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.

(American Thinker)   Income inequality wasn't a problem until Obama took office   (americanthinker.com) divider line 217
    More: Unlikely, Obama, income inequality, devaluation, Investment Company Institute, price bubble, seasonal adjustments, investment return, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics  
•       •       •

1885 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Jan 2014 at 1:34 PM (48 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-14 09:55:14 PM  

coeyagi: super_grass: Obama's been in office for six years now. I think it's okay to talk about new things in this span of time.

This is his sixth year in office.  He hasn't been in office for six years.

See the difference?  (Please, please, tell me you do)


Actually, f*ck that noise.  He still has 6 more days in office for his 5th year.
 
2014-01-14 10:18:28 PM  
media3.giphy.com
 
2014-01-14 11:03:44 PM  
media2.giphy.com
 
2014-01-15 12:00:24 AM  

DrPainMD: There is nothing scientific about 99% of economics, and 100% of Keynesianism.

Interesting premise - both of those appear completely incorrect.  Can you back up your assertions?

In fact, Vernon L. Smith won the Nobel prize in economics in 2002 This is true.

for having the genius to apply the scientific method to economics Wrong.  Smith got the Nobel for work in applying the experimental method to econ.  Not at all the same thing.

, which hadn't been done before. Wrong.  Any number of economists before the 1970s used a variety of test methods, data analysis, and comparative methodologies for a variety of economic subjects and studies.

His work led him to abandon the Keynesian school This implies that he ever supported the Keynesian school, which doesn't appear evident.  Do you have anything besides your bare assertion?  To both parts, support and abandonment, plz.

, as it does not hold up under scientific scrutiny. Wrong.  It does so far, during the history of the past 100 years.  Please see Recession of 1937 for what happens when you have a Keynesian stimulus vs when it gets removed, Reagan's increase in defense spending, and the success of the recent ARRA (2009 Obama stimulus program) vs when it ended.  Here, I'll help illustrate that last one:
farm7.static.flickr.com
Extra fun:  Your pal Vernon L. Smith was against the ARRA - said it wouldn't work.  Let's apply the scientific method and review the results to see if Smith or Keynes/Obama was right, shall we?

You'll never guess what school of economic thought does hold up?I'll let you google it... wouldn't want to spoil the surprise. You're the one making the assertion, you google it and show us all how right you are.

It ain't the Austrian School for sure though, if that's what you're trying to claim.  The Freshwater guys can't even get past their office doorways to find a real-world case where Austrian Econ is correct.
 
2014-01-15 12:04:38 AM  
timenewsfeed.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-01-15 12:05:32 AM  
Sorry Jackson - just felt a larger image was required.
 
2014-01-15 12:17:41 AM  

El Pachuco: DrPainMD: There is nothing scientific about 99% of economics, and 100% of Keynesianism. Interesting premise - both of those appear completely incorrect.  Can you back up your assertions?

In fact, Vernon L. Smith won the Nobel prize in economics in 2002 This is true.

for having the genius to apply the scientific method to economics Wrong.  Smith got the Nobel for work in applying the experimental method to econ.  Not at all the same thing.

, which hadn't been done before. Wrong.  Any number of economists before the 1970s used a variety of test methods, data analysis, and comparative methodologies for a variety of economic subjects and studies.

His work led him to abandon the Keynesian school This implies that he ever supported the Keynesian school, which doesn't appear evident.  Do you have anything besides your bare assertion?  To both parts, support and abandonment, plz.

, as it does not hold up under scientific scrutiny. Wrong.  It does so far, during the history of the past 100 years.  Please see Recession of 1937 for what happens when you have a Keynesian stimulus vs when it gets removed, Reagan's increase in defense spending, and the success of the recent ARRA (2009 Obama stimulus program) vs when it ended.  Here, I'll help illustrate that last one:
[farm7.static.flickr.com image 500x359]
Extra fun:  Your pal Vernon L. Smith was against the ARRA - said it wouldn't work.  Let's apply the scientific method and review the results to see if Smith or Keynes/Obama was right, shall we?


Obama isn't a Keynesian. So let me stop you right there before you say anything else.
 
