Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 05, 2020, 08:36:35 AM
Home Help Search Login Register

News: IN WARNOCK WE TRUST - WE ARE STAYING UP!

Pages: [1]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Interesting short video on "the deficit"  (Read 597 times)
towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« on: June 29, 2020, 12:45:02 PM »

Watch and learn, RWNJs

https://www.bbc.com/reel/video/p08jbbry/why-we-need-to-debunk-the-deficit-myth-
Logged
maggiethatcherrulesok
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 338


WLM


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 29, 2020, 12:51:56 PM »

Bore off.

This is negativity towards BLM week.

 :mido:
Logged

WLM
towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 29, 2020, 01:05:04 PM »

Did you watch it?
Logged
TerryCochranesSocks
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7 398


Pull your socks up Tel.


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2020, 01:12:53 PM »

I did.
Logged

I fuckin' hate smart-arsed signatures
nekder365
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2 019


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 29, 2020, 01:13:05 PM »

Did you watch it?

Nope the second the BBC logo came up i switched off....
Logged
towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2020, 01:13:19 PM »

What did you think Tozza?
Logged
TerryCochranesSocks
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7 398


Pull your socks up Tel.


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2020, 01:15:56 PM »

I thought she was mostly right but that it didn't tell us anything we don't already know.
The casual dismissal of taxes as just "making room for increased spending without inflationary pressure" is the weakness in it, but yeah, on the whole not much to disagree with.
Logged

I fuckin' hate smart-arsed signatures
towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2020, 01:16:52 PM »

So you agree austerity is fiscally a waste of time and an ideological assault on the poor?
Logged
TerryCochranesSocks
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7 398


Pull your socks up Tel.


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2020, 01:18:25 PM »

No, I agree that we could have chosen not to have austerity, opted instead for runaway inflation and assaulted the poor with that.
Logged

I fuckin' hate smart-arsed signatures
towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2020, 01:22:04 PM »

I think it's all gone out of the window with Covid situation anyway
Logged
Wee_Willie
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9 072



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: June 29, 2020, 01:28:45 PM »

Logged
towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: June 29, 2020, 01:29:38 PM »

?
Logged
Bobupanddown
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3 059


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: June 29, 2020, 01:38:29 PM »

Fuck me where did they find this idiot?

"The difference between government and household or business debt is that governments don't go broke."

No that's right - no government has ever been unable to pay its debts back  lost souey




But wait - there's more.

"We've been taught that government debt is our debt and that we're on the hook for that debt but that's not right"

Who pays back the debt then? Santa Clause? The Easter Bunny?

She's not done yet.....

"We've been taught that our tax payments to the government are the way that government pays its bills but its not so, governments can not use and do not use taxes to pay for things" 

Without taxes government bonds are worthless and therefore there is no borrowing, did this woman just get off a crack pipe? I can't believe the BBC had the brass fucking neck to call this cunt an economist. She lives in cloud cuckoo land.

Here you go Towz, here's someone worth listening to when it comes to economics - Did you know the average UK house house prices are the same now as they were in 1974 and 1986?

Look and learn

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDE-_553jc
« Last Edit: June 29, 2020, 01:50:17 PM by Bobupanddown » Logged

There is nothing socialist about China

Westlane_rightwinger
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 678


Fred West ruined my wife


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: June 29, 2020, 02:08:34 PM »

You'll love her you tax dodging prick.  :wanker:
Logged
TerryCochranesSocks
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7 398


Pull your socks up Tel.


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: June 29, 2020, 02:10:05 PM »

I think it's all gone out of the window with Covid situation anyway

Massively.
 :like:
Logged

I fuckin' hate smart-arsed signatures
38red
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 367


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: June 29, 2020, 02:28:18 PM »

Fuck me where did they find this idiot?

"The difference between government and household or business debt is that governments don't go broke."

No that's right - no government has ever been unable to pay its debts back  lost souey




But wait - there's more.

"We've been taught that government debt is our debt and that we're on the hook for that debt but that's not right"

Who pays back the debt then? Santa Clause? The Easter Bunny?

She's not done yet.....

"We've been taught that our tax payments to the government are the way that government pays its bills but its not so, governments can not use and do not use taxes to pay for things" 

Without taxes government bonds are worthless and therefore there is no borrowing, did this woman just get off a crack pipe? I can't believe the BBC had the brass fucking neck to call this cunt an economist. She lives in cloud cuckoo land.

Here you go Towz, here's someone worth listening to when it comes to economics - Did you know the average UK house house prices are the same now as they were in 1974 and 1986?

Look and learn

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDE-_553jc

She's right in everything she says if the country is a sovereign issuer of its own fiat currency, operates under a floating exchange rate and doesn't borrow foreign exchange. It can't go bust as it can always redeem its bonds by creating new money ex nihilo. Similarly, it doesn't need to raise taxes to finance spending - it can simply create money. Taxes act as a reserve drain against the inflation risk of excessive monetary financing; they're not a prerequisite for public spending, except to confer acceptability on a currency.

There are obvious inflation risks of excessive monetary creation but they would be fairly weak at the moment. For the UK the main dangers would be to the exchange rate. There is also a political risk as, ultimately, the government is creating claims on resources which would have distributional effects, in much the same way that taxes do.
Logged
towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: June 29, 2020, 02:35:29 PM »



Who pays back the debt then? Santa Clause? The Easter Bunny?



Clearly you haven't understood, for a change  charles
Logged
Bobupanddown
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3 059


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: June 29, 2020, 02:54:15 PM »

Fuck me where did they find this idiot?

"The difference between government and household or business debt is that governments don't go broke."

No that's right - no government has ever been unable to pay its debts back  lost souey




But wait - there's more.

"We've been taught that government debt is our debt and that we're on the hook for that debt but that's not right"

Who pays back the debt then? Santa Clause? The Easter Bunny?

She's not done yet.....

"We've been taught that our tax payments to the government are the way that government pays its bills but its not so, governments can not use and do not use taxes to pay for things" 

Without taxes government bonds are worthless and therefore there is no borrowing, did this woman just get off a crack pipe? I can't believe the BBC had the brass fucking neck to call this cunt an economist. She lives in cloud cuckoo land.

Here you go Towz, here's someone worth listening to when it comes to economics - Did you know the average UK house house prices are the same now as they were in 1974 and 1986?

Look and learn

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDE-_553jc

She's right in everything she says if the country is a sovereign issuer of its own fiat currency, operates under a floating exchange rate and doesn't borrow foreign exchange. It can't go bust as it can always redeem its bonds by creating new money ex nihilo. Similarly, it doesn't need to raise taxes to finance spending - it can simply create money. Taxes act as a reserve drain against the inflation risk of excessive monetary financing; they're not a prerequisite for public spending, except to confer acceptability on a currency.

There are obvious inflation risks of excessive monetary creation but they would be fairly weak at the moment. For the UK the main dangers would be to the exchange rate. There is also a political risk as, ultimately, the government is creating claims on resources which would have distributional effects, in much the same way that taxes do.

Yes you are right, a government can borrow from itself to pay its bills ad infinitum - but the consequences of this is inflation and  hyper inflation.

Hence how houses are worth the same today as they were in 1974, its the currency thats devalued.
Logged

There is nothing socialist about China

Bobupanddown
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3 059


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: June 29, 2020, 02:57:09 PM »



Who pays back the debt then? Santa Clause? The Easter Bunny?



Clearly you haven't understood, for a change  charles

Towz, as a self confessed socialist you're in no position to lecture anyone on economics.

Logged

There is nothing socialist about China

Bobupanddown
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3 059


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: June 29, 2020, 03:06:24 PM »

Actually I don't even know why we bother. You're right. Let's all quit work and the government can just print money for us to spend forever.

Obviously there is no negative side to that, why didn't anyone think of it before?

