 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
it really really difficult earn money
 |
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by MidiMagic 
Your credibility is slipping. Argumentum ad hominum (name calling and abuse) is also a fallacious argument mode. very illogical.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by MidiMagic
That's classical economics. Neoclassical economics believes that government should do something, but that Keynesians are doing it wrong.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by MidiMagic
That's NOT creating wealth. That's unbalancing markets so it looks like there is more wealth.
Creating money and creating wealth are two different things. Only work can create wealth.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by MidiMagic
That is still part of Keynesian economics. And when the Democrats took over both Congress and the White House, they piled fiscal policy on top of the monetary policy. The result was 18 percent inflation and 15 percent unemployment.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by MidiMagic
That's the Classical model. The Neoclassical model says that the economy needs correction, but timed differently than the Keynesian model, and for different reasons.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by MidiMagic
This is because the people running the federal reserve were also playing the stock market, and adjusting the monetary policy to make their stocks rise. The entire reason the depression lasted so long was that the dollar was too large, and there were not enough in circulation. But we didn't know enough about monetary policy to know that then.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by MidiMagic
The Keynesian fiscal policy also helped prolong the depression, because it was in overshoot.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by MidiMagic
People believe the Keynesian model only because it the teachers unions demand that it be taught in public schools.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by MidiMagic
I have a minor in Economics.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by MidiMagic
The Neoclassical model believes in using fiscal and monetary policy together to quell the business cycle. Liberals try to stop the business cycle at the boom side, which is not possible.
Seriously dude.. I don't understand how you are so stupid. Are you really a 9 year-old child? This is what reason has led me to believe.. Have you even graduated from high school? If you went right now and took the Economics and Physics AP tests, you would score a 0. If you took the SAT, you would score in the negatives. If you even enrolled in a high school course, you would fail. Your IQ is probably below average. Basically, you suck at life. You're nothing more than a failure.
•
•
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,580
Reputation: 
Solved Threads: 52
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by bumsfeld
I agree with MidiMagic, the name calling is very immature! Most countries in Europe take about 50% taxes from you, and people have gotten used to it. For that we get free healthcare too!
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by joshSCH
Wrong. You are confused. I suggest you research the different economic models.
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by joshSCH
..and may I ask, what is your definition of 'wealth' ?••••Originally Posted by midimagicThat's NOT creating wealth. That's unbalancing markets so it looks like there is more wealth.
Creating money and creating wealth are two different things. Only work can create wealth.
Making money on the other hand will decrease the value of currency. This could create wealth, but only as a side effect, or if there is only one party creating the currency. The side effect would be that anybody having non-cash assets would find that the monetary value of their assets would increase, causing them to appear more wealthy compared to a party whose assets lie primarily in cash reserves (which would be dropping in value).
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by joshSCH
Seriously dude.. I don't understand how you are so stupid. Are you really a 9 year-old child? This is what reason has led me to believe.. Have you even graduated from high school? If you went right now and took the Economics and Physics AP tests, you would score a 0. If you took the SAT, you would score in the negatives. If you even enrolled in a high school course, you would fail. Your IQ is probably below average. Basically, you suck at life. You're nothing more than a failure.
•
•
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,550
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 22
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by joshSCH
...
Seriously dude.. I don't understand how you are so stupid. Are you really a 9 year-old child? This is what reason has led me to believe.. Have you even graduated from high school? If you went right now and took the Economics and Physics AP tests, you would score a 0. If you took the SAT, you would score in the negatives. If you even enrolled in a high school course, you would fail. Your IQ is probably below average. Basically, you suck at life. You're nothing more than a failure.
I upped my sanitary measures, up yours!
@JoshSCH:
You may be right. MidiMagic may be wrong. I neither know enough, nor (at this point in time) care enough to determine who is correct between the two of you on my own.
However, by presenting the arguments the two of you are in this forum, I find myself agreeing with MidiMagic. He tends to present arguments bolstered by at least some evidence. Once I find the time (and inclination; again, at the moment I really don't care about the topic itself) to look into it, I can attempt to verify, either for confirmation or denial, what MidiMagic has stated. You, on the other hand, seem to revolve around direct personal insults as your main mode of debate. This is not an attack on the credibility of the person, which would indeed be valid, it is an attack on the person. Calling someone an idiot does not decrease their credibility except among those who would be willing to accept any comment tossed out by any random individual.
