If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Study: "tax cuts ≠ economic growth" GOP: "Grrr. Kill it." Dems: "Hey, where'd that study go? Let's republish it." And...scene {bow}   (tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 198
    More: Interesting, GOP, Sander Levin, tax cuts, Democrats, Orrin Hatch, personal incomes, R-UT, economic growths  
•       •       •

6823 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Nov 2012 at 6:51 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



198 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-01 08:11:56 PM
"fark the economy. We have to pay back the Job Creators who fill up our campaign coffers somehow."
 
2012-11-01 08:14:08 PM

Hunter_Worthington: So, you might want to call your mom to pick you up from Little League, because you're not in the majors, kid.


Good stuff. Point at a Mankiw clone. Appeal to authority much?

I go to this guy if I'm looking for such staggering insight as

"The results also indicate that the main effect of tax cuts on the government budget is to induce subsequent legislated tax increases"

Truly an unparalleled economic mind. Really, why not just point at Mankiw, who, by the way I've personally worked with and spoken to on these matters and who is the 'economics advisor' to the Romney campaign. Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I welcome an honest discussion that includes even the barest evidence of their conclusions. I'm really not impressed by how many text books someone sells. I made good money correcting text books and supporting materials. Up to the point that the publisher would allow it because the author might get butthurt.

Nice try though, logical fallacy and all.
 
2012-11-01 08:15:09 PM

Karac: He records it, and thens plays back the very same show he just heard for the last three hours to make sure he didn't miss anything.


may i suggest a location for gathering a pile of sticks?
 
2012-11-01 08:15:53 PM

burning_bridge: Aren't they always screaming bloody murder over social engineering experiments? Can we put this one to rest now that we have 30+ years of conclusive evidence that shows it's a load of bunk?



No you idiot. All this shows is that we still haven't cut taxes ENOUGH.

It won't be until we cut taxes on millionaires to -5000% that we finally see tax cuts starting to work.
 
2012-11-01 08:18:21 PM
Wow. Congressional GOP commissions study. Study finds no evidence for their sacred cow. Congressiona GOP hides study.

How much more stereotypically partisan can these asshats be?
 
2012-11-01 08:21:32 PM

kasmel: Hunter_Worthington: So, you might want to call your mom to pick you up from Little League, because you're not in the majors, kid.

Good stuff. Point at a Mankiw clone. Appeal to authority much?

I go to this guy if I'm looking for such staggering insight as

"The results also indicate that the main effect of tax cuts on the government budget is to induce subsequent legislated tax increases"

Truly an unparalleled economic mind. Really, why not just point at Mankiw, who, by the way I've personally worked with and spoken to on these matters and who is the 'economics advisor' to the Romney campaign. Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I welcome an honest discussion that includes even the barest evidence of their conclusions. I'm really not impressed by how many text books someone sells. I made good money correcting text books and supporting materials. Up to the point that the publisher would allow it because the author might get butthurt.

Nice try though, logical fallacy and all.


That's going to leave a mark.
 
2012-11-01 08:22:12 PM

cman: Ahh, ultrapartisanship, where your side can never be wrong. Never admit defeat. Destroy anything that makes you look bad.


Exactly. And the Democrats are just as bad, because of an anecdote my Uncle once told me, that I can't quite remember right now.

I guess I'd better vote for change, then, to stick it to those fatcats in DC.

www.logotypes101.com
 
2012-11-01 08:22:23 PM

randomjsa: Yet somehow in the lala land of liberalism simply by having the government take money from the private sector and then spend that money... The private sector gets better.

A bit like if I took 50 dollars from you and spent it, somehow things get better for you right?


I'm sure some or all of this has been covered between your post and mine, but...

That massive tax rate on the top end of the heap in the fifties, is not unlike the top rate now, no one with an accountant actually paid that.
Also, that massive tax rate in the fifties and sixties helped pay for infrastructure that made the making of money easier for the guys getting taxed so it was kinda a win for them too. They understood that, and were mostly okay with it too...
 
2012-11-01 08:22:45 PM

Karac: He listens to the Limbaugh show twice a day - but it only comes on once. He records it, and thens plays back the very same show he just heard for the last three hours to make sure he didn't miss anything.