 
Logged

There is nothing socialist about China

towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: June 29, 2020, 03:16:54 PM »

*MELTDOWN KLAXON*  charles
Logged
38red
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 367


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: June 29, 2020, 04:13:11 PM »

Actually I don't even know why we bother. You're right. Let's all quit work and the government can just print money for us to spend forever.

Obviously there is no negative side to that, why didn't anyone think of it before?

 
That's why you need taxes. The existence of taxes obliges people to do things to acquire the money to pay the taxes, e.g. provide goods or services. This confers acceptability on fiat money. This acceptability, in turn, confers exchange value on money. People will work to acquire more money in order to acquire more goods and services.
Logged
livefastdieyoung
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 724


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: June 29, 2020, 04:35:39 PM »

I'll never get those two minutes of my life back. You boring boring bastards.

 

Logged
towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: June 29, 2020, 04:48:01 PM »

You didn't even watch it to the end  mcl
Logged
Bobupanddown
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3 059


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: June 29, 2020, 10:31:07 PM »

Actually I don't even know why we bother. You're right. Let's all quit work and the government can just print money for us to spend forever.

Obviously there is no negative side to that, why didn't anyone think of it before?

 
That's why you need taxes. The existence of taxes obliges people to do things to acquire the money to pay the taxes, e.g. provide goods or services. This confers acceptability on fiat money. This acceptability, in turn, confers exchange value on money. People will work to acquire more money in order to acquire more goods and services.

If there no negative to unlimited government borrowing then there is no reason for anyone to work and therefore no taxes.

I assume you agree with that?

No taxes means maturities on government bonds(Gilts) can't be paid, well not without selling additional bonds. Like taking out a credit card to pay back your loan. Eventually the bound value drops to zero.
At that point nobody lends to you and hyper inflation starts because you have to print money directly and the currency is then worthless.

This is what happened when Nathan de Rothschild heard Wellington had defeated Napolian at Waterloo 12 hours before anyone else knew. At first he panic sold his UK government bonds triggering a run. When the price dropped to all time lows he bought up every single one he could get his hands on.

When news broke of Wellingtons victory the price shot up but far more tellingly the Bank of England now owed him the maturities on and rights to those bonds and essentially gave him control of the bank.

Logged

There is nothing socialist about China

towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: June 29, 2020, 11:06:49 PM »

Of course there is a reason to work, it's  how stuff gets done, made, created, grown, harvested and so on, the point being a strong economy with under control inflation is the important thing, not the "deficit which isn't really owed to anyone as stated, it's effectively money invested in the economy by the government

Logged
Bobupanddown
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3 059


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: June 30, 2020, 08:42:04 AM »

Of course there is a reason to work, it's  how stuff gets done, made, created, grown, harvested and so on, the point being a strong economy with under control inflation is the important thing, not the "deficit which isn't really owed to anyone as stated, it's effectively money invested in the economy by the government



You think people will flip burgers in McDonald's because they want to get stuff done?
You think people will pour over privileged cunts macchiatos in Starbucks because they want to get stuff done?

 souey souey souey


This is typical socialist thinking, so removed from the real world that you think people will go to work in jobs they hate when there is literally no financial requirement to do so.
Logged

There is nothing socialist about China

towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: June 30, 2020, 09:12:31 AM »

Of course there is a reason to work, it's  how stuff gets done, made, created, grown, harvested and so on, the point being a strong economy with under control inflation is the important thing, not the "deficit which isn't really owed to anyone as stated, it's effectively money invested in the economy by the government



You think people will flip burgers in McDonald's because they want to get stuff done?
You think people will pour over privileged cunts macchiatos in Starbucks because they want to get stuff done?

 souey souey souey


This is typical socialist thinking, so removed from the real world that you think people will go to work in jobs they hate when there is literally no financial requirement to do so.

Here's a thought, pay them more money
Logged
Bobupanddown
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3 059


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: June 30, 2020, 10:29:50 AM »

Of course there is a reason to work, it's  how stuff gets done, made, created, grown, harvested and so on, the point being a strong economy with under control inflation is the important thing, not the "deficit which isn't really owed to anyone as stated, it's effectively money invested in the economy by the government



You think people will flip burgers in McDonald's because they want to get stuff done?
You think people will pour over privileged cunts macchiatos in Starbucks because they want to get stuff done?

 souey souey souey


This is typical socialist thinking, so removed from the real world that you think people will go to work in jobs they hate when there is literally no financial requirement to do so.

