1 posted on
11/28/2005 5:52:30 PM PST by
qam1
To: qam1; ItsOurTimeNow; PresbyRev; tortoise; Fraulein; StoneColdGOP; Clemenza; malakhi; m18436572; ...
Xer Ping Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social (and sometimes nostalgic) aspects that directly effects Generation Reagan / Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations (i.e. The Baby Boomers) are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.
Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.
2 posted on
11/28/2005 6:01:21 PM PST by
qam1
(There's been a huge party. All plates and the bottles are empty, all that's left is the bill to pay)
To: qam1
Insidious little plot, isn't it.
3 posted on
11/28/2005 6:05:46 PM PST by
satchmodog9
( Seventy million spent on the lefts Christmas present and all they got was a Scooter)
To: qam1
Keynes is right in the short run. The classical model is right in the long time. Short term recessions are caused by lag time between drops in consumption and corresponding deflation. In the long term, firms adjust their production and price schemes to match demand (so goods don't just sit on the shelf, unsold, costing money).
How long term the short term is seems to be the matter of debate. The great society programs stimulated demand which had been lacking for at least five years at the time the programs were instituted, but they went on too long and caused inflation when already recovered demanded was continually stimulated.
There is no catch-all, magic formula for economics. It is all about trade offs. There are some things you definitely don't want to do (inflationary policies that also encourage unemployment), but there are a number of relationships in econ where you can have a lot of either one of two things, and not both.
4 posted on
11/28/2005 6:20:32 PM PST by
durh
To: qam1
Excellent article, except that the title should qualify itself by saying modern liberal economics. When I hear the term "liberal economics", I automatically think neoclassical.
To: qam1
btt
10 posted on
11/28/2005 10:43:38 PM PST by
Cacique
(quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
To: qam1
Those Baby Boomers are today’s profligate, “you deserve it” spenders, who must be supported in their old age by today’s young workers.
Sorry, it's gang bangers on social security starting when they're 27 years old that's breaking the bank. Old people more than paid for what they get...
11 posted on
11/28/2005 10:50:42 PM PST by
GOPJ
(The cost of launching an attack on America is high in spite of Dems trying to undermine defense)
To: qam1
The Democratic party is composed of groups of people whose economic fortune does not depend on GDP growth. This massive conglomeration includes recipients of transfer payments through tax policy, those who work for the various state, local and federal governments, teachers, trial lawyers, etc., who are compensated in such a manner that PROSPERITY from private sector economic growth is something which happens to everyone else.
Envy is the operative emotion here, and the cliche that "rising tides raise all boats" is simply not their perception. The " goose that laid the golden egg" will thus be killed off.
13 posted on
02/26/2006 9:27:14 PM PST by
SunkenCiv
(My Sunday Feeling is that Nothing is easy. Goes for the rest of the week too.)
To: Berosus; Cincinatus' Wife; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Do not dub me shapka broham; ...
Interesting that cash-back credit cards (Discover, some others) pay better interest rates than a savings account -- but of course, that's assuming one doesn't carry a balance. :') Not too hard to do with a little discipline and with a bigger income than I have. ;')
14 posted on
02/26/2006 9:29:01 PM PST by
SunkenCiv
(My Sunday Feeling is that Nothing is easy. Goes for the rest of the week too.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson