Atlanta Federal Reserve Bank Predicts 5.4% gdp growth for Q1 2018

Computer Science, about ten grand a year

 

You will do very well when you graduate and will have no trouble paying off the loans. It's a great investment but it's aggravating that the costs are so unexplainably high. Government in action again doing regressive harm. It's a pattern.

 

Earth to @AFM: business and personal tax cuts aren't supply-side economics.

 

They bought them.

 

People better than me have been stuck in poverty going down the same path.

 

Not in computer science. The automation going on in the world today will provide many jobs in the automation service sector.

 

Corporate and capital gains taxes are. Personal income tax rate reductions are a Keynesian stimulus but fit into the supply side objective of giving consumers more of their earned income to make decisions with. It all makes sense if you think it through.

 

White collar jobs are going to be automated away even faster than the blue collar ones. Blue collar work involves wear and tear and therefore machines that do it require expensive parts and regular repairs. White collar work deals with processing information, which is what computers are natively best at.

 

Some one has to program them.

 

What did Bernanke say in his speech about the Great Depression you claim is so obviously wrong you feel constrained to call him a "macroeconomic ignoramus?"

Your opinion is noted. The 1920-21 Depression happened more than a year after WW1 ended and was a result of the Fed tightening monetary policy in a misguided effort to fight inflation.

Depressions have different precipitating events and don't require the same response. There are, too, political complications impacting the range of possible actions.

The Fed tightened the money supply. The economy grew 10% per year during Roosevelt's first term, but the economy had contracted so much under Hoover that output didn't fully recover until WW2.

 

Your comments bring back memories of students I had as a high school and adult (mostly young) educator. There was an element of no nonsense but still fun loving types who weren't hooked on acquiring junk. Many were in control of their lives even as high school students.

About the only thing I ever stumped them on was asking them to observe their fellow students screwing up, directionless and unmotivated, and ask them to explain their contemporaries. They'd get a funny, puzzled look and pretty much say, "Beats me!"

They have to buy stuff. Can't live without it? Why? Beats me.

 

Artificial intelligence on quantum computers will bring changes difficult to imagine.

 

Well, to start with...his statement that the Great Recession was worse than the Great Depression. What a maroon. And in his speech - his ridiculous over-emphasis on the Fed at that time.
But whatever...the guy is a macroeconomic moron. His pathetic handling of the 'Great Recession' and the virtual stagnation it has left the economy in is proof positive. Though not to you, I am sure.
Anyway, enough about that loser - Helicopter Ben.

So what? He dumped over $20+ billion in debt onto the economy (between 1933-'39)...no wonder it grew...technically.

But by 1939, despite SEVEN years of FDR's pathetic 'New Deal' and drunken-sailor spending, the unemployment rate was still FIVE TIMES higher then before the crash. And the DOW - during FDR"s ENTIRE time in office - never got back anywhere near to it's pre-crash levels.
And he more then doubled the national debt by 1939 alone.

https://www.shmoop.com/great-depression/statistics.html

http://www.polidiotic.com/by-the-numbers/us-national-debt-by-year/

Yet, the 1920/21 Depression - which had the largest deflation rate ever recorded by the American economy (I believe) - was ended in 3 1/2 years...with lower taxes and a national debt surplus.

We already know how incredibly fast the 1920/21 Depression was ended and with lower taxes and the government letting the economy fix itself. Please prove - using ONLY unbiased facts/data (not theories - which mean almost nothing to me) - that this would not have been just as effective in 1930?

 

No, they aren't. They don't improve output per input. God, you're gullible.

 

Ummm...yes they are.

'supply side economics

Theory that income taxes reduce incentives for work, savings, and investment, and that accelerated economic growth without inflation can be achieved by increasing the supply of goods and services. Supply side economics advocates large scale tax cuts for individuals and corporation, deregulation of businesses, and strong incentives for investment.

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/supply-side-economics.html'

 

The reduce prices and facilitate the movement of capital. That is classic supply side. Where do you get your information on what supply side is - Paul Krugman ??

 

He said it was potentially worse and he was right.

Uh huh. It's no surprise you can't present a coherent position.

Figures.

Noted.

Technically?

The DOW was wildly overvalued in 1929.

The downturns required a different response.

The thing we learned is that depressions don't necessarily self-correct.

 

BS put out by "free lunch" tax-cutting types to reel in people like you.

 

So, you cannot provide ANY unbiased evidence whatsoever that had Hoover/FDR just let the economy fix itself in 1930 (like Wilson/Harding had done in 1920/21) that the Great Depression would not have ended FAR quicker...or gotten as bad as it did.

So noted.

(BTW - similar goes for the 2008 recession - all the stimulus has done is stagnate the economy)

Anyway, unless you have some unbiased, factual data/stats to provide, we are done here for now.

Good day.

 

Man, that IS the definition. How many links to respected sites do I have to post before you admit that Supply-side economics DOES include business and personal tax cuts?

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/supply-sidetheory.asp

https://www.nasdaq.com/investing/glossary/s/supply-side-economics

https://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/supply-side+economics

Jeez man...I have no idea where you are getting your information from. But supply side economics includes personal and corporate tax cuts.

That is absolutely common knowledge amongst investors.


But hey, if you want to call a spade a banana - go ahead.


Good day.

 

Uh huh. A more formal claim around the effectiveness of monetary policy is the liquidity trap and subsequent views of economists on the preference for money versus other non-liquid forms of money. A less formal explanation is the destruction of parts of the economy (businesses, banks, etc.) in some downturns requires government involvement in rebuilding productive assets.

There's one more element to what Roosevelt did that might excuse some of his questionable solutions to the depression--the unemployment that threatened the capitalist system. The CCC was the worst sort of make work, but it provided hope and bought time.

The above is more than your snarky, uninformed comment probably deserves.

 

It does now outside of economic thought, and it's even bleeding into economics which is a profession influenced by money and politics. Cutting personsal taxes has nothing to do with increasing output per unit of input. It has everything to do with someone making more money. Cutting business taxes is about where or if something is produced, not efficiency.

Real supply-side economics is about cutting red tape, poor regulations, improving worker skills, better infrastructure, and so on.

Yeah, well--"good day" to you, too, but that doesn't make you right or that most investors know much about economics.

 

So smug for someone who knows so little, perfect for the Trump Era where everyone has an opinion and figures their uniformed views carry weight.

 

The minimum wage where I live is $10USD adjusted for PPP. I am not on it anyway. I was for a bit then got a better job.

Tech support sucks. I have never worked in it but know plenty who do. Good luck finding a better job.