Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 66
Thanks Tree48Thanks

Thread: Donald Trump Is A Vulgar Keynesian

  1. #11
    res
    res is offline
    Member
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,176
    Thanks
    792

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    "There's nothing Keynesian about a tax cut plus military spending increase." You're quite mistaken. Nor was Krugman saying that cutting taxes amounted to 'vulgar Keynesianism'. Read my OP more carefully, please.

    What Krugman was calling 'vulgar Keynesianism', as I DID explain, was the notion that we should try to ANTICIPATE a recession and try to WARD it off with tax cuts and/or spending increases.
    That's all fine. But in order for the policy to be anything close to Keynesian it has to have an increase in government expenditure through specific programmes aimed at spurring demand.

    Cutting taxes is the opposite spectrum of the economic theory. It is based in Says law where supply determines demand. The problem with Republicans since Nixon (especially Reagan) is that they never managed to get it into their heads that increased military spending coupled with deregulation and cutting of corporate and income taxes amounts to a disaster. Nothing Keynesian about it. I think you are getting too attached to Krugman's interpretation of "government intervention" which he twists and turns in order for it to fit his agenda. The link between cutting taxes "the modern Republican way" and Keynesianism is tenuous at best.
    Last edited by res; 14th November 2016 at 06:17 AM.
    Thanks from labrea

  2. #12
    res
    res is offline
    Member
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,176
    Thanks
    792

    Quote Originally Posted by Six View Post
    Debt increased every year under Clinton. He added $1.396 trillion, a 32% increase to the $4.4 trillion debt level at the end of Bush's last budget, FY 1993.
    It's not true that debt increased every year under Clinton. He ended a couple of years in surplus. The only time Republicans managed to balance a budget was in the first year of Reagan's presidency which can be attributed to Jimmy Carter's policies as it was too early for Reagan to fuck up the economy. Reagan increased debt by 176% during his 8 years in office. Quite the able fiscal conservative.
    I seriously don't understand why Americans hold Reagan in such high esteem. He was a second, third rate actor, ruined much of US industry, ballooned the national debt, and created the conditions that led to Trump and Tea Party lunatics.
    Thanks from labrea and MaryAnne

  3. #13
    Moderator libertariat720's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    5,574
    Thanks
    1775

    From
    ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Six View Post
    Krugman's a partisan hack who sold out any and all semblance of objectivity long ago. This is the same that claimed Greece could simply devalue its way out of their debt crisis if they had access to their own sovereign National currency

    Worse was Krugman's defense of the Fannie and Freddie after the Sub-prime crisis.
    Fannie, Freddie and You - The New York Times

    If Krugman starts predicting un-paralleled economic growth over the next 4 years then I'll start to worry.



    Yup, he's proposing massive new fiscal stimulus, and we'll see how successful he is with a GOP Congress that understands just how ineffective stimulus spending is when it comes to growing market based economies. The only savings grace is that Hillary wont be allowed to waste American tax dollars " investing in Green energy " and he wont be raising taxes to pay for it



    He's proposed removing the IDIOTIC 33 % tax Americans corporations are hit with when they try to repatriate overseas profits back to the US. What made Sanders and Hillary's economic initiatives so potentially destructive was the tax increases. Both of them were planning on new stimulus spending while simultaneously driving off private sector investment capital.

    Sanders especially would have been a disaster of epic proportions.



    First, Trumps no Conservative, never has been a Conservative and it remains to be seen if he's truly embraced the Conservative ideology. As a PROUD Conservative I can tell you we dont " loathe, revile, and despise " Fiscal stimulus or Keynes goofy economic concepts, we just know they're not effective and we definitely understand why the Left embraces them blindly

    Its basically Govt intervention into the economy under the pretense that its a effective strategy
    Yep, and both parties practice keynesian economics, but it will be funny to see the libs here criticize their own economics because it doesn't have a (D) next to it.

  4. #14
    res
    res is offline
    Member
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,176
    Thanks
    792

    Quote Originally Posted by Thx1138 View Post
    Did trickle-down stop with Bush sr.?

    Did it stop with Bush jr?

    Call it whatever you want, it is still tax cuts for the wealthy.

    I knew when it was introduced, a tax cut merely on "income" with no provisions like new hires or capitol equipment purchases... that we were giving the wealthy a tax cut "until they feel they have enough money."

    Sure, that'll stimulate the economy...

    Thx
    John Kennedy cut taxes! But John Kennedy was able to do it because he had surpluses. During his presidency US debt decreased steadily, as it had under Truman and Eisenhower.
    The problem is cutting taxes while your debt is increasing. Only a moron does that, and every Republican that came after Jimmy Carter's presidency has been such a moron (though the jury is still out on GHWB as he reluctantly increased taxes). It is idiotic to cut taxes and not cut expenditure, if you are a proponent of classical economics.

    If you are a Keynesian you will increase expenditure to spur demand and thus growth because your position is that a temporary increase in wealth will have a multiplier effect on your economy and would eventually leave you with residual real wealth once the prices are adjusted for inflation after one or two cycles. From that point it's easy to dismiss Krugman's view of "vulgar Keynesians" as just a nice catch-phrase with no substance behind it.
    Last edited by res; 14th November 2016 at 06:29 AM.
    Thanks from Thx1138

  5. #15
    Veteran Member GordonGecko's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    29,460
    Thanks
    22174

    From
    VA
    Reagan was a Keynesian.

