US government debt isn't all that bad.

[Ant]

http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/09/how-indebted-is-us-government.html



As a percentage of GDP.  US debt isn't that far off its historical average. 

[Don Rizzle]

weren't u ranting about how bush was ruining the economy with all this debt not so long ago?

[Ant]

Yeah... but this was an intereting slide.  Altho, there are two sides to the story...

NOT SUCH A PRETTY PICTURE
by Jason Furman

My friend Greg Mankiw says we shouldn't be worried about the current fiscal situation, just the looming fiscal challenge. I'm not quite sure what to make of the statement, back in the Clinton administration our argument for running large surpluses and reducing the debt was precisely to prepare for the looming fiscal challenges.

http://maxspeak.org/mt/archives/002567.html

I have to say... on second thought, this analysis seems more reasonable to me. 

[virtuoso]

There is so much bullshit, spin and disinfo, that is why it is best if the source is non partisan, clearly those who are pro democratic or repub;ocan are likely to put an improved glossed over slant on things if they are defending that party and vice versa when the other party is called into question.

[Real American]

I like the new, more conservative Ant of late.

[Ant]

There is so much bullshit, spin and disinfo, that is why it is best if the source is non partisan, clearly those who are pro democratic or repub;ocan are likely to put an improved glossed over slant on things if they are defending that party and vice versa when the other party is called into question.

There are few, if any, non-partisan sources of information.  Granted, there are plenty of organizations that add the word "non-partisan" to their website's about us page.  But most everyone leans one way or the other.

So, its best to listen to people who base their arguments on a genuine concern for the well-being of the public, and argue with logic - not emotional rhetoric.

[virtuoso]

Everyone argues in emotional rhetoric of some form or another, by the way I messaged you my response to some of the issues you have been mentioning. Hopefully you received them, wasn't sure if you had got the first one, besides which it was riddled with typos so I resent it

[Ant]

That's a poor excuse.  You should actively try to eliminate emotions from arguement.  That's complete bullshit to suggest such a thing is acceptable... and it goes a long way to explaining why your ideas are often off the mark.

I read your PM, and I disagree with most of it.  But, I've said all I care to say.  I prefer to talk in the forum than in PM.  But again, I'd still recommend you watch this...

[virtuoso]

What is it with you disagree with within the content of the message? Most genuine disagreement have an element of emotional rhetoric to them it is not bullshit at all. I have just re read the message I sent you I am struggling to see what is so far off the mark, indeed I acknowledged some of the things you have said.

[Ant]

What is it with you disagree with within the content of the message? Most genuine disagreement have an element of emotional rhetoric to them it is not bullshit at all. I have just re read the message I sent you I am struggling to see what is so far off the mark, indeed I acknowledged some of the things you have said.

On second read, you were fine until you got to discussing minimum wages

Now as far as the minimum wage is concerned it is a very difficult subject to discuss and perhaps in my previous replies to it I have been answering emotionally. Albeit it is a very emotive topic and I do see both sides of it, you say you are a conservative and I am not sure what the genuine conservative stance is on this, but what I do know is this I do not believe in the abolition of the minimum wage and it's very simple why.

Perhaps I'm conservative... I'm not sure.  I like to think I'm a realist.  Either way, the economic stance says that  minimum wages reduce economic efficiency.

When manufacturing was a key element of the economy both here in England and the U.S, the minimum wage was not as big an issue because lets face it mosr jobs were very well paid due to the skilled nature of the work. Unfortunately millions of manufacturing jobs have now been lost to the far east and have been replaced by service sector jobs. Which are on average poorly paid and quite often the type of work involved is low skilled or non skilled.

This is a massive oversimplification of changes that have occurred during the past decade.  Furthermore, its a simplification of history that was written to support your existing view - that being,  minimum wages are good.

The problem that presents is that there is mass supply of potential labour because it is very easy for someone to do the type of work involved i mentioned to you about supermarkets before, so I guess that is a good example to continue with. It concerns me greatly that without a minimum wage that for these positions business would literally slash their current pay beyond all recognition. There is the other side of the coin of course which says that if the minimum wage is driven to high that small business will be driven out and that big business will have ever greater market power because of the diminishing amount of alternatives for customers.

Without minimum wage businesses would generally pay people what they are worth.  You want to believe this is intrinsically unfair.  But it's reality.  I think its true to say, you can't help someone who doesn't want to help themselves.  But, liberals want to believe otherwise.  They have two illusions 1) everyone that is poor is good, but just fucked over by society 2) everyone that is poor can be helped.   

That does seem a reasonable argument on paper but then such a viewpoint then goes on to back that up by saying business ends up moving it's operations to a less developed country. My problem with that it is the bigger businesses who do that and i fear since globalisation has basically had its day i.e. there are no new world markets to penetrate that this trend will continue anyway. Europe and America are actually shedding mass I.T job losses each year to again India China etc. That is why it is such a difficult subject

You're right its a complicated subject, and your explanation of it is based on pure personal speculation.  The paragraph above is a based on personal opinion - rather than extensive knowledge with the topic at hand.  I'd suggest rather than continually trying to comment on things you don't understand - you give up for the time being, and either continue commenting on things you do know well - or if these issues really interest you.  Then try to learn more.

I am really not sure what the solution is,

Nor am I, but I am sure that neither of us has the background necessary to craft one. 

I know that increasing the minimum wage beyond all recognition would only exasperate things. These are 2 of my suggestions and they are only that 1) big business those making mass profits are treated different to small companies with regards to minimum wage 2) there is a sort of protectionism introduce a carrot and stick offer greater incentives to set up in America but make it much harder for a business to pull their operations. The truth is these days of global dominance it is so hard to strike a balance I understand that.

