Political Forums
Forum Notice

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk

Political Talk Political Talk Forum - Discuss and debate politics


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 12th, 2012, 02:54 PM   #1
The Chief
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Planet Earth (Mostly)
Posts: 14,270
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKY1xA36ua8[/youtube]
tadpole256 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old February 12th, 2012, 03:44 PM   #2
Meh Economist
 
Fayt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Not in MD
Posts: 13,826
ooookay? You really like Mr. Friedman tadpole. Have you read any of his books?
Fayt is offline  
Old February 13th, 2012, 08:07 AM   #3
Not Believing My Eyes....
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 29,748
Shhhh Tadpole with all that noise. You might wake up someone who's asleep.....
imaginethat is offline  
Old February 13th, 2012, 08:23 AM   #4
Meh Economist
 
Fayt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Not in MD
Posts: 13,826
Oh yes, don't wake up the great sleeping liberal
Fayt is offline  
Old February 13th, 2012, 08:41 AM   #5
Not Believing My Eyes....
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 29,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fayt View Post
Oh yes, don't wake up the great sleeping liberal


Like George Carlin said, it's called the American Dream because you gotta be asleep to believe it.
imaginethat is offline  
Old February 13th, 2012, 08:52 AM   #6
Meh Economist
 
Fayt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Not in MD
Posts: 13,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fayt' timestamp='1329153819' post='382713

Oh yes, don't wake up the great sleeping liberal


Like George Carlin said, it's called the American Dream because you gotta be asleep to believe it.


Only for the uninformed and the American Dream isn't become the next Bill Gates.
Fayt is offline  
Old February 14th, 2012, 12:54 PM   #7
The Chief
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Planet Earth (Mostly)
Posts: 14,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fayt View Post
ooookay? You really like Mr. Friedman tadpole. Have you read any of his books?


Of course, and I suggest you do... He was awarded a Nobel Prize for a reason. It would be a good start to your budding Econ Education.
tadpole256 is offline  
Old February 14th, 2012, 12:54 PM   #8
The Chief
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Planet Earth (Mostly)
Posts: 14,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fayt View Post
Oh yes, don't wake up the great sleeping liberal


IT and I are the only only real liberals in this thread
tadpole256 is offline  
Old February 14th, 2012, 12:55 PM   #9
The Chief
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Planet Earth (Mostly)
Posts: 14,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fayt View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat' timestamp='1329154886' post='382718

[quote name='Fayt' timestamp='1329153819' post='382713']

Oh yes, don't wake up the great sleeping liberal


Like George Carlin said, it's called the American Dream because you gotta be asleep to believe it.


Only for the uninformed and the American Dream isn't become the next Bill Gates.

[/quote]



Not your dream perhaps...
tadpole256 is offline  
Old February 14th, 2012, 01:49 PM   #10
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,364
If we just raise the retirement age to 70 for people born before 1960, we would be much, much, much better off. It's do-able, and I'm sure it will be done at some point in the near future.
waitingtables is offline  
Old February 14th, 2012, 01:50 PM   #11
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,364
Friedman has been wrong a lot. Don't get me wrong, I respect his ideas and all, but he was wrong about some things.
waitingtables is offline  
Old February 14th, 2012, 01:55 PM   #12
The Chief
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Planet Earth (Mostly)
Posts: 14,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Friedman has been wrong a lot. Don't get me wrong, I respect his ideas and all, but he was wrong about some things.


Everyone is wrong on somethings, but I don't know that you can say he was wrong "a lot"... Can you cite examples?
tadpole256 is offline  
Old February 14th, 2012, 01:59 PM   #13
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,364
Quote:

First, when the United States and the United Kingdom tried to put monetarism into practice at the end of the 1970s, both experienced dismal results: in each country steady growth in the money supply failed to prevent severe recessions. The Federal Reserve officially adopted Friedman-type monetary targets in 1979, but effectively abandoned them in 1982 when the unemployment rate went into double digits. This abandonment was made official in 1984, and ever since then the Fed has engaged in precisely the sort of discretionary fine-tuning that Friedman decried. For example, the Fed responded to the 2001 recession by slashing interest rates and allowing the money supply to grow at rates that sometimes exceeded 10 percent per year. Once the Fed was satisfied that the recovery was solid, it reversed course, raising interest rates and allowing growth in the money supply to drop to zero.

Second, since the early 1980s the Federal Reserve and its counterparts in other countries have done a reasonably good job, undermining Friedman’s portrayal of central bankers as irredeemable bunglers. Inflation has stayed low, recessions—except in Japan, of which more in a second—have been relatively brief and shallow. And all this happened in spite of fluctuations in the money supply that horrified monetarists, and led them—Friedman included—to predict disasters that failed to materialize. As David Warsh of The Boston Globe pointed out in 1992, “Friedman blunted his lance forecasting inflation in the 1980s, when he was deeply, frequently wrong.”


http://www.nybooks.com/articles/arch...gination=false
waitingtables is offline  
Old February 14th, 2012, 02:18 PM   #14
The Chief
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Planet Earth (Mostly)
Posts: 14,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Quote:

First, when the United States and the United Kingdom tried to put monetarism into practice at the end of the 1970s, both experienced dismal results: in each country steady growth in the money supply failed to prevent severe recessions. The Federal Reserve officially adopted Friedman-type monetary targets in 1979, but effectively abandoned them in 1982 when the unemployment rate went into double digits. This abandonment was made official in 1984, and ever since then the Fed has engaged in precisely the sort of discretionary fine-tuning that Friedman decried. For example, the Fed responded to the 2001 recession by slashing interest rates and allowing the money supply to grow at rates that sometimes exceeded 10 percent per year. Once the Fed was satisfied that the recovery was solid, it reversed course, raising interest rates and allowing growth in the money supply to drop to zero.