Are you certain he's actually alive? Are any bits of him rotting off? Does he moan and try and eat your face off? What I'm saying is that your co-worker doesn't have a functioning brainstem, let alone brain.
 
2012-11-01 08:24:27 PM

sno man: randomjsa: Yet somehow in the lala land of liberalism simply by having the government take money from the private sector and then spend that money... The private sector gets better.

A bit like if I took 50 dollars from you and spent it, somehow things get better for you right?

I'm sure some or all of this has been covered between your post and mine, but...

That massive tax rate on the top end of the heap in the fifties, is not unlike the top rate now, no one with an accountant actually paid that.
Also, that massive tax rate in the fifties and sixties helped pay for infrastructure that made the making of money easier for the guys getting taxed so it was kinda a win for them too. They understood that, and were mostly okay with it too...


If that's true, then why wouldn't they be content with the 1950s-era tax rate?

(checks income gap percentage increase since then)

Oh, right, greed.
 
2012-11-01 08:28:11 PM

heap: i'll vote, i'll pay my taxes and show up for jury duty, but...beyond that? society at large is for laughing at, not seriously contemplating or attempting to amend. anything else gets depressing. and after all, there are always tacos.


Yes, tacos rule, we are in agreement.

Lionel Mandrake: ...I remember when I felt ways about stuff


Right. Now I just watch my Sons of Anarchy and Doctor Who, play my Skyrim and amuse the cats. Life is much more relaxing this way. It is also nice to have friends over seas and up north. I can leave whenever I want, for the cost of a plane ticket or a few tanks of gas if the shiat ever truly hits the fan..,,, I'm done trying to care.
 
2012-11-01 08:30:10 PM

coeyagi: sno man: randomjsa: Yet somehow in the lala land of liberalism simply by having the government take money from the private sector and then spend that money... The private sector gets better.

A bit like if I took 50 dollars from you and spent it, somehow things get better for you right?

I'm sure some or all of this has been covered between your post and mine, but...

That massive tax rate on the top end of the heap in the fifties, is not unlike the top rate now, no one with an accountant actually paid that.
Also, that massive tax rate in the fifties and sixties helped pay for infrastructure that made the making of money easier for the guys getting taxed so it was kinda a win for them too. They understood that, and were mostly okay with it too...

If that's true, then why wouldn't they be content with the 1950s-era tax rate?

(checks income gap percentage increase since then)

Oh, right, greed.


bingo
80's me, me, me....
and Mr. Gekko
 
2012-11-01 08:32:16 PM
Sure, but that study uses liberal math. It doesn't even recognize potato as a number!
 
2012-11-01 08:32:56 PM

kasmel: Hunter_Worthington: So, you might want to call your mom to pick you up from Little League, because you're not in the majors, kid.

Good stuff. Point at a Mankiw clone. Appeal to authority much?

I go to this guy if I'm looking for such staggering insight as

"The results also indicate that the main effect of tax cuts on the government budget is to induce subsequent legislated tax increases"

Truly an unparalleled economic mind. Really, why not just point at Mankiw, who, by the way I've personally worked with and spoken to on these matters and who is the 'economics advisor' to the Romney campaign. Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I welcome an honest discussion that includes even the barest evidence of their conclusions. I'm really not impressed by how many text books someone sells. I made good money correcting text books and supporting materials. Up to the point that the publisher would allow it because the author might get butthurt.

Nice try though, logical fallacy and all.

 
2012-11-01 08:34:39 PM

Ow! That was my feelings!: heap: cman: I do.

Hatred runs deep. Liberals hate Conservatives, conservatives hate Liberals, everyone hates Greens, Libertarians, and Communists.

We are too divided now. Unless something happens that scars us on the scale of 9/11 I cannot see any other outcome except for civil war.

just as an experiment, (and i realize it will have to be delayed, i doubt you could do it with the election eminent) try turning off the news channels. step away from politics threads.

you very well could be amazed at just how many people could give a flying fark, and...you might just join them. you sound immersed in political bullshiat, and sure that everyone else is too....when most just want a taco and something funny on TV.

in summation, taco.

[southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com image 400x300]


This thread is now tacos.
 
2012-11-01 08:35:14 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: Sure, but that study uses liberal math. It doesn't even recognize potato as a number!


Then what is this magnificent digit 0? See the similarities. The Indus civilization couldn't properly call zero potato as potatoes are indigenous to the Americas. But if they knew them, they would know what they'd created.

us.123rf.com
 
2012-11-01 08:35:25 PM

cman: dickfreckle: You gotta love this country. It only took a few years for 50% of the population to conveniently forget what got us here, and that the extension of the cuts only worsens the deficit (especially annoying when it comes from a self-styled "deficit hawk").

What does it take, people? Herbert Hoover? When are you gonna wise up to this bullsh*t?

Meh, keep wrapping turds in a flag and I guess people will keep buying it.

This is not like other elections that we have had before. This has become rather personal for many.

This election SCARES the shiat out of me by the way everyone is acting. Ultrapartisanship reigns supreme. We have thrown out all logic for emotion.

Both Liberals and Conservatives are saying this is the most important election in many, many years. We are cut throat take no farking names kicking ass. Both sides are throwing everything at the farking wall hoping that it will all stick.

This election is insane. fark ALL OF YOU PARTISAN farkS WHO ARE THROWING US SO EVER CLOSER TO CIVIL WAR




Partisanship of Congress

Note how the far-right has slowly extinguished the center-right completely, and is now squeezing the moderate-right. When you mock people for partisanship, make sure you put the blame where the majority of it lies: In the party that has tripled Senate Cloture votes the moment Obama was elected. The party where members will not receive any campaign funding unless they sign a pledge of allegiance to far-right causes.

Democrats have tried and tried and tried to compromise, and been rebuked every single time. "We got 98% of what we wanted", said Boehner 2 years ago. And still his party rejected it, because getting 98% of what they wanted was just. not. enough.
 
2012-11-01 08:36:24 PM

kasmel: Hunter_Worthington: So, you might want to call your mom to pick you up from Little League, because you're not in the majors, kid.

Good stuff. Point at a Mankiw clone. Appeal to authority much?

I go to this guy if I'm looking for such staggering insight as

"The results also indicate that the main effect of tax cuts on the government budget is to induce subsequent legislated tax increases"

Truly an unparalleled economic mind. Really, why not just point at Mankiw, who, by the way I've personally worked with and spoken to on these matters and who is the 'economics advisor' to the Romney campaign. Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I welcome an honest discussion that includes even the barest evidence of their conclusions. I'm really not impressed by how many text books someone sells. I made good money correcting text books and supporting materials. Up to the point that the publisher would allow it because the author might get butthurt.

Nice try though, logical fallacy and all.


Let's try that again... 

nbchardballtalk.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-11-01 08:36:37 PM

MithrandirBooga: cman: dickfreckle: You gotta love this country. It only took a few years for 50% of the population to conveniently forget what got us here, and that the extension of the cuts only worsens the deficit (especially annoying when it comes from a self-styled "deficit hawk").

What does it take, people? Herbert Hoover? When are you gonna wise up to this bullsh*t?

Meh, keep wrapping turds in a flag and I guess people will keep buying it.

This is not like other elections that we have had before. This has become rather personal for many.

This election SCARES the shiat out of me by the way everyone is acting. Ultrapartisanship reigns supreme. We have thrown out all logic for emotion.

Both Liberals and Conservatives are saying this is the most important election in many, many years. We are cut throat take no farking names kicking ass. Both sides are throwing everything at the farking wall hoping that it will all stick.

This election is insane. fark ALL OF YOU PARTISAN farkS WHO ARE THROWING US SO EVER CLOSER TO CIVIL WAR



Partisanship of Congress

Note how the far-right has slowly extinguished the center-right completely, and is now squeezing the moderate-right. When you mock people for partisanship, make sure you put the blame where the majority of it lies: In the party that has tripled Senate Cloture votes the moment Obama was elected. The party where members will not receive any campaign funding unless they sign a pledge of allegiance to far-right causes.

Democrats have tried and tried and tried to compromise, and been rebuked every single time. "We got 98% of what we wanted", said Boehner 2 years ago. And still his party rejected it, because getting 98% of what they wanted was just. not. enough.


It was 1 year ago, it only seems like that f*cking mess was 2 years ago.
 
2012-11-01 08:38:28 PM

PonceAlyosha: A Dark Evil Omen: Sure, but that study uses liberal math. It doesn't even recognize potato as a number!

Then what is this magnificent digit 0? See the similarities. The Indus civilization couldn't properly call zero potato as potatoes are indigenous to the Americas. But if they knew them, they would know what they'd created.

[us.123rf.com image 850x850]

 

nextlol.com
 
2012-11-01 08:38:35 PM
TFA: "I don't think there's a conclusion that there's no relationship," Auerbach added, "only that it's not so big that it comes through."

So there may be a relationship but it's so small that it is undetectable in the last 65 years of data. Yeah, that must be it.
 
2012-11-01 08:39:27 PM
Sorry, guys, Grover Norquist is just too good in the sack.
 
2012-11-01 08:41:33 PM

randomjsa: Yet somehow in the lala land of liberalism simply by having the government take money from the private sector and then spend that money... The private sector gets better.

A bit like if I took 50 dollars from you and spent it, somehow things get better for you right?


Salmon swim against the current, upstream, to fight for spawning opportunities in a desperate and inspiring bid for the survival of their bloodline.

In your case, I feel more like I'm watching a guppy swim against the tide of a swirling toilet bowl.
 
2012-11-01 08:48:01 PM

kasmel: Truly an unparalleled economic mind. Really, why not just point at Mankiw, who, by the way I've personally worked with and spoken to on these matters and who is the 'economics advisor' to the Romney campaign. Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I welcome an honest discussion that includes even the barest evidence of their conclusions. I'm really not impressed by how many text books someone sells. I made good money correcting text books and supporting materials. Up to the point that the publisher would allow it because the author might get butthurt.


I laughed heartily.
 
2012-11-01 08:48:01 PM

Blue_Blazer: Hunter_


kasmel: Hunter_Worthington: So, you might want to call your mom to pick you up from Little League, because you're not in the majors, kid.

Good stuff. Point at a Mankiw clone. Appeal to authority much?

I go to this guy if I'm looking for such staggering insight as

"The results also indicate that the main effect of tax cuts on the government budget is to induce subsequent legislated tax increases"

Truly an unparalleled economic mind. Really, why not just point at Mankiw, who, by the way I've personally worked with and spoken to on these matters and who is the 'economics advisor' to the Romney campaign. Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I welcome an honest discussion that includes even the barest evidence of their conclusions. I'm really not impressed by how many text books someone sells. I made good money correcting text books and supporting materials. Up to the point that the publisher would allow it because the author might get butthurt.

Nice try though, logical fallacy and all.


I don't really need to appeal to an authority, as -unlike yourself- I have both read and understood that text book, where as you're confusing textbooks with punditry, and confusing Mankiw for Romer. More importantly, on the off chance your parents can take you down to the local library, or you can save several years of allowance money and can purchase a copy, I suggest you start your studies with Chapters 5 and 6, which develop an Open Economy New Keynsian model, starting with an elementary Hicks-Hansen IS-LM model, and moving on to models incorporating imperfect flows of capital and labor between countries (it's a two country model -more countries would be a bit beyond the scope of that book.) Chapter 7 deals with Consumption, including the marginal propensity to consume, although, as a fair warning, truly understanding this material will require at least Calculus II and a decent Econometrics course. Now, then, as I recall Chapter 8 deals with Investment (Consumption and Investment are components of GDP, in case you didn't know) you will need a good understanding of Ordinary Differential Equations to handle the material in that chapter and understand my original point.

Now, I too would welcome "an honest discussion that includes even the barest evidence". Alas, it won't be with you. In this brief exchange, you've managed to not only embarrass yourself, and your parents, but expose relatively poor quality of your education -which I can only assume is provided by America's Public School system. Perhaps, someday, after you've demonstrated sufficient mastery of Analysis, Statistics and Economics, we could try again.

For now, it's approaching 9pm here on the East Coast, and I do believe tomorrow is a school day. So, it's time for you to log off AOL, slink into your parents basement, crawl into your Pokemon bedsheets, and prepare yourself for a fun filled day of being the smartest person in your high school English class.

