Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
Author Message
Bull_In_Exile Offline
Eternal Pessimist
*

Posts: 21,809
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 461
I Root For: The Underdog
Location:
Post: #41
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
(02-23-2012 12:38 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:15 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 09:00 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 08:58 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 08:56 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  I'll take that as "I don't know." 03-nutkick

Take it however you want. Obama is either a liar or woefully inept. Which one works best for you?

He didn't know what he was talking about. Probably was given that number by someone on his staff and he regurgitated it. It was theoretical and he was wrong.

Edit: Also, introducing Obama was an attempt to distract from the actual discussion of this thread: Was Romney wrong?

No I don't know exact numbers, asking for them is like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin...

Yes Romney was wrong, cutting is not going to kill you if you cut smart and over time..

Do you even know how GDP is calculated?

yes. Which method are you interested in?
(This post was last modified: 02-23-2012 12:55 PM by Bull_In_Exile.)
02-23-2012 12:54 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AtlanticLeague Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,783
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 110
I Root For: UMD / W&M
Location: DC
Post: #42
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
(02-23-2012 12:50 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 10:47 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  2014 Paul's cuts hack 4% of GDP in one year. Economy collapses due to market panic and a spike in unemployment. US economy will theoretically be reborn stronger than ever with a long term viability that it never had before

Show your work or you are full of crap..

Depending on which way you look at it, ~20% of GDP is Federal Spending. If Paul cuts 20% out of the federal budget (he'd need to cut ~25% to eliminate the deficit), that's a 4% reduction in overall GDP (.2 x .2 = .04). While this is a decrease in GDP on paper only, the technical recession and associated media and stock market panic it would create would be very real. Revenues then drop, and more cuts would be required to stay ahead of the deficit. And this only looking at the impact of cutting federal spending, completely ignoring any associated multipliers.

We can't hack our way to a brighter financial future, we have to grow our way out.
02-23-2012 01:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
I'mMoreAwesomeThanYou Offline
Medium Pimping
*

Posts: 7,020
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 100
I Root For: America
Location:
Post: #43
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
(02-23-2012 01:16 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:50 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 10:47 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  2014 Paul's cuts hack 4% of GDP in one year. Economy collapses due to market panic and a spike in unemployment. US economy will theoretically be reborn stronger than ever with a long term viability that it never had before

Show your work or you are full of crap..

Depending on which way you look at it, ~20% of GDP is Federal Spending. If Paul cuts 20% out of the federal budget (he'd need to cut ~25% to eliminate the deficit), that's a 4% reduction in overall GDP (.2 x .2 = .04). While this is a decrease in GDP on paper only, the technical recession and associated media and stock market panic it would create would be very real. Revenues then drop, and more cuts would be required to stay ahead of the deficit. And this only looking at the impact of cutting federal spending, completely ignoring any associated multipliers.

We can't hack our way to a brighter financial future, we have to grow our way out.


We can do both.
02-23-2012 01:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AtlanticLeague Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,783
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 110
I Root For: UMD / W&M
Location: DC
Post: #44
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
(02-23-2012 12:54 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:38 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:15 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 09:00 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 08:58 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  Take it however you want. Obama is either a liar or woefully inept. Which one works best for you?

He didn't know what he was talking about. Probably was given that number by someone on his staff and he regurgitated it. It was theoretical and he was wrong.

Edit: Also, introducing Obama was an attempt to distract from the actual discussion of this thread: Was Romney wrong?

No I don't know exact numbers, asking for them is like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin...

Yes Romney was wrong, cutting is not going to kill you if you cut smart and over time..

Do you even know how GDP is calculated?

yes. Which method are you interested in?

Expenditure.
02-23-2012 01:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bull_In_Exile Offline
Eternal Pessimist
*

Posts: 21,809
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 461
I Root For: The Underdog
Location:
Post: #45
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
(02-23-2012 01:21 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:54 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:38 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:15 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 09:00 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  He didn't know what he was talking about. Probably was given that number by someone on his staff and he regurgitated it. It was theoretical and he was wrong.

Edit: Also, introducing Obama was an attempt to distract from the actual discussion of this thread: Was Romney wrong?

No I don't know exact numbers, asking for them is like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin...

Yes Romney was wrong, cutting is not going to kill you if you cut smart and over time..

Do you even know how GDP is calculated?

yes. Which method are you interested in?

Expenditure.

GDP = gross investment + private consumption + government spending + Trade Surplus/Defecit

Now if you assume that there is no relationship between Gross Investment, Private Consumption , and Government spending you're a fool.

It's also really imporant to know that SS, for the sake of consumption, does not count as 'government spending'

Trade and Gross investment drive near, mid, and long term private consumption far better than government spending. Of cours expenditure is preferred by Keynesians

Gross Value Added (production) is a more mathematically sound method.
02-23-2012 01:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AtlanticLeague Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,783
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 110
I Root For: UMD / W&M
Location: DC
Post: #46
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
(02-23-2012 01:38 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 01:21 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:54 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:38 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:15 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  No I don't know exact numbers, asking for them is like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin...

