Total Posts:36|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Obama's Address to Congress

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 6:26:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
What are your thoughts on it so far?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 6:30:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Doesn't matter, Republicans will never let it pass through congress, but will blame Obama for not doing anything.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 6:42:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Over half the plan is tax cuts, $245 billion of the $447 billion. I don't care for that too much, not while there are still all the tax loopholes and Bush tax cuts. If we clean up all that mess before adding more, I'd be more excited. But, oh well.

$140 billion in direct government stimulus, by updating bridiges, roads, buildings, etc, is very good. Ideally, the goal is that while they are working, they are making money (from the stimulus) and can spend that money, on whatever they fancy. That creates demand, which creates jobs. The goal being that as jobs are created from that demand, they shift from the government job to the private sector job. But, let's say all that tanks, they work for 24 months doing this, then go back to being unemployed. At least we got roads and bridges to show for it, which we are in dire need of.

$35 billion directly to keeping teachers working. In general I like this, but not while we have the TU creating problems.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
cobiader
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 6:46:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 6:42:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Over half the plan is tax cuts, $245 billion of the $447 billion. I don't care for that too much, not while there are still all the tax loopholes and Bush tax cuts. If we clean up all that mess before adding more, I'd be more excited. But, oh well.

$140 billion in direct government stimulus, by updating bridiges, roads, buildings, etc, is very good. Ideally, the goal is that while they are working, they are making money (from the stimulus) and can spend that money, on whatever they fancy. That creates demand, which creates jobs. The goal being that as jobs are created from that demand, they shift from the government job to the private sector job. But, let's say all that tanks, they work for 24 months doing this, then go back to being unemployed. At least we got roads and bridges to show for it, which we are in dire need of.

$35 billion directly to keeping teachers working. In general I like this, but not while we have the TU creating problems.

How will government jobs create demand for private sector jobs? What kind of demand stems from road work? He's trying to reduce the unemployment rate with jobs he created using money he doesn't have. The vast majority of our nations roads are in great condition, especially the federal roads. I don't even listen to him anymore because he never follows through with his plans anyways. Thank God for that, or we'd be in a lot bigger of a mess than we already are in.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 7:00:28 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 6:46:29 PM, cobiader wrote:
At 9/8/2011 6:42:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Over half the plan is tax cuts, $245 billion of the $447 billion. I don't care for that too much, not while there are still all the tax loopholes and Bush tax cuts. If we clean up all that mess before adding more, I'd be more excited. But, oh well.

$140 billion in direct government stimulus, by updating bridiges, roads, buildings, etc, is very good. Ideally, the goal is that while they are working, they are making money (from the stimulus) and can spend that money, on whatever they fancy. That creates demand, which creates jobs. The goal being that as jobs are created from that demand, they shift from the government job to the private sector job. But, let's say all that tanks, they work for 24 months doing this, then go back to being unemployed. At least we got roads and bridges to show for it, which we are in dire need of.

$35 billion directly to keeping teachers working. In general I like this, but not while we have the TU creating problems.

How will government jobs create demand for private sector jobs? What kind of demand stems from road work? He's trying to reduce the unemployment rate with jobs he created using money he doesn't have. The vast majority of our nations roads are in great condition, especially the federal roads. I don't even listen to him anymore because he never follows through with his plans anyways. Thank God for that, or we'd be in a lot bigger of a mess than we already are in.

Building roads doesn't matter, the government could be giving the money away to those people, but building roads at least gets work out of it, so the people have recent job work on their resumes.

What happens is they now have an income. This means that they will be spending more money (on food above the bare minimum, electronics, games, clothes, cars, whatever, just like other people), since they are spending their money on that, the demand for those things increase. Because the demand increases those things need to increase production to meet that demand (or allow a competetor to do it). In order to increase production, they need to hire more workers.

