I want inflation. I want debt. I want spending. It's the only way to get us booming!

This middle class person isnt going to spend us into prosperity, that's for sure.

 

Ummm... wow. Where do I start?

Dude, you must be in about the 5th grade. Why don't you wait till you get out of HS and get a little college under your belt before you start bloviating on stuff you have no clue about.

 

And... the government isn't going to tax us into prosperity either.

 

Read my thread on Government spending and inflation and that will explain it more thoroughly. If you can provide evidence to the contrary, then I will gladly debate you.

 

Link?

And this thread better contain links to unbiased sources of statistics/facts to back up your claim - or I am not going to bother.

I could care less what someone's theory says; if it is not backed up with at least some facts...it's just hot air.


As for my evidence that it is almost impossible for 'easy money' to cause deflation?

1) Common sense. The more you make of something - the less valuable it generally becomes.

2) America today - between artificially low interest rates, record government deficits, huge personal debt and massive 'money printing'; America is definitely awash in 'cheap money'. Trillions and trillions of dollars of it. And inflation is going up...not down.

US Inflation Rate Continues at 3.6%, Consumer Prices Jump 0.5% in July 2011

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com...-2011/1000904/

3) History. Weimar Germany, Zimbabwe, Argentina, etc..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation#Examples_of_hyperinflation

 

CA is talking about high-speed rail from SF to LA and it will take 2 hours 40 minutes for the trip. 800 miles of track and 24 stations which means there is a station every 33.3 miles, yet they claim speeds up to 220mph?? I don't even understand how it can be called high-speed rail if it has a station stop every 33 miles?? I have not yet seen the ticket prices but I'm guessing they will be high enough to shock people. I don't know the exact data but we can guess there are currently air flights from SF to LA every 30-60 minutes, which take 2 hours, and are relatively cheap. If you look at this website, http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/Proposed_Route_Planner.aspx you will see a route plan that has zigs and zags instead of straighter routes one would imagine are needed to achieve 220mph. Other than the novelty of riding a train, why would anyone choose to use this high-speed train?

Maybe I'm naive but I can't think of a single reason why this is a reasonable project?? I also believe I have read that no train service in the USA is profitable...meaning all of it is subsidized...

 

Infrastructure may be the most beneficial place to spend money, where government controls it and generally neglects it otherwise. I'm not sure what you mean by "technology." That's a rather broad term that could encompass many things and I'm not sure what government can do, other than interfere, that would be more beneficial than what private entrepreneurs are already doing. Alternate fuel sources offer no immediate value, nor does educaiton. If the goal is to get out of the recession, then wealth must be produced. If just spending money leads to prosperity, then I ask again, what does it matter if there are jobs to go along with the spending?

 

So then you aren't arguing that building bridges for the sake of putting people to work building will fix the recession?

 

A stimulus will not fix a recession!

A stimulus ONLY buys some time for the root economy to fix itself.

If a stimulus creates jobs, producing something we need, this is more productive than just handing out money. But both have the same outcome of stimulating the economy.

Using stimulus to build a bridge to nowhere, for example, is the idiocy which got us into this mess in the first place...stupid and out of control spending!

In principle I like the idea of an economic stimulus. In reality, with our inefficient spending and self-serving greedy behavior, and politics rules the day mentality, I like them much less...

 

C'mon, Amtrak has a great record for reliability and safety. What could possibly go wrong with a government sponsored high speed rail? After all the US government has a huge success rate in every endeavor they partake.

 

And the simple reason why we do most of these types of projects is rooted in greed. People just don't want to say no to money! 98% of Americans don't give a rip about where the money comes from as long as it doesn't come from them...so spend spend spend!

If the government declared they wanted high-speed train service between SF and LA, and requested bids from the private sector, and the government agreed to provide 50% of the initial cost in low-interest government loans, BUT, the government would not subsidize the long-term operation of the train service, IMO not a single private enterprise would legitimately bid on the job. This means it is not a viable business venture. So there's no one left to do this crap except government and they just keep on spending no matter the rationale and efficiency of the spending.

I live a stinking 3.5 miles from my little town and the only way I can get there safely is to drive a personal car. I can't ride a bicycle because there are no shoulders or sidewalks or bike lanes, and there is no public transit. There are thousands of examples around the country like this yet instead of providing public transit for the masses, we prioritize building $40-$50 billion high speed trains which will only benefit a few.

I say this over and over; can we name anything that government has done in the past decade or more that has positively effected a majority of Americans?

 

That's because the best government corporate money can buy doesn't work for the majority of Americans. Hasn't for many decades now. I keep telling you that and you keep saying huh-uh, and then contradicting yourself (like above for example). (???)

 

On election day, how many votes does 'corporate America' have??

 

Isn't that cute, you still believe individual's vote's count for something.

