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.

(Washington Post)   Oh, look, another Rethuglican spouting off at the mouth about Medicare being unsustainable and people getting $3 in services for every dollar they put in and fark it, let's just sick the liberal fact checkers on him. See, I told you...oh, he's right?   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 754
    More: Obvious, Medicare, fact checking, John Barrasso, average wage  
•       •       •

2705 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Mar 2013 at 12:24 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-20 01:14:30 PM  

DamnYankees: MattStafford: If a bank loaned me two trillion dollars, and I bought and consumed two trillion dollars worth of goods, would that help the economy?

In the current economy? Yes. A lot.

Look, I understand that you fundamentally disagree with Keynesian economics, but is there some reason that you need to re-start every single thread pretending not to know what Keynesian's think, and re-asking the same questions over and over again?


Same exact style used by that evolution topic troller, Levets.
 
2013-03-20 01:14:54 PM  

MattStafford: qorkfiend: MattStafford: qorkfiend: MattStafford: If I printed ten trillion dollars, and bought ten trillion dollars worth of goods and services, would our economy be better off?

What do you think happens to that $10 trillion? It doesn't just vanish.

So are you agreeing that the economy would be better off? What if I printed 20 trillion dollars, and hired every single working age person in America to produce goods for me? Would the economy be better off then?

If every single working age person in America was being regularly paid for work it would be spectacular for the economy.

This is a joke.  What the fark are they going to buy with their money?  I'm employing literally every able bodied person in America to produce goods for me to consume!  They won't have anything to purchase!  What good is the money going to do for them?


When are you going to admit you lied when you claimed to have earned a degree in economics?
 
2013-03-20 01:15:09 PM  

MattStafford: Alright, look guys - I'll try to make this as simple as possible:

Imagine the recipients of Medicare and Social Security as one collective entity.  They receive a great deal of borrowed money every year that they use to spend on goods and services.  People in this thread are claiming that this is good for the economy.

Suppose instead of that one collective entity, it was just me receiving that money.  If the US government borrowed the same amount of money every year, and just gave it to me, would that still be good for the economy?

It Depends on what you spend the money on.  Hookers and blow?  No.  Cars?  Yes.

And if you do think that that is good for the economy, let me ask some follow up questions.

When the government has to pay back those loans, where will they get the tax money from?  Me, or the rest of the economy?
Taxes are paid in a variety of ways including payroll taxes, sales taxes, and income taxes.  Increased cash flow into an economy will result in several transactions in which at least one of these taxes is paid, generating money for the government.
If the government can no longer afford to borrow, what will they do?  Print the money?  You are suggesting that the government printing large quantities of money, giving that money to me, and having me buy goods with it will help the economy?  Stop giving me money?  They still need to raise taxes (again, not on me) and what will happen to all the jobs and businesses I support with my consumption?
Since the government is not a traditional player in a market and does not behave in its own self-interest, it's difficult to say exactly what would happen if the government simply kept borrowing money.  What we do know, is that during a time of recession, a government should spend money and operate at a loss (i.e. borrow).

A government budget does not (and should not) be balanced 100% of the time.  It should, however, be balanced over the long run.  To your credit, the US government has done a poor job of balancing a budget and paying back debt during times of economic prosperity.
 
2013-03-20 01:15:20 PM  

MattStafford: People still think borrowing money for Social Security and Medicare is a good idea?  Jesus, how dense are you guys?

Please explain to me how keeping millions of people, who by definition do not produce things or provide services, alive financed via a massive amount of debt is somehow going to make our country stronger?  Who cares if we provide massive amounts of jobs to doctor's providing them services?  Those jobs disappear once we can no longer borrow money to fund the scheme!


You realize that Social Security has a surplus, to the tune of something like $2-3 trillion, right? We borrow nothing (nada, zilch, zip) to fund it.

Proceed with the derp about Medicare.
 
2013-03-20 01:15:22 PM  

CPennypacker: MattStafford: cameroncrazy1984: Because old people buy lots of things and that helps the economy. I don't understand why this has to be explained to you over and over again.