Wrong, and wrong.  Why do you need to punish people for being successful.  Google is one of the most profitable companies in the world right now, but would you argue they should be punished for their success?  If you care about things like "freedom" and "liberty" than what we need is a level playing field.  Not different rules for different people.

And this is another fault of socialism and liberalism.  The idea that "people" are capable of choosing who to punish and who to promote.  I said in another post... liberalism assumes the existence of philosopher kings, who in reality don't exist. 

Liberals always say government could solve our problems "if only we could have good, intelligent people in charge"  In other words, if only the government was ran by philosopher kings, we'd all be ok.  But this won't ever happen. 

So, you need to learn to live with that constraint.  Which means, you need to stop suggesting policies that depend on an omnipotent government to differentiate between good and bad when crafting policy.

[virtuoso]

You are right of course, some of this is just personal opinion, however I am surprised you would simply look to dismiss it as personal opinion when I talk about globalisation reaching a saturation point and the massive shedding of I.T jobs to India and China. That is not opinion my friend that is fact, the figures are well documented and reported they do not make for good reading. As you are well read with economics then it also surprises me that you would challenge the notion that globalisation has reached a saturation point. I would be the first to admit that I do not know the issue as well as I might and I do intend to do more reading on the matter by the way I am not sure if you saw me post the link on here already but this is an interesting video to watchhttp://www.infowars.com/articles/economy/video_veith_interview_fiat_money_system.htm
it's not related to this point but as someone who obviously takes a strong interest in economics I would recommend you watch it.
By the way what is the traditional conservative stance on the minimum wage?

[Ant]

This is on of your bigger problems.  You don't review the background of your sources.  You got upset that I called you far left, but you often post from far-left propoganda sites.  To which you'd perhaps reply..." but the MSM has its own agenda, and sometimes you need to go to these places for the "truth."  "

But, I'd suggest you do not.

There are plenty of people in the academic world that are genuinely concerned with the well-being of society. 

So, this guy has "Dr." in front of his name.  I find that obnoxious.  Most any academic can add "Dr." in front of their name.  They all have Ph. D's, but for some odd reason, its usually the biggest pricks that insist on proclaiming "HEY ALL YOU! LISTEN TO ME, I'M A DOCTOR." So this guy says specifically in this interview "I have two doctorate degrees."  Who gives two shits.  Why did he need to brag about that? This guy annoys the piss out of me.  He is a nobody, pretending to be a somebody.  If the guy's theories had credibility they would be appreciated by the rest of academia. 

Case, in point, this guy is not linked in to the web at all.  I did a quick seach from him.  He's practically non-existent.  Nothing in wikipedia on him.  Nothing in google.  Just this random propoganda site.  Who is the interview?  Another nobody.  WTF dude... this shit makes my blood pressure rise.  Please don't encourage me to sit through crap like this again.  I'm annoyed that I even have to write a post explaining this much.

[virtuoso]

Wait at what point in time did I say this was the definitive discussion on the issue of the federal reserve? the answer is I never I simply put up the link because I thought it was interesting., so why you are making a song and dance about it god only knows. I simply put up the link it is entirely up to you whether you disagree with it, it's funny that you call this man obnoxious when your reply is completely obnoxious. You are calling into question why this man would say he holds a phd, well the reason is simply when someone holds a view which is outside the "mainstream" they make the point so people know that right or wrong they at least understand the field from which they are talking about. By the way that you would dismiss that site as random propoganda is ridiculous just look at all the well respected guests that have come on the show, there are literally dozens which I can name just from memory, so to label it some random propoganda site just highlights massive ignorance.

[Ant]

I made an obnoxious reply, but its obvious you're so deeply entrenched in your pt. of view, that even the most polite of replies would be a time-waster.  There is nothing I can say, that would change your opinion - this much is obvious.  So why bother anymore?

Maybe down the road, you will waken up.  But for now, this is just pure ridiculousness.  Go learn from some real economists.  Not these idiotic wanna-bes.

I can't stand these people.  I see them all the time.  Big deal, you have a Ph. D.  That doesn't mean shit.  Do you know how many people have a Ph. D.  These pricks wanna use it as a badge to give them legitimacy.  But thats not how legitimacy works in academics.  Legitimacy exists in academica via peer-review.  This guy is a nobody for a good reason.

The fact that you'd even suggest I waste my time listening to nobodies is obnoxious.  You don't get anywhere doing such a thing.

I made a conscious decision long ago, to focus my effort learning from the best in every field I was interested in.  That decision has served me well for simple reasons.  The best minds know what they are talking about, random no-bodies dont.  Every field has wanna-be experts.  But in every field there are the "10 best" minds.  Or maybe 5, or maybe 20.  But either way, those are the people I turn to.

I'd suggest you do the same.

[virtuoso]

You are again incorrect in your assumptions the truth of the matter is and I shall repeat it again I never suggested it was the definitive answer, indeed its not a field in which I have given too much thought to. I read and watch sources from many sources I find it interesting and helps to give me some kind of insight. I am simply saying the man's point of view is interesting, you know full well that if he hadnt of mentioned he holds a phd you would have jumped all over that and questioned if he was legitimately qualified to speak on those matters. I woke up about 4 years ago, you are the person who ignorantly dismisses the suggestion that the elections were fixed now you either havent read into it very deeply or you just don't want to know. Either way its up to you, I am not going to get into a back and forth as this is not particularly important in the grand scheme of things.