TIL, about economics (Beware of the whale boats)
-
Where the fuck did 186 billion dollars go? For all I know, they could've actually found some $5 paper clip manufacturer that makes them out of gold alloy or something.
-
Where the fuck did 186 billion dollars go?
Where the fuck did the mention of $5 paper clips come from? Just made it up whole cloth like the rest of your arguments?
-
5-dollar paperclips or whatever the fuck is making them and their contractors spend obscene amounts of money even beyond the already obscene amounts of money they were supposed to have originally gotten
Emphasis added for clarification.
-
You still appear to be an idiot.
-
You still appear to be dodging the question. Where the fuck did 186 billion dollars go, and why was it better spent wherever the fuck it went rather than on helping people who actually need money? I mean, jesus, part of that could've gone directly to that $5-a-day idea of mine for all of the US citizens living in poverty, with an extra hundred billion dollars left over which could nearly double the government work force, which would be more than enough new people to actually implement that plan.
-
You still appear to be dodging the question. Where the fuck did 186 billion dollars go, and why was it better spent wherever the fuck it went rather than on helping people who actually need money?
You mean the program that started in 1996, and has had its goal posts moved a few times and is developing what amounts to 3 different airplanes now, because three sections of the military decided to bikeshed it? That one?
I could see where thatoney could go, without Lockheed Martin being at fault. Also, if you take your plan and fund it with that money, you are down to roughly 25 cents a day...
-
I mean, jesus, part of that could've gone directly to that $5-a-day idea of mine for all of the US citizens living in poverty, with an extra hundred billion dollars left over which could nearly double the government work force, which would be more than enough new people to actually implement that plan
I can see why you dropped out of econ.
-
@Fox said:
I mean, jesus, part of that could've gone directly to that $5-a-day idea of mine for all of the US citizens living in poverty, with an extra hundred billion dollars left over which could nearly double the government work force, which would be more than enough new people to actually implement that plan
I can see why you dropped out of econ.
When did I say I dropped out? I said I passed the AP test for it with a perfect score.
-
Dude, you're quoting old Reader's Digests with that 5 dollar paperclip shit. And note - move a paperclip around the globe and it does get expensive to do so. Track a paperclip's movements and suddenly there are logistical costs.
-
Okay. Never studied Econ.
AP is like a survey course, but for one grade lower.
-
To be fair, you can't really expect high levels of reading comprehension from people who have already decided that your views are automatically invalid because they appear to threaten the established order.
-
Remember, asshat, you bombed out of CS AP.
But it was Pascal! Fuck Pascal!
Yeah well, okay.
-
Considering that it's a problem that has never actually occurred in any study where anything even vaguely similar to basic income has been tried, I've just got it classified under "more fantasy-land speculation that conservatives will pull out of their arses in an apparently sincere attempt to persuade everybody that we're already living in the best of all possible worlds".
Yes, there's never been easy money or inflation before.
-
If we bothered to give every single American citizen living in poverty a basic stipend of $5 a day
Those guys are likely already getting more than that in aid from various governments.
-
The thing about people who argue against the effect of basic income on market economics grounds is that they simply refuse to think about how markets actually work
They're also asking questions about where the money is coming from and what effects does that have? And it does have effects.
-
@Polygeekery said:
You are changing every dynamic in play, and markets will not react well to that.
And again with the "booga, booga, booga, markets". That's the best you've got?
It's better than, "We've never tried this! Maybe something unexpected will happen!"
-
I mean, jesus, part of that could've gone directly to that $5-a-day idea of mine for all of the US citizens living in poverty, with an extra hundred billion dollars left over which could nearly double the government work force, which would be more than enough new people to actually implement that plan.
CRS identified 83 overlapping federal welfare programs that together
represented the single largest budget item in 2011—more than the nation spends on Social Security,
Medicare, or national defense. The total amount spent on these 80-plus federal welfare programs
amounts to roughly $1.03 trillion. Importantly, these figures solely refer to means-tested welfare benefits.
They exclude entitlement programs to which people contribute (e.g., Social Security and Medicare)$1.03 trillion And that's just Federal spending. In short, STFU with your $5 per day bullshit because you're talking out of your ass.
-
In the process of Jeffing this stuff, I noticed this, here, where @fox posted his definition of corruption, which proves him wrong:
In philosophical, theological, or moral discussions, corruption is the abuse of bestowed power or position to acquire a personal benefit. Corruption may include many activities including bribery and embezzlement.
