Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 66
Thanks Tree48Thanks

Thread: Donald Trump Is A Vulgar Keynesian

  1. #1
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    19,392
    Thanks
    17007

    From
    Colorado

    Donald Trump Is A Vulgar Keynesian

    Well, we ALL know that Donald Trump is a vulgar person, of course. We've all heard the pussy-grabbing comments. And that's vulgar.

    But that's NOT the kind of 'vulgarity' I'm talking about here.

    I'm thinking back to a memorable Paul Krugman column from early 2001, after the SCOTUS had installed George W. Bush as President.

    And Bush and Cheney were calling for a ginormous tax cut to ward off what they saw as a looming recession.

    And even though Krugman is a Keynesian himself, he dubbed that idea 'vulgar Keynesianism': the notion that we should try to ANTICIPATE recessions and implement tax cuts to try to prevent that recession before it even HAPPENED.

    Donald Trump is a vulgar Keynesian in THAT sense. He is calling for a truly MASSIVE fiscal stimulus, and at a time when the U.S. economy is NOT in a recession. He is calling for:

    (1) A Trillion dollar plus infrastructure program;

    (2) A possibly trillion dollar plus military spending spree;

    (3) And, of course, ENORMOUS tax cuts, and mostly for our billionaires.

    Vulgar Keynesianism.

    And conservatives are SUPPOSED to loathe, revile, and despise Lord Keynes and his radical ideas......

    CHEW on THAT, conservatives. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

    You've gone over to the Dark Side.

    HILARIOUS!
    Thanks from RNG, DemoWhip, Friday13 and 4 others

  2. #2
    Polemicist Supremum Monk-Eye's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    3,374
    Thanks
    317

    From
    Yesod

    Golden Arts Of Nothing For Something Deals

    " Golden Arts Of Nothing For Something Deals "

    * Supply Versus Demand Quagmire *

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_multiplier
    In economics, the fiscal multiplier (not to be confused with monetary multiplier) is the ratio of a change in national income to the change in government spending that causes it. More generally, the exogenous spending multiplier is the ratio of a change in national income to any autonomous change in spending (private investment spending, consumer spending, government spending, or spending by foreigners on the country's exports) that causes it. When this multiplier exceeds one, the enhanced effect on national income is called the multiplier effect.
    ...
    In certain cases multiplier values less than one have been empirically measured (an example is sports stadiums), suggesting that certain types of government spending crowd out private investment or consumer spending that would have otherwise taken place.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplier_uncertainty
    In macroeconomics, multiplier uncertainty is lack of perfect knowledge of the multiplier effect of a particular policy action, such as a monetary or fiscal policy change, upon the intended target of the policy. For example, a fiscal policy maker may have a prediction as to the value of the fiscal multiplier—the ratio of the effect of a government spending change on GDP to the size of the government spending change—but is not likely to know the exact value of this ratio. Similar uncertainty may surround the magnitude of effect of a change in the monetary base or its growth rate upon some target variable, which could be the money supply, the exchange rate, the inflation rate, or GDP.

  3. #3
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    19,392
    Thanks
    17007

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by Monk-Eye View Post
    " Golden Arts Of Nothing For Something Deals "

    * Supply Versus Demand Quagmire *

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_multiplierhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplier_uncertainty
    Yes. Interesting stuff. I don't disagree with any of it. But it leaves me wondering what your point is.
    Thanks from cable2, labrea and Friday13

  4. #4
    RNG
    RNG is online now
    Member RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    2,623
    Thanks
    2360

    From
    Canada, West Coast
    What I laugh about is that Trump claims to support the Mack Penny Plan and also advocates massive infrastructure and defense spending.

    Doublethink anyone?
    Thanks from BigLeRoy

  5. #5
    Bizarroland Observer Thx1138's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    18,987
    Thanks
    10700

    From
    aMEEErica
    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    Well, we ALL know that Donald Trump is a vulgar person, of course. We've all heard the pussy-grabbing comments. And that's vulgar.

    But that's NOT the kind of 'vulgarity' I'm talking about here.

    I'm thinking back to a memorable Paul Krugman column from early 2001, after the SCOTUS had installed George W. Bush as President.

