GSO/Guilford Pols

September 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        

« Curbage | Main | It was a very good system »

Jul 27, 2011

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341cc33e53ef015390360f5b970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Hard times:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

bubba

Wow!

Another new excuse for the failed "progessive" economic agenda, and another thinly veiled version of the requisite "we need more stimulus for economic recovery" post we've been all too accustomed to reading here.

But wait, there's something new associated with that! It's the "we need more incentive spending locally" post, designed to add a new twist to the same old wrong-headed economics.

Some people just don't know when to stop beating their dead horses, do they?

Grant

our elected officials seem content with business as usual

Well, a good chunk of them seem to believe in shaking up the status quo by bringing down the roof on our heads.

E/Z Check Cashing And Employment Service

Some people just don't know when to stop beating their dead horses, do they?*Bubba

Bad News Bubba! Your job app at Taco Bell has been turn down, since you put on your app that you were willing to work for 700 dollars a hour as a nude drive-inn window server.. Now for the good news, You can go to work at Redneck Boys BBQ as chief bottlewasher and cook for 2 dollars a hour.. Good luck on your search for the Republican Paradise in these hard times..

polifrog

Gibberish:

Bad News Bubba! Your job app at Taco Bell has been turn down, since you put on your app that you were willing to work for 700 dollars a hour as a nude drive-inn window server.. Now for the good news, You can go to work at Redneck Boys BBQ as chief bottlewasher and cook for 2 dollars a hour.. Good luck on your search for the Republican Paradise in these hard times..


Connie Mack Berry,
Words your own?

but,

Connie Mack Rarely
a thought his own.

and,

Connie Crack Rarely
wit his own.

Can-He Crack Rarely
the sanity zone?

No.

Poor Connie Mack Berry,
tone the drone...

Grant

BOEHNER: Well, first they want more. And my goodness, I want more too. And secondly, a lot of them believe that if we get passed August the second and we have enough chaos, we could force the Senate and the White House to accept a balanced budget amendment. I’m not sure that that — I don’t think that that strategy works. Because I think the closer we get to August the second, frankly, the less leverage we have vis a vis our colleagues in the Senate and the White House.


Meno

The CFR report points out that while Americans argue over their left-right duopoly and hit the ball back and forth over the net every two years, since the corporate downsizing of the early 90s and the push toward global value and supply chains, there has been minimal growth in the non-government and non-medical sectors of our economy.

It also points to the chilling realization that the fastest growing economies (BRIC nations) are poised to move up the value chain from basic labor intensive sectors to begin eating away at our upper blue and white collar jobs.

I think Neil Ferguson pointed out several years ago that we were moving into a period of economic nationalism similar to that leading up to the First World War, with spheres of influence and ever changing alliances.

As the US has lost its manufacturing base and come to rely on a 70 percent consumer economy based on debt financed spending, a great part of the rest of the developed and developing world has moved deep into a 21st century economic nationalism.

When our access to easy credit goes bye-bye, what then?

It's much bigger than a few points of tax rates and a few trillion off the national debt. It's far bigger than the worn out Keynes versus Hayek argument.

I think we are so far behind that we can't even begin to recognize the hole we are in.

Billy Jones

Meno: "I think we are so far behind that we can't even begin to recognize the hole we are in."

Or that there may be no way out but down.

tc

Meno: "I think we are so far behind that we can't even begin to recognize the hole we are in." So true. We are told that the green energy revolution is our way to economic freedom. One problem with that is that China controls 95% of the rare earths metals needed for the green energy revolution. In the US there is just one rare earths metals mine and that has just recently been reopened.

justcorbly

If recovery could be had by virtue of sustained puffery and ego-inflated irrelevancies, Bubba and Frog would be Captains of Industry.

Alas, though, they are spent balloons. We can't argue with, or expect much from, such things.

justcorbly

Voodoo Conservatives don't want government money used to create jobs because every job created would put the lie to their cherished, and hypocritical, worship of the free market.

The fact that any unemployment exists, at any level, is the most visible indicator of the inability of the market system to provide jobs for everyone. It has never done that, yet we are constantly told by the Voodoo Dancers that it can.

The truth is this: The Voodoo Acolytes are beyond the realm of reason. They would gladly sacrifice the lives and welfare of millions of Americans rather than see their gods brought down.

polifrog

JustCorbly:

Voodoo Conservatives don't want government money used to create jobs because every job created would put the lie to their cherished, and hypocritical, worship of the free market.