Yours,

Hunter W. Gathers,
Col. OSI, Commanding
 
2012-11-01 08:48:14 PM

The Onion is prophetic: Has there ever been anyone, anywhere, who has looked more like a turtle than Mitch McConnell? I don't even see a human face on him anymore, it's just a 200 year old sea turtle with glasses on.



Well, maybe this guy

media.tumblr.com

...but not by much.
 
2012-11-01 08:48:43 PM

LectertheChef: Mitt Romneys Tax Return: Snapper Carr: Trickle down is an article of faith in the GOP (one could say that it is the central article of faith) - heresy must be stamped out.

And, just like religon, no objective evidence to the contrary will dissuade them from their faith.

When reason fails, use fire.


i75.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-01 08:49:33 PM

mediablitz: kasmel: Truly an unparalleled economic mind. Really, why not just point at Mankiw, who, by the way I've personally worked with and spoken to on these matters and who is the 'economics advisor' to the Romney campaign. Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I welcome an honest discussion that includes even the barest evidence of their conclusions. I'm really not impressed by how many text books someone sells. I made good money correcting text books and supporting materials. Up to the point that the publisher would allow it because the author might get butthurt.

I laughed heartily.


Muphry's Law.
 
2012-11-01 08:50:09 PM

coeyagi: MithrandirBooga: cman: dickfreckle: You gotta love this country. It only took a few years for 50% of the population to conveniently forget what got us here, and that the extension of the cuts only worsens the deficit (especially annoying when it comes from a self-styled "deficit hawk").

What does it take, people? Herbert Hoover? When are you gonna wise up to this bullsh*t?

Meh, keep wrapping turds in a flag and I guess people will keep buying it.

This is not like other elections that we have had before. This has become rather personal for many.

This election SCARES the shiat out of me by the way everyone is acting. Ultrapartisanship reigns supreme. We have thrown out all logic for emotion.

Both Liberals and Conservatives are saying this is the most important election in many, many years. We are cut throat take no farking names kicking ass. Both sides are throwing everything at the farking wall hoping that it will all stick.

This election is insane. fark ALL OF YOU PARTISAN farkS WHO ARE THROWING US SO EVER CLOSER TO CIVIL WAR



Partisanship of Congress

Note how the far-right has slowly extinguished the center-right completely, and is now squeezing the moderate-right. When you mock people for partisanship, make sure you put the blame where the majority of it lies: In the party that has tripled Senate Cloture votes the moment Obama was elected. The party where members will not receive any campaign funding unless they sign a pledge of allegiance to far-right causes.

Democrats have tried and tried and tried to compromise, and been rebuked every single time. "We got 98% of what we wanted", said Boehner 2 years ago. And still his party rejected it, because getting 98% of what they wanted was just. not. enough.

It was 1 year ago, it only seems like that f*cking mess was 2 years ago.


... God it's been a long year.
 
2012-11-01 08:52:35 PM

Hunter_Worthington: Hunter W. Gathers,
Col. OSI, Commanding


Account created: 2012-10-28 17:28:40
 
2012-11-01 08:53:24 PM

Lenny_da_Hog: Muphry's Law.


It was a great burn for both. "Let me very clearly tell you why you wrong, AND fark up while I'm showing you how much better I am than you and why".

I love Fark!!!
 
2012-11-01 08:55:09 PM

mediablitz: kasmel: Truly an unparalleled economic mind. Really, why not just point at Mankiw, who, by the way I've personally worked with and spoken to on these matters and who is the 'economics advisor' to the Romney campaign. Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I welcome an honest discussion that includes even the barest evidence of their conclusions. I'm really not impressed by how many text books someone sells. I made good money correcting text books and supporting materials. Up to the point that the publisher would allow it because the author might get butthurt.

I laughed heartily.



No, he's good.

"They operate from a conclusions driven [paradigm] rather than an evidence driven paradigm."
 
2012-11-01 08:55:46 PM

kasmel: Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.


I do have to take issue with this statement. Both Mankiw and Romer have done quite a bit of good 'scientific' (I use quotes since as economists we can't perform true scientific experimentation, but we try our best to get there) research in the past. They've both written some very informative and ground-breaking papers in their time, especially their work on endogenous growth theory; and in Mankiw's case his more recent work on price stickiness.

Now, I'm just talking about his research. Some of the policies Mankiw has campaigned for have been a bit odd, and even at odds with his own research (budget deficits being one). So I also have to admit that I don't understand what causes him to become a proponent of some policies.