Yes Romney was wrong, cutting is not going to kill you if you cut smart and over time..

Do you even know how GDP is calculated?

yes. Which method are you interested in?

Expenditure.

GDP = gross investment + private consumption + government spending + Trade Surplus/Defecit

Now if you assume that there is no relationship between Gross Investment, Private Consumption , and Government spending you're a fool.

It's also really imporant to know that SS, for the sake of consumption, does not count as 'government spending'

Trade and Gross investment drive near, mid, and long term private consumption far better than government spending. Of cours expenditure is preferred by Keynesians

Gross Value Added (production) is a more mathematically sound method.

These things are all true. My point is that it's a two-way street. You can't ignore the negative impact of substantial cuts in spending.
02-23-2012 01:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bull_In_Exile Offline
Eternal Pessimist
*

Posts: 21,809
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 461
I Root For: The Underdog
Location:
Post: #47
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
(02-23-2012 01:41 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 01:38 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 01:21 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:54 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:38 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  Do you even know how GDP is calculated?

yes. Which method are you interested in?

Expenditure.

GDP = gross investment + private consumption + government spending + Trade Surplus/Defecit

Now if you assume that there is no relationship between Gross Investment, Private Consumption , and Government spending you're a fool.

It's also really imporant to know that SS, for the sake of consumption, does not count as 'government spending'

Trade and Gross investment drive near, mid, and long term private consumption far better than government spending. Of cours expenditure is preferred by Keynesians

Gross Value Added (production) is a more mathematically sound method.

These things are all true. My point is that it's a two-way street. You can't ignore the negative impact of substantial cuts in spending.

But you can mitigate them by easing back, as I said.

Yes 10% is a SWAG, I don't care to do the math on this discussion but it's no more a SWAG than your 'economy will contract by 4% comment later on'.

Point is our spending has grown by leaps and bounds for decades both parties have been doing it. It's time to readjust over how long a period and by how much are debatable but we cant keep increasing..
02-23-2012 01:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AtlanticLeague Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,783
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 110
I Root For: UMD / W&M
Location: DC
Post: #48
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
(02-23-2012 01:46 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 01:41 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 01:38 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 01:21 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 12:54 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  yes. Which method are you interested in?

Expenditure.

GDP = gross investment + private consumption + government spending + Trade Surplus/Defecit

Now if you assume that there is no relationship between Gross Investment, Private Consumption , and Government spending you're a fool.

It's also really imporant to know that SS, for the sake of consumption, does not count as 'government spending'

Trade and Gross investment drive near, mid, and long term private consumption far better than government spending. Of cours expenditure is preferred by Keynesians

Gross Value Added (production) is a more mathematically sound method.

These things are all true. My point is that it's a two-way street. You can't ignore the negative impact of substantial cuts in spending.

But you can mitigate them by easing back, as I said.

Yes 10% is a SWAG, I don't care to do the math on this discussion but it's no more a SWAG than your 'economy will contract by 4% comment later on'.

Point is our spending has grown by leaps and bounds for decades both parties have been doing it. It's time to readjust over how long a period and by how much are debatable but we cant keep increasing..

(I had to look up SWAG, great acronym)

Now please explain how you can say something reasonable like that, and then claim that what Romney said is wrong. You seem to disagree with the extent of the negative impact, not its existence.
02-23-2012 02:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Max Power Offline
Not Rod Carey
*

Posts: 10,059
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 261
I Root For: NIU, Bradley
Location: Peoria
Post: #49
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
Bull Maynard Keynes
02-23-2012 02:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bull_In_Exile Offline
Eternal Pessimist
*

Posts: 21,809
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation: 461
I Root For: The Underdog
Location:
Post: #50
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
(02-23-2012 02:06 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 01:46 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 01:41 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 01:38 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  
(02-23-2012 01:21 PM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  Expenditure.

GDP = gross investment + private consumption + government spending + Trade Surplus/Defecit

Now if you assume that there is no relationship between Gross Investment, Private Consumption , and Government spending you're a fool.

It's also really imporant to know that SS, for the sake of consumption, does not count as 'government spending'

Trade and Gross investment drive near, mid, and long term private consumption far better than government spending. Of cours expenditure is preferred by Keynesians

Gross Value Added (production) is a more mathematically sound method.

These things are all true. My point is that it's a two-way street. You can't ignore the negative impact of substantial cuts in spending.

But you can mitigate them by easing back, as I said.

Yes 10% is a SWAG, I don't care to do the math on this discussion but it's no more a SWAG than your 'economy will contract by 4% comment later on'.

Point is our spending has grown by leaps and bounds for decades both parties have been doing it. It's time to readjust over how long a period and by how much are debatable but we cant keep increasing..

(I had to look up SWAG, great acronym)

Now please explain how you can say something reasonable like that, and then claim that what Romney said is wrong. You seem to disagree with the extent of the negative impact, not its existence.

