"Conservative Policies are Driving Americans to Suicide…"

Most economists say the stimulus package wasn’t big enough.

When has austerity ever worked?
No economy in history has been successful with austerity.
It’s a bankrupt idea. Recently the 2 economist most advocating it have been shown to be in error.

Reinhart and Rogoff are wrong about austerity

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


www.peri.umass.edu...

Robert Pollin and Michael Ash In 2010, two Harvard economists published an academic paper that spoke to the world’s biggest policy question: should we cut public spending to co n trol the deficit or use the state to rekindle economic growth? Growth in a Time of Debt by Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff has served as an important intellectual bulwark in support of austerity policies in the US and Europe. It has been cited by politicians ranging from Paul Ryan, the US congressman, to George O s borne, the UK chancellor. But we have shown that several critical findings advanced in this p a per are wrong . So do we need to r e think austerity economics more broadly? Their research is best known for its result that, across a broad range of countries and periods, ec o nomic growth declines dramatically when a country’s level of public debt exceeds 90 per cent of gross domestic product. In their work with a sample of 20 advanced economies in the postwar per i od, they repo rt that average annual GDP growth ranges between about 3 per cent and 4 per cent when the ratio of public debt to GDP is below 90 per cent. But it collapses to - 0.1 per cent when the ratio rises above a 90 per cent threshold. In a new working paper , co - authored with Thomas Herndon, we found that these results we re based on data errors and unsupportable statistical techniques. For example, because of miscalc u lation and unconventional methods of averaging data, a one - year experience in New Zealand in 1951, during which eco- nomic growth was - 7.6 per cent and the public debt level was high, ends up exerting a big influence on their overall findings. When we performed accurate recalculations, we found that, when countries’ debt - to - GDP ratio exceeds 90 per cent, average growth is 2.2 per cent, not - 0.1 per cent. We also found that the r e latio n ship b e- tween growth and public debt varies widely over time and between countries.

This is something I knew could happen, just didn't think it would be
this soon.

Oh and if you want Flags simply change "Conservative policies"
to "Obama" in your title.

"Conservative Policies are Driving Americans to Suicide…"

You gotta be crapping me!

Let me wrap my head around this people are so dissatisfied with all the free stuff conservative opposites give people they are offing themselves?

Is that right?

True money can't buy happiness it just buys votes for conservative opposites, and now get 'upset' their base is 'disappearing'.

Damn evil right wingers!!!!

Always their faults !

reply to post by Willtell


You'd be entirely mistaken if you ever expect me to argue in favor of austerity. All that word means in the current usage is pain for the public because Government screwed the pooch so bad, even it's howling can't cover the sound of the iceberg tearing open our Titanic any longer.

Now if we want to talk about true cost cutting as a national measure of survival? OF COURSE that will work. When has spending within our means to pay for it ever failed on that basis alone? Walk the halls of your local courthouse on Bankruptcy hearing day and you'll see the human wreckage of what the Government is currently doing. It sure isn't cutting anything.


That would be trillions in taking the single digit on the left of the numbers to stand in the t position. Not much cutting there.

(..and here is the site which the graphic links to)

Now there is a little pinch of cutting shown there ...but ..err.. oops. That doesn't even touch Ben Bernanke's financially suicidal move of 85 Billion a month or just over 1 trillion by the end of the fiscal year. (Not to mention the info on the added link) So, that deficit? It's closer to 2 trillion....not UNDER 1 trillion in actual and REAL dollars spent, which the nation literally didn't have value or backing to produce. What we do bring in? Well, it sure doesn't come CLOSE to covering what is currently going out ....and this is including the taxes to come into play this year.


(Source of Above Graphics)

So, while we're championing new spending or...God save us..another stimulus? I wonder if you could tell us all, where that money would be coming from? I'm honestly missing where, short of just making up more from thin air, it comes? People are taxed silly as it is, and that is STILL 1 trillion (on the books) over the budget line. Any other new sources?

So, how will everyone handle massive austerity when this countries credit gets downgraded and there is no more money left to borrow? Make no mistake the day will come when the US goes the way of Greece.

Who is going to be blamed then? Every single politician regardless of affiliation that has their hands in the cookie jar so to speak is at fault, and nobody can place blame on either party without placing equal blame on their own.

reply to post by neo96


Is it 2016?



Anything to deflect from CURRENT Issues.

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by neo96

 

Is it 2016?

Anything to deflect from CURRENT Issues.

The endless victimization neurosis !

Yes We Can blame other people for pretty much anything they want to.

They will definitely keep the White House

reply to post by Willtell

The conservative Republicans are blocking everything Obama wants to do.

Thank God somebody STILL has their heads screwed on right.

People are starting to think about how things would be now if everything Obama Inc. has done so far was the opposite.

reply to post by neo96

Hartmann was born in Grand Rapids, Michigan,[5] the son of a staunch conservative Republican, atheist father and a Christian mother, and grew up in nearby Lansing, Michigan. His paternal grandparents were from Norway.[6] He later lived in Detroit at age two and grew up in Lansing.[7][8] Interested in politics from a young age, he campaigned for Barry Goldwater during the 1964 presidential election when he was 13.[9] Hartmann was expelled from high school during tenth grade and later earned a GED.

Thom Hartmann


No wonder this guy thinks the way he does.


Sheesh. The Anti-Rush Limbaugh.....................

My friends look at the statistics, the stats don’t lie.
In conservative administrations people commit more suicides, it’s documented.

Conservative philosophy is stingy, selfish, and in the service of the interests of the super-rich

It’s that simple, not complicated.

