Comments on: The Patterico Plan for the Economy

By: AD

AD — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 02:57:41 +0000

There is plenty of money (capital), there just seems to be no incentive, or desire, to trade in it.
The Fed is attempting to push money into the system to make up for the decline in velocity, but they have a tiger by the tail, and no one knows when, or how, to let go.
As in 1933 following the “Bank Holiday”, capital is “taking a holiday”.
I would just hope that the prompt to end that holiday is not as attention grabbing as what occurred in 1939.

By: MattJ

MattJ — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 02:47:01 +0000

Doing nothing is not an option. “Doing as little as possible” is a much better idea; the only problem is figuring out how much is possible in the first place, and refraining from doing what makes no difference.

But really now: anyone who has lived through a basic Econ course covering even just a little macroeconomics should know that the government has to act to restore the money supply. That has been basic macroeconomics since Keynes’s brilliant book, “The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money”.

By: John Hitchcock

John Hitchcock — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 03:52:20 +0000

Just today, I was talking to a convenience store/gas station cashier concerning political matters, as I am wont to do. I stated that most people falsely think Democrats are liberal and Republicans are conservative when it is much more accurate to say Democrats are liberal and Republicans are moderate, and there is no conservative party of any real viability.

He waved that past (metaphor) and said he isn’t D or R but his view was: If a R sees someone in need, he opens his wallet. If a D sees someone in need, he opens somebody else’s wallet.

By: carlitos

carlitos — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 03:28:22 +0000

Oiram? Oiram?

By: AD

AD — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 17:45:50 +0000

The only money that mariO thinks about is the obscene pile that attaches to Rush.

By: daleyrocks

daleyrocks — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 17:21:12 +0000

SPQR – Precisely. I wanted to hear if it was only OPM solutions Oiram was proposing or if he has thought it through in terms of his own money.

By: carlitos

carlitos — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 17:07:53 +0000

I personally think it’s obtuse to compare Ireland’s economic needs to the U.S.’s.

I wasn’t comparing their needs, Oiram. I was merely observing that they lowered corporate tax rates, and (surprise) their economy grew. But never mind – Western Europe is nothing like the USA. We have a unique economy that has nothing to do with the rest of the world. The laws of scarcity, taxation, supply and Demand are just theories in a classroom which don’t apply in more than one place.

Anyway, you ignored my last question – after you suggested that we somehow “tax” companies the relocate outside the US but still have US customers (the only way to do this would be to slap a duty or tariff on their imports), I asked you:

When in our (American) history has protectionism (tariffs) created jobs and lowered prices?

By: SPQR

SPQR — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 17:07:19 +0000

Oiram’s statements make a lot of sense … if you accept Oiram’s belief that other peoples’ money must be taken from them and used for the purposes that Oiram approves of.

By: daleyrocks

daleyrocks — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:50:47 +0000

Oiram?

By: daleyrocks

daleyrocks — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:13:29 +0000

Oiram – Do you own shares of stock in any individual corporation? I’l not talking about mutual funds, I’m talking about individual stocks. If you do, when you look at their financial statements do you ever find yourself saying, I think the company ought to expand its workforce by 30% because Americans need work. I don’t really care that the company doesn’t need the workers and it’s like featherbedding, America needs this. I also don’t care that it will hurt the company’s earnings and earnings per share and probably trash the company’s stock price, it’s the right thing to do for America.

If you do think like that, I’ll wager you think differently than the large majority of the company’s shareholders.