Here's a thought, pay them more money

Here's a thought, inflation.

You can pay them as much as you like, the inherent value of things will remain the same but the price will go up as the currency will devalue.


Logged

There is nothing socialist about China

towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: June 30, 2020, 11:03:34 AM »

Of course there is a reason to work, it's  how stuff gets done, made, created, grown, harvested and so on, the point being a strong economy with under control inflation is the important thing, not the "deficit which isn't really owed to anyone as stated, it's effectively money invested in the economy by the government



You think people will flip burgers in McDonald's because they want to get stuff done?
You think people will pour over privileged cunts macchiatos in Starbucks because they want to get stuff done?

 souey souey souey


This is typical socialist thinking, so removed from the real world that you think people will go to work in jobs they hate when there is literally no financial requirement to do so.

Here's a thought, pay them more money

Here's a thought, inflation.

You can pay them as much as you like, the inherent value of things will remain the same but the price will go up as the currency will devalue.




Rubbish, it means that the worst off in society will have more purchasing power, resulting in more spending healthier economy and them having a bit more stuff to keep them happy. You assume a finite supply of resource with your inflationary model, which on a national scale simply doesn't hold.

The only reason wages are held low is greed of their employers who seek increasing profits to report to shareholders, squeezing the workers. Pay people a decent living wage and their will be myriad economic benefits, see the scando countries and germany
Logged
Bobupanddown
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3 059


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: June 30, 2020, 11:26:04 AM »

Rubbish, it means that the worst off in society will have more purchasing power, resulting in more spending healthier economy and them having a bit more stuff to keep them happy. You assume a finite supply of resource with your inflationary model, which on a national scale simply doesn't hold.

The only reason wages are held low is greed of their employers who seek increasing profits to report to shareholders, squeezing the workers. Pay people a decent living wage and their will be myriad economic benefits, see the scando countries and germany

Arguing with you about economics is like talking French to to do dog, its not that you lack the ability to understand the language. It's more you lack the cognitive ability to even understand the concept of language.

There is no such thing as infinite resource in any context (local, national or international)

The market sets wage levels and the cost of items

The USA is 4th in the world in terms of average wages and 1st in terms of major countries - are you suggesting we follow their economic model? (Germany is 12th)
Logged

There is nothing socialist about China

towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: June 30, 2020, 12:25:43 PM »

Rubbish, it means that the worst off in society will have more purchasing power, resulting in more spending healthier economy and them having a bit more stuff to keep them happy. You assume a finite supply of resource with your inflationary model, which on a national scale simply doesn't hold.

The only reason wages are held low is greed of their employers who seek increasing profits to report to shareholders, squeezing the workers. Pay people a decent living wage and their will be myriad economic benefits, see the scando countries and germany

Arguing with you about economics is like talking French to to do dog, its not that you lack the ability to understand the language. It's more you lack the cognitive ability to even understand the concept of language.

There is no such thing as infinite resource in any context (local, national or international)

The market sets wage levels and the cost of items

The USA is 4th in the world in terms of average wages and 1st in terms of major countries - are you suggesting we follow their economic model? (Germany is 12th)

Quoi?  charles

Who said there was infinite resource? My point being, that on a national scale, if people have more disposable income and can buy things they want, suppliers will find a way to get more of it, from the international markets, without risk of any significant  inflationary effect on the price of said products
« Last Edit: June 30, 2020, 12:34:56 PM by towz » Logged
Bobupanddown
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3 059


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: June 30, 2020, 01:12:53 PM »

Rubbish, it means that the worst off in society will have more purchasing power, resulting in more spending healthier economy and them having a bit more stuff to keep them happy. You assume a finite supply of resource with your inflationary model, which on a national scale simply doesn't hold.

