology and therefore couldn't have possibly happened.
thekad said:So wait, a government program (an interventionist one, at that!) pulled America out of the Great Depression? Are you sure you want to stick with that?
No, I'm pretty sure it means they ended with 95m in cash on hand. Mccain had $31.5 million in cash on hand after May and RNC presumably something like 40M. They probably didn't spend much in June.reilo said:McCain and GOP raised $95mil in June?
Dammit America!
Holy crap. What's the split between them?reilo said:McCain and GOP raised $95mil in June?
Dammit America!
scorcho said:soo....the Great Depression wasn't caused by the utter failure of unregulated markets, but...the 'horrific expansion of the money supply'?
is libertarianism the new code for revisionism?
FDR/Congress essentially gave Britain materiel by letting them "borrow" warships and such, but really, what's the value of a warship when it's been blown up from fighting? I still don't understand what Lend Lease has to do with invigorating the economy, considering Britain wasn't buying a damn thing from the US (and therefore giving no incentive to entrepreneurs) at the time. That's why FDR wanted to give them help, chum.Gaborn said:bla bla bla
Quite possibly. In fact, apparently Gaborn was talking about Lend Lease the whole time now, which is revisionism on the much smaller scale of the internets.scorcho said:is libertarianism the new code for revisionism?
Who gives a shit?reilo said:How does Cindy McCain poll higher than Michelle?
....
Terrorist fist bump > stealing from your own charity?reilo said:How does Cindy McCain poll higher than Michelle?
....
Now now, you also have to throw in high wealth disparity and the false prosperity projected by it.scorcho said:soo....the Great Depression wasn't caused by the utter failure of unregulated markets, but...the 'horrific expansion of the money supply'?
Gaborn said:Not contradictory at all. The US government had too much money of too little worth at the time, inflation was the issue more than funding. The war in Europe provided incentive for entrepreneurs to start factories which increased the size of the economy and pumped up the worth of US currency, which enabled the government to afford contracts with their money now worth something.
So if I oppose Medicare / Medicaid funding AND the Iraq War do I get a cookie?reilo said:It's funny reading on some other forums how people opposed to the recent bill that kept Medicare/Medicaid funding the same, and say that it is too much burden on our tax dollars... and yet support the damn Iraq war and say it should continue.
Hitokage said:Now now, you also have to throw in high wealth disparity and the false prosperity projected by it.
JayDubya said:So if I oppose Medicare / Medicaid funding AND the Iraq War do I get a cookie?
reilo said:How does Cindy McCain poll higher than Michelle?
....
FDR died, like, two weeks before V-E Day and 3 months before Japan surrendered.thekad said:Eh, I thought FDR didn't employ Keynesian economics until after the war. Maybe I'm wrong.
Dartastic said:I just got this link forwarded to me. I found it kinda hilarious. In a really, really horrible way.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...odbye-from-the-world's-biggest-polluter'.html
I figured you did. I just like being an ass.thekad said:I missed a word.
Mandark said:thekad: FDR didn't do much of anything after the war, hint hint. But it's true that the government only adopted temporary deficit spending during the war, after working to balance the budget through the 30's.
Gaborn: You're crazy and wrong. There was deflation in the early 30's, and then inflation starting around 1942.
The US government couldn't suddenly "afford contracts" because the dollar was worth more during the war, cause it wasn't. Hell, it couldn't afford those contracts anyway, because it borrowed massive amounts of money to pay for them.
Or do we have to explain that one again?
Shirokun said:Holy crap if real! Whether it's McCain or Obama, January can't come soon enough!
The American leader, who has been condemned throughout his presidency for failing to tackle climate change, ended a private meeting with the words: "Goodbye from the world's biggest polluter."
He then punched the air while grinning widely, as the rest of those present including Gordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy looked on in shock.
Mr Bush, whose second and final term as President ends at the end of the year, then left the meeting at the Windsor Hotel in Hokkaido where the leaders of the world's richest nations had been discussing new targets to cut carbon emissions.
its the seismic battle between Friedman and Keynes; Monetarists and Realists; Evil and Good.reilo said:Can you just, come up with one grandiose post that explains it all, and whenever Gabron opens his mouth about the Great Depression and FDR policies leading up-to and during WWII, you can just repaste it over and over again? Maybe he will understand it the more times he reads it. You know, kind of like trigonometry and calculus - the more you practice and see it, the better you understand it?
scorcho said:its the seismic battle between Friedman and Keynes; Monetarists and Realists; Evil and Good.
reilo said:Oh no.
A failed terrorist attack by Turkish nationals on the US Embassy in Turkey. The Turkish government are claiming that Al Qeada might be behind this.