2014-01-15 12:24:07 AM  
Since there are too many replies to my post for me to answer each one individually, allow this to answer all of you:

farm4.staticflickr.com
 
2014-01-15 12:28:12 AM  

DrPainMD: Since there are too many replies to my post for me to answer each one individually, allow this to answer all of you:

[farm4.staticflickr.com image 640x360]


If you can't back up your statement, why not make yourself look like a total douche in the process?

Mission: Achieved.
 
2014-01-15 12:30:21 AM  
Austrian economics has been proven to work in the past. Just look at...
 
2014-01-15 12:34:20 AM  

zarberg: Do you think those who write this crap actually believe it?

If they did actually believe it, does that make them more or less dangerous?


1. Yes
2. More
 
2014-01-15 03:06:13 AM  

justinguarini4ever: Obama isn't a Keynesian. So let me stop you right there before you say anything else.


Obama definitely tried to be a Keynesian.  The Republicans made it clear they would let the nation burn to the ground before they'd let him take credit for the recovery.  Obama decided to take a minor victory instead of a Pyhrric one. Your statement is invalid.
 
2014-01-15 09:06:51 AM  

DROxINxTHExWIND: Ghastly: The uppitiness of neegros has increased exponentially with the duration of Obama's term as President. Study it out. Study it out.


I know I've been uppity as shiat since the inaugeration. Stared down a cop at a traffic light. Told an old white man to go fark himself in a Georgia Walmart parking lot for not yeilding to walkers. Drove around Montgomery County, MD without a seatbelt on.

/I been going HAM


SIR! I must ask that you restrain yourself before you give the women folk the vapours.
 
2014-01-15 10:54:00 AM  

justinguarini4ever: Obama isn't a Keynesian. So let me stop you right there before you say anything else.


What - KINO?
 
2014-01-15 10:57:25 AM  

Mrtraveler01: Austrian economics has been proven to work in the past. Just look at...


Austrian economics is closer to the answer than Keynesian, but it has some fundamentally bad ideas. I'll stick to classical economics while the math supports it.
 
2014-01-15 11:54:28 AM  
Its great to see how everyone here argues against subby's straw man and not against what TFA actually said.
 
2014-01-15 10:25:09 PM  

coeyagi: Fun with DerpLibs!

_________ didn't exist until _______ came around.

1. Slavery didn't exist until Lincoln came around.
2. Strippers didn't exist until Howard Stern came around.
3. Big Macs didn't exist until Bill Clinton came around.
4. Cum stains didn't exist until Bill Clinton came around.
5. The internet didn't exist until Al Gore came around.


Damn, I did all this work and then I see the above post, which is very similar in sentiment if not content.

Oh, well. Here it is any way:

The Civil War wasn't a problem until Lincoln took office.

World War II wasn't a problem until FDR took office.

The Atomic Bomb and the USSR wasn't a problem until Truman took office.

Television wasn't a problem until Eisenhower took office.

Vietnam wasn't a problem until LBJ took office after JFK mysteriously disappeared shortly after having talked about withdrawal of some American troops.

Dick Cheney wasn't a problem until Bush asked him to find a Vice-President.

And nothing was a problem until Obama got his hands on that damn Lincoln time machine.

No problems here, chum . . . p!

No sense of history, either.

Notice how closely connected problems are to solutions.

Christians say that God never gives us a problem too big for us to solve. Atheists and secularists say that man only embraces the problems that he is ready to solve. Personally, I find that Man is curiously busy creating problems unawares until the problems become unavoidable and then and only then, does Man attempt to solve them, so yes the problems exist first and solutions come after they are acknowledged as such.

One can not deny that unequality has always been with us, like poverty, and that it has been growing since the conservatives regrouped under Nixon in the late 1960s, but despite being around for 50 years, it has only now been labelled a problem--sort of like Obama. Yes, very like Obama. Not a problem in August, 1961. Although that is when the alleged conspiracy to conceal his birthplace must have started, if not earlier.

Sort of like Jesus--no sooner was he born and a vast left-wing conspiracy covered up his Nativity in Bethlehem so King Herod wouldn't find out where he was and settle his hash in the cradle, so to speak. Even so, there was a Massacre of Innocents which Nietzsche said weighed so heavily on young Jesus' mind that he punished himself for it all his life and by his ignominious death.
 
Displayed 17 of 217 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report