Buying shiat does not help the economy!  Christ, how difficult is that to understand?

If a bank loaned me two trillion dollars, and I bought and consumed two trillion dollars worth of goods, would that help the economy?

YES


Seriously, a Fark Economist doesn't understand velocity of money?  Wow.
 
m00
2013-03-20 01:15:42 PM  

MattStafford: What the fark are they going to buy with their money?


crap made in China?
 
2013-03-20 01:15:55 PM  

MattStafford: FarkedOver: MattStafford: Imagine the recipients of Medicare and Social Security as one collective entity

But they aren't one collective entity.....

Why would the effect on the economy be different if it was one person spending the money as opposed to one thousand people?  The same amount of money is injected into the economy.


If you came into one trillion dollars.... shortly thereafter you would be the proud owner of the world's only one trillion dollar potato.  You've got that going for you!
 
2013-03-20 01:16:03 PM  
 
2013-03-20 01:16:29 PM  

DarwiOdrade: Look guys, here it is in a nutshell. If you don't believe Medicare is bad then imagine all that money being stuffed into an eggplant and shoved up a giraffe's ass. Do you think that's good for the economy?


Only if coconuts come out.
 
2013-03-20 01:17:17 PM  

MattStafford: FarkedOver: MattStafford: Imagine the recipients of Medicare and Social Security as one collective entity

But they aren't one collective entity.....

Why would the effect on the economy be different if it was one person spending the money as opposed to one thousand people?  The same amount of money is injected into the economy.


This post is worth 1000 facepalms.
 
2013-03-20 01:17:39 PM  

MattStafford: FarkedOver: MattStafford: Imagine the recipients of Medicare and Social Security as one collective entity

But they aren't one collective entity.....

Why would the effect on the economy be different if it was one person spending the money as opposed to one thousand people?  The same amount of money is injected into the economy.


Because economies are not made by pools of money.  They are made by transfers of money.

One guy spending a trillion dollars does not make an economy, because no one else has any money.

One thousand guys spending a trillion dollars makes an economy because everyone has money to spend.
 
2013-03-20 01:17:39 PM  

DarwiOdrade: Look guys, here it is in a nutshell. If you don't believe Medicare is bad then imagine all that money being stuffed into an eggplant and shoved up a giraffe's ass. Do you think that's good for the economy?


Hmmm, now that you put it that way....yes, I'm starting to understand, yes...
 
2013-03-20 01:17:48 PM  
Conceptualize the economy as two entities - Me, MattStafford, and every other actor in the economy.

Start:  MattStafford has X goods and Y dollars.  Everyone else has A goods and Y dollars.

MattStafford prints one trillion new dollars, and buys goods from everyone else.

End:  MattStafford has X goods + 1 trillion dollars more worth of goods and Y dollars.  Everyone else has A goods - 1 trillion dollars worth of goods, and Y + 1 trillion dollars.

Are you actually suggesting that the rest of the economy benefited from that transaction?
 
2013-03-20 01:18:16 PM  

MattStafford: Conceptualize the economy as two entities - Me, MattStafford, and every other actor in the economy.

Start:  MattStafford has X goods and Y dollars.  Everyone else has A goods and Y dollars.

MattStafford prints one trillion new dollars, and buys goods from everyone else.

End:  MattStafford has X goods + 1 trillion dollars more worth of goods and Y dollars.  Everyone else has A goods - 1 trillion dollars worth of goods, and Y + 1 trillion dollars.

Are you actually suggesting that the rest of the economy benefited from that transaction?


When are you going to admit you lied when you claimed to have earned a degree in economics?
 
2013-03-20 01:18:17 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-20 01:18:34 PM  

FarkedOver: If you came into one trillion dollars.... shortly thereafter you would be the proud owner of the world's only one trillion dollar potato.  You've got that going for you human-potato hybrid

 
2013-03-20 01:18:50 PM  

Fart_Machine: MattStafford: FarkedOver: MattStafford: Imagine the recipients of Medicare and Social Security as one collective entity

But they aren't one collective entity.....

