Because there is no sensible point. That poster does not even have the slightest clue why "cycles" even occur. They don't just happen, they are executed.
Listen imbecile, you ought to learn basic economics before spewing crap in this forum. You have to learn what value infrastructure projects have for the overall economy and employnment. Your false analogies, non sequiturs, strawman arguments, just show what kind of a fool you are. "Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody's Economy.com, estimates that every dollar of infrastructure spending boosts the gross domestic product by $1.59." "Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers, who is a possible Treasury secretary in an Obama administration, told a congressional committee that "properly designed infrastructure projects have the virtue of being helpful as short-run stimulus, especially for the employment of the workers most hard hit by the housing decline, while at the same time augmenting the economy's productive potential in the long run." ""You always worry about pork-barrel spending, but with the economy in the shape that it's in right now, that's less of a concern than it was earlier this year," said Robert L. Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a budget watchdog group." and finally, "Rep. John Tanner (D-Tenn.), a member of the fiscally conservative Blue Dogs, said he is more receptive to infrastructure spending than to sending out more tax rebate checks." http://www.latimes.com/news/printed...rastructure9-2008nov09,0,3801400.story?page=1 So imbecile, it seems you gonna have to turn off your web TV and go to work, no more stimulus checks in the mail for you.
LOL yeah ok there, keep up the comedy. You're so hopeless it's not even worth trying to discuss anything with you. Feel free to donate your minimum wage salary for infrastructure projects.
Watching this thread for all these so-called "Austrians" is quite the hilarious bit of entertainment. From a long, extremely dry, extremely detailed economics book in my library, the ultimate judgment of these alleged economists below. This was in the context of a controversy over whether the pre-1914 Austrian central bank intervened in the currency market or not. Mises insisted they didn't, Federn, who actually worked at the central bank at the time in question, insisted they did. I will quote the whole thing, so as to give the bolded passage the proper effect: source: A Dynamic Theory of Foreign Exchange, 2nd Edition, by Paul Einzig, 1967. We live in a Keynesian world. For followers of the Austrians to claim that Keynesianism has been proven wrong, when a) the General Theory was written after the Depression had already occurred, so that those in this thread who are saying that the Depression was a result of Keynesian policies are so ignorant of history it's frightening, and b) nothing like it has happened since Keynesian policies were adopted, is, well, once again, frightening in the utter, abysmal, inexcusable ignorance of economic history it shows. I'm not even a Keynesian. But if someone is going to contribute to a thread which depends on a basic knowledge of economics and of the history of economics for it to be even mildly intelligible, they should at least have that basic knowledge. Otherwise, shut up and let those of us who actually know what we're talking about do the talking.
I think you mean well but imo opinion you fall into the sheeple economist crowd. When was the last time an economist with their ridiculous models was right? NEVER Greenspan went before Congress and said he didn't know wtf was going on. I mean really, Paulson and Bernanke and all the other idiots were under oath when they said we are not in a recession. Think about it, anyone who tells you they can model anything is delusional. We went over the answer to these questions already with Cuttens response. Please read it. Also, anyone from Moody's can get bent as far as i'm concerned, i hope i don't have to explain why.
The government builds a bridge. The bridge exists. It is, let us suppose, a beautiful and not an ugly bridge. It has come into being through the magic of government spending. Where would it have been if the obstructionists and the reactionaries had had their way? There would have been no bridge. Here again the government spenders have the better of argument with all those who cannot see beyond the immediate range of their physical eyes. They can see the bridge. But if they have taught themselves to look for indirect as well as direct consequences they can once more see in the eye of imagination the possibilities that have never been allowed to come into existence. They can see the unbuilt homes, the unmade cars and washing machines, the unmade dresses and coats, perhaps the ungrown and unsold foodstuffs......What has happened is merely that one thing has been created instead of others. --Hazlitt
LOL, funniest post on the thread. This has nothing to do with advanced theories (read mental masturbation jerk-off fantasies) of how economics, finance or human beings operate. It's all about pure unadulterated greed, getting mine regardless of whether the other guy gets his or not, making sure I come out on top in the game of life, and fuck the rest. That's what time it is, everything else, well, you learned in the same school that you got your worthless finance degree from. Cutten has already told you people what time it is and what needs to be done to fix this broken and fucked-up economy ... but I sincerely doubt it's going to happen. They used to take people like Dick Fuld out back and shot'em, I for one don't think letting him keep his ill-gotten gains and ride off into the sunset is a sign that we've evolved.
The government builds a bridge. The bridge exists. It is, let us suppose, a beautiful and not an ugly bridge. It has come into being through the magic of government spending. Where would it have been if the obstructionists and the reactionaries had had their way? There would have been no bridge. Here again the government spenders have the better of argument with all those who cannot see beyond the immediate range of their physical eyes. They can see the bridge. But if they have taught themselves to look for indirect as well as direct consequences they can once more see in the eye of imagination the possibilities that have never been allowed to come into existence. They can see the unbuilt homes, the unmade cars and washing machines, the unmade dresses and coats, perhaps the ungrown and unsold foodstuffs......What has happened is merely that one thing has been created instead of others. --Hazlitt
Government builds a bridge. a) Government charges the people who need to travel across the bridge a toll tax. b) If someone can't afford to pay the tax, they simply take the long route around the bridge. c) If someone has a lot of money and friends (amongst the government officials), they don't have to pay very much toll tax, if any. People go to work on their farms, their stores; the butcher, the baker and the candlestick maker all have to pay 49% of their income in a toll tax (to makeup for those who are too poor to pay, and to allow those with a lot of money to continue to come to the village gratis and spend it). This is called progress.
70s Britain had most of the same problems that present USA has, ailing car industry etc. I sincerely hope that you won't make the same mistakes that we did. We had a bad dose of Socialism to appease the disgruntled workers. It was disastrous and so the Govt had to beg the IMF for aid to escape national bankruptcy. It all swung too much the other way under Thatcher in the 80s. Our Gordon Brown offers sweet words which are very carefully constructed left wing propaganda but have the same end which is bankruptcy. He wastes huge resources on social engineering and " black hole " 3rd world projects. Promoting the have-nots, incompetents and the lazy is very expensive but does sound good at election time. Let's hope B Ob sees thru his bullshit before Jan 21st when he takes over