Tried to send you a PM, but it wouldnt take.
I dont know why.
Just a heads up if youre in Oceanside for a beer or two.
Essential Economics for Politicians
- Thread starter Bruddah IZ
- Start date
-
- Tags
- finance too
I dont know why.
Just a heads up if youre in Oceanside for a beer or two.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
It Literally Hurts My Brain to Read the Economic Idiocy Emitted by Trumpkins
Here’s a letter to the Wall Street Journal:
Wilbur Ross’s and Peter Navarro’s defense of Donald Trump’s economic policies is mostly a mash of bunkum (“A Vote for Trump Is a Vote for Growth,” Oct. 26). Consider this claim: “Donald Trump will cut taxes, reduce regulation … and eliminate our trade deficit through muscular trade negotiations that increase exports, [and] reduce imports….”
Cut taxes? Bunk. Trump famously promises to raise taxes on Americans who buy imports. Reduce regulation? Rubbish. Trump promises moregovernment intrusions into Americans’ commerce with foreigners.
As for ‘eliminating’ our trade deficit, Trump might indeed succeed on that front. But such ‘success’ would be regrettable, for it would be the inevitable outcome of the American economy being made an unattractive destination for investment. (Ross and Navarro seem to be unaware that to “eliminate our trade deficit” – such as was done, for example, during the Great Depression – is to eliminate net contributions by foreigners to increasing the size of America’s capital stock.)
But Trump’s most absurd promise is to enrich Americans by increasing exports and reducing imports. Imports are what we voluntarily buy and exports are the price we pay. Therefore, a policy meant to increase exports while decreasing imports is a policy meant to force Americans to pay more to foreigners and to receive less in return – a decidedly unartful deal the architect of which would deserved to be fired.
But the Trump camp’s confusion runs even more deeply. Exporting for Americans is worthwhile only because it supplies us with the means to purchase imports, either currently or in the future. So a policy that aims both to increase exports and to decrease imports is akin to a policy that aims both to increase people’s spending power and to decrease it. It’s a policy meant to give Americans greater means for acquiring imports as it simultaneously strips Americans of the freedom to use those means. It’s the economic policy equivalent of an attempt to square a circle.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030
Here’s a letter to the Wall Street Journal:
Wilbur Ross’s and Peter Navarro’s defense of Donald Trump’s economic policies is mostly a mash of bunkum (“A Vote for Trump Is a Vote for Growth,” Oct. 26). Consider this claim: “Donald Trump will cut taxes, reduce regulation … and eliminate our trade deficit through muscular trade negotiations that increase exports, [and] reduce imports….”
Cut taxes? Bunk. Trump famously promises to raise taxes on Americans who buy imports. Reduce regulation? Rubbish. Trump promises moregovernment intrusions into Americans’ commerce with foreigners.
As for ‘eliminating’ our trade deficit, Trump might indeed succeed on that front. But such ‘success’ would be regrettable, for it would be the inevitable outcome of the American economy being made an unattractive destination for investment. (Ross and Navarro seem to be unaware that to “eliminate our trade deficit” – such as was done, for example, during the Great Depression – is to eliminate net contributions by foreigners to increasing the size of America’s capital stock.)
But Trump’s most absurd promise is to enrich Americans by increasing exports and reducing imports. Imports are what we voluntarily buy and exports are the price we pay. Therefore, a policy meant to increase exports while decreasing imports is a policy meant to force Americans to pay more to foreigners and to receive less in return – a decidedly unartful deal the architect of which would deserved to be fired.
But the Trump camp’s confusion runs even more deeply. Exporting for Americans is worthwhile only because it supplies us with the means to purchase imports, either currently or in the future. So a policy that aims both to increase exports and to decrease imports is akin to a policy that aims both to increase people’s spending power and to decrease it. It’s a policy meant to give Americans greater means for acquiring imports as it simultaneously strips Americans of the freedom to use those means. It’s the economic policy equivalent of an attempt to square a circle.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
Bruddah IZ
DA
Desperate Measures to Stop Devastating Overtime Rules
https://fee.org/articles/desperate-measures-to-stop-devastating-overtime-rules/
Our salaried employees enjoy being salaried and treated like adults. They are given tasks to do, and they decide how and when to do them. Nobody looks over their shoulders with a stopwatch telling them how long they have to drink coffee.
Sure, they have some weeks that are very busy and which require long hours, but if they want to come in late for a few days in a row, leave early, or take an extra week off during the slow season, they get that flexibility too.
They get the flexibility to work from home or pursue job-related training opportunities. If they need to take a couple hours off to pick up a sick child from school or take care of some errands, they have that option.
Effective December 1, however, I have to take away that flexibility and freedom.
https://fee.org/articles/desperate-measures-to-stop-devastating-overtime-rules/
Our salaried employees enjoy being salaried and treated like adults. They are given tasks to do, and they decide how and when to do them. Nobody looks over their shoulders with a stopwatch telling them how long they have to drink coffee.
Sure, they have some weeks that are very busy and which require long hours, but if they want to come in late for a few days in a row, leave early, or take an extra week off during the slow season, they get that flexibility too.
They get the flexibility to work from home or pursue job-related training opportunities. If they need to take a couple hours off to pick up a sick child from school or take care of some errands, they have that option.
Effective December 1, however, I have to take away that flexibility and freedom.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Obama's Overtime Rules Will Kill Telework
https://fee.org/articles/obamas-overtime-rules-will-kill-telework/?utm_medium=popular_widget
Consider what could be a real-life example: Peter, a fellow at a think tank who earns a salary of $45,000 a year. Now if he works late one night, he can come in later the following day, or take extra time off. He can duck out of the office to get a haircut without reporting to his boss. If he feels sick, he can ask to work from home. He can come home for dinner and catch up with his work in the evenings. His employer is free to say, “Peter, you worked a lot of evenings this week. Take some extra days off with your family over Thanksgiving.”
On Dec. 1, Peter and his employer will no longer be able to have such an arrangement. Along with others who make under $47,476 annually, Peter will have to keep track of his hours by clocking in and out. Because of his employer’s requirement to track his hours, telecommuting will be difficult. If he works longer in one particular week, his employer will not be legally allowed to give him “comp time” (time off instead of the extra hours), but will have to pay him overtime instead.
https://fee.org/articles/obamas-overtime-rules-will-kill-telework/?utm_medium=popular_widget
Consider what could be a real-life example: Peter, a fellow at a think tank who earns a salary of $45,000 a year. Now if he works late one night, he can come in later the following day, or take extra time off. He can duck out of the office to get a haircut without reporting to his boss. If he feels sick, he can ask to work from home. He can come home for dinner and catch up with his work in the evenings. His employer is free to say, “Peter, you worked a lot of evenings this week. Take some extra days off with your family over Thanksgiving.”
On Dec. 1, Peter and his employer will no longer be able to have such an arrangement. Along with others who make under $47,476 annually, Peter will have to keep track of his hours by clocking in and out. Because of his employer’s requirement to track his hours, telecommuting will be difficult. If he works longer in one particular week, his employer will not be legally allowed to give him “comp time” (time off instead of the extra hours), but will have to pay him overtime instead.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Obama’s Egregious Overtime Rules Attack Prosperity and Worker Rights........
https://fee.org/articles/obama-s-eg...-and-worker-rights/?utm_medium=popular_widget
The Department of Labor’s new regulation regarding working hours ranks among the most outrageously destructive actions by the Obama administration in its two-term history. It is going to profoundly affect the lives of many millions of people, shattering dreams and smashing the human rights of workers to negotiate, produce, and achieve.
By executive fiat, the Department has now said that time-and-a-half rules on worker pay apply to workers earning up to $47,476 per year (such specificity!) whereas they used to apply only up $23,660. The new rules apply to salaried as well as hourly workers. High-level executives (along with teachers and doctors) are exempt (how people will be classified is determined by a complicated test).
https://fee.org/articles/obama-s-eg...-and-worker-rights/?utm_medium=popular_widget
The Department of Labor’s new regulation regarding working hours ranks among the most outrageously destructive actions by the Obama administration in its two-term history. It is going to profoundly affect the lives of many millions of people, shattering dreams and smashing the human rights of workers to negotiate, produce, and achieve.
By executive fiat, the Department has now said that time-and-a-half rules on worker pay apply to workers earning up to $47,476 per year (such specificity!) whereas they used to apply only up $23,660. The new rules apply to salaried as well as hourly workers. High-level executives (along with teachers and doctors) are exempt (how people will be classified is determined by a complicated test).
Bruddah IZ
DA
"If there were no debts in our money system, there wouldnʻt be any money"-- Mariner Eccles, Governor of the Federal Reserve System in 1941
Bruddah IZ
DA
If all the Bank loans were paid, no one could have a bank deposit, and there would not be a dollar of coin or currency in circulation.--Robert Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve bank in Atlanta, 1936
B IZ, I have trouble figuring out what you're saying. Sometimes you appear to question the wisdom of government monetary policies. Other times you seem to object to any government intervention. For government to make wise policies,
I have trouble discerning your positions. Sometimes you appear to question the wisdom of government monetary policies. Other times you seem to object to any government intrusion to the extent you almost sound like an anarchist. The former is out of my depth. On your latter point of view, I feel confident enough to have a discussion
Bruddah IZ
DA
In any event, there is a large degree of truth in the claim that our fiat money, fractional reserve banking system, is one in which debt is intertwined with money. This system features the utterly perverse properties that massive increases in indebtedness give rise to a euphoric boom (as the money supply grows ), while periods of frugality and debt payment coincide with periods of depression (as the money supply contracts). This is not a feature of the market economy, but instead a result of government intervention in the monetary and banking arenas.--Carlos Lara & Robert Murphy, How Privatized Banking Really Works
Could you expound?
Bruddah IZ
DA
The attachment should be helpful in explaining the "former".
http://consultingbyrpm.com/uploads/HPBRW.pdf
Knowledge keeps me from being an anarchist while sounding like one to those who lack it.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Read Chapter 16, page 225, in the attached .pdf. Although the entire book really is a good read for understanding the boom and bust cycles that we see in the U.S. and around the world.
If I ask your position on a religious issue, giving me a copy of the Bible doesn't answer my question, does it? Can you just say in short, dumbed down language whether you think it's possible for free market to be truly free without government?
Bruddah IZ
DA
LOL!!
Bruddah IZ
DA
Is it a religious economic issue?