Although it may be government money, it is not the Government's money.

and:

The fact that any unemployment exists, at any level, is the most visible indicator of the inability of the market system to provide jobs for everyone.
No. Unemployment increases and decreases naturally in a healthy cyclical economy. The fact that unemployment is so consistently high is an indicator of the failure of the dominant Keynesian policy approaches that have been taken.

Examples of those Keynesian failures include The Great Depression, Japan's 20 year recession, and the US's current recession/depression. In each case Keynesian solutions have monkey-wrenched the economic cycle at the worst time extending each recession. Keynes effectively breaks the market.

Keynesian supporters, of course, blame either "the market" or imperfect implementation of the solutions.

I am not sure if it is an Urban Myth or not, but planes in a death spiral more often crash when the pilot fights the controls than if the pilot simply lets go.

A hard thing to do indeed.

and:

They would gladly sacrifice the lives and welfare of millions of Americans rather than see their gods brought down.
Spoken like a true Keynesian.
Grant

Confirmed: the Lunatic Caucus has taken the reins, set course for the cliff.

Billy Jones

Polifrog: "Unemployment increases and decreases naturally in a healthy cyclical economy."

Cyclical economy is another way to say musical chairs, except in the game of economic musical chairs there are no adults to make sure the bullies don't cheat and push the smaller kids out of the chairs. Where will slimy amphibians be in the game when the music stops playing? Too dumb to know they've been played. Croak.

Billy Jones

Grant: "Confirmed: the Lunatic Caucus has taken the reins, set course for the cliff."

'Tis par for the course of lemings.

bubba

"Spoken like a true Keynesian."

Actually, he's just enjoying his well-past-the-point-of-relevance dementia, pf, in a similar category as Connie occupies.

At least Connie has some sense of humor, a concept alien to corbs.

polifrog

Bubba:

At least Connie has some sense of humor, a concept alien to corbs.

I wasn't sure if I was seeing humor or dementia. Perhaps there is a shade more humor than dementia...

Mike J.

Danged old talking about I tell you what man I think I found the stars of my new show: Bubba and Polifrog.

polifrog

Billy Jones:

Where will slimy amphibians be in the game when the music stops playing?

Control over "animal spirits" is one of the goals of Keynesian Theory. This done by funneling influence over shifts in the market from the many to the few, to the same few you refer to as "adults", the same few who have magnified the problems in Europe as a result of the Keynesian goal of focusing "animal spits" in the fewest number of elites as possible. These are your "adults" and your "adults" are Europe's problem.

Of course, your choice of terminology hints at your own arrogance. What you refer to as "smaller kids" are in truth adults, and your "adults" are in reality officials with the power to stop our economic cycle with Keynesian "solutions" at the worst possible moment and hold us there as long as they possibly can while useful idiots blame the free markets we no longer have for the damage to the economy caused by your "adults".

Truthfully, can you name a time when over the long term when focusing power in the hands of the few has been a wise choice?

All I argue is that markets should be in the hands of the many. This is not slimy; it is my faith in the ultimate goodness inherent in the dispersal of power and influence across the many.

And that is anti Keynesian.

Meno

American idealization of freedom and liberty became outdated about the time of the Whiskey Rebellion and the Assumption Acts. Ever since then they have been used as red capes to attract the attention of the bull.

You could cut taxes on the rich and corporations in America to zero and deregulate every aspect of this nation's economy and Atlas would still shrug all the way to the developing countries.

Andrew Brod

"Control over 'animal spirits' is one of the goals of Keynesian Theory."

Is it worth pointing out any more that virtually everything Frog says about Keynesian economics is wrong? I mean, say what you will about libertarianism, at least Frog understands its principles (not that they're hard to understand). But Frog can't say with any accuracy what Keynesianism is. We do all (except Bubba) understand that by now, don't we?

My point is not that Keynesianism is good or bad, just that one can't have an intelligent conversation about it with a person who doesn't know what it is.

This thread is a case in point. Presumably, even non-Keynesians believe that jobs are, as Ed's original post said, "good revenue raisers." Does anyone actually disagree with that?

polifrog
You could cut taxes on the rich and corporations in America to zero and deregulate every aspect of this nation's economy and Atlas would still shrug all the way to the developing countries.


A criticism absent an alternative is no solution unless it is the status quo you prefer.

Meno

It's beyond your Keynes v. Hayek paradigm so maybe it's your status quo that needs shaking up?

polifrog

Dr. Brod:

Is it worth pointing out any more that virtually everything Frog says about Keynesian economics is wrong?

No, I do not recite your scripture. I interpret it.