Basically, my take is that his research has been pretty good, but his policy recommendations have been a bit more iffy and/or ideologically motivated.
 
2012-11-01 09:04:51 PM

PonceAlyosha: A Dark Evil Omen: Sure, but that study uses liberal math. It doesn't even recognize potato as a number!

Then what is this magnificent digit 0? See the similarities. The Indus civilization couldn't properly call zero potato as potatoes are indigenous to the Americas. But if they knew them, they would know what they'd created.

[us.123rf.com image 850x850]


I think I just witnessed a miracle. You can see the true value of potato in the image. It is 123RF. If we an just resolve the variables of R and F in the formula, we might finally understand the Conservative mind.
 
2012-11-01 09:08:32 PM

phaseolus: mediablitz: kasmel: Truly an unparalleled economic mind. Really, why not just point at Mankiw, who, by the way I've personally worked with and spoken to on these matters and who is the 'economics advisor' to the Romney campaign. Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I welcome an honest discussion that includes even the barest evidence of their conclusions. I'm really not impressed by how many text books someone sells. I made good money correcting text books and supporting materials. Up to the point that the publisher would allow it because the author might get butthurt.

I laughed heartily.


No, he's good.

"They operate from a conclusions driven [paradigm] rather than an evidence driven paradigm."


Well shiat. You are correct on that one. Now you're going to tell me he was talking about Romer, not Romney ;-)

*hangs head in shame*
 
2012-11-01 09:09:41 PM
So anyway, once again today's Republican Party demonstrates how much they're like the USSR's Communist Party from back in the bad old days -- Party dogma always trumps anything it disagrees with.

See how these other comments from upthread could apply equally well to 20th century Soviet Communists or to 21st century American Republicans:

cman: Ahh, ultrapartisanship, where your side can never be wrong. Never admit defeat. Destroy anything that makes you look bad.


Mentat: Just because it hasn't worked yet doesn't mean it never will.

[yep, just one more Five Year Plan and we'll have our paradise...]

Lionel Mandrake: Party before principle/facts/reality/greater good!

 
2012-11-01 09:17:10 PM

KhanAidan: kasmel: Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I do have to take issue with this statement. Both Mankiw and Romer have done quite a bit of good 'scientific' (I use quotes since as economists we can't perform true scientific experimentation, but we try our best to get there) research in the past. They've both written some very informative and ground-breaking papers in their time, especially their work on endogenous growth theory; and in Mankiw's case his more recent work on price stickiness.

Now, I'm just talking about his research. Some of the policies Mankiw has campaigned for have been a bit odd, and even at odds with his own research (budget deficits being one). So I also have to admit that I don't understand what causes him to become a proponent of some policies.

Basically, my take is that his research has been pretty good, but his policy recommendations have been a bit more iffy and/or ideologically motivated.


He gets paid a lot of money to say shiatty things.
 
2012-11-01 09:21:20 PM

cman: This election is insane. fark ALL OF YOU PARTISAN farkS WHO ARE THROWING US SO EVER CLOSER TO CIVIL WAR

Thank you for being civility and rationality to our political discourse. Clearly you're above throwing fire bombs.
You're a shining example to us all.

jWeren't you the guy saying that Libertarians have nothing to do with the GOP, despite the fact that they've nominated two lifelong GOP hacks for President in the last two elections?
//If you were trying to be funny, thanks for the laughs. Even if you weren't trying to be funny, thanks for the laughs.
 
2012-11-01 09:22:16 PM

KhanAidan: kasmel: Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I do have to take issue with this statement. Both Mankiw and Romer have done quite a bit of good 'scientific' (I use quotes since as economists we can't perform true scientific experimentation, but we try our best to get there) research in the past. They've both written some very informative and ground-breaking papers in their time, especially their work on endogenous growth theory; and in Mankiw's case his more recent work on price stickiness.

Now, I'm just talking about his research. Some of the policies Mankiw has campaigned for have been a bit odd, and even at odds with his own research (budget deficits being one). So I also have to admit that I don't understand what causes him to become a proponent of some policies.

Basically, my take is that his research has been pretty good, but his policy recommendations have been a bit more iffy and/or ideologically motivated.