Thus, private sector jobs are created by the stimulus. However, in order to see any results, two things need to be done. 1) You need to do it large enough to have an impact, a $2,000 stimulus is not going to make a difference. 2) You need to do it long enough that companies adjust to the increased demand. There is a lag time between increased demand, and a market's response to that demand.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 7:35:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Does anybody have a link to a video of it?
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 8:16:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
OreEle, you commit a variant of the broken window fallacy. Sure, the stimulus might "create" a job, and that we see, but what we do not see is how the taxation required to fund the stimulus destroys a different job. Government interference is not a positive-sum game like the market; it is instead zero-sum or even negative-sum.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 8:25:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 7:54:19 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 9/8/2011 7:35:27 PM, mongoose wrote:
Does anybody have a link to a video of it?

I agree, a video would be helpful.

http://www.youtube.com...

A little bit into it. I have to say Biden's background expressions are quite amusing. Haven't finished watching, so I don't know how much bullsh!t is in it.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
seraine
Posts: 734
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 8:37:30 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 7:00:28 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/8/2011 6:46:29 PM, cobiader wrote:
At 9/8/2011 6:42:57 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Over half the plan is tax cuts, $245 billion of the $447 billion. I don't care for that too much, not while there are still all the tax loopholes and Bush tax cuts. If we clean up all that mess before adding more, I'd be more excited. But, oh well.

$140 billion in direct government stimulus, by updating bridiges, roads, buildings, etc, is very good. Ideally, the goal is that while they are working, they are making money (from the stimulus) and can spend that money, on whatever they fancy. That creates demand, which creates jobs. The goal being that as jobs are created from that demand, they shift from the government job to the private sector job. But, let's say all that tanks, they work for 24 months doing this, then go back to being unemployed. At least we got roads and bridges to show for it, which we are in dire need of.

$35 billion directly to keeping teachers working. In general I like this, but not while we have the TU creating problems.

How will government jobs create demand for private sector jobs? What kind of demand stems from road work? He's trying to reduce the unemployment rate with jobs he created using money he doesn't have. The vast majority of our nations roads are in great condition, especially the federal roads. I don't even listen to him anymore because he never follows through with his plans anyways. Thank God for that, or we'd be in a lot bigger of a mess than we already are in.

Building roads doesn't matter, the government could be giving the money away to those people, but building roads at least gets work out of it, so the people have recent job work on their resumes.

What happens is they now have an income. This means that they will be spending more money (on food above the bare minimum, electronics, games, clothes, cars, whatever, just like other people), since they are spending their money on that, the demand for those things increase. Because the demand increases those things need to increase production to meet that demand (or allow a competetor to do it). In order to increase production, they need to hire more workers.

Thus, private sector jobs are created by the stimulus. However, in order to see any results, two things need to be done. 1) You need to do it large enough to have an impact, a $2,000 stimulus is not going to make a difference. 2) You need to do it long enough that companies adjust to the increased demand. There is a lag time between increased demand, and a market's response to that demand.

1: Take Money from people.

2: Give to other people

3: ???

4: Profit!

If you take money away from the middle class and give it to the poor, it seems like the poor would spend more and the middle class less- thus not solving anything.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 8:53:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
On an interesting note, Robert Murphy finally got the chance to debate Keynesian theory vs. Austrian theory. It isn't Paul Krugman, but its interesting nonethless:
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2011 9:45:10 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
So apparently earthquakes are man-made.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 9:57:05 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/8/2011 8:16:54 PM, mongeese wrote:
OreEle, you commit a variant of the broken window fallacy. Sure, the stimulus might "create" a job, and that we see, but what we do not see is how the taxation required to fund the stimulus destroys a different job. Government interference is not a positive-sum game like the market; it is instead zero-sum or even negative-sum.

1) Not all broken window fallacies are actual fallaices, much like not all "true scottsmen" fallacies are fallacies.

2) We know that jobs are not being created because we can see that they aren't right now. Large businesses are sitting on trillions of dollars because of two things, uncertainty caused by the republicans, and lack of demand (no point creating supply when there is no demand).