Why would the effect on the economy be different if it was one person spending the money as opposed to one thousand people?  The same amount of money is injected into the economy.

This post is worth 1000 facepalms.


It's as if millions of potatoes cried out and were suddenly silenced.
 
2013-03-20 01:19:02 PM  

MattStafford: qorkfiend: MattStafford: qorkfiend: MattStafford: If I printed ten trillion dollars, and bought ten trillion dollars worth of goods and services, would our economy be better off?

What do you think happens to that $10 trillion? It doesn't just vanish.

So are you agreeing that the economy would be better off? What if I printed 20 trillion dollars, and hired every single working age person in America to produce goods for me? Would the economy be better off then?

If every single working age person in America was being regularly paid for work it would be spectacular for the economy.

This is a joke.  What the fark are they going to buy with their money?  I'm employing literally every able bodied person in America to produce goods for me to consume!  They won't have anything to purchase!  What good is the money going to do for them?


So, you imagine that no one would ever leave your employ in order to start a business selling things to your employees, who are flush with cash thanks to being employed?
 
2013-03-20 01:19:20 PM  

MattStafford: Conceptualize the economy as two entities - Me, MattStafford, and every other actor in the economy.

Start:  MattStafford has X goods and Y dollars.  Everyone else has A goods and Y dollars.

MattStafford prints one trillion new dollars, and buys goods from everyone else.

End:  MattStafford has X goods + 1 trillion dollars more worth of goods and Y dollars.  Everyone else has A goods - 1 trillion dollars worth of goods, and Y + 1 trillion dollars.

Are you actually suggesting that the rest of the economy benefited from that transaction?


Where do th eeggplant and giraffe fit in here? Are they part of A?
 
2013-03-20 01:19:37 PM  

Epoch_Zero: FarkedOver: If you came into one trillion dollars.... shortly thereafter you would be the proud owner of the world's only one trillion dollar potato.  You've got that going for you human-potato hybrid


Wow, I screwed that one up.
 
2013-03-20 01:20:07 PM  

Lando Lincoln: So yeah,

we should totally abandon Medicare and let old people die. Well...old people that can't afford to pay for their treatments die. We are a Christian Nation, after all. Everybody knows how much Jesus hated sick people.

Sadly, there are more than a couple farkers who think that's EXACTLY what we should do.

I am not one of them, but they are out there.
 
2013-03-20 01:20:34 PM  

m00: MattStafford: What the fark are they going to buy with their money?

crap made in China?


Why would people in China accept dollars?  They have nothing to spend it on either!
 
2013-03-20 01:20:49 PM  

DarwiOdrade: Fart_Machine: MattStafford: FarkedOver: MattStafford: Imagine the recipients of Medicare and Social Security as one collective entity

But they aren't one collective entity.....

Why would the effect on the economy be different if it was one person spending the money as opposed to one thousand people?  The same amount of money is injected into the economy.

This post is worth 1000 facepalms.

It's as if millions of potatoes cried out and were suddenly silenced.


Billions and billions of potatoes
 
2013-03-20 01:20:54 PM  

MattStafford: MattStafford prints one trillion new dollars, and buys goods from everyone else.

End: MattStafford has X goods + 1 trillion dollars more worth of goods and Y dollars. Everyone else has A goods - 1 trillion dollars worth of goods, and Y + 1 trillion dollars.

Are you actually suggesting that the rest of the economy benefited from that transaction?


The selling and buying of goods does not affect the economy.  This is what Matt Stafford actually believes.
 
2013-03-20 01:20:57 PM  

MattStafford: Conceptualize the economy as two entities - Me, MattStafford, and every other actor in the economy.

Start:  MattStafford has X goods and Y dollars.  Everyone else has A goods and Y dollars.

MattStafford prints one trillion new dollars, and buys goods from everyone else.