I think Mankiw is a bit of a star-farker. If you read his blog, he is inordinately proud of his textbooks. Sure, those are things to be proud of, but undergirding much of what he writes and much of who he is seems to be a profound desire not just for money, but to be a player, a power.

I believe he sold out whatever was good in his work for a chance to run with the big dogs, and he produced work that completely compromised the best of his profession. Trying to endorse fast food workers as manufacturing? Really?
 
2012-11-01 09:24:58 PM

Mentat: Just because it hasn't worked yet doesn't mean it never will. If you let the tax cuts accumulate over time, eventually the wealth will trickle down like Niagara Falls.


nah the wealthy are like Piñatas. fat and full of goodies but you have to take a stick to em and bust them open first.
 
2012-11-01 09:25:09 PM

kasmel: Hunter_Worthington: Hunter W. Gathers,
Col. OSI, Commanding

Account created: 2012-10-28 17:28:40


He has the dubious honor of having his profile copypasta'ed in every thread he's been in since his birth.

We don't know much about him... but I suppose that's something.

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-11-01 09:26:55 PM

InmanRoshi: cman: This election is insane. fark ALL OF YOU PARTISAN farkS WHO ARE THROWING US SO EVER CLOSER TO CIVIL WAR
Thank you for being civility and rationality to our political discourse. Clearly you're above throwing fire bombs.
You're a shining example to us all.

jWeren't you the guy saying that Libertarians have nothing to do with the GOP, despite the fact that they've nominated two lifelong GOP hacks for President in the last two elections?
//If you were trying to be funny, thanks for the laughs. Even if you weren't trying to be funny, thanks for the laughs.


Well, at least I did entertain you, so I guess that is a plus
 
2012-11-01 09:37:53 PM

Hunter_Worthington: MisterTweak: You mean the Blessed Job Creators, peace be upon them, might actually just be a bunch of wealth accumulators who want to accumulate more wealth?

I am shocked. Shocked!

If you're going to criticize stupid policy, don't be a moron yourself. Wealth "accumulators" gather wealth, and addition wealth through investment, i.e. setting aside surplus money now, to enjoy potentially greater consumption utility in the future. In this matter, under ordinary times, wealth accumulation raises investment, and through that, expectations of future income for everyone, so that a rising tide lifts all boats.


That is among the stupidest things I have ever seen committed to text.
 
2012-11-01 09:40:06 PM

KhanAidan: Basically, my take is that his research has been pretty good, but his policy recommendations have been a bit more iffy and/or ideologically motivated.


A methodology is only as strong as the conclusions that can be drawn from it. So either his methodology for devising models is flawed or his capacity to derive conclusions through analysis of data based on those models is flawed.

In either case, when those conclusions consistently have an ideological bent, it's relatively safe to assume that there is a bias skewing the results.

Mankiw, more than Romer, has demonstrated the capacity to operate from a microeconomics perspective in terms of risk/reward on a price/value level. But even there his 'insight' leans towards flawed supply side models. His take on 'nominal rigidities', that since a company lowering their prices doesn't necessarily mean that they'll receive the full benefit because their competitors will adjust and while consumers will be able to buy more they won't necessarily buy more from THEM, fails to take into consideration that the larger motivating factor of price changes is demand. Lowering the price of an unwanted product/service will not necessarily spur demand for that product/service. Jiffy Lube can lower the cost of an oil change to $5 if they want, but people aren't necessarily going to go out of their way to get MORE oil changes. Jiffy Lube may benefit for a short time by stealing some business from competitors, but in the long run it's not going to make much difference, and then when they have to raise prices again they're likley to lose both the customers they gained as well as customers they may have kept by not changing their prices at all. By the same token most people are not motivated to buy something just because they can. Which means that whether a company will receive the full benefit of a consumer base for lowering their prices presupposes that people will arbitrarily increase their consumption simply because it's within their economic means to do so.

Anyway. We've gotten off topic. Long story short, I'm not suggesting that Mankiw and Romer are completely without merit. Simply that more often than not their conclusions, and the content of their texts, hold to a particular ideological bent that is neither supported by evidence, nor practically supported by any valid model. I take anything that they may offer with an extra helping of skepticism.
 