I've said it multiple times on this forum.

100 people making $100,000 a year create more demand than 1 person making $10,000,000 a year. They create more demand for food, more demand for cars, more demand for homes, more demand for electronics, more demand for nearly all goods, apart from yachts and other extreme luxuries.

The rich tend to create little demand, and more supply. That is because they invest a greater propotion of their income back into companies through stocks. Stocks give money to companies so that they can grow and make more products (i.e. increase supply, not demand). A healthy economy needs a balance of both. Right now we are in a demand shortage, not a supply shortage. So trading off supply to increase demand is ultimately benefitial.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 1:38:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).

That is no longer true for most industries. Very few industries make a product after demand has been expressed (an order placed by the end user). They attempt to predict the demand for their product and build so many units, if they predicted wrong, the price adjusts to force it in (products going on sale or what have you).

In cases where people wait to build something until after an order has been made by the end user, then yes, supply and demand are the same thing because supply always equals demand (though it can be argued that the supply of your labor to make a product is constant and so prices for that labor must adjust based on demand). But in cases where people don't wait and try to predict, then supply and demand are two seperate things.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 2:14:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 1:38:59 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).

That is no longer true for most industries. Very few industries make a product after demand has been expressed (an order placed by the end user).
That has nothing to do with what I actually said.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 2:46:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 2:14:53 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 1:38:59 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).

That is no longer true for most industries. Very few industries make a product after demand has been expressed (an order placed by the end user).
That has nothing to do with what I actually said.

A lack of aggregated demand occurs If the money is just going into savings, thus keeping resources idle.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 2:49:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 2:46:18 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:14:53 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 1:38:59 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).

That is no longer true for most industries. Very few industries make a product after demand has been expressed (an order placed by the end user).
That has nothing to do with what I actually said.

A lack of aggregated demand occurs If the money is just going into savings, thus keeping resources idle.

Savings for one party is loans for another.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 3:44:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 2:49:00 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:46:18 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:14:53 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 1:38:59 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).

That is no longer true for most industries. Very few industries make a product after demand has been expressed (an order placed by the end user).
That has nothing to do with what I actually said.

A lack of aggregated demand occurs If the money is just going into savings, thus keeping resources idle.

Savings for one party is loans for another.

Not if the banks or companies are sitting on the money, as they are right now.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 3:47:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 3:44:31 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:49:00 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:46:18 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:14:53 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 1:38:59 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).

That is no longer true for most industries. Very few industries make a product after demand has been expressed (an order placed by the end user).
That has nothing to do with what I actually said.

A lack of aggregated demand occurs If the money is just going into savings, thus keeping resources idle.

Savings for one party is loans for another.

Not if the banks or companies are sitting on the money, as they are right now.

They dont have any confidence in the consumer.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 3:52:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 3:47:29 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 9/9/2011 3:44:31 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:49:00 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:46:18 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:14:53 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 1:38:59 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).

That is no longer true for most industries. Very few industries make a product after demand has been expressed (an order placed by the end user).
That has nothing to do with what I actually said.

A lack of aggregated demand occurs If the money is just going into savings, thus keeping resources idle.

Savings for one party is loans for another.

Not if the banks or companies are sitting on the money, as they are right now.

They dont have any confidence in the consumer.

Because many consumers are unemployed or underemployed.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 3:54:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 3:44:31 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:49:00 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:46:18 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:14:53 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 1:38:59 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).

That is no longer true for most industries. Very few industries make a product after demand has been expressed (an order placed by the end user).
That has nothing to do with what I actually said.

A lack of aggregated demand occurs If the money is just going into savings, thus keeping resources idle.

Savings for one party is loans for another.

Not if the banks or companies are sitting on the money, as they are right now.

No bank sits on money. Chase for example I've read is in debt 50 times it's earnings.

Less loose with its money than prerecession=/= sitting on money
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 6:01:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 3:54:42 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 3:44:31 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:49:00 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:46:18 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:14:53 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 1:38:59 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).