Romney's statement is "you can't just cut" it said nothing about how to cut. The implication, If I am reading you right, is that revenue (aka taxes have to be raised)..

My point was that you don't have to raise revenue, you can get there by cutting. So Romney was either wrong in what he said (you have to raise taxes) or wrong in how he said it (can't just cut when he meant *now*)
02-23-2012 02:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
mlb Offline
O' Great One
*

Posts: 20,276
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 540
I Root For: Cincinnati
Location:

Donators
Post: #51
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
(02-23-2012 02:36 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Romney's statement is "you can't just cut" it said nothing about how to cut. The implication, If I am reading you right, is that revenue (aka taxes have to be raised)..

My point was that you don't have to raise revenue, you can get there by cutting. So Romney was either wrong in what he said (you have to raise taxes) or wrong in how he said it (can't just cut when he meant *now*)

I didn't read that at all... I read that he wants pro-growth tax policies. That could very easily mean lower tax rates to encourage spending by people which then in turn creates more jobs that in turn creates more revenues for the federal gov't.
02-23-2012 02:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Max Power Offline
Not Rod Carey
*

Posts: 10,059
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 261
I Root For: NIU, Bradley
Location: Peoria
Post: #52
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
I think he realizes cuts alone have a negative effect on the economy, as Bull said, and that therefore he wants them to be accompanied by cuts to taxes (to the "job creators," who just love creating jobs when they get windfalls irrespective of demand because they're just swell guys). That's not a terrible idea because the tax cuts increase demand to help offset the spending cuts (though probably not by a long shot); either way it's a net negative that will hurt our economy and decrease revenue.
02-23-2012 05:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Max Power Offline
Not Rod Carey
*

Posts: 10,059
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 261
I Root For: NIU, Bradley
Location: Peoria
Post: #53
RE: John Maynard Romney: Spending cuts hurt growth
Excellent Krugman article labeling Romney a "closet Keynesian" and suggests he's "pretend(ing) to agree with people (he) privately believe(s) are fools"--

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/24/opinio....html?_r=1
Quote:According to Michael Kinsley, a gaffe is when a politician accidently tells the truth. That’s certainly what happened to Mitt Romney on Tuesday, when in a rare moment of candor — and, in his case, such moments are really, really rare — he gave away the game.

...

The right’s ideology police were, predictably, aghast; the Club for Growth quickly denounced the statement as showing that Mr. Romney is “not a limited-government conservative.” On the contrary, insisted the club, “If we balanced the budget tomorrow on spending cuts alone, it would be fantastic for the economy.” And a Romney spokesman tried to walk back the remark, claiming, “The governor’s point was that simply slashing the budget, with no affirmative pro-growth policies, is insufficient to get the economy turned around.”

But that’s not what the candidate said, and it’s very unlikely that it’s what he meant. Almost surely, he is, in fact, a closet Keynesian.

How do we know this? Well, for one thing, Mr. Romney is not a stupid man. And while his grasp of world affairs does sometimes seem shaky, he has to be aware of the havoc austerity policies are wreaking in Greece, Ireland and elsewhere.

Beyond that, we know who he turns to for economic advice; heading the list are Glenn Hubbard of Columbia University and N. Gregory Mankiw of Harvard. While both men are loyal Republican spear-carriers — each served for a time as chairman of George W. Bush’s Council of Economic Advisers — both also have long track records as professional economists. And what these track records suggest is that neither of them believes any of the propositions that have become litmus tests for would-be G.O.P. presidential candidates.

Consider Mr. Mankiw, in particular. Modern Republicans detest Keynes; Mr. Mankiw is the editor of a collection of papers titled “New Keynesian Economics.” In an early edition of his best-selling textbook, he dismissed supply-side economics — the doctrine embraced by the sainted Ronald Reagan — as the creation of “charlatans and cranks.” And, in 2009, he called for higher inflation as a solution to the economic crisis, a position anathema to Republicans like Representative Paul Ryan, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, who warn ominously about the evil of “debasing” our currency.

Given his advisers, then, it seems safe to assume that what Mr. Romney blurted out Tuesday reflected his real economic beliefs — as opposed to the nonsense he pretends to believe, because it’s what the Republican base wants to hear.

And therein lies the reason Mr. Romney acts the way he does, why he is running a campaign of almost pathological dishonesty.

For he is. Every one of the Romney campaign’s major themes, from the attacks on President Obama for going around the world apologizing for America (he didn’t), to the insistence that Romneycare and Obamacare are very different (they’re virtually identical), to the claim that Mr. Obama has lost millions of jobs (which is only true if you count the first few months of his administration, before any of his policies had taken effect), is either an outright falsehood or deeply deceptive. Why the nonstop mendacity?

As I see it, it comes down to the cynicism underlying the whole enterprise. Once you’ve decided to hide your beliefs and say whatever you think will get you the nomination, to pretend to agree with people you privately believe are fools, why worry at all about truth?
(This post was last modified: 02-24-2012 12:24 PM by Max Power.)
02-24-2012 12:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.