'Murica! (239 Viewers)

[ALC]

Of course you wouldn't.

just askin questions. You can’t prove it’s not what happened

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Hust]

just askin questions. You can’t prove it’s not what happened

 

[Bjerknes]

Charles Barkley is the most hated person on Twitter right now, just because of this.








- - - Updated - - -

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

However I think that we can all agree that he is the leading expert on the women of San Antonio.

 

[Hust]

...

inb4 he (the one and only Charles Barkley) is canceled.

- - - Updated - - -

It's really quite remarkable how black democrats turn on other blacks because they are republican OR speak out against the riots and try to use common sense.. "traitors to their race", "skin folk but not kin folk",

Even how blacks turn on black police officers. That side has lost all ability to find any thing related to "middle ground".

 

[il brutto]

- - - Updated - - -

Baseline = Biden wins, republican senate and democratic house
Democratic sweep = Biden wins, democratic senate and democratic house
Republican sweep = Trump wins, republican senate and republican house

Here's the full report for anyone interested:
https://www.moodysanalytics.com/-/m...macroeconomic-consequences-trump-vs-biden.pdf

 

[Bjerknes]

inb4 he (the one and only Charles Barkley) is canceled.

- - - Updated - - -

It's really quite remarkable how black democrats turn on other blacks because they are republican OR speak out against the riots and try to use common sense.. "traitors to their race", "skin folk but not kin folk",

Even how blacks turn on black police officers. That side has lost all ability to find any thing related to "middle ground".

It's because they've joined a cult. The scary thing is there are millions of cult members.

- - - Updated - - -

- - - Updated - - -

Baseline = Biden wins, republican senate and democratic house
Democratic sweep = Biden wins, democratic senate and democratic house
Republican sweep = Trump wins, republican senate and republican house

Here's the full report for anyone interested:
https://www.moodysanalytics.com/-/m...macroeconomic-consequences-trump-vs-biden.pdf

GDP = C + G + I + NX

To sum it, Biden plans on increasing the "G", which is government spending. Of course Democrats want to spend more on government, but that isn't real growth and will take away from C and I unless they print the money out of thin air (which they'll do anyway, but still).

 

[Hust]

It's because they've joined a cult. The scary thing is there are millions of cult members.

To them there is a right and wrong way to be a person of color/minority.

 

[Bjerknes]

To them there is a right and wrong way to be a person of color/minority.

Hate to say it, but they are literal slaves to the system and a certain way of thinking. Freedom of thought isn't allowed in a cult.

- - - Updated - - -

What would these poor "protestors" blocking traffic do without... the police?


- - - Updated - - -

YEAH! Fuck you cracka driving through our anti-police protest. Hope them fucking pigs arrest yo ass!!!!

 

[Hust]

Hate to say it, but they are literal slaves to the system and a certain way of thinking. Freedom of thought isn't allowed in a cult.

- - - Updated - - -

What would these poor "protestors" blocking traffic do without... the police?


- - - Updated - - -

YEAH! Fuck you cracka driving through our anti-police protest. Hope them fucking pigs arrest yo ass!!!!

Can't run them over b/c god forbid you give them a taste of their own medicine when you are just trying to live your life.

They drug him out and beat him. He is probably thinking he should just have made a few extra speed bumps but he would have been the one prosecuted but the thugs that beat him and his car won't see any jail time and if they do liberals like Kamala Harris will get on TV and push a charity that bails them out the LA DA will throw the book at the driver.

lmao

 

[lgorTudor]

- - - Updated - - -

Baseline = Biden wins, republican senate and democratic house
Democratic sweep = Biden wins, democratic senate and democratic house
Republican sweep = Trump wins, republican senate and republican house

Here's the full report for anyone interested:
https://www.moodysanalytics.com/-/m...macroeconomic-consequences-trump-vs-biden.pdf

Interesting report!

Wasn't Moody's the rating agency which gave out tens of thousands of triple-A ratings to subprime mortgages which enabled the 2008 financial crisis?

asking for a friend

 

[il brutto]

To sum it, Biden plans on increasing the "G", which is government spending. Of course Democrats want to spend more on government, but that isn't real growth and will take away from C and I unless they print the money out of thin air (which they'll do anyway, but still).

Of course government spending can create real growth. In the democratic sweep scenario real disposable income is up, unemployment rate is down and corporate profits are up. Those are great numbers for the democrats, but I don't expect the hardcore Trumpians on here to acknowledge that. In this thread numbers only seem to matter when they are in favour of Trump.

 

[Bjerknes]

Of course government spending can create real growth. In the democratic sweep scenario real disposable income is up, unemployment rate is down and corporate profits are up. Those are great numbers for the democrats, but I don't expect the hardcore Trumpians on here to acknowledge it. In this thread numbers only seem to matter when they are in favour of Trump.