Wiki:

"Animal spirits" is the term John Maynard Keynes used in his 1936 book The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money to describe emotions which influence human behavior and can be measured in terms of consumer confidence. Trust is also included or produced by "animal spirits". Several articles and at least two books with a focus on "animal spirits" were published in 2008 and 2009 as a part of the Keynesian resurgence.

Jim C and I discussed Animal Spirits previously.

Jim C:

A large part of Keynes's ideas centers on Animal Spirits , something more modern behavioral economists like Robert Shiller spend a lot of time on. The basic idea is that when things are going well, people tend to spend more, spurring growth, but when things are going poorly, people spend less. This is a positive feedback system that tends to push towards either unstable or undesirable outcomes. Thinking that way, the Keynes knife cuts two ways: the gov't should stimulate during bad times, but restrain during good times.

It can not be denied that market swings fueled by animal spirits have been muted by Keynes. Keynesian Theory has an undeniable seduction, but I am inherently suspect of any mechanism that rationalizes control away from the many to the few.

If we accept the concept of "animal spirits" (I tend to think of this as the human propensity to take advantage of bounty and to protect spoils in the lack of bounty) and that Keynesian Theory is an attempt to assuage the resultant amplification of market swings due to "animal spirits", we have to ask whether Keynesian Theory divorces the "animal spirits" of those who manipulate the market within governance from the market itself.

Secondly, I argue that Keynes fails to divorce humanity from its "animal spirits" in that it opens the door to "animal spirits" in a different and more dangerous way, the raiding of bounty from within governance (running deficits during expansions). There is no restraint in good times.

So, here too, Keynes fails to divorce "animal spirits" from humanity and hence, the market. In fact, it only succeeds in shifting some percentage of "animal spirits" from the private sector to governance. Of course, this aspect of Keynes goes a long way in explaining its popularity among the governing class and our ever expanding national debt.

polifrog

Meno:

It's beyond your Keynes v. Hayek paradigm so maybe it's your status quo that needs shaking up?

A second criticism absent an alternative is no solution unless it is the status quo you prefer.

tk solomon

i believe the parasitic sonzahs have done business as usual in an unusually business-like manner.

they have kept their benefactors bailed out and well off while keeping the mundane fearful of what would occur if they were subject to the laws of nature.

the incumbency rate is running around 90% despite their propensity for serial lingamfolly and horrible financial planning...as they control the flow of digits and the nomenclature of their accounting methods. Even the teapartiers put their children in yellow limos without seatbelts to be carried to schools where they learn a pledge to the republic under a god which can only be acknowleged in said pledge.

This is a very efficient model and not to be trifled with by chronic complainers, the Heynesians or the Kayeks.

Meno

John: What I am trying to express to you is that your genius level understanding of Keynes is moot in the economic climate the world is evolving into. Employment growth has been dead for 20 years. The only growth has been in government and medical, which is quasi-government.

The global free market has siphoned millions of once American jobs to emerging economies. This has primarily been in basic manufacturing, like the thousands of jobs lost in Eden in the last decade.

The only growth has been in retail, which was financed by consumer debt.

All of this happened in a less Keynesian climate. See for example The Commanding Heights analysis at the turn of the century.

I am sure we are all impressed with your knowledge of Keynes, but as Alvin Toffler discovered when he wrote Future Shock, most people in Washington spend their careers protecting outdated modes of thinking and institutions that have outlived their usefulness. They are not capable of reacting and adapting to an increasingly fluid situation. Especially in America because we have to pay homage to 18th century modes of thinking and organization even if we are two steps already into the 21st century.

The alternative I offer is that the world economy has evolved beyond Keynes, which is why no amount of stimulus has or will make a dent in our current crisis. Policy makers will not admit this because it will terrify millions of Americans.

We've known global competition would be a threat to American economic health since the late 80s when Paul Kennedy published a book entitled The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. American global hegemony was never sustainable and since we pissed away the goodwill of our peace dividend and left the safe harbor of rational American government in the summer of 2001 we have nothing to show for our victory.

The only alternative I see is becoming a closed, protectionist economy and embracing nationalism per se, but the American melting pot society would mean too much tension between those of different cultural backgrounds which would necessarily undercut that strategy.

Homespun and localism is another possible path, but it takes a lot of grit to live like a pioneer. I'm not sure most Americans could do that.

Meno

Another interesting observation is that total population growth in America has been about 25 percent since 1990 while employment growth has been about 22 percent. And about half of that employment growth has been in government and medical, as I stated, which is a hybrid of government and private sector.

I'm sure the real economists among us could dig deeper into this and point out the fallacies in my comparison, but at face value, when combined with natural evolution in specialization, distribution and automation in business and industrial processes, this would leave a natural surplus of labor that would demand a higher than average unemployment rate and put additional downward pressure on wages and increased demands for social welfare programs, at least in the hearts and minds of those who have any sense of compassion for the less fortunate.

