Bigga
Well-Known Member
Go to fucking bed.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Go to fucking bed.
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 18,837
I may well be “supporting” a position you are making, but I’m disagreeing with the basic premises you are both making. You’re both arguing against each other with “facts” that are no such thing. It’s like watching two boxers slap each other.Maybe the night is getting to you?
You're arguing my point that wage rises and bailout can happen, both in the States and here.
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 18,837
OK, Dad. Read up on some basic economics while I’m asleep, please.Go to fucking bed.
“The crash happened because greedy fucking bankers were high on money and didn’t stop to think.
I am also aware who bailed them out and it’s why I’ve been saying the banks need to help us now, like we did them.
Of course you can print more money but that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea, look at Zimbabwe. You do it when you’re in a crisis and that’s the last time the US did it, in 2008, to get them through it.”
1) You can print money and it can be a good idea. Running to an extreme example (Zimbabwe) when discussing complex and sophisticated economies (UK and US) is nonsensical. Money is currency and it depends on who wants it and at what price. That’s the advantage of having a currency people trust and are willing to hold in times of crisis....you can print lots of it and you don’t get hyperinflation or devaluation.
2) The US didn’t stop printing money in 2008, in fact it has been printing money feverishly for quite some time now, even though it has just kicked it up to unheard of extremes in recent weeks.
And, no, I’m about to go to bed. I’m a night owl and the house is quiet. I’ll get up around lunchtime, seeing as how it’s fucking Groundhog Day tomorrow again! Quarantine sucks!!!
I was merely using Zimbabwe as an example as to why just printing money isn’t the answer to funding public services.
The US last only engaged in high levels following 2008, as they will likely now, if they haven’t already.
Hyperinflation will occur at a particular point, I’m not knowledgeable to say when that point is but I do know it will.
The UK and US have engaged in a steady constant of quantitative easing, since 2008 but it’s nothing compared to what they do during a crisis.
Bigga
Well-Known Member
OK, Dad. Read up on some basic economics while I’m asleep, please.
When you wake the fuck back up and in a better mood, you can explain how to move the economies forward whilst supporting the lower working classes of the US and UK that the govs aren't doing or actively avoiding.
Nightie night, kiddie pops.
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 18,837
It’s a bad example while trying to discuss complex and sophisticated economies with stable currencies.Do I need to say that slower?I was merely using Zimbabwe as an example as to why just printing money isn’t the answer to funding public services.
Seriously?The US last only engaged in high levels following 2008, as they will likely now, if they haven’t already.
You know no such thing.Hyperinflation will occur at a particular point, I’m not knowledgeable to say when that point is but I do know it will.
So, what’s quantitative easing FOR? Fun? Shits and grins? It happens constantly, just in different ways, through different mechanisms, especially during periods of waning economic activity...or to prop up liquidity...or, or, or...The UK and US have engaged in a steady constant of quantitative easing, since 2008 but it’s nothing compared to what they do during a crisis.
You are taking one use, extrapolating and acting like it’s all a given.
The US was at about $20T National Debt BEFORE this happened. Why record low interest rates with a ballooning debt load (printing money)?
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 18,837
That crap might work with some, but calling childish names when YOU are the one up the creek without a paddle is hilarious!When you wake the fuck back up and in a better mood, you can explain how to move the economies forward whilst supporting the lower working classes of the US and UK that the govs aren't doing or actively avoiding.
Nightie night, kiddie pops.
P.S. I’m not in a bad mood, but it appears anyone who disagrees with you must be in a bad mood. Bigga, clearly doesn’t always mean Betta!
You enjoy playing in the sand pit. Let me know if you find any salient points worth discussing, as opposed to broad, banal generalities that you’ve heard the big boys talking about.
Have a nice day now, ya hear!
This is a really good point that's gotten lost since 2016. Hillary, for all of her many, many flaws as a candidate beat Trump by 3 million in the popular vote and lost because of 100k people combined in three swing states. He isn't some invincible electoral juggernaut that people have convinced themselves of since and Biden can win by simply turning out mainstream Democrats and getting his fair share of independents. Going hard left to win over the Bernie voters that couldn't even be bother to turn out for Bernie in the primary is a losing strategy if it turns off centrists.FOR THE RECORD
Trump did NOT win big. He scraped a victory in a few KEY states with decent electoral votes, which greatly exaggerates the perception of victory...which, of course, he further exaggerates!
Official 2016 Result: Trump 304 vs Clinton 227
That looks big, but it came down to THREE STATES: Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin
MI: 16 Delegates, difference in the vote: 10,704; 0.22%
PA: 20 Delegates, difference in the vote: 44,292; 0.72%
WI: 10 Delegates, difference in the vote: 22,748; 0.76%
Total difference in Delegates: 46
Total difference in the votes: 77,744
Total NATIONAL votes cast: 136,669,237
Total NATIONAL % Diff: 0.056%
Simply switch HALF+1 of those votes from Trump to Clinton:
MI: 5,352
PA: 22,147
WI: 11,375
==========
Ttl: 38,874
==========
38,874 KEY VOTES in three key states changed the entire trajectory of the world.
Switching those 38,874 votes from Trump to Clinton would have switched:
TRUMP 304 - CLINTON 227, into
TRUMP 258 - CLINTON 273, with 270 Delegates being the magic number needed to be President!
Last edited:
Bigga
Well-Known Member
That crap might work with some, but calling childish names when YOU are the one up the creek without a paddle is hilarious!
P.S. I’m not in a bad mood, but it appears anyone who disagrees with you must be in a bad mood. Bigga, clearly doesn’t always mean Betta!
You enjoy playing in the sand pit. Let me know if you find any salient points worth discussing, as opposed to broad, banal generalities that you’ve heard the big boys talking about.
Have a nice day now, ya hear!
Yeah, again, another to pick the small unimportant part of the post.
Hilarious.
It’s a bad example while trying to discuss complex and sophisticated economies with stable currencies.Do I need to say that slower?
Seriously?
You know no such thing.
So, what’s quantitative easing FOR? Fun? Shits and grins? It happens constantly, just in different ways, through different mechanisms, especially during periods of waning economic activity...or to prop up liquidity...or, or, or...
You are taking one use, extrapolating and acting like it’s all a given.
The US was at about $20T National Debt BEFORE this happened. Why record low interest rates with a ballooning debt load (printing money)?
You’re making the mistake of thinking we were being very specific. Of course it becomes complex when applying it to 1st world economies but Bigga and I were discussing public services first and foremost and this was a side point to a wider debate.
It was a general point in argument to printing money as a policy to pay for public services. If you go back and read what I said, I said the UK had engaged in the experiment of continuing with quantitive easing since 2010.
Tell me then, why don’t governments of the world, in these economies we’re discussing, just print huge amounts of money, if hyperinflation won’t occur?
Quantitive easing is used to keep the market buoyant and encourage spending, lending and investment.
It works if applied correctly but you shouldn’t be doing it to fund our NHS.