And I'm sorry, Josh, but your style is the one that reminds me of a nine-year old child. The type of attacks (and they are attacks) you make against MidiMagic's person sound more like the tauntings of an elementary school child than any kind of reasoned response.
If you have hard facts to bolster your statements, Josh, please provide them for us to view ourselves. Otherwise, I'm afraid that I, at least, will view your own arguments (given without evidence of your own counterpoints) as being a 'shoot the messenger' syndrome for those whose statements you disagree with...which would tend to bias me in favor of their arguments.
You may be right. MidiMagic may be wrong. I neither know enough, nor (at this point in time) care enough to determine who is correct between the two of you on my own.
However, by presenting the arguments the two of you are in this forum, I find myself agreeing with MidiMagic. He tends to present arguments bolstered by at least some evidence. Once I find the time (and inclination; again, at the moment I really don't care about the topic itself) to look into it, I can attempt to verify, either for confirmation or denial, what MidiMagic has stated. You, on the other hand, seem to revolve around direct personal insults as your main mode of debate. This is not an attack on the credibility of the person, which would indeed be valid, it is an attack on the person. Calling someone an idiot does not decrease their credibility except among those who would be willing to accept any comment tossed out by any random individual.
And I'm sorry, Josh, but your style is the one that reminds me of a nine-year old child. The type of attacks (and they are attacks) you make against MidiMagic's person sound more like the tauntings of an elementary school child than any kind of reasoned response.
If you have hard facts to bolster your statements, Josh, please provide them for us to view ourselves. Otherwise, I'm afraid that I, at least, will view your own arguments (given without evidence of your own counterpoints) as being a 'shoot the messenger' syndrome for those whose statements you disagree with...which would tend to bias me in favor of their arguments.
"No trees were harmed in the production of this post. However, several electrons were severely inconvenienced."
Kumquat.
Kumquat.
•
•
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,066
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 18
Stop picking Midimagic...Josh your post doesn't make any sense.
"Whether humanity is to continue and prosper on spaceship Earth depends entirely on the integrity of the human individuals and not on the political and economic systems. The cosmic question has been asked, are humans a worthwhile invention?" - Buckminster Fuller
•
•
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,550
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 22
It also seems to depend in which currency you make your money. If you made your money in Euro or Canadian Dollars in the past few years, you would be 30% richer than someone who made US Dollars.
Look at the Chinese, they have bought close to a trillion dollars in US treasury bonds which was used to finance the war in Iraq. Now with the US Dollar sinking like the Titanic, they have lost huge sums of money! There is a saying: "A fool and his money are soon parted!"
Look at the Chinese, they have bought close to a trillion dollars in US treasury bonds which was used to finance the war in Iraq. Now with the US Dollar sinking like the Titanic, they have lost huge sums of money! There is a saying: "A fool and his money are soon parted!"
I upped my sanitary measures, up yours!
•
•
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,210
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 164
I will quote from the macroeconomics book I used in college:
"Modern macroeconomics is often seen as a battleground for conflict between two implacably opposed schools of thought - monetarism, represented by its champion, Milton Friedman, and "keynesianism", or nonmonetarism, or fiscalism, represented by economists such as Franco Modigliani and James Tobin. This view is seriously misleading. There are indeed conflicts of opinion and even theory between monetarists and nonmonetarism, but much more there are major areas of agreement: there is far more to macroeconomics than the topics on which monetarists and fiscalists disagree. We do not emphasize the monetarist-fiscalist debate in this book, preferring to discuss substantive, while mentioning alternative views where relevant."
Macroeconomics
Rudiger Dornbusch & Stanley Fischer
(C) 1978 McGraw-Hill page 5
In the book, they then outline how all markets interact with each other, how markets cannot stay out of balance, how monetary and fiscal policy interlock together, and how, if misused, fiscal and monetary policies create an oscillatory feedback loop.
