Posted on 10/03/2020 12:57:54 PM PDT by Eleutheria5
That's fine, but when you're in a debate in the forum of ideas, you've gotta have more than that if you're going to challenge my assertions and rationale.
You should bone up on the difference between economics and business, and the difference between government and business, and get an idea of your own rationale on those subjects, before you start challenging people about those subjects.
MAGA.....Leni
It keeps blowing up in their faces, but they keep trying again.
These leftist dipsh#ts put the Coyote to shame with their failed attempts to get Trump.
Beep! Beep!
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1312525833505058816
Trump’s “hospital bed” at Walter Reid...
Well, if you don’t understand the substance of the subject, then you probably shouldn’t go challenging me on that subject because, yeah, you’ll be chasing your tail.
He’s not in a local doctor’s office with one doc checking him out.
I have seen how secret service deals with their subjects while in the hospital. I assure you there is no one slipping anything into an IV that is in the president.
But as a practical matter, the latest emergency aid package is just like the previous: Lousy, outdated economics. JM Keynes meets LBJ and Bill Clinton. But necessary for political purposes, because Nancy wants to spend four billion just for starters, and saying, “not a farthing, because it’s inflationary” is not a winning answer. Then she’s Robin Hood and you’re the Sheriff. The best that can be said about the whole thing is that it has some fiscal restraint, and it may cause inflation, but not double-digit Jimmy Carter inflation; something that can be lived down eventually. The virus will be gone soon. The crazed panic will cool off. But the inflation will take longer to work out. Then again, I thought we would have had Argentinian-style inflation under Obama but it never came.
He likes a hard mattress.
LOL!
"Stimulus" and government spending over GDP increase simply INFLATES the money supply rendering your dollar less value than it was before. In time that lower value dollar will be reflected in higher prices. THAT is the hidden tax of inflation caused ONLY by increase in government spending.
Trump's "stimulus" ratifies the JM Keynes and Leftist approach that more government fixes things. But more unconstitutional government wrecks things. Trump needs to understand that the TRUE economic "stimulus" is TAX CUTS, or in this case TAX REBATES (RETURN SOME OF THE TAXES PAID) - ie. shrink government income and spending.
There is only ONE cause for inflation: running the government printing presses to facilitate more government spending beyond our GDP. The graphs below show how increase in inflation follows increases government spending, taking off big time since the 1970's.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/dollarbuyingpowerchart-b2a181a24abc43e1b16dfe720b0b3e0f.png)
Trump knows a lot about successful business - one of the best. But he still has a lot to learn about economics and the value of SMALL CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT. Short term illusory "help" from "stimulus" does not offset the long-term damage done by such. Again, what he should be doing, is TAX REBATES - that is not more government spending but shrinking government income which under the right thinking will shrink government spending.
FYI, the second graph is the increase in government spending. Inflation and government spending go together like “peas and carrots”.
He has already done what he can with taxes. The point of this “stimulus” is pure short-term, to take the ball out of Nancy, Chuck and Joe’s court so that they do not have an issue to campaign on. Long-term, it’s inflationary. 100%. But long-term, allowing Joe to become No. 46 will be even more inflationary, and that’s the very least damage that he would do. Trump took micro and macro-economics at Wharton, I’m sure, and he knows all about government spending and its effect on inflationary trends. But as a politician, he has to pass a stimulus bill on his terms, and that’s the best that can be done. 1.5 Trillion, say, instead of 3 or a compromise of 2.2 Trillion, because otherwise Biden will get to pose as compassionate and use that to slither his way into the oval office. This became inevitable as soon as the lock-down became policy. You play the cards you’re dealt. He’s playing them well. But it’s a lousy hand.
“You should bone up on the difference between economics and business, and the difference between government and business, and get an idea of your own rationale on those subjects, before you start challenging people about those subjects.”
Your constant repetitive mantra about the difference between gov’t and business, is getting tiresome, to say the least. You seem to think you are the only one with that knowledge, rather than all of the economics experts that surround the President and advise him on economic policy constantly. So you know it all, they don’t, according to how you word your comments.
You seem blind to the political considerations that must be factored in, especially as we are 30 days out from an election of such consequence for our Country’s well-being. We have a populace that has heard on a continuing basis from our politicians that they will be receiving a second stimulus that is not happening (thank you Nancy Pelosi).
You also do not factor in that giving citizens another stimulus check is the equivalent of giving us a tax break, cutting our taxes by returning OUR money back to us rather than leaving it in the hands of the gov’t to spend as THEY wish. It’s then in OUR pockets to spend as WE wish.
Since when are conservatives against our gov’t having less money, and our citizens having more of their OWN money back. The less the gov’t has at my expense, the happier I am. So your argument for lesser gov’t is indeed fulfilled by our U.S. citizens getting a rebate of their own money to spend as they choose. Plus all of those rebates will find their way back into our economy via however way people choose to spend it. A boost to the economy. The glass is half full, not half empty here.
Of course the point is undoubtedly moot as Nancy Pelosi will undoubtedly prevent any stimulus from taking place, as she is holding out for a Biden election while also trying to make Trump look bad. She is rolling the dice and had better hope for the Senate to turn Dem too, or all her plotting is for naught on getting her Christmas Tree ornaments passed.
But back to the original premise; a stimulus check in the hands of our citizens is basically a tax cut, and is a good thing, not a bad one.
No.
Not sure you'll get this but it's not that complicated. Depends on how bone-headed you are.
"Stimulus" and government spending over GDP increase simply INFLATES the money supply. The more dollars in circulation, the less value each dollar has. In time that lower value dollar will be reflected in higher prices. THAT is the hidden tax of inflation caused ONLY by increase in government spending. THAT is the reason we've had relentless inflation and relentless price increases for a long time.
A TRUE economic "stimulus" is TAX CUTS, or in this case TAX REBATES (RETURN SOME OF THE TAXES PAID) - ie. shrink government income and spending.
The hand Trump was dealt was a Free Constitutional Republic perverted greatly by Leftist Marxist games.
I voted for Trump to be a GAME CHANGER. His next four years needs to be about CHANGING the mostly unconstitutional totalitarian government into our Free Constitutional Republic America upon which was founded.
He cut taxes. He cut regulations. He altered bad trade deals. He appointed and is appointing great constitutionalist judges. He’s respecting the federalist principles, even while governors are deliberately ramping up Covid deaths by exposing elders, forbidding fishing, gardening and motorboats, and other stupid, tyrannical decrees. He’s avoiding wars so far. But elections have to be won, and for that you have to put the onus on the Dems to pass this damned stimulus bill, while at the same time insisting on no pork, or less pork, at least. Being a purist and saying no to any stimulus at all would backfire, sort of like just letting go of the angry bear’s tail and expecting a thank-you.
What’s wrong with a tax rebate?
Payroll tax relief is part of the “stimulus”. Can’t give rebates from an empty till. Just take in less in present payroll receipts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.