Also, Paterius has been nominated to a higher post.
reilo said:How does Cindy McCain poll higher than Michelle?
....
McCains campaign has outspent Obamas on advertising by almost 3:1 over the last two months.
scorcho said:soo....the Great Depression wasn't caused by the utter failure of unregulated markets, but...the 'horrific expansion of the money supply'?
is libertarianism the new code for revisionism?
I stitched together the cash on hand from a few reports. McCain's dropped in June by $3m, while the RNC packed it away, increasing by $13m.Incognito said:Doesn't bode well for McCain. He's treading water as it stands and Obama's campaign is out there balls to the walls organizing and registering voters. That 3:1 discrepancy sure won't last and when Obama starts saturating the TeeVee with ads....
[looks up at his post linking to Bernake's speech]Gaborn said:Unregulated markets? You don't know what the money supply is, do you? You HAVE heard of the federal reserve at least? The markets were hardly "unregulated" at the time, and it was the way they were regulated and mismanaged by the government that caused the great depression.
Gaborn said:Icarus - it wasn't the transfer of materiel to the allies, it was the fact that workers were being paid to manufacture so much materiel. Creating a large number of jobs to help with a war effort is going to do a lot for any economy.
Being paid... by the US government. (look up lend lease - it was pretty much Congress giving Britain warships because FDR wanted to help the Brits out cause, uh, they couldn't buy warships. which means the money to pay for them was borrowed by the federal government)Gaborn said:Icarus - it wasn't the transfer of materiel to the allies, it was the fact that workers were being paid to manufacture so much materiel.
You know what? You either don't listen or you just consistently miss the point entirely, even (especially) when you yourself make that point.Creating a large number of jobs to help with a war effort is going to do a lot for any economy.
GhaleonEB said:I stitched together the cash on hand from a few reports. McCain's dropped in June by $3m, while the RNC packed it away, increasing by $13m.
Going from the report in Missouri that Obma is going to have several times the paid staff and field offices than McCain, I wonder if he's willing to cede some of the advertising war and is shifting more of his resources to the ground game.
Farmboy said:A while ago someone asked about a comprehensive list of McCain flip-flops. This may have been answered already, but here's a good one. Worth Digging (and/or e-mailing to low-info family members).
Farmboy said:UPDATE: Here's an even better list, via Kos.
Hell, the CIA failed to assassinate the guy for fifty years. Might as well throw him a bone - and I hear his brother's a lot nicer too!Negotiating with Cuba/Castro: With Fidel Castro acceptable in 2000, not 2008.
scorcho said:[looks up at his post linking to Bernake's speech]
no i have never heard of the Federal Reserve, what it does, or if it even exists. i will now claim your tactic by denying your reality and substituting in my own.
icarus-daedalus said:Being paid... by the US government. (look up lend lease - it was pretty much Congress giving Britain warships because FDR wanted to help the Brits out cause, uh, they couldn't buy warships. which means the money to pay for them was borrowed by the federal government)
Aaaaand the Federal Government was still the one making the materiel or building the factories or what have you, which necessitates spending on the part of the government, so, pardon my French, what the fuck is your point?Gaborn said:Ok, fair enough, but it wasn't the lending of materiel that led to the recovery, it was the start up of the factories to build the materiel.
Oh, so now you're completely changing what you're saying to protect your ideology? haha, I should have ignored you from the get go.I don't see how the government spending money affects anything, even in the most libertarian of societies we'd still have the government spending SOME money, you do know the libertarian party supports having a military (and a substantial number of arms were laid away for when the US got into WW2, something that was considered inevitable for a couple years before Pearl Harbor was attacked), right?
Mandark said:You realize you're just endorsing Keynesian expansionary spending during recessions, right? The government spends more money than it takes in through taxes in order to kick the economy into a virtuous cycle.
Also, you're so completely wrong about the role of inflation. It's almost impressive.
icarus-daedelus said:Aaaaand the Federal Government was still the one making the materiel or building the factories or what have you, which necessitates spending on the part of the government, so, pardon my French, what the fuck is your point?
Oh, so now you're completely changing what you're saying to protect your ideology? haha, I should have ignored you from the get go.
Also, in the most libertarian of societies we wouldn't be giving boats to the Brits in the first place, unless Milton Friedman was excessively fond of Winston Churchill or something, but I won't press that point too much.
Gaborn said:Actually, I found their inflation calculator more useful.. From the start of the federal reserve in 1913 (though the dates there only go to 1914 unfortunately) inflation was 73%. That's the highest rate of inflation over a 15 year span in our nation's history.