End:  MattStafford has X goods + 1 trillion dollars more worth of goods and Y dollars.  Everyone else has A goods - 1 trillion dollars worth of goods, and Y + 1 trillion dollars.

Are you actually suggesting that the rest of the economy benefited from that transaction?


Is 'X' coconuts or bananas?
 
2013-03-20 01:21:01 PM  

qorkfiend: MattStafford: qorkfiend: MattStafford: qorkfiend: MattStafford: If I printed ten trillion dollars, and bought ten trillion dollars worth of goods and services, would our economy be better off?

What do you think happens to that $10 trillion? It doesn't just vanish.

So are you agreeing that the economy would be better off? What if I printed 20 trillion dollars, and hired every single working age person in America to produce goods for me? Would the economy be better off then?

If every single working age person in America was being regularly paid for work it would be spectacular for the economy.

This is a joke.  What the fark are they going to buy with their money?  I'm employing literally every able bodied person in America to produce goods for me to consume!  They won't have anything to purchase!  What good is the money going to do for them?

So, you imagine that no one would ever leave your employ in order to start a business selling things to your employees, who are flush with cash thanks to being employed?


Dude, you're, like, not conceptualizing....
 
2013-03-20 01:21:08 PM  
It's a simple question: If the U.S. Government lent me all the money in the country, and I went to Vegas and bet it all on black and lost, would that be good for the economy? I don't understand why people aren't taking this simple analogy seriously.

Follow-up question:  If you were a hot dog, and you were starving, would you eat yourself?
 
2013-03-20 01:21:22 PM  
Jesus Christ was an extraterrestrial.
 
2013-03-20 01:21:28 PM  

MattStafford: m00: MattStafford: What the fark are they going to buy with their money?

crap made in China?

Why would people in China accept dollars?  They have nothing to spend it on either!


When are you going to admit you lied when you claimed to have earned a degree in economics?
 
2013-03-20 01:21:33 PM  
Man you all are easy to troll
 
2013-03-20 01:21:47 PM  

Rent Party: One guy spending a trillion dollars does not make an economy, because no one else has any money.

One thousand guys spending a trillion dollars makes an economy because everyone has money to spend.


If I spend a trillion dollars, then everyone I spent that money on now has money to spend!  As long as I'm not hoarding it, that money is circulating throughout the economy.
 
2013-03-20 01:21:48 PM  

MattStafford: People still think borrowing money for Social Security and Medicare is a good idea?  Jesus, how dense are you guys?

Please explain to me how keeping millions of people, who by definition do not produce things or provide services, alive financed via a massive amount of debt is somehow going to make our country stronger?  Who cares if we provide massive amounts of jobs to doctor's providing them services?  Those jobs disappear once we can no longer borrow money to fund the scheme!


No. F*ck you. Die.
 
2013-03-20 01:22:01 PM  

Car_Ramrod: Wow, subs, were you able to finish while writing that headline?

Anyways:

Steuerle said that he was not trying to single out Medicare, but was trying to focus on both Social Security and Medicare. "I think we would probably engage in a better reform if we tried to reform both systems at the same time," he said in an e-mail.

But, if Medicare is the one with the problem, why does the other need reform? And why isn't it noted that the ratio has dropped from 7:1 for a 65 year old in 1960 to 3:1 in 2030? And does he realize you don't actually get that money when they pay for your services? Maybe services are too damned expensive. But that's crazy talk. I'm sure the answer is to cut off the poor people.


Exactly.

"I paid into Medicare $5 for that lousy pill and Medicare was billed $80 for that aspirin.  Damn you Fartschlongo!"
 
2013-03-20 01:22:08 PM  

MattStafford: Rent Party: One guy spending a trillion dollars does not make an economy, because no one else has any money.

One thousand guys spending a trillion dollars makes an economy because everyone has money to spend.

If I spend a trillion dollars, then everyone I spent that money on now has money to spend!  As long as I'm not hoarding it, that money is circulating throughout the economy.


When are you going to admit you lied when you claimed to have earned a degree in economics?
 