If they have the top democrat and republican candidates in their hip pocket (as they always seem to do), they "have" all of them that matter. The deck is always stacked in their favor.

 

How many votes does a corporation have?

The cute answer is ZERO!

It's fine if you hate corporations but just say that and stop making up stuff just to complain...

 

Corporations are considered Individuals now with Infinite money to donate... Buying out the entire Media for the people you want elected isn't too hard when you have the Millions to do so.

 

Old man;

See you just don't get it, at all (or you are part of the problem and simply do not want to admit it since it is in your favor to allow it). I don't hate corporate entities, I'm not jealous of rich people, I am extremely concerned about their ability to use their power and money to manipulate the system to their advantage. It's criminal. If you actually cared you would be angry too. The corporate entities that play by the rules (the mega ones never do) will be left in the dust eventually because the rules are stacked against them on purpose, just like the mom and pops and main street America was destroyed they too will meet their demise, by the efforts of criminal corporate entities and the best government corporate money can buy.
　
　
They don't care who you vote for just as long as the system is rigged and their guys (democrats and republicans) remain in charge.
　

 

No one can donate infinite money!!!!

http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/contriblimits.shtml

If they're ALL buying out something as you propose, then ALL of them are on an even playing field.

And...if People believe their media outlets are honest when it comes to politics, then shame on the People for being so stupid...

 

Way too much conspiracy for me! Have a little faith in the system?? In my area last election PG&E spent something like $30 million promoting some platform that voters would decide...and PG&E lost!

Can you identify a single election that was 'bought' by someone?

 

Old man;

　
　
Name something in politics that isn't conspiratorial.
　
　

　
　
Having faith in a system that is corrupt and broken is like driving nails blindfolded, and believing you won't hit your thumb.
　
　

　
　
How do you know that wasn't the plan/goal all along? It's politics. Reverse psychology, and reverse/reverse psychology is simply part of their game. It's much better if you get the people to do something thinking it is their idea to begin with. It's done all the time, and it has been documented since the early days of ancient Greece possibly even longer. It can very easily be played either way too. Too much information to confuse the issue or not enough so the people's vote leans to an uninformed solution or blatant misinformation that plays off of peoples emotions and/or discriminating personalities, it's politics and the idea is to sway people into doing or believing things they wouldn't normally think or believe on their own.
　
　
In any case it benefits someone to do this, Usually the individuals with enough power or influence to see it through, but not necessarily the people.
　
　

　
　
Seriously?? It would probably be easier to point out elections that were not financed/purchased by someone other than the people who are actually eligible to vote in that particular election.
　
　
　
Money comes from everywhere, it shouldn't but it does, and it is funneled legally, even though unethically, and literally from the national offices of each of the dominating political parties. It's their system they created, control, and determine the oversight to assure they will never be held criminally liable/responsible for cheating the system to their advantage. Voter fraud/bribery isn't a single isolated incident, it is a national pastime in our election process thanks to a two party system run amuck. Then once they are elected the lobbyist move in. How many billions of dollars are spent annually to sway political dominance to benefit corporate entities and/or entire industries interests for that matter? We may never know for sure but to claim it doesn't exist???
　
　
Surely you can not be that gullible? Really??

 

The election laws and campaign laws are identical for everyone! No matter how much money is thrown around, it is equitable for all parties.

There is nothing wrong with lobbyists! All people and business and special interest groups are entitled to access their government. I wonder if you believe the special interest group who lobbies Washington to create harsher laws for adults who rape underage children...is something evil? Don't you think AARP has a right to lobby? How about educators? There is nothing wrong with lobbyists!!

 

Riiight! Equal but different. And who is it that counts the votes, determines who can or cannot participate in debates, get on election ballots as anything other than a possible write in, etc... etc...? Oh that's right the two dominating parties determine all that. Give me a break the system is equal nonsense.
　
　

　
　
I heard you the first time. No, lobbyists are not all created equal. Some have much better access to the people's elected officials than the people have themselves.
　
　
Lobbyists, doesn't matter what the cause, whether it is a concerned community trying to get a federal law passed to make sure school buses stop at railroad tracks, or high paid lawyers and lobbyists trying to allow specific corporate entities to get preferential tax/regulation exemptions they should not get, preferential treatment in general, or be allowed to meet behind closed doors with "ANY" public official with suitcases stuffed with money, access codes to off shore bank accounts, lucrative job offers, or special trips/dinners/golf tournaments or any other bribes disguised as gifts.
　
　
This country is going to hell in a hand basket and reform is necessary. This sort of thing is exactly the cause of most of the corruption that goes on, and it has only gotten worse in the last two administrations, so it is an ongoing orchestrated effort by both dominating parties and is not isolated. Money needs to be removed from the equation as much as possible. Anything that can be done to eliminate it, or make it harder for politicians to sell out to the highest bidder, the better IMHO.