This is Dave Thomas's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Dave Thomas's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Dave Thomas
Recent Activity
Hear! Hear! Mr. Zorn. Hear! Hear!
You forget that you have to convince the entire globe because "money" can go anywhere it wants in today's world. Also you have to compete with countries who aren't targeting NGDP also, aka market economies. There are a few left. So what you need for NGDP targeting to work is a vacuum where the "victims" of this manipulation can't get any information from other competing systems or move their "money" there.
1 reply
Well I can delete this bookmark. Anyone that doesn't know what a Ponzi scheme is and doesn't understand that social security is one isn't worth my time. Have a good life.
Where has deficit spending and government stimulus improved an economy? Keynesian economics did not end the Depression despite historic deficits. LBJ's War on Poverty didn't end poverty, but the deficits did create the stagflation decade of th 1970's that were finally ended by a strong dollar and lower marginal tax rates. Old Keynesian economics and new Keynesian economics produce endless amounts of theoretical reasoning, but no real world empirical evidence of the sustainable growth resulting from their policies or even the phantom multiplier they claim. Liberals claim to see all the weaknesses and faults of business, but they are totally blind to the corruption and catastrophic failures of government. Old Keynesian and New Keynesian followers think government can administer the redistribution of wealth through taxation without wasting one single penny in the process and magically spending every cent more wisely than individuals or businesses they taxed it from would. The operative word is hubris and the operative phrase is detachment from reality. Old Keynesian and New Keynesian think that government gets a dollars worth of results from every dollar it spends. They are blind to the cost of government's bloated bureaucracy, much less it's corruption and waste. Business realizes that you need streamlining to get efficiency. Keynesian philoophers think that you need to add layers of bureaucracy to create efficiency.
1 reply
I still love John Cochrane's unsurpassed rebuttal of Krugman's tactics. To paraphrase John, Krugman hints at dark conspiracies while most of his articles are just calumnious personal attacks on an ever-growing enemies list. Rather than source professional writing, he plays gotcha with out-of-context second-hand quotes from media interviews. He makes stuff up, boldly putting words in people’s mouths that run contrary to their written opinions. Even this isn’t enough: he adds cartoons to try to make his “enemies” look silly, and puts them in false and embarrassing situations. It’s annoying to the victims, but we’re big boys and girls. It’s a disservice to New York Times readers. They depend on Krugman to read real academic literature and digest it, and they get this schlock instead. And it’s ineffective. Any astute reader knows that personal attacks and innuendo mean the author has run out of ideas.
1 reply
Government programs provide benefits to the bureaucrats that work in them and that is it. The biggest benefit would be to eliminate as many government jobs as possible in order, use the savings to reduce taxes on the private sector that would lead to the creation of real, self-sustaining jobs.
1 reply
Mr. Cronon is an environmental historian if anyone is familiar with his work, Changes in the Land and Nature's Metropolis. Anyone claiming he is an expert in labor history discredits themselves. If you don't believe me simply look at his CV. Otherwise a historian of diplomatic history has as much credibility as Mr. Cronon. If he wants to make political statements outside his field of expertise the he should be prepared for criticism. Could you imagine Niall Ferguson saying something about American Unions? The fact that Mr. Cronon belongs to a union in Wisconsin destroys any claim to objectivity in addition to his having no standing as an expert in labor history. I wonder why Paul didn't point out these facts?
1 reply
Going beyond bargaining power Greg. Doesn't a good education give an individual the free thinking to go outside the box and the basic knowledge necessary to start their own business? My education made my self-employment a reality, along with and admirable work ethic and unbelievable good looks! The fact that so many think of a "job" instead of carving their own path is an indictment of today's higher education.
1 reply
LOL!
1 reply
Excellent points John. All degrees definitely aren't the same and higher education isn't immune from the self-serving motives of all large institutions. I read a history of the AMA and the author documented that at the beginning of the 20th century it was a major goal of the association to increase the class status and income of doctors through a monopoly on licensing. Isn't it time for an end to this monopoly?
1 reply
We need much more training in the trades. The everyone needs to go to college high school model has failed miserably. We already have part of the NIT with 47% paying no income tax.
1 reply
The fact that Kevin Hill makes an ad hominem stab at the Tea Parties in his first sentence detracts from the article. Why not just let your argument speak for itself Mr. Hill, unless of course it can't. If pensions are so well funded then why do bond rating agencies declare the shortfalls at $1-2 trillion nationally? Are they Tea Partiers too?
1 reply
Alfred E. Neuman, is that you?
1 reply
The author of that blog post is "Mike." Mike who? There wasn't a signal link to verify anything "Mike" posted in that blog post. So I can go find any opinion, which is what a blog post is without any type of outside verification, and provide a link to it on this thread like it is a peer reviewed fact. Thanks for the chuckle.
Toggle Commented Feb 23, 2011 on Wisconsin at Economist's View
1 reply
Links, Facts, Numbers?
Toggle Commented Feb 23, 2011 on Wisconsin at Economist's View
1 reply
David, that's a nice stat to point out. Why would you quit when the main reason you are working is a more lucrative retirement than in the private sector.
Toggle Commented Feb 23, 2011 on Wisconsin at Economist's View
1 reply
Missed this one. One link in thirteen posts.
Toggle Commented Feb 23, 2011 on Are Teachers Overpaid? at Economist's View
1 reply
I've never met a "conservative net activist." Your own private stereotype?
Toggle Commented Feb 23, 2011 on Are Teachers Overpaid? at Economist's View
1 reply
You have thirteen posts in this thread without any links, facts, or numbers. That's a fact.
Toggle Commented Feb 23, 2011 on Are Teachers Overpaid? at Economist's View
1 reply
What market power does an employer have once the contract is signed and tenure is granted?
Toggle Commented Feb 23, 2011 on Are Teachers Overpaid? at Economist's View
1 reply
Or the pension are too high to begin with, and retirement ages are too low to begin paying them out.
Toggle Commented Feb 23, 2011 on Are Teachers Overpaid? at Economist's View
1 reply
The ability to terminate is crucial.
Toggle Commented Feb 23, 2011 on Are Teachers Overpaid? at Economist's View
1 reply
Only your opinion matters?
Toggle Commented Feb 23, 2011 on Are Teachers Overpaid? at Economist's View
1 reply
You decide that for everyone?
Toggle Commented Feb 23, 2011 on Are Teachers Overpaid? at Economist's View
1 reply
Budget deficits don't create prosperity. It's been two years since President Obama's stimulus bill. Just look at the prosperity it created. I can't wait to read the "it would have been so much worse without the stimulus" replies. LBJ's deficits run up to fund the war on poverty and great society didn't create prosperity. The idea that budget deficits create prosperity is pure fiction. Government doesn't create prosperity. The aggregate efforts of individuals acting in their own self-interest creates prosperity no matter how much socialists want to deny the fact.
1 reply