Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

I’m sorry, but economists...

HoustonHuskyHoustonHusky Member Posts: 5,993
edited May 2022 in Tug Tavern
Are some of the dumbest people around. They amaze me at times.

Had to vent...
«13

Comments

  • HHuskyHHusky Member Posts: 21,573
    They are people, so I'm sure some are. I've seen precious little evidence that they are especially dumb or that they uniformly agree with one another.

    What got your goat?
  • Blu82Blu82 Member Posts: 1,577
    HHusky said:

    They are people, so I'm sure some are. I've seen precious little evidence that they are especially dumb or that they uniformly agree with one another.

    What got your goat?

    Probably dumbfucks that think like you.
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,612

    Guy got a question on if there is a limit to how much money the Fed can print and how large the Federal Government deficits can go and he replied by saying 'the interest rates are incredibly low so the Federal Government should be borrowing everything it can'.

    Same guy literally got several questions about unnaturally high oil prices considering the reduction in usage, rapidly rising housing prices, and if the stock market is overvalued and then went on a long talk about how amazingly low inflation numbers are...

    Guy forecasts 6% GDP growth for at least the next 2 years...

    Had a sweet graph too on how the economy as a whole will be above prepandamic forecasts for 2023 if we pass the large stimulus in front of Congress...admitted under questioning that there is a minor assumption of just using standard multipliers (i.e. if you borrow 10 trillion than the GDP will grow to 50 trillion, or the more the govt spends the better the economy looks...).

    With these folks in charge we might get some of those Chinese empty cities built yet...

    I'd avoid Spanish banks.

    Chintresting. He's basically saying, in a nutshell, that the game works.


    I still cling to one basic thought: don't we need real value in there somewhere for growth?
  • HoustonHuskyHoustonHusky Member Posts: 5,993

    Guy got a question on if there is a limit to how much money the Fed can print and how large the Federal Government deficits can go and he replied by saying 'the interest rates are incredibly low so the Federal Government should be borrowing everything it can'.

    Same guy literally got several questions about unnaturally high oil prices considering the reduction in usage, rapidly rising housing prices, and if the stock market is overvalued and then went on a long talk about how amazingly low inflation numbers are...

    Guy forecasts 6% GDP growth for at least the next 2 years...

    Had a sweet graph too on how the economy as a whole will be above prepandamic forecasts for 2023 if we pass the large stimulus in front of Congress...admitted under questioning that there is a minor assumption of just using standard multipliers (i.e. if you borrow 10 trillion than the GDP will grow to 50 trillion, or the more the govt spends the better the economy looks...).

    With these folks in charge we might get some of those Chinese empty cities built yet...

    I'd avoid Spanish banks.

    Probably someone like Krugman.

    I'm not opposed to still borrowing money at amazingly low interest rates, but that spending has to go into things like infrastructure and/or R&D which increase productivity and have long term ROI. I don't see the point in just giving everyone $2K.
    You'd be amazed at the US GDP multiple of funding gender studies in Pakistan...

    I'm sure if somebody asked him he'd realize/admit the only reason the interest rates are low is because the Fed is monetizing the debt...I doubt he'd ever admit that process drives massive asset inflation currently happening that isn't recorded in the Fed inflation stats. I'm sure the guy LOVES Krugman.

    Seriously though...the idea the govt has a list of infrastructure/R&D projects to fund that have any meaningful return is not realistic, much less $2 trillion worth of them. You may get a few more worthless Solyndras out of it, but most of that money is for bailing out cities and states on money already spent, and the idea bailing out NYC or the state of Illinois from their funding mess has a 5x multiple (or whatever this guy was using) is just comical. Its amazing at times how people say things with such authority that if they stopped to think about it for a second they would realize it sounds completely asinine.


  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,612

    Guy got a question on if there is a limit to how much money the Fed can print and how large the Federal Government deficits can go and he replied by saying 'the interest rates are incredibly low so the Federal Government should be borrowing everything it can'.

    Same guy literally got several questions about unnaturally high oil prices considering the reduction in usage, rapidly rising housing prices, and if the stock market is overvalued and then went on a long talk about how amazingly low inflation numbers are...

    Guy forecasts 6% GDP growth for at least the next 2 years...

    Had a sweet graph too on how the economy as a whole will be above prepandamic forecasts for 2023 if we pass the large stimulus in front of Congress...admitted under questioning that there is a minor assumption of just using standard multipliers (i.e. if you borrow 10 trillion than the GDP will grow to 50 trillion, or the more the govt spends the better the economy looks...).

    With these folks in charge we might get some of those Chinese empty cities built yet...

    I'd avoid Spanish banks.

    Probably someone like Krugman.

    I'm not opposed to still borrowing money at amazingly low interest rates, but that spending has to go into things like infrastructure and/or R&D which increase productivity and have long term ROI. I don't see the point in just giving everyone $2K.
    You'd be amazed at the US GDP multiple of funding gender studies in Pakistan...

    I'm sure if somebody asked him he'd realize/admit the only reason the interest rates are low is because the Fed is monetizing the debt...I doubt he'd ever admit that process drives massive asset inflation currently happening that isn't recorded in the Fed inflation stats. I'm sure the guy LOVES Krugman.