In particular, "of bestowed power or position." But we must answer the question, Bestowed by whom? Well, the government. That's where the power and positions that can be bestowed come from. IOW, corruption is not just being a jerk or a criminal. It's abusing some official power.
-
Goddamn you and your doing jour job. I wanted to have spawned the clusterfuck free-for-all from hell.
-
BITCH at @antiquarian.
-
Yes but we COMPLAIN too you
-
I for one loved the opportunity to read this all over again.
Maybe we should flag for a Rejeffing back to the other topic?
-
-
@loopback0 said:
Maybe we should flag for a Rejeffing back to the other topic?
BANNED
FLAGGED.
-
@boomzilla said:
@loopback0 said:
Maybe we should flag for a Rejeffing back to the other topic?
BANNED
FLAGGED.
LIAR
-
@loopback0 said:
@boomzilla said:
@loopback0 said:
Maybe we should flag for a Rejeffing back to the other topic?
BANNED
FLAGGED.
LIAR
BACKATCHA.
-
In the process of Jeffing this stuff, I noticed this, here, where @fox posted his definition of corruption, which proves him wrong:
In philosophical, theological, or moral discussions, corruption is the abuse of bestowed power or position to acquire a personal benefit. Corruption may include many activities including bribery and embezzlement.
In particular, "of bestowed power or position." But we must answer the question, Bestowed by whom? Well, the government. That's where the power and positions that can be bestowed come from. IOW, corruption is not just being a jerk or a criminal. It's abusing some official power.
Parents, mostly.
-
-
Also
/me channels @Polygeekery
I'm the OP so I'm obviously the expert here since I posted about it first.
-
I'll totally go along with the premise that only you know what you're trying to say.
-
Oh, great a thread about economics. May I get out the Ouija board, crystal ball and slaughter a chicken to read its entrails?
Because that might just increase the prediction accuracy of any theory of economy.
-
In the long run, we're all dead.
I know, this was meant differently originally. But who cares.
-
I prefer "vitally challenged".
-
Well, as I said in what I'm guessing is a comment that was jeffed into this thread, I got a perfect score on the CollegeBoard AP Test for Macroeconomics by bullshitting the entire essay portion, so, in my capacity as OP of This Thread and Resident Expert of Economics, I hereby proclaim that your idea has substantial merit and that we shall require all economists to read the Ouija board, crystal ball, and chicken entrails, which shall henceforth be known as the Signs of the Market.
-
-
I got a perfect score on the CollegeBoard AP Test for Macroeconomics by bullshitting the entire essay portion, so, in my capacity as OP of This Thread and Resident Expert of Economics
Where do I begin?
- Getting a good score on an AP test doesn't make you an expert in the field.
- AP courses aren't anywhere near as hard as real college courses. If the class average on an exam is 30%, then we're talking an appropriate level of difficulty.
@antiquarian already called you out on Dunning-Kruger, so I'm going to skip over that and briefly list a few important applications of the field that your survey-level course probably omitted:
- Microeconomics (at what price point should we be selling our product?)
- Game theory (You know that I know that you know that I know that...)
- Public finance and econometrics (Does taxing cigarettes pay for the social costs incurred by smoking and by how much?)
I'll give you that many macroeconomic models are like glorified weather hindcasting, but you run into similar problems when trying to model any chaotic system.
-
Whoosh confirmed.
-
Whoosh confirmed.
Cool, it's been a while.
Probably since 1970-01-01T00:00:00Z or 1753-01-01T00:00:00Z
-
Well, as I said in what I'm guessing is a comment that was jeffed into this thread, I got a perfect score on the CollegeBoard AP Test for Macroeconomics by bullshitting the entire essay portion, so, in my capacity as OP of This Thread and Resident Expert of Economics, I hereby proclaim that your idea has substantial merit and that we shall require all economists to read the Ouija board, crystal ball, and chicken entrails, which shall henceforth be known as the Signs of the Market.
Relevant:
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
@Fox said:
Well, as I said in what I'm guessing is a comment that was jeffed into this thread, I got a perfect score on the CollegeBoard AP Test for Macroeconomics by bullshitting the entire essay portion, so, in my capacity as OP of This Thread and Resident Expert of Economics, I hereby proclaim that your idea has substantial merit and that we shall require all economists to read the Ouija board, crystal ball, and chicken entrails, which shall henceforth be known as the Signs of the Market.
Relevant:
Relevant:
http://cdn.worldlifestyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/tumblr_na96djuya71t90ulfo2_250.gif
http://i62.tinypic.com/34xi2xw.gif
-
Yes, indeed. Relevant, indeed.