Dogma and trite ridicule and hyperbole is only a smokescreen to avoid facts.

I would like one of the austerity believers to answer my question.

When has austerity ever worked?

All I hear is noisy propaganda and dogma.

reply to post by Willtell


Liberal philosophy is stingy, selfish, and in the service of the interests of the super-rich, like Obama, Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, etc....


Fixed for hypocrisy.

What conservative policies? I live in Virginia and I like it here. Wanna know why? Because they generally leave me alone. I'm not overly pleased with the taxes here, but for the most part, out here in the western mountains....folks tend to be friendly and yet mind their own damn business.

The economy is in the crapper thanks to the efforts of both parties...pandering to special interest groups and the lobbyist for the super, mega corporations. This could be fixed rather simply if the GOV would back off the regulations that reduce competition in the market place. I could give you examples but I have an idea that it would be pointless.

The GOV should not regulate business into the dirt....it NEEDS to facilitate a free market....period.

Originally posted by Willtell
My friends look at the statistics, the stats don’t lie.
In conservative administrations people commit more suicides, it’s documented.

Conservative philosophy is stingy, selfish, and in the service of the interests of the super-rich

The higher rates must mean that more Liberals simply can't stand that frost bitten brain feeling.

Mental illness is rapidly increasing in the world and "will be the second biggest cause of death and disability by 2020."[1] According to the World Health Organization:

Mental illnesses, from epilepsy to depression, currently affect over 400 million people around the world. This group includes 45 million people with schizophrenia.

America and Japan experience the highest levels of depression .... Over 1 million people now die through suicide each year. The ten countries with the highest suicide rates are all former Soviet states, and the Scandinavian countries, lauded in Liberal circles for their socialistic policies, also have extremely high suicide rates.

The above-cited countries are notable for imposing liberal or atheistic teachings by their governments on large populations. In the United States, liberal indoctrination governs public schools, which educate 89% of children. As of 2002, "[a]n estimated 20 percent of children have a mental illness that causes at least mild functional impairment,"[2] with nearly all those children a product of a public school education.

Public schools educate 89% of Americans, and "[t]he incidence that a teen will have depression some time in their adolescence is higher, felt to be at least one out of four.

Teaching children to accept and believe things that are demonstrably false cannot help mental health. Included in this category are the liberal teachings in school that:

* Lying about the truth, causing belief in falsehoods or encouraging conduct disorders.

*There are no real differences between boys and girls.

*Humans are just another type of animal.

*All there is is what you see (with or without special equipment, such as microscopes or telescopes).

*Conversely, that an unproven 'unconscious' excuses evil actions.

*Self-inflicted death (i.e. suicide) can somehow be good.

*Denying self-defense, mentally and physically.

*Denying the ability to control sexual desires (such as homosexuality & lesbianism); promoting lifestyles that lead to mental illness.

*Insisting on an illogical and unjustified "wall of separation of church and state"; When classroom prayer would promote mental stability.

*Encouraging dependence on state welfare services rather than taking responsibility for ones own actions. Dependency is a major cause of depression.

*Socialistic theories based upon materialism encourage nihilism and depresion.

ETA:
the link is blocked
it must be a Liberal blockade

""http://www.conservapedia.com/Mystery:
Do_Liberal_Teachings_Cause_Mental_Illness%3F""

reply to post by xuenchen


What right wing propaganda mill did you drudge that nonsense up from? C'mon now.

reply to post by Willtell


Clinton was also the President that signed the law repealing big chunks of Glass-Steagall too.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000



Look what Jerry Brown did in California. A balanced reasonable approach. Not hysterical cuts that hurt people. Took a basket case and revived it by a balanced approach.
No left wing or right wing dogma

Again, you or no one else can name one time in economic history did austerity bring prosperity. It makes things worse

You’re making a lot of noise; I commend you but no logical or relevant info to the essence of the question.

Austerity in Europe, the States, and the US economy has never worked; isn't working and likely will never work.

Look at England

It’s Official: Austerity Economics Doesn’t Work

At every stage of the experiment, critics (myself included) have warned that Osborne’s austerity policies would prove self-defeating. Any decent economics textbook will tell you that, other things being equal, cutting government spending causes the economy’s overall output to fall, tax revenues to decrease, and spending on benefits to increase. Almost invariably, the end result is slower growth (or a recession) and high budget deficits. Osborne, relying on arguments about restoring the confidence of investors and businessmen that his forebears at the U.K. Treasury used during the early nineteen-thirties against Keynes, insisted (and continues to insist) otherwise, but he has been proven wrong.

Just the facts mam

reply to post by BobM88


And he was wrong and part of the problem. But that's another proof that IT WASN'T SPENDING that brought about the 2007-8 economic hit.

Wow.

I posted this before... guess I have to post it again.

- Austerity is a tool, and like all tools it can be used wrong.
(You can't blame a soup-plate if you use it upside down.)

- If a nation has to resort to austerity measures, that nation already did something wrong (budget mismanagement; IOW: spending beyond the means).

- Germany already had austerity measures itself. At the right time, in the right proportions.

- Austerity cannot work for an economy, if the most important element is missing: the economy still has to create something of real value.

Real value as in: either extracting ressources, or building/creating something that will generate revenue,
like factories/industry that can build products, engineers creating new technologies, or a highly trained workforce.

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by xuenchen

 

What right wing propaganda mill did you drudge that nonsense up from? C'mon now.

Same place this came from:

Conservative policies are driving Americans to suicide.

The internetz.