No, it can't. Government spending isn't real growth because the government doesn't produce anything. The government can only spend what it receives through taxation, which means taking away from investment and savings. The government can also borrow and spend, which means higher deficits would be ran, which also includes the "print money" option since their creditor would be the Fed. Those bond payments will eventually be due unless you default. Not to mention the impacts of debasing your currency over time, which impacts purchasing power for everyone (other than the top 1%, of course). Who cares about a 2% increase in GDP growth per quarter when that q/q increase is lower than the real inflation rate because you've destroyed your currency, which is what they're seemingly trying to do anyway.

 

[il brutto]

No, it can't. Government spending isn't real growth because the government doesn't produce anything. The government can only spend what it receives through taxation, which means taking away from investment and savings. The government can also borrow and spend, which means higher deficits would be ran, which also includes the "print money" option since their creditor would be the Fed. Those bond payments will eventually be due unless you default. Not to mention the impacts of debasing your currency over time, which impacts purchasing power for everyone (other than the top 1%, of course). Who cares about a 2% increase in GDP growth per quarter when that q/q increase is lower than the real inflation rate because you've destroyed your currency, which is what they're seemingly trying to do anyway.

Could you then show me your macroeconomic simulations? Because the one I just showed you clearly shows bigger economic growth in the scenario with bigger government spending.

Greater government spending adds directly to GDP and jobs, while the higher tax burden has an indirect impact through business investment and the spending and saving behavior of high-income households. Since these households will not reduce their spending one-for-one in response to their higher tax bills and will use their savings and other financial resources, the near-term impact on GDP and jobs is mitigated.

Longer-term growth under Biden’s policies is also stronger because on net they expand the supply side of the economy—the quantity and quality of labor and capital needed to produce goods and services. His plan to increase spending on the nation’s infrastructure also boosts business competitiveness and productivity. His paid family leave and elder care plans would increase labor force participation, which is approximately a percentage point higher a decade from now as a result, while increased spending on higher education and early childhood education would raise the educational attainment of workers. Increased global trade and foreign immigration would increase the size of the workforce, both skilled and unskilled, and support stronger productivity.

These benefits to long-term growth will more than offset the economic costs from the higher marginal corporate and personal tax rates under his plan that reduce the incentives to save, invest and work, the disincentives to work and save from the larger social benefits, and the higher federal minimum wage that would be phased in over a long enough period to mitigate much of its negative effects on jobs.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

No, it can't. Government spending isn't real growth because the government doesn't produce anything. The government can only spend what it receives through taxation, which means taking away from investment and savings. The government can also borrow and spend, which means higher deficits would be ran, which also includes the "print money" option since their creditor would be the Fed. Those bond payments will eventually be due unless you default. Not to mention the impacts of debasing your currency over time, which impacts purchasing power for everyone (other than the top 1%, of course). Who cares about a 2% increase in GDP growth per quarter when that q/q increase is lower than the real inflation rate because you've destroyed your currency, which is what they're seemingly trying to do anyway.

These Keynesians just won't go away, no matter how wrong they are proven time and again.

 

[Lapa]

Our government really knows how to spend. That's what you get when you let fucking commies run the show.

I bet @il brutto voted for Sanna Marin!

 

[il brutto]

Interesting report!

Wasn't Moody's the rating agency which gave out tens of thousands of triple-A ratings to subprime mortgages which enabled the 2008 financial crisis?

asking for a friend

I don't know and not sure how that is relevant to this report in 2020. If you think there's a problem with these simulations you are free to point them out.

- - - Updated - - -

Our government really knows how to spend. That's what you get when you let fucking commies run the show.

I bet @il brutto voted for Sanna Marin!

I didn't, but she has handled this challenging situation well thus far. Not sure what's wrong with our government spending or what it has to do with communists, but that is very off topic anyways. Feel free to PM me with if your undoubtedly great views about Finnish politics though or just write them in the general politics thread.

 

[Enron]

Are there any alternative models to compare with the one Brutto posted or examples of countries who benefit from an alternative economic system?

 

[Post Ironic]

Reagan (and now Trump) style “trickle down” republicans won’t go away no matter how many times they are proven to be absurdly wrong.

 

[Lapa]

I don't know and not sure how that is relevant to this report in 2020. If you think there's a problem with these simulations you are free to point them out.

- - - Updated - - -


I didn't, but she has handled this challenging situation well thus far. Not sure what's wrong with our government spending or what it has to do with communists, but that is very off topic anyways. Feel free to PM me with if your undoubtedly great views about Finnish politics though or just write them in the general politics thread.

My God!