On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:02:05 -0400, wrote:


spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

really?

uh...why did the depression end in 39?

did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2

canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance
of history

It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again.

That was when the rest of the world was borrowing from us.

Bob, do you see the difference?


Greg, do you see that the US gov't was injecting money into the
economy? Do you see why it doesn't make much difference how it does it
and that via a war isn't exactly the best way to do that... unless you
don't mind killing a lot of people in the name of profit of course.

Never mind. You're hiding. I forgot.

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 23:33:29 -0700, wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:02:05 -0400, wrote:


spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

really?

uh...why did the depression end in 39?

did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2

canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance
of history

It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again.

That was when the rest of the world was borrowing from us.

Bob, do you see the difference?


Greg, do you see that the US gov't was injecting money into the
economy? Do you see why it doesn't make much difference how it does it
and that via a war isn't exactly the best way to do that... unless you
don't mind killing a lot of people in the name of profit of course.

Never mind. You're hiding. I forgot.

yep, the right keeps confirming that LIBERALS have the right ideas.
LIBERAL KEYNESIAN economcs, not right wing bull****, makes an economy
grow.

yet the right wants to continue its bizarre faith based economics.

On 14/06/2011 4:09 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 23:33:29 -0700, wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:02:05 -0400, wrote:


spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

really?

uh...why did the depression end in 39?

did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2

canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance
of history

It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again.

That was when the rest of the world was borrowing from us.

Bob, do you see the difference?


Greg, do you see that the US gov't was injecting money into the
economy? Do you see why it doesn't make much difference how it does it
and that via a war isn't exactly the best way to do that... unless you
don't mind killing a lot of people in the name of profit of course.

Never mind. You're hiding. I forgot.

yep, the right keeps confirming that LIBERALS have the right ideas.
LIBERAL KEYNESIAN economcs, not right wing bull****, makes an economy
grow.

yet the right wants to continue its bizarre faith based economics.

Keynes was an unemployed liberal economist looking for a job, so he told
politicians what they wanted to here.

3 years of Keynes and just a load of debt to show for it. No results,
just more bu11sh1t.

I do actually think Keynews could work if enhanced to include the
concept of a reserve fund. During fat times, no debt, governments
hoards cash to have a solid reserve and avoid greed. Even cut
government in good times. But the lack of a reserve is why Keynes is
full of sh1t.

You can't debt-spend your way out of a debt problem. Keynes does not
properly even apply. Fact is, your not paying your bills with real
money. Just paying with BS and a prayer, and sooner or later that
bubble will pop.

--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:52:20 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 4:09 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 23:33:29 -0700, wrote:


Greg, do you see that the US gov't was injecting money into the
economy? Do you see why it doesn't make much difference how it does it
and that via a war isn't exactly the best way to do that... unless you
don't mind killing a lot of people in the name of profit of course.

Never mind. You're hiding. I forgot.

yep, the right keeps confirming that LIBERALS have the right ideas.
LIBERAL KEYNESIAN economcs, not right wing bull****, makes an economy
grow.

yet the right wants to continue its bizarre faith based economics.

Keynes was an unemployed liberal economist looking for a job, so he told
politicians what they wanted to here.

HAHAHAHA he was rich! what a moron!


3 years of Keynes and just a load of debt to show for it. No results,
just more bu11sh1t.

HAHAHAHA you apparently never heard of 1929! we DIDNT do what keynes
recommended

how'd that work out?? ROFLMAO!


You can't debt-spend your way out of a debt problem

sure you can. the US did it in 1939 when we started spending on ww2

idiot

you're so ****ing stupid they have to put you on a ventilator because
you forget how to breath, right winger

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:41:26 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 06:09:25 -0400, wf3h wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 23:33:29 -0700, wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:02:05 -0400, wrote:


spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

really?

uh...why did the depression end in 39?

did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2

canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance
of history

It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again.

That was when the rest of the world was borrowing from us.

Bob, do you see the difference?


Greg, do you see that the US gov't was injecting money into the
economy? Do you see why it doesn't make much difference how it does it
and that via a war isn't exactly the best way to do that... unless you
don't mind killing a lot of people in the name of profit of course.

Never mind. You're hiding. I forgot.

yep, the right keeps confirming that LIBERALS have the right ideas.
LIBERAL KEYNESIAN economcs, not right wing bull****, makes an economy
grow.

yet the right wants to continue its bizarre faith based economics.

There was a lot more complexity to the investment in WWII.

We were investing our money in an enterprise to destroy all of our
competition ... literally.

We built the bombs that laid waste to the industrial capacity of
virtually all of our competition while the rest of the western world
paid us to build them more bombs.

That is not likely to happen today. The industrial capacity has left
the country. If for some strange reason we reenacted WWII today, China
would win, simply because they have the industrial capacity to build
all the weapons to arm their 100 million man army and still export
weapons for the rest of the world.

Nukes have made that an unlikely prospect tho. That is why we have had
to declare wars, for no particular reason, on backward countries who
can't really fight back. Our idea of the WWII prosperity today is the
million dollars a man we **** away in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is
really not providing much employment and we are doing more damage to
our own economy than we are to the rest of the world.

WWII analogies simply do not apply.

Which is correct up to a point. Yet, you used this argument to bolster
your position against stim funding.

On 14/06/2011 9:41 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 06:09:25 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 23:33:29 -0700, wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:02:05 -0400, wrote:


spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

really?

uh...why did the depression end in 39?

did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2

canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance
of history

It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again.

That was when the rest of the world was borrowing from us.

Bob, do you see the difference?


Greg, do you see that the US gov't was injecting money into the
economy? Do you see why it doesn't make much difference how it does it
and that via a war isn't exactly the best way to do that... unless you
don't mind killing a lot of people in the name of profit of course.

Never mind. You're hiding. I forgot.

yep, the right keeps confirming that LIBERALS have the right ideas.
LIBERAL KEYNESIAN economcs, not right wing bull****, makes an economy
grow.

yet the right wants to continue its bizarre faith based economics.

There was a lot more complexity to the investment in WWII.

We were investing our money in an enterprise to destroy all of our
competition ... literally.

Yep. Just raises costs, making USA less competitive.

We built the bombs that laid waste to the industrial capacity of
virtually all of our competition while the rest of the western world
paid us to build them more bombs.

Some big truth to that. Still goes on too in economic outflow of wealth.

That is not likely to happen today. The industrial capacity has left
the country. If for some strange reason we reenacted WWII today, China
would win, simply because they have the industrial capacity to build
all the weapons to arm their 100 million man army and still export
weapons for the rest of the world.

Only way USA could win is a pre-emptive massive nuclear attach. Would
result in Russia stepping in. Everyone a loser is USA's best scenario.

Worst scenario, USA is a third world country as the currency collapses.
Which is were it is headed. $10,000 a barrel? Think it is a joke?
Study Zimbabwe. Can't print your way out of debt, but you can dilute
your currency to a much lower value.

Nukes have made that an unlikely prospect tho. That is why we have had
to declare wars, for no particular reason, on backward countries who
can't really fight back. Our idea of the WWII prosperity today is the
million dollars a man we **** away in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is
really not providing much employment and we are doing more damage to
our own economy than we are to the rest of the world.

WWII analogies simply do not apply.

Yep, with nukes, it is he MAD principle. Imagine, China could field
3,000,000 troupes in BC and take over Canada as fast as their tanks
could travel. Have a border skirmish with an economically decimated USA.

Real problem here is China is bailing out the USA with its policies. It
sees USA going down as bad for them. They in fact support the value of
a USD. But I question how long they can prop up the value of a USD. In
reality it needs to be massively devalued....

Which is why Obama opens up on China then quietly shuts up. China just
might write off $2T of bad US debt and let USA take its chances with the
valueless dollar. Would make oil for Chinese cheaper.

Watch Chinese inflation, that is where the weak USD is driving the
pressures. If the Chinese let the USD float down in value, the USA will
see major inflation pressures.

Bottom line, US economics is now owned by China. Far too much money
expansion from the US Fed and government debt to stop it now. The
reality hasn't set in, but China is already in many ways the #1 world
economy.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:52:17 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 9:41 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 06:09:25 -0400, wrote:

yet the right wants to continue its bizarre faith based economics.

There was a lot more complexity to the investment in WWII.

We were investing our money in an enterprise to destroy all of our
competition ... literally.

Yep. Just raises costs, making USA less competitive.

funny that countreis with strong unions have the strongest
manufacturing.


Which is why Obama opens up on China then quietly shuts up. China just
might write off $2T of bad US debt and let USA take its chances with the
valueless dollar. Would make oil for Chinese cheaper.


HAHAHAH guess he forgot the keynesian dictim

if you owe the bank $1000 you have a problem

if you owe $1 million, the bank has a problem


Watch Chinese inflation, that is where the weak USD is driving the
pressures. If the Chinese let the USD float down in value, the USA will
see major inflation pressures.

really? from where? the non existent pay increases of the middle
class? the renmimbi is undervalued and has been for years

you're just too stupid to know that


Bottom line, US economics is now owned by China. Far too much money
expansion from the US Fed and government debt to stop it now. The
reality hasn't set in, but China is already in many ways the #1 world
economy.

the chinese hold about 5% of US debt

so tell me again how they rule us

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:52:17 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 9:41 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 06:09:25 -0400, wrote:

yet the right wants to continue its bizarre faith based economics.

There was a lot more complexity to the investment in WWII.

We were investing our money in an enterprise to destroy all of our
competition ... literally.

Yep. Just raises costs, making USA less competitive.

funny that countreis with strong unions have the strongest
manufacturing.


Which is why Obama opens up on China then quietly shuts up. China just
might write off $2T of bad US debt and let USA take its chances with the
valueless dollar. Would make oil for Chinese cheaper.


HAHAHAH guess he forgot the keynesian dictim

if you owe the bank $1000 you have a problem

if you owe $1 million, the bank has a problem


Watch Chinese inflation, that is where the weak USD is driving the
pressures. If the Chinese let the USD float down in value, the USA will
see major inflation pressures.

really? from where? the non existent pay increases of the middle
class? the renmimbi is undervalued and has been for years

you're just too stupid to know that


Bottom line, US economics is now owned by China. Far too much money
expansion from the US Fed and government debt to stop it now. The
reality hasn't set in, but China is already in many ways the #1 world
economy.

the chinese hold about 5% of US debt

so tell me again how they rule us

You are the self appointed economic genius, tell us.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:24:20 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:52:17 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

really? from where? the non existent pay increases of the middle
class? the renmimbi is undervalued and has been for years

you're just too stupid to know that


Bottom line, US economics is now owned by China. Far too much money
expansion from the US Fed and government debt to stop it now. The
reality hasn't set in, but China is already in many ways the #1 world
economy.

the chinese hold about 5% of US debt

so tell me again how they rule us

You are the self appointed economic genius, tell us.


gee. the answer is obvious

they dont rule us

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:24:20 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:52:17 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

really? from where? the non existent pay increases of the middle
class? the renmimbi is undervalued and has been for years

you're just too stupid to know that


Bottom line, US economics is now owned by China. Far too much money
expansion from the US Fed and government debt to stop it now. The
reality hasn't set in, but China is already in many ways the #1 world
economy.

the chinese hold about 5% of US debt

so tell me again how they rule us

You are the self appointed economic genius, tell us.


gee. the answer is obvious

they dont rule us

You only know how to pick up rocks and throw them.