That is no longer true for most industries. Very few industries make a product after demand has been expressed (an order placed by the end user).
That has nothing to do with what I actually said.

A lack of aggregated demand occurs If the money is just going into savings, thus keeping resources idle.

Savings for one party is loans for another.

Not if the banks or companies are sitting on the money, as they are right now.

No bank sits on money. Chase for example I've read is in debt 50 times it's earnings.

Less loose with its money than prerecession=/= sitting on money

Funny, Chase's deposits are up 8%, and the money loaned out is down 4% from 1 year ago. A smiliar trend in BOA and Wells Fargo.

And companies are doing similar, sitting on highly liquid investments (meaning not loans) and cash.

http://finance.fortune.cnn.com...
http://www.businessinsider.com...
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Steelerman6794
Posts: 158
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 7:25:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Why are all of you treating producers and consumers as if they are mutually exclusive? The circular flow model is a simple introduction that should only be used in the first few days of Macroecon 101.

Obama's jobs bill only constitutes a broken window fallacy if the private sector can currently perform better in place of government stimulus. On the other hand, the jobs bill MUST actually meet a significant demand, or else its just a waste of resources. Creating new "demand" curves through government projcects is inefficient and often counterproductive (think of all those unfinished infrastructure projects).
LeoL
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 8:31:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
The speach was very political, but at the same time it was very bipartisan. He tried to include things into his Bill that the Republicans can agree on. He tried to compromise for the greater good of America. When was the last time you've seen a president move forward from ideology and look at reality? Anyway, the Republicans will probably oppose the bill, because you know, thats all they're good for.
Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too? -Douglas Adams
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 8:49:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 3:52:08 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Because many consumers are unemployed or underemployed.

Alot of union workers are overpaid... so?
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 9:29:37 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 6:01:47 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 3:54:42 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 3:44:31 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:49:00 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:46:18 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:14:53 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 1:38:59 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).

That is no longer true for most industries. Very few industries make a product after demand has been expressed (an order placed by the end user).
That has nothing to do with what I actually said.

A lack of aggregated demand occurs If the money is just going into savings, thus keeping resources idle.

Savings for one party is loans for another.

Not if the banks or companies are sitting on the money, as they are right now.

No bank sits on money. Chase for example I've read is in debt 50 times it's earnings.

Less loose with its money than prerecession=/= sitting on money

Funny, Chase's deposits are up 8%, and the money loaned out is down 4% from 1 year ago. A smiliar trend in BOA and Wells Fargo.
That doesn't mean sitting on money. That means less "negative sitting on money" than before.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 9:33:09 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/9/2011 9:29:37 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 6:01:47 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 3:54:42 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 3:44:31 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:49:00 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:46:18 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 9/9/2011 2:14:53 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 9/9/2011 1:38:59 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 9/9/2011 12:29:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Investment is demand too-- demand for capital.

Supply IS demand when one speaks of generalized supply and generalized demand-- one only supplies a thing because one wishes another, and by supplying it one obtains the means for that other. It's only in the case of specific goods where supply can be higher than demand or vice versa (unless by demand one merely means wishes instead of wishes with means).

That is no longer true for most industries. Very few industries make a product after demand has been expressed (an order placed by the end user).
That has nothing to do with what I actually said.

A lack of aggregated demand occurs If the money is just going into savings, thus keeping resources idle.

Savings for one party is loans for another.

Not if the banks or companies are sitting on the money, as they are right now.

No bank sits on money. Chase for example I've read is in debt 50 times it's earnings.

Less loose with its money than prerecession=/= sitting on money

Funny, Chase's deposits are up 8%, and the money loaned out is down 4% from 1 year ago. A smiliar trend in BOA and Wells Fargo.
That doesn't mean sitting on money. That means less "negative sitting on money" than before.

Unless a company is going bankrupt, the company's assets is much greater then its liabilities.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2011 10:05:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Oh?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.