The only reason wages are held low is greed of their employers who seek increasing profits to report to shareholders, squeezing the workers. Pay people a decent living wage and their will be myriad economic benefits, see the scando countries and germany

Arguing with you about economics is like talking French to to do dog, its not that you lack the ability to understand the language. It's more you lack the cognitive ability to even understand the concept of language.

There is no such thing as infinite resource in any context (local, national or international)

The market sets wage levels and the cost of items

The USA is 4th in the world in terms of average wages and 1st in terms of major countries - are you suggesting we follow their economic model? (Germany is 12th)

Quoi?  charles

Who said there was infinite resource? My point being, that on a national scale, if people have more disposable income and can buy things they want, suppliers will find a way to get more of it, from the international markets, without risk of any significant  inflationary effect on the price of said products


How do you think the cost of something is defined? Its what someone is willing to pay for it. Price a product too high, nobody buys. Too low and you fail to make a profit.

The more disposable income people have the more they'll pay for things = inflation.

If you have to pay someone £20 an hour to flip burgers at McDonald's those burgers will cost £5 and not £1.50 because the business will just pass the cost onto the customer.

The customer is willing to pay that because they have more money in their pocket.
The inherent value of the burger (or anything) hasn't changed, you've just devalued the currency.

The idea that the business would just find a magical way to keep the bugers at £1.50 is laughable. Why would they exhaust untold amounts of effort and money to do that when they can simply pass the cost onto the customer?
Logged

There is nothing socialist about China

towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: June 30, 2020, 02:44:55 PM »


How do you think the cost of something is defined? Its what someone is willing to pay for it. Price a product too high, nobody buys. Too low and you fail to make a profit.

The more disposable income people have the more they'll pay for things = inflation.

If you have to pay someone £20 an hour to flip burgers at McDonald's those burgers will cost £5 and not £1.50 because the business will just pass the cost onto the customer.

The customer is willing to pay that because they have more money in their pocket.
The inherent value of the burger (or anything) hasn't changed, you've just devalued the currency.

The idea that the business would just find a magical way to keep the bugers at £1.50 is laughable. Why would they exhaust untold amounts of effort and money to do that when they can simply pass the cost onto the customer?


1) How do you think the cost of something is defined? Its what someone is willing to pay for it. Price a product too high, nobody buys. Too low and you fail to make a profit.

You are confusing PRICE and COST. PRICE is set by the company, cost plus is a usual strategy, i.e  cost to produce + 25%. COST is defined by cost of raw materials, energy consumption costs, labour costs and so on. Labour costs are often a fraction of the overall cost so will not necessarily have huge impact on PRICE of a product or service

2) The more disposable income people have the more they'll pay for things = inflation.

WRONG: "Much of the economic news lately is focusing on the fact that labor is becoming a scarce commodity. Each quarter when labor and job statistics are released, we hear how it is becoming more and more difficult for employers to find qualified workers. We have been told that for the first time in 20 years the number of jobs available is outpacing the number of workers seeking employment. Indeed, the unemployment rate itself is at a 50 year low of 3.7 percent. And then, immediately we are told that there is a cloud to this silver lining. All this seemingly good news could give rise to inflation.

If you have been a viewer of any of the cable business channels, here’s what you are likely to have heard. In this environment where growth in the (mislabeled) “supply of jobs” is outpacing the (also mislabeled) demand for jobs, there is (and will continue to be) upward pressure on wages. I point out that the terminology is wrong because it is so often used. There is no such thing as a supply and demand for jobs. Rather, there is a supply of and demand for labor. So, to be accurate, what they are actually saying is that the growth in the demand for labor is outpacing its supply. And when this happens to any good or service its price increases. In this case, the service is labor, and the price of labor is what we call wages.

But, as noted, instead of seeing this as the good thing that it is, we are told that these gains are likely to be ephemeral. This is because higher wages will push up production costs, which will push up consumer prices. This old song, long gone from most economics textbooks, is a remnant of discredited Keynesian economics and it is, in fact, called “wage push” inflation.