2012-11-01 09:43:48 PM

Hunter_Worthington: Blue_Blazer: Hunter_

kasmel: Hunter_Worthington: So, you might want to call your mom to pick you up from Little League, because you're not in the majors, kid.

Good stuff. Point at a Mankiw clone. Appeal to authority much?

I go to this guy if I'm looking for such staggering insight as

"The results also indicate that the main effect of tax cuts on the government budget is to induce subsequent legislated tax increases"

Truly an unparalleled economic mind. Really, why not just point at Mankiw, who, by the way I've personally worked with and spoken to on these matters and who is the 'economics advisor' to the Romney campaign. Neither Mankiw or Romer study economic theory from a scientific perspective. They operate from a conclusions driven rather than an evidence driven paradigm. They hold a conviction as regards how they FEEL an economic model should behave.

I welcome an honest discussion that includes even the barest evidence of their conclusions. I'm really not impressed by how many text books someone sells. I made good money correcting text books and supporting materials. Up to the point that the publisher would allow it because the author might get butthurt.

Nice try though, logical fallacy and all.

I don't really need to appeal to an authority, as -unlike yourself- I have both read and understood that text book, where as you're confusing textbooks with punditry, and confusing Mankiw for Romer. More importantly, on the off chance your parents can take you down to the local library, or you can save several years of allowance money and can purchase a copy, I suggest you start your studies with Chapters 5 and 6, which develop an Open Economy New Keynsian model, starting with an elementary Hicks-Hansen IS-LM model, and moving on to models incorporating imperfect flows of capital and labor between countries (it's a two country model -more countries would be a bit beyond the scope of that book.) Chapter 7 deals with Consumption, including the marginal propensity t ...


I didn't understand a word you two have said, but it reminded me of this scene:

wheatcitymag.com 

"How do you like them apples?"
 
2012-11-01 09:44:04 PM
Germany's highest tax rate is 45% and somehow their GDP growth is around 3% and their unemployment rate is 5%.

I was told high taxes impede growth. This can't be right.
 
2012-11-01 09:45:00 PM

coeyagi: He has the dubious honor of having his profile copypasta'ed in every thread he's been in since his birth.

We don't know much about him... but I suppose that's something.


After reading back through his stuff I can say that if he's not a very talented troll (seriously Hunter W. Gathers, hats off for the last bit) he's a truly and spectacularly delusional human being.

So he has that going for him.

I guess that that's nice.
 
2012-11-01 09:45:14 PM

coeyagi: kasmel: Hunter_Worthington: Hunter W. Gathers,
Col. OSI, Commanding

Account created: 2012-10-28 17:28:40

He has the dubious honor of having his profile copypasta'ed in every thread he's been in since his birth.

We don't know much about him... but I suppose that's something.

[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x624]


Well, some Farkers don't get away from their comfort zones much, and operate under the perception that disagreements = trolling, or that their B.A. in Political Science qualifies them to have a valid opinion on Economics (or anything, come to it.). If it weren't for the fact that that sort of thing makes it more difficult to get constructive policy through, it'd be funny.

A bit like hearing a tour guide talk of a far away land, of which she knows nothing and understands even less, really.
 
2012-11-01 09:56:31 PM

kmmontandon: GAT_00: Facts: the enemy of conservatives.

Add them to the list.


I think it's been there a while already.
 
2012-11-01 09:57:25 PM

Hunter_Worthington: coeyagi: kasmel: Hunter_Worthington: Hunter W. Gathers,
Col. OSI, Commanding

Account created: 2012-10-28 17:28:40

He has the dubious honor of having his profile copypasta'ed in every thread he's been in since his birth.

We don't know much about him... but I suppose that's something.

[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x624]

Well, some Farkers don't get away from their comfort zones much, and operate under the perception that disagreements = trolling, or that their B.A. in Political Science qualifies them to have a valid opinion on Economics (or anything, come to it.). If it weren't for the fact that that sort of thing makes it more difficult to get constructive policy through, it'd be funny.

A bit like hearing a tour guide talk of a far away land, of which she knows nothing and understands even less, really.


No, a simpler formula - Outrageous Comments + Brand new ALT the week of elections = Nobody takes you seriously.
 
Displayed 50 of 198 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report