2013-03-20 01:22:11 PM  
Look, you guys just aren't understanding: Conceptualize the economy as a frictionless sphere of constant density. On this sphere there are two potatoes, one of whom has all of the coconuts and the other has all of the gravity. Now, if the gravity potato trades all of his gravity to the coconut potato, but the coconut potato only has X-1 coconuts, the gravity potato AND the coconut potato will float away, and the sphere will collapse into a black hole.

DO YOU GET IT NOW, LIIIIBS?
 
2013-03-20 01:22:22 PM  

MattStafford: qorkfiend: MattStafford: qorkfiend: MattStafford: If I printed ten trillion dollars, and bought ten trillion dollars worth of goods and services, would our economy be better off?

What do you think happens to that $10 trillion? It doesn't just vanish.

So are you agreeing that the economy would be better off? What if I printed 20 trillion dollars, and hired every single working age person in America to produce goods for me? Would the economy be better off then?

If every single working age person in America was being regularly paid for work it would be spectacular for the economy.

This is a joke.  What the fark are they going to buy with their money?  I'm employing literally every able bodied person in America to produce goods for me to consume!  They won't have anything to purchase!  What good is the money going to do for them?


Wait a second, so in this example, you are the government (since you're printing money), but everyone else (non-government), is making goods that only you, the government can use. So you're paying these people (with the money you borrowed), though paying them doesn't really mean anything since there's nothing left for them to consume?  And this example is supposed to prove what point?

For a while I really thought you were someone who just had a different view than most posters here, and while I didn't agree, I'd at least read what you have to say. But this thread has shown me you really are purposely misconstruing points just to have people engage in hypothetical debates that have no basis in reality. You're officially going on the Ignore list, and I hope others do the same, so that future posts aren't ruined.
 
2013-03-20 01:22:51 PM  

max_pooper: DarwiOdrade: Fart_Machine: MattStafford: FarkedOver: MattStafford: Imagine the recipients of Medicare and Social Security as one collective entity

But they aren't one collective entity.....

Why would the effect on the economy be different if it was one person spending the money as opposed to one thousand people?  The same amount of money is injected into the economy.

This post is worth 1000 facepalms.

It's as if millions of potatoes cried out and were suddenly silenced.

Billions and billions of potatoes


Carl Sagan approves.
 
2013-03-20 01:23:19 PM  
It's a simple question doctor.
 
2013-03-20 01:24:01 PM  

skullkrusher: meat0918: skullkrusher: Dr. Whoof: cameroncrazy1984: skullkrusher: isn't the point of Medicare to give people more than they pay for?

I thought that was usually how insurance worked, yeah.

The concept of shared risk pooling is too difficult for Cletus to understand, so let's end Medicare.

if the average person is getting $3 back for every $1 put in, that's not very effective risk pooling.

Medicare was never about effective risk pooling for the government, it was about helping people the insurance companies refuse to cover because they are too high risk to cover profitably.

which was my original point.


Ok, nevermind then.

It seems to me the most pragmatic solution is to expand Medicare to everyone.
 
2013-03-20 01:24:22 PM  

jtrockville: MattStafford: People still think borrowing money for Social Security and Medicare is a good idea?  Jesus, how dense are you guys?

Please explain to me how keeping millions of people, who by definition do not produce things or provide services, alive financed via a massive amount of debt is somehow going to make our country stronger?  Who cares if we provide massive amounts of jobs to doctor's providing them services?  Those jobs disappear once we can no longer borrow money to fund the scheme!

You realize that Social Security has a surplus, to the tune of something like $2-3 trillion, right? We borrow nothing (nada, zilch, zip) to fund it.

Proceed with the derp about Medicare.


intragovernmental debt though so while the SSTF might have $2.7T in funds, most of that is in the form of IOUs from the Federal government
 
2013-03-20 01:24:24 PM  

MattStafford: Rent Party: One guy spending a trillion dollars does not make an economy, because no one else has any money.

One thousand guys spending a trillion dollars makes an economy because everyone has money to spend.