Second, since the early 1980s the Federal Reserve and its counterparts in other countries have done a reasonably good job, undermining Friedman’s portrayal of central bankers as irredeemable bunglers. Inflation has stayed low, recessions—except in Japan, of which more in a second—have been relatively brief and shallow. And all this happened in spite of fluctuations in the money supply that horrified monetarists, and led them—Friedman included—to predict disasters that failed to materialize. As David Warsh of The Boston Globe pointed out in 1992, “Friedman blunted his lance forecasting inflation in the 1980s, when he was deeply, frequently wrong.”


http://www.nybooks.c...agination=false


Of course this was written by Paul Krugman, a half-assed economist who is a superstar in academic circles because he frequently distorts reality. The fact of the matter is that the Federal Reserve never officially adopted Friedman-type monetary policies, because part of those policies would require massive deregulation on a scale we've never seen. This is not likely to happen because it would eliminate a lot of Washington's power. Krugman, like so many other progressives is quick to call the slightest deregulation "Friedman-type" monetary policy, but the fact is that the government has only at best taken half-measures. And by the way, most of the disasters Friedman predicted did materialize, just a bit later.



Krugman is the classical progressive who thinks we can spend our way to prosperity.

Krugman doesn't indicate how exactly even more deficit spending by de facto bankrupt governments could possibly improve the situation. The truth is of course that it wouldn't. Would Krugman's vaunted "confidence fairy" be likely to make a sudden entrance if Greece's debt-to-GDP ratio were (hypothetically) to rise to 200% or 300% instead of to 160% as it is likely to do next year? I think not.





In fact, more deficit spending isn't even possible for bankrupt governments – luckily. I would therefore retort that for deeply indebted nations, doing something about their debts is far better than to just continue spending all willy-nilly – which is what Krugman recommends the U.S. government should do.





In addition, Krugman makes a mistake that strikes me as rather typical for supporters of Keynesian deficit spending recipes. He looks at what has happened in one year and insists that the observations made in such a short time span are sufficient to judge whether the austerity policy is likely to bring about the desired results. How did the Asian economies get out of the 1997-1998 crisis? People seem to dimly recall that they all introduced austerity measures and that it took a good while for the positive results to become manifest.





So papers by Krugman can hardly be taken seriously.
tadpole256 is offline  
Old February 14th, 2012, 04:15 PM   #15
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,364
Krugman gives a lot of credit to Friedman. And Krugman is not as you have painted him.
waitingtables is offline  
Old February 14th, 2012, 10:02 PM   #16
Meh Economist
 
Fayt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Not in MD
Posts: 13,826
And obviously you can't tadpole. If you're going to copy and past a whole article at least provide the source. despite you preaching to me about how you studied ecom in college and blah blah blah, you're not being very original. Hopefully you wasn't a sleep most of the time doing class. Source your pasts.
Fayt is offline  
Old February 15th, 2012, 11:22 AM   #17
The Chief
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Planet Earth (Mostly)
Posts: 14,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Krugman gives a lot of credit to Friedman. And Krugman is not as you have painted him.


How so?
tadpole256 is offline  
Old February 15th, 2012, 04:32 PM   #18
An Awesome Dude
 
Dude111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location:
Posts: 3,253
You could check out my thread ON THE TAX BASE tadpole!!
Dude111 is offline  
Old February 15th, 2012, 04:38 PM   #19
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,364
Quote:
In the long run, great men are remembered for their strengths, not their weaknesses, and Milton Friedman was a very great man indeed—a man of intellectual courage who was one of the most important economic thinkers of all time, and possibly the most brilliant communicator of economic ideas to the general public that ever lived. But there’s a good case for arguing that Friedmanism, in the end, went too far, both as a doctrine and in its practical applications. When Friedman was beginning his career as a public intellectual, the times were ripe for a counterreformation against Keynesianism and all that went with it. But what the world needs now, I’d argue, is a counter-counterreformation.


Keynes has not been disproved. Krugman is not a hack. There is a time and place for Keynes' ideas as well as Friedman's.
waitingtables is offline  
Old February 15th, 2012, 04:54 PM   #20
Meh Economist
 
Fayt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Not in MD
Posts: 13,826
pfff, no time for Friedman's ideas imo.
Fayt is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk

Tags
security, social, truth


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Social Security problems liberalguy Money and Finance 82 October 4th, 2011 07:15 PM
Social security tax limit pensacola_niceman Money and Finance 5 September 21st, 2010 02:40 PM
Social Security to pay tadpole256 Money and Finance 104 September 15th, 2010 05:03 AM
social security hevusa Political Talk 128 September 15th, 2005 11:17 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.