So why has this particular theory of inflation, like other aspects of Keynesian analysis, been discredited? After all, it sounds pretty logical, right? Why wouldn’t rising wages ultimately result in higher business costs and therefore higher prices? The reason is that it begs the most fundamental question. If all wages, the cost of production, and prices are going up, i.e., if there is inflation, where does the money come from?  Given a growing economy, there cannot be overall increases in the price level without new money being created to support it, regardless of what happens to wages. In an environment where the money supply is stable, price increases in one place would have to be offset with decreases in prices someplace else. For businesses, it could be reduced costs of technology, computer equipment, or any of the other inputs into the production process. Whatever it is, simple arithmetic tells us that without increases in the supply of money, spending more in one place means that you have to spend less elsewhere. So, where does the money come from? It is “created” out of thin air by the Federal Reserve via the banking system.

Now, this doesn’t mean that we may not be seeing increased inflation over the coming months or years. For well over a decade, the Fed has been pursuing a policy of easy money. That’s what the talk of interest rates approaching zero and so-called “quantitative easing” has been all about. The fears of inflation that are all the chatter among the business commentator class are real and justified. What is wrongheaded is the explanation that it might be caused by increased wages.

This also doesn’t mean that rising wages in certain sectors couldn’t be part of the story of how the new Fed-created money is working its way through the economy. New money flows from the Fed through the banks and into the economy unevenly. Therefore, prices and wages are also bid up unevenly. So, as different sectors of the economy receive the new money, possibly through new investment stimulated by the artificially low-interest rates, wages will rise. This, in turn, may lead to those wage earners having more money to spend on goods and services, which will drive up prices generally. But the higher wages are not the cause of the inflation but a symptom of it.

The idea that higher wages can cause inflation is simply bad economics. It is part of the same discredited Keynesian analysis that tells us that government budget deficits create economic growth and that increased saving reduces it. As a wise graduate school professor of mine once told me, to ignore changes in money supply when trying to explain inflation is the equivalent of ignoring the eruption of Mount Vesuvius when trying to explain the destruction of Pompeii."
Logged
CLEM FANDANGO
*****
Online Online

Posts: 14 489



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: June 30, 2020, 02:50:19 PM »

Oh fuck.  He's got the bold text out.

 lost
Logged

Official COB Prediction League Winner 2017/18/19
Official CLEM vs THUNDER Winner 2016/17/18/19/20/INFINITY
COB 2020 Battlenips: PEOPLE'S Champion
Bobupanddown
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3 059


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: June 30, 2020, 03:14:03 PM »

Oh fuck.  He's got the bold text out.

 lost

And the cut n paste  :alf:
Logged

There is nothing socialist about China

towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: June 30, 2020, 03:45:19 PM »

 jc
Logged
Oldfield
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 828



View Profile
« Reply #37 on: June 30, 2020, 04:06:00 PM »

Oh fuck.  He's got the bold text out.

 lost

And like all plagiarists doesnt post his source

Here ya go

https://www.johnlocke.org/update/the-myth-of-wage-push-inflation/

Not a single original thought in his tinpot head
Logged
towz
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8 574


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: June 30, 2020, 07:13:22 PM »

Just trying to enlighten you dinosaurs with some modern economic theory
Logged
maggiethatcherrulesok
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 338


WLM


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: June 30, 2020, 08:18:24 PM »

 klins
Logged

WLM
Bobupanddown
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3 059


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: July 01, 2020, 08:04:33 AM »

The idea that higher wages can cause inflation is simply bad economics. It is part of the same discredited Keynesian analysis that tells us that government budget deficits create economic growth and that increased saving reduces it. As a wise graduate school professor of mine once told me, to ignore changes in money supply when trying to explain inflation is the equivalent of ignoring the eruption of Mount Vesuvius when trying to explain the destruction of Pompeii."

Doesn't this go exactly against what the women in the very first video said? That increased government deficit creates growth.

So we're all in agreement that woman was a fucking idiot?
Logged

There is nothing socialist about China

Pages: [1]   Go Up
Print
Jump to:  



Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!