    And Bush and Cheney were calling for a ginormous tax cut to ward off what they saw as a looming recession.

    And even though Krugman is a Keynesian himself, he dubbed that idea 'vulgar Keynesianism': the notion that we should try to ANTICIPATE recessions and implement tax cuts to try to prevent that recession before it even HAPPENED.

    Donald Trump is a vulgar Keynesian in THAT sense. He is calling for a truly MASSIVE fiscal stimulus, and at a time when the U.S. economy is NOT in a recession. He is calling for:

    (1) A Trillion dollar plus infrastructure program;

    (2) A possibly trillion dollar plus military spending spree;

    (3) And, of course, ENORMOUS tax cuts, and mostly for our billionaires.

    Vulgar Keynesianism.

    And conservatives are SUPPOSED to loathe, revile, and despise Lord Keynes and his radical ideas......

    CHEW on THAT, conservatives. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

    You've gone over to the Dark Side.

    HILARIOUS!
    Yes, a spending spree reminiscent of the way George Bush squandered the surplus he inherited.

    That's what these "fiscal conservatives" do, run up a big bill and leave the next dem to get a handle on it.

    Same with Ronald Reagan and Bush senior, the original "fiscal conservatives" who got the trickle-down ball rolling.

    "Four trillion dollars!? You'd think we'd be living in some kind of Utopian paradise!"

    Thx
    Thanks from cable2, BigLeRoy, Panzareta and 3 others

  6. #6
    res
    res is offline
    Member
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,139
    Thanks
    757

    Quote Originally Posted by Thx1138 View Post
    Yes, a spending spree reminiscent of the way George Bush squandered the surplus he inherited.

    That's what these "fiscal conservatives" do, run up a big bill and leave the next dem to get a handle on it.

    Same with Ronald Reagan and Bush senior, the original "fiscal conservatives" who got the trickle-down ball rolling.

    "Four trillion dollars!? You'd think we'd be living in some kind of Utopian paradise!"

    Thx
    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.
    Thanks from Claudius the God

  7. #7
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    19,392
    Thanks
    17007

    From
    Colorado
    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.
    "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.

  8. #8
    Bizarroland Observer Thx1138's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    18,987
    Thanks
    10700

    From
    aMEEErica
    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.
    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
    Last edited by Thx1138; 13th November 2016 at 03:35 AM.

  9. #9
    Six
    Six is offline
    Established Member Six's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,027
    Thanks
    473

    From
    Houston, Tx
    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    Well, we ALL know that Donald Trump is a vulgar person, of course. We've all heard the pussy-grabbing comments. And that's vulgar.

    But that's NOT the kind of 'vulgarity' I'm talking about here.

    I'm thinking back to a memorable Paul Krugman column from early 2001, after the SCOTUS had installed George W. Bush as President.

    And Bush and Cheney were calling for a ginormous tax cut to ward off what they saw as a looming recession.

    And even though Krugman is a Keynesian himself, he dubbed that idea 'vulgar Keynesianism': the notion that we should try to ANTICIPATE recessions and implement tax cuts to try to prevent that recession before it even HAPPENED.

    Donald Trump is a vulgar Keynesian in THAT sense. He is calling for a truly MASSIVE fiscal stimulus, and at a time when the U.S. economy is NOT in a recession. He is calling for:
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    (1) A Trillion dollar plus infrastructure program;

    (2) A possibly trillion dollar plus military spending spree;
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    (3) And, of course, ENORMOUS tax cuts, and mostly for our billionaires.
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    And conservatives are SUPPOSED to loathe, revile, and despise Lord Keynes and his radical ideas......
    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
    Thanks from libertariat720

  10. #10
    Six
    Six is offline
    Established Member Six's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,027
    Thanks
    473

    From
    Houston, Tx
    Quote Originally Posted by Thx1138 View Post
    Yes, a spending spree reminiscent of the way George Bush squandered the surplus he inherited.

    That's what these "fiscal conservatives" do, run up a big bill and leave the next dem to get a handle on it.

    Same with Ronald Reagan and Bush senior, the original "fiscal conservatives" who got the trickle-down ball rolling.

    "Four trillion dollars!? You'd think we'd be living in some kind of Utopian paradise!"

    Thx

    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.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... 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