If you wonder why we get deeper in debt check this out

[SheriffJoe]

many economists think like I do

So-Sorry-935&

Whenever their crackpot theories don't work, they always say we didn't spend enough. So I asked fratfraud how much stimulus was needed to get the economy back on track. He didn't answer but I refused to let him off the hook and kept pressing.

He finally admitted he didn't know and that those decisions were best left to "really REALLY smart dudes"

The troll is a total fraud...he's either trash talking or talking out of his.

Like I said, get rid of tenure and all these Keynesian clowns disappear tomorrow.

 

[akphidelt]

Whenever their crackpot theories don't work, they always say we didn't spend enough. So I asked fratfraud how much stimulus was needed to get the economy back on track. He didn't answer but I refused to let him off the hook and kept pressing.

He finally admitted he didn't know and that those decisions were best left to "really REALLY smart dudes"

The troll is a total fraud...he's either trash talking or talking out of his.

Like I said, get rid of tenure and all these Keynesian clowns disappear tomorrow.

The economy is very complex. So you use a logical fallacy approach to get me to answer a question that requires hundreds of economists that deal with very complex situations and then use my refusal to answer as proof I don't know what I'm talking about. That's how retards debate. Good try!

 

[russ1945]

Trolling along in economiciville. What a loser. We are talking about wastful spending. We are talking about wasteful spending at a time and place when we can least afford it. Aktard doesn't get it. No economist would recommend wasting money. Are you shitting me. Nobody in their right minds can justify that. The topic is not economics in general, just wasteful spending in particular. What part of that don't you understand. Troll to the bone. What a loser.

 

[SheriffJoe]

The economy is very complex. So you use a logical fallacy approach to get me to answer a question that requires hundreds of economists that deal with very complex situations and then use my refusal to answer as proof I don't know what I'm talking about. That's how retards debate. Good try!

:Carcajada::Carcajada::Carcajada::Carcajada::Carcajada:

Is the troll for real????

Psst, an infinitely complex economy with over 300 million people cannot be micro managed by "hundreds of economists" face)(*^%

 

[akphidelt]

:Carcajada::Carcajada::Carcajada::Carcajada::Carcajada:

Is the troll for real????

Psst, an infinitely complex economy with over 300 million people cannot be micro managed by "hundreds of economists" face)(*^%

Yes, a $17 trillion global economy requires a lot of organization by thousands of economists and experts. Only retards like you believe economies are run by magic.

 

[akphidelt]

Trolling along in economiciville. What a loser. We are talking about wastful spending. We are talking about wasteful spending at a time and place when we can least afford it. Aktard doesn't get it. No economist would recommend wasting money. Are you shitting me. Nobody in their right minds can justify that. The topic is not economics in general, just wasteful spending in particular. What part of that don't you understand. Troll to the bone. What a loser.

It's not what the government pays for, it's what the recipients of the money pay for. Something you'll never understand. The government is not in the business of making money. How hard is that to comprehend?

 

[SheriffJoe]

Yes, a $17 trillion global economy requires a lot of organization by thousands of economists and experts. Only retards like you believe economies are run by magic.

So you admit you're a socialist then? The government should micro-manage the economy...isn't that right?

Just get it over with already -- "I FRATFRAUD AM A PROUD SOCIALIST!"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

Socialism is an economic system characterised by social ownership of the means of production and co-operative management of the economy.[SUP][1][/SUP][SUP][2][/SUP] "Social ownership" may refer to cooperative enterprises, common ownership, state ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these.[SUP][3][/SUP] There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them.[SUP][4][/SUP] They differ in the type of social ownership they advocate, the degree to which they rely on markets or planning, how management is to be organised within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism.[SUP][5]
[/SUP]
A socialist economic system is based on the organisational precept of production for use, meaning the production of goods and services to directly satisfy economic demand and human needs where objects are valued based on their use-value or utility, as opposed to being structured upon the accumulation of capitaland production for profit.[SUP][6][/SUP] In the traditional conception of a socialist economy, coordination, accounting and valuation would be performed in kind (using physical quantities), by a common physical magnitude, or by a direct measure of labour-time in place of financial calculation.[SUP][7][/SUP][SUP][8][/SUP] Distribution of output is based on the principle of to each according to his contribution. The exact methods of resource allocation and valuation are the subject of debate within the broader socialist calculation debate.

uke1:

 

[Acebb]

The economy is very complex. So you use a logical fallacy approach to get me to answer a question that requires hundreds of economists that deal with very complex situations and then use my refusal to answer as proof I don't know what I'm talking about. That's how retards debate. Good try!