It's one hell of a vortex we are currently trapped in.

In the past someone would start a war and we would throw these excesses upon spears, trenches and bayonets for a few years until things balanced out. We've evolved beyond that now to fight these economic and data battles for supremacy.

Billy Jones

Polifrog: "Truthfully, can you name a time when over the long term when focusing power in the hands of the few has been a wise choice?"

Honestly, no, but you make the mistaken and absurd assumption that power is held by the many when in fact it is held by a few multinational corporations who are responsible for the Fascist you so blindly support. Multinational corporations use governments to control small businesses and the rest of the working class but you're unable to understand who is pulling the strings.

And therein lies the problem with those on the far right: you don't know who the enemy is so you point your fingers at anyone bright enough not to follow the party line.

polifrog

Meno, could be an appropriate pseudonym, for it is difficult to peer through the dust thrown aloft during paradigm shifts and discover the unknown, but is that what you do?

We must not forget the known (history) when seeking the unknown.

Lets look at some of the elements of your solution:

Homespun and localism... embracing nationalism... protectionist economy...

Additionally, you point to a weakness in your strategy:


the American melting pot society would mean too much tension between those of different cultural backgrounds which would necessarily undercut that strategy.
for which there is the tried and true "pressure cooker" solution.

And lastly, there is this:

at face value, when combined with natural evolution in specialization, distribution and automation in business and industrial processes, this would leave a natural surplus of labor that would demand a higher than average unemployment rate and put additional downward pressure on wages and increased demands for social welfare programs, at least in the hearts and minds of those who have any sense of compassion for the less fortunate.
which at its root questions capitalism.

The elements of your solution, "homespun","localism", "embracing nationalism", "protectionist economy", pressure cooker solutions recalling the worst of the Balkin experience, and laying blame on wealth generation for the failures of Keynes and the social state all have a home in history, the Soviet Union. Additionally, current examples still cast millions into suffering in North Korea and Cuba.

Were Soviet citizens fortunate? The North Koreans? The Cubans?

When you say:

The alternative I offer is that the world economy has evolved beyond Keynes, which is why no amount of stimulus has or will make a dent in our current crisis. Policy makers will not admit this because it will terrify millions of Americans.
they should be terrified, as your solutions are known, have been tried and illuminate terribly poor choices going forward.

You ignore the success of 18th century thinking as well as the failures of 20th century thinking and conclude you are searching for something new when you are not. Meno is an inappropriate pseudonym, as what you seek is already known. It is known as the progenitor of death and failure.

polifrog

Meno, could be an appropriate pseudonym, for it is difficult to peer through the dust thrown aloft during paradigm shifts and discover the unknown, but is that what you do?

We must not forget the known (history) when seeking the unknown.

Lets look at some of the elements of your solution:

Homespun and localism... embracing nationalism... protectionist economy...

Additionally, you point to a weakness in your strategy:


the American melting pot society would mean too much tension between those of different cultural backgrounds which would necessarily undercut that strategy.
for which there is the tried and true "pressure cooker" solution.

And lastly, there is this:

at face value, when combined with natural evolution in specialization, distribution and automation in business and industrial processes, this would leave a natural surplus of labor that would demand a higher than average unemployment rate and put additional downward pressure on wages and increased demands for social welfare programs, at least in the hearts and minds of those who have any sense of compassion for the less fortunate.
which at its root questions capitalism.

The elements of your solution, "homespun","localism", "embracing nationalism", "protectionist economy", pressure cooker solutions recalling the worst of the Balkin experience, and laying blame on wealth generation for the failures of Keynes and the social state all have a home in history, the Soviet Union. Additionally, current examples still cast millions into suffering in North Korea and Cuba.

Were Soviet citizens fortunate? The North Koreans? The Cubans?

When you say:

The alternative I offer is that the world economy has evolved beyond Keynes, which is why no amount of stimulus has or will make a dent in our current crisis. Policy makers will not admit this because it will terrify millions of Americans.
they should be terrified, as your solutions are known, have been tried and illuminate terribly poor choices going forward.

You ignore the success of 18th century thinking as well as the failures of 20th century thinking and conclude you are searching for something new when you are not. Meno is an inappropriate pseudonym, as what you seek is already known. It is known as the progenitor of death and failure.

Billy Jones

Froggy, Perhaps you should spend your time trying to solve Meno's paradox. At least then you'd be contributing something of value.

The comments to this entry are closed.