    Sure he had tax cuts...but he agreed to MORE Government spending.


    "Fiscal conservatism" and "austerity"...are a hoax.
    Thanks from cable2 and BitterPill

  6. #16
    Veteran Member GordonGecko's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    29,460
    Thanks
    22174

    From
    VA
    Quote Originally Posted by libertariat720 View Post
    Yep, and both parties practice keynesian economics, but it will be funny to see the libs here criticize their own economics because it doesn't have a (D) next to it.
    Or funny to NOT see "fiscal conservatives" criticize Trump's economics....until of course Democrats re-gain the Congress or re-take the Presidency....


    but when the GOP runs everything?...."fiscal conservatives" become "deficit doves" and don't say a blessed word against deficit spending.
    Thanks from cable2 and BitterPill

  7. #17
    Bizarroland Observer Thx1138's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    18,987
    Thanks
    10706

    From
    aMEEErica
    Quote Originally Posted by res View Post
    John Kennedy cut taxes! But John Kennedy was able to do it because he had surpluses. During his presidency US debt decreased steadily, as it had under Truman and Eisenhower.
    The problem is cutting taxes while your debt is increasing. Only a moron does that, and every Republican that came after Jimmy Carter's presidency has been such a moron (though the jury is still out on GHWB as he reluctantly increased taxes). It is idiotic to cut taxes and not cut expenditure, if you are a proponent of classical economics.

    If you are a Keynesian you will increase expenditure to spur demand and thus growth because your position is that a temporary increase in wealth will have a multiplier effect on your economy and would eventually leave you with residual real wealth once the prices are adjusted for inflation after one or two cycles. From that point it's easy to dismiss Krugman's view of "vulgar Keynesians" as just a nice catch-phrase with no substance behind it.
    It would be fine "If" the wealthy actually did invest in America... but again, we are asking these folks when they feel they have enough easy money accumulated...

    Stimulus tax cuts for corporations are fine, as long as they are for reasons that will actually help the economy.

    Thx
    Thanks from cable2 and res

  8. #18
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    26,902
    Thanks
    21494

    From
    Behind the Redwood Curtain
    Quote Originally Posted by res View Post
    Actually, Bush Sr. wasn't a trickle down economics proponent. He called it voodoo economics. You can look it up in his debates with Ronald Reagan during Republican primaries in 1980 elections. What tilted the election in 1992 to Clinton was Bush Sr actually raising taxes in order to get a grip on the rising deficit. As far as I know George HW Bush never cut taxes, he raised them.

    I'm really fascinated how father and son could've had such different world views both on economics and politics. Remember, it was Bush Sr warning his son not to invade Iraq in 2003.

    As for Paul Krugman. I've read a lot of his stuff. Mostly in his OpEd piece in NY Times. The notion that cutting taxes is in some way "vulgar Keynesianism" is just ridiculous to me. It's a tenet of classical economic theory. The problem with modern Republicans is that they forget to follow through on the radical downsizing of the government apparatus needed for the tax cuts to remain viable. That's why GHW Bush called it voodoo economics. We can thank the stupid second rate actor for popularizing that idiocy.

    Krugman just wanted to insult the younger Bush but there's nothing Keynesian about a tax cut plus military spending increase.

    As for Trump. No way is he going to go for trillion dollars worth of infrastructure projects. A trillion dollar hike in military spending absolutely. He wants to give the nuclear bomb to the Saudis for fuck sake.
    I think that is where the "vulgar" comes in.
    Thanks from res

  9. #19
    res
    res is offline
    Member
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,176
    Thanks
    792

    Quote Originally Posted by Thx1138 View Post
    It would be fine "If" the wealthy actually did invest in America... but again, we are asking these folks when they feel they have enough easy money accumulated...

    Stimulus tax cuts for corporations are fine, as long as they are for reasons that will actually help the economy.

    Thx
    I completely agree. And that's why I think it's a bullshit argument on Krugman's part to call the neocons "vulgar Keynesians".
    The basic tenet of Keynes theory is that the marginal propensity to consume of poor people is far greater than that of rich people. In other words poor people consume a far greater part of their their income than do rich people which is on average very true. And as we have seen from the recently released Panama papers, rich people do not tend to reinvest money but to accumulate it making that much less money available for consumption, driving down demand and creating a downward spiral. That's the basic argument for redistribution of wealth.

    What modern Republicans have been doing is not Keynesianism by any stretch of imagination. It's what Bernie Sanders rightly called "redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich". That is a very dangerous thing for any democracy.
    Thanks from Thx1138 and labrea

  10. #20
    res
    res is offline
    Member
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,176
    Thanks
    792

    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    I think that is where the "vulgar" comes in.


    I can't thank the post unfortunately.
    Thanks from labrea

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 8th October 2016, 12:18 PM
  2. Trump Is Vulgar To Women
    By Madeline in forum Political Controversies
    Replies: 480
    Last Post: 31st May 2016, 07:23 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 13th April 2016, 04:04 PM
  4. Obama denounces rise of 'vulgar and divisive' politics of Trump
    By meridian5455 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 19th March 2016, 09:37 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 8th March 2016, 04:04 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed