Jump to content

TPS

Members
  • Content Count

    5,319
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

392 Excellent

About TPS

  • Rank
    Veteran

Recent Profile Visitors

847 profile views
  1. I'll keep saying it, they aren't leftists. Aaron Mate is the most vocal leftist criticizing the Russian witch hunt, and there are many others. It's the DNC center, which is why they are becoming more and more irrelevant.
  2. TPS

    Bucky Brooks Mock Draft

    I guess this means you can say McBean are responsible for the past two drafts! I gave McD all the credit in year 1.
  3. I've said a few times, I think the most interesting part of this year's Bills' draft are those three mid-round picks, assuming no trades. They will have 3 picks out of about 12 (depends on comp picks). McBean have found some good ones here--Johnson (R4), Milano and Teller (R5).
  4. TPS

    Top 9 players in the draft.

    This will be key to their R1 pick this year, how many QBs will go in the first 8? Then there is always the surprise pick, a la Browns at 4 last year...
  5. Someone actually listened to it without accepting that she said it. 👍
  6. DCDude, it's called a counterfactual. Tasker and GG claim that government distributes income without creating wealth. I gave ONE example when government was the prime generator of economic growth and wealth. If government can't cause the private sector to create wealth, then how do you explain this case? Was it only possible this one time? Why do you think president's declare war on poverty or terrorism, because they want to raise spending to fight those wars. Now, The problem with accepting this reality is that their libertarian theology comes crashing down. Government can no longer be viewed as stealing wealth if it can help create it. i understand that it is difficult for people to give up their beliefs.... That said, people conflate my describing how things work with my political leanings. The key point is government can expand private sector wealth by spending in excess of its taxes, and can do this as long there are excess resources. Note, that also means government can do the same thing by cutting taxes and keeping spending constant. Yes, I'd like to see more spending that supports the working class and less spending that supports the MIC, but that is a separate question--which is, if we can get the economy to produce more, how should we do it? What should it produce more of? If you want the private sector to make the decisions, then cut more taxes. it's that simple;and it's Trump's policy. If we ever do adopt this strategy, spending and/or taxes have to be more flexible in case we start to experience higher inflation, because the prescription from this perspective is to cut spending (or raise taxes). So there are issues with trying to use fiscal policy as a fine tuning tool, but that is no reason to waste unused resources. If you want to learn something, read this: https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2019/01/16/1547640616000/America-has-never-worried-about-financing-its-priorities/ The last paragraph is something i didn't know: *Modern monetary theory has the least Marxist origin story of any concept in the history of human thought. According to Warren Mosler, credited with inventing it, the idea came "after spending an hour in the steam room with Don Rumsfeld at the Racquet Club in Chicago."
  7. Dude, I've said several times it's exactly what Trump has done: he's passed two bills to increase spending and he's cut taxes which raised the 2018 deficit by almost $200 billion. Also, I haven't said government spending is the only way to do it. As GG said, one can also increase deficits by cutting taxes, one part of Trump's plan. Back during the crisis I said one of the best policies would be to cut the payroll tax, which they actually did.
  8. Hmmm...I thought I just said that if the Fed were to try QE at this point of the recovery it would cause inflation. silly me. It's not a necessary condition. I'm not sure what you mean by "reject the dollar"? China, Japan, the Saudis et al stop accumulating reserves? Oil is prices in another currency? You'll have to expand. Given our policies of endless war and outsourcing manufacturing, we will certainly see a demise. These are two areas where I hope Trump makes a difference.
  9. The impact is unique to each country depending upon its resources and current state of the economy. If the Fed added another $6 trillion over the next four years, we'd see a significant jump in inflation given the current state of the economy, 3.7% unemployment currently. Slight difference in cases: people die, government can exist forever... People have to pay off their debts when they die, or their estate does. When exactly will the US government die?
  10. Oh, you're taking about the same ratings agencies that said subprime mortgages were AAA? Hahahahahaha!!!!!
  11. So Dick Cheney is a leftist? I didn't know that.... One point we do agree on is that our spending priorities are different. That's where the politics enters the discussion and is independent of how fiscal policy works. Yes, Negative rates were applied in Europe by the ECB a so-called independent central bank...
  12. If you're expecting it to cause inflation but can't explain why it hasn't, then there must be a problem with your theory. And that's a general you, not YOU.
  13. Did the government deficits and debt accumulated from WWII cause the US economy to collapse? Can you point to a site that shows the US debt has been downgraded? Thanks. That the US economy was so weak, the FEd went to extremes to try to stimulate it. Did it impact inflation? Are we Zimbabwe?
  14. Please, let's not compare an underdeveloped country with a developed one. Zimb lacks capital; The US uses about 80% of its capital capacity currently. It's not up to the Treasury to deploy funds, it has to be appropriated by Congress. When congress passed Trump's spending Bills, that gave the Treasury the ability to spend, and it didn't need taxes to spend; in fact, Trump cut the revenues going to the Treasury with his other Bill. The private sector has more to spend and the government is spending more. The bigger deficits mean the Treasury also has to sell more bonds as the law requires. The Fed coordinates the auctions using its Primary Dealers who are required to fill the auction, and they always have the funds because the government spent them into existence (see my example above). Regarding your inflation concern, the fact that the government is required to sell bonds = to its deficits ties soaks up the newly created funds from the spending. As I said, the government is limited by the real resources available to produce real things, which is why Zimbabwe can't deficit spend and the US can, though we are getting closer to full employment, maybe...
  15. The issue is that Tasker and GG think that government can only redistribute income, which has no impact on growth/wealth. In the case of a balanced budget that is true. With deficit spending, that's not the case. Government stimulates demand via deficits which causes the private sector to produce more output--wealth. From 1935 to 1940, RGDP grew by about 6% annually vs 12 % during the war. The average deficit in the first period was just under 3%/year; the average deficit in the second period was 17%/year. The impact of deficits of course depends on what's happening in the other sectors. Usually they go up when the private sector (C+I) is contracting, so higher deficits are associated with lower growth (as in Obama's first term). However, if the economy is growing and you juice it with deficits, it will juice the economy, just as we saw last year. It's really straight-forward. Unfortunately it's usually ideology that prevents using deficits to stimulate the economy more than if left alone, though republicans certainly realize "deficits don't matter." For conservatives, it seems deficit spending is fine as long as it for a wall or a war..... The only thing that limits us from producing more wealth is labor and capital as Tasker stated. Government deficit spending is a mechanism that puts more labor and capital to use. It's up to us to influence our politicians on how we want those resources used.
×