If I spend a trillion dollars, then everyone I spent that money on now has money to spend!  As long as I'm not hoarding it, that money is circulating throughout the economy.


Guess what, if you were a plutocrat, you'd be f*cking hoarding it.  Trickle-down is what a yellow lab does on your leg, not what the GOP claims happens in the economy.
 
2013-03-20 01:24:41 PM  

qorkfiend: So, you imagine that no one would ever leave your employ in order to start a business selling things to your employees, who are flush with cash thanks to being employed?


Why would they do that?  There is no benefit to them doing that, as there is nothing for them to buy?

Imagine you were one of the people being employed by me - your two options are continue working for me and consume nothing (there is nothing that I'm not consuming) or work for someone else that I'm employing, and consume nothing (there is nothing that either myself or your new employer isn't consuming).
 
2013-03-20 01:25:29 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: Look, you guys just aren't understanding: Conceptualize the economy as a frictionless sphere of constant density. On this sphere there are two potatoes, one of whom has all of the coconuts and the other has all of the gravity. Now, if the gravity potato trades all of his gravity to the coconut potato, but the coconut potato only has X-1 coconuts, the gravity potato AND the coconut potato will float away, and the sphere will collapse into a black hole.

DO YOU GET IT NOW, LIIIIBS?


Dunno about you but I don't think anyone who espouses anarcho-socialism as a viable economic-political structure should be mocking anyone. Just sayin
 
2013-03-20 01:25:40 PM  

ShawnDoc: The selling and buying of goods does not affect the economy. This is what Matt Stafford actually believes.


If I printed up hundreds of trillions of dollars, and started buying every good I could possibly see, would you think that this is good or bad for the economy?
 
2013-03-20 01:25:44 PM  

MattStafford: qorkfiend: So, you imagine that no one would ever leave your employ in order to start a business selling things to your employees, who are flush with cash thanks to being employed?

Why would they do that?  There is no benefit to them doing that, as there is nothing for them to buy?

Imagine you were one of the people being employed by me - your two options are continue working for me and consume nothing (there is nothing that I'm not consuming) or work for someone else that I'm employing, and consume nothing (there is nothing that either myself or your new employer isn't consuming).


How many potatoes could you consume in one afternoon?
 
2013-03-20 01:25:55 PM  

MattStafford: qorkfiend: So, you imagine that no one would ever leave your employ in order to start a business selling things to your employees, who are flush with cash thanks to being employed?

Why would they do that?  There is no benefit to them doing that, as there is nothing for them to buy?

Imagine you were one of the people being employed by me - your two options are continue working for me and consume nothing (there is nothing that I'm not consuming) or work for someone else that I'm employing, and consume nothing (there is nothing that either myself or your new employer isn't consuming).


When are you going to admit you lied when you claimed to have earned a degree in economics?
 
2013-03-20 01:26:07 PM  

MattStafford: cameroncrazy1984: Because old people buy lots of things and that helps the economy. I don't understand why this has to be explained to you over and over again.

Buying shiat does not help the economy!  Christ, how difficult is that to understand?


Just wanted to point this out.  Buying stuff doesn't help the economy.  Got it.

/please be a troll, don't tell me you believe this
 
m00
2013-03-20 01:26:14 PM  

MattStafford: Why would people in China accept dollars?


Dollars are the world reserve currency... dude, last time I was  inChina, everywhere I went  preferred US dollars to the yuan. So they already do accept dollars, and prefer them over their own currency...

So what makes you think people in China won't accept dollars?
 
2013-03-20 01:26:38 PM  

MattStafford: ShawnDoc: The selling and buying of goods does not affect the economy. This is what Matt Stafford actually believes.

If I printed up hundreds of trillions of dollars, and started buying every good I could possibly see, would you think that this is good or bad for the economy?


When are you going to admit you lied when you claimed to have earned a degree in economics?
 
2013-03-20 01:27:29 PM  
Sounds like someone moved from a GED in law to a GED in economics. Switch the names and the post style match up.
 
Displayed 50 of 754 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report