    Seriously though...the idea the govt has a list of infrastructure/R&D projects to fund that have any meaningful return is not realistic, much less $2 trillion worth of them. You may get a few more worthless Solyndras out of it, but most of that money is for bailing out cities and states on money already spent, and the idea bailing out NYC or the state of Illinois from their funding mess has a 5x multiple (or whatever this guy was using) is just comical. Its amazing at times how people say things with such authority that if they stopped to think about it for a second they would realize it sounds completely asinine.


    They tyranny of the experts. When someone has the ballz to challenge them, many reveal how thin the exterior of their knowledge really happens to be.
  • dncdnc Member Posts: 56,800
    Economis are important
  • whlinderwhlinder Member Posts: 4,947 Standard Supporter

    Guy got a question on if there is a limit to how much money the Fed can print and how large the Federal Government deficits can go and he replied by saying 'the interest rates are incredibly low so the Federal Government should be borrowing everything it can'.

    Same guy literally got several questions about unnaturally high oil prices considering the reduction in usage, rapidly rising housing prices, and if the stock market is overvalued and then went on a long talk about how amazingly low inflation numbers are...

    Guy forecasts 6% GDP growth for at least the next 2 years...

    Had a sweet graph too on how the economy as a whole will be above prepandamic forecasts for 2023 if we pass the large stimulus in front of Congress...admitted under questioning that there is a minor assumption of just using standard multipliers (i.e. if you borrow 10 trillion than the GDP will grow to 50 trillion, or the more the govt spends the better the economy looks...).

    With these folks in charge we might get some of those Chinese empty cities built yet...

    I'd avoid Spanish banks.

    Probably someone like Krugman.

    I'm not opposed to still borrowing money at amazingly low interest rates, but that spending has to go into things like infrastructure and/or R&D which increase productivity and have long term ROI. I don't see the point in just giving everyone $2K.
    You'd be amazed at the US GDP multiple of funding gender studies in Pakistan...

    I'm sure if somebody asked him he'd realize/admit the only reason the interest rates are low is because the Fed is monetizing the debt...I doubt he'd ever admit that process drives massive asset inflation currently happening that isn't recorded in the Fed inflation stats. I'm sure the guy LOVES Krugman.

    Seriously though...the idea the govt has a list of infrastructure/R&D projects to fund that have any meaningful return is not realistic, much less $2 trillion worth of them. You may get a few more worthless Solyndras out of it, but most of that money is for bailing out cities and states on money already spent, and the idea bailing out NYC or the state of Illinois from their funding mess has a 5x multiple (or whatever this guy was using) is just comical. Its amazing at times how people say things with such authority that if they stopped to think about it for a second they would realize it sounds completely asinine.


    There's a lot of freeways and bridges that need fixing for starters. And I'm all for places like Seattle building out mass transit even if it's a bit of a boondoggle. I also think we need to treat China as a Sputnik type moment and spend money on military R&D accordingly. We don't want to let those guys catch up to us in military technology. Historically, the spin offs from military R&D have been very advantageous.
    I'll keep this cool

    In our the other guys spend to much politics we are in the wrong cycle for military spending but we did do some build up the last few years

    Really think we missed an opportunity on infrastructure. Blame who you want on the tug but we had a big spending president with a big spending congress and couldn't get it done.
    Sad how far we've fallen. We used to have no problem building cool shit in the country.


    Take it to the histry bored!
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,612
    dnc said:

    Economis are important

    Howdy there stranger!
  • dfleadflea Member Posts: 7,242
    edited February 2021
    Blu82 said:

    HHusky said:

    They are people, so I'm sure some are. I've seen precious little evidence that they are especially dumb or that they uniformly agree with one another.

    What got your goat?

    Probably dumbfucks that think like you.
    I think I found an Econ major.

    lol


    Houston is going with the Eeyore narrative, so he's not having anyone tell him any different. 6% sounds pretty optimistic to me, too, but I'm not a practicing economist, so I'm not ready to make a counter-argument. I looked for HH's counter argument, but didn't see it.
  • pawzpawz Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 21,232 Founders Club

    Guy got a question on if there is a limit to how much money the Fed can print and how large the Federal Government deficits can go and he replied by saying 'the interest rates are incredibly low so the Federal Government should be borrowing everything it can'.

    Same guy literally got several questions about unnaturally high oil prices considering the reduction in usage, rapidly rising housing prices, and if the stock market is overvalued and then went on a long talk about how amazingly low inflation numbers are...

    Guy forecasts 6% GDP growth for at least the next 2 years...

    Had a sweet graph too on how the economy as a whole will be above prepandamic forecasts for 2023 if we pass the large stimulus in front of Congress...admitted under questioning that there is a minor assumption of just using standard multipliers (i.e. if you borrow 10 trillion than the GDP will grow to 50 trillion, or the more the govt spends the better the economy looks...).

    With these folks in charge we might get some of those Chinese empty cities built yet...

    I'd avoid Spanish banks.

    Probably someone like Krugman.

    I'm not opposed to still borrowing money at amazingly low interest rates, but that spending has to go into things like infrastructure and/or R&D which increase productivity and have long term ROI. I don't see the point in just giving everyone $2K.
    I don't see the poont of bailing out the repo market to the tune of $4 Trillion.

    You're never going to have a truly healthy economy if you don't allow it to crash and burn on occasion and clean itself out. You just blow the bubble up even bigger. Which also causes massive income inequality - the effects of which is a convo for the Tug. (People forget what started the French Revolution. People forget that.)




Sign In or Register to comment.