Um, "logical fallacy" doesn't mean what you think it means so you should probably stop using it.

And again, this chart wasn't put together by "hundreds" of people. It was put together by fewer than 20.

You are an idiot.

 

[Acebb]

Whenever their crackpot theories don't work, they always say we didn't spend enough. So I asked fratfraud how much stimulus was needed to get the economy back on track. He didn't answer but I refused to let him off the hook and kept pressing.

He finally admitted he didn't know and that those decisions were best left to "really REALLY smart dudes"

The troll is a total fraud...he's either trash talking or talking out of his.

Like I said, get rid of tenure and all these Keynesian clowns disappear tomorrow.

Yeah, he's just a dumb little kid clowning because he has nothing better to do.

The content on the posts clearly reveal that.

 

[SheriffJoe]

fratfraud says the stimulus wasn't enough, but can't tell us how much is necessary.

Priceless.

 

[akphidelt]

Yeah, he's just a dumb little kid clowning because he has nothing better to do.

The content on the posts clearly reveal that.

You are agreeing with Sheriff Joe. That's embarrassing, lol. The guy is an obsessed weirdo who has been online for decades arguing about birther shit and his weird economic theories. You might want to reevaluate your thought process.

 

[Acebb]

The economy is very complex. So you use a logical fallacy approach to get me to answer a question that requires hundreds of economists that deal with very complex situations and then use my refusal to answer as proof I don't know what I'm talking about. That's how retards debate. Good try!

Your inability to answer shows you are clueless.

What is even funnier about this frankly embarrassingly stupid response, is you actually think that you haven't posted in many, many responses here that this stuff is 'basic' and "even retards understand" some of your dumb drivel.

See moron, when you're lying it is really difficult to keep the story straight.

Everyone knows you're lying.

You can stop now.

 

[Acebb]

fratfraud says the stimulus wasn't enough, but can't tell us how much is necessary.

Priceless.

But many economists agree with him!!!!!

 

[Acebb]

Trolling along in economiciville. What a loser. We are talking about wastful spending. We are talking about wasteful spending at a time and place when we can least afford it. Aktard doesn't get it. No economist would recommend wasting money. Are you shitting me. Nobody in their right minds can justify that. The topic is not economics in general, just wasteful spending in particular. What part of that don't you understand. Troll to the bone. What a loser.

Russ,

this dope actually thinks the spending is a good idea because the people receiving government money spend it on stuff and that makes it totally cool!

 

[akphidelt]

Um, "logical fallacy" doesn't mean what you think it means so you should probably stop using it.

And again, this chart wasn't put together by "hundreds" of people. It was put together by fewer than 20.

You are an idiot.

It is a logical fallacy because you are equating a projection by Obama's economic team to whether or not economists know what they are talking about. My theories hardly resemble projections. Predicting how the economy is going to be in 10 years is quite literally impossible. Understanding what's happening now and what the data is now is feasible. Which is what I do. The fact you think a projection from 2008 on what the unemployment rate would be in 2009 has some significance to what I'm talking about is hilarious. Just a testament to how dumb you really are.

 

[Acebb]

It is a logical fallacy because you are equating a projection by Obama's economic team to whether or not economists know what they are talking about.

Um, no I'm not and I never said that.

See, again, you're just a dumb little kid.

When you're a dumb little kid, it is hard to keep up.

 

[akphidelt]

Russ,

this dope actually thinks the spending is a good idea because the people receiving government money spend it on stuff and that makes it totally cool!

Yea, the people selling the stuff probably think it's "totally cool", lol. You guys are dumb.

 

[akphidelt]

Your inability to answer shows you are clueless.

What is even funnier about this frankly embarrassingly stupid response, is you actually think that you haven't posted in many, many responses here that this stuff is 'basic' and "even retards understand" some of your dumb drivel.

See moron, when you're lying it is really difficult to keep the story straight.

Everyone knows you're lying.

You can stop now.

I answer every question. You just continue to make stupid comments that have nothing to do with economics. Just caving. Poor kid.

 

[Acebb]

Yea, the people selling the stuff probably think it's "totally cool", lol. You guys are dumb.

Which is why retail sales isn't a leading economic indicator.

LOL

 

[akphidelt]

So you admit you're a socialist then? The government should micro-manage the economy...isn't that right?

Just get it over with already -- "I FRATFRAUD AM A PROUD SOCIALIST!"

What I'm talking about has nothing to do with socialism. You are just a weird freak that doesn't understand economics.