"Modern macroeconomics is often seen as a battleground for conflict between two implacably opposed schools of thought - monetarism, represented by its champion, Milton Friedman, and "keynesianism", or nonmonetarism, or fiscalism, represented by economists such as Franco Modigliani and James Tobin. This view is seriously misleading. There are indeed conflicts of opinion and even theory between monetarists and nonmonetarism, but much more there are major areas of agreement: there is far more to macroeconomics than the topics on which monetarists and fiscalists disagree. We do not emphasize the monetarist-fiscalist debate in this book, preferring to discuss substantive, while mentioning alternative views where relevant."
Macroeconomics
Rudiger Dornbusch & Stanley Fischer
(C) 1978 McGraw-Hill page 5
In the book, they then outline how all markets interact with each other, how markets cannot stay out of balance, how monetary and fiscal policy interlock together, and how, if misused, fiscal and monetary policies create an oscillatory feedback loop.
Daylight-saving time uses more gasoline
•
•
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 164
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 1
Junior Poster
i have a very low grasp of economics but i know that keynesianism is being used outside of where it is supposed to be used. correct me if i am wrong but is the basis of keynes not that when there are large amounts of unused resources because of recession or something like that then the government can by means of fiscal or monetary policy draw those unused resources into production. it does not say anything about creating wealth based on a concept of not working. in fact its backbone is getting the idle economic resources to work. so i dont quite get what midimagic means about faulty kaynesianism. is it possible that he understands it incorrectly? or that others use keynes beyond what it was meant tobe used. like i said unused resources.
as for the taxes. i am not going to argue percentages with him but his argument seems plausable. i find it hard to believe that government would tax up to 72% but josch provides no logical arguments against it. just some name calling.
i also agree with midimagic that the only way to earn money is for someone(not nescesarily the one ending up with it) to work for it. even in a world without money it would still apply. someone has to make the nets and boats used in fishing. or plow the land for agriculture. there is no such thing as a free lunch. only a stolen one. of course this does not say you should not be an entrepeneur who makes an honest profit.
as for the taxes. i am not going to argue percentages with him but his argument seems plausable. i find it hard to believe that government would tax up to 72% but josch provides no logical arguments against it. just some name calling.
i also agree with midimagic that the only way to earn money is for someone(not nescesarily the one ending up with it) to work for it. even in a world without money it would still apply. someone has to make the nets and boats used in fishing. or plow the land for agriculture. there is no such thing as a free lunch. only a stolen one. of course this does not say you should not be an entrepeneur who makes an honest profit.
... what society overwhelmingly asks for is snake oil. Of course, the snake oil has the most impressive names —otherwise you would be selling nothing— like "Structured Analysis and Design", "Software Engineering", "Maturity Models", "IPSE", "MIS", "OO", "BPRE".... by Edsger W. Dijkstra
•
•
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,550
Reputation:
Solved Threads: 22
You only make (real) money, if you know something not everyone else knows! The stock market is a good example of this.
I upped my sanitary measures, up yours!
•
•
•
•
Originally Posted by Lardmeister
You only make (real) money, if you know something not everyone else knows! The stock market is a good example of this.
As people are clearly allowed to attack me but I'm not allowed to defend myself, I no longer post to this site.
|
Similar Threads
- can anyone tell me how can i earn money in advertising? (Promotion and Marketing Plans)
Other Threads in the Geeks' Lounge Forum
- Previous Thread: Ah try this!
- Next Thread: The Cure For A.I.D.S. DISCOVERED !
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Latest Geeks' Lounge Posts
- Today's Posts
- Unanswered Threads
Related Forum Features
Tag cloud for Geeks' Lounge
amazon apple article beard beijing books children clocks code cognitive_disorder comedy complaint console consoles cracked.com daniweb design development disk election empty facebook financialcrisis fun future games gaming garbage google grandtheftauto gta halo3 happiness hardware internet java kids kindle king knife larnyx library life linux mad madden manly marketing merger microsoft ms murder netbook networking neuropathology news nintendo obama odf opinion os outlook pain parenting playstation programming ps3 ps4 research search security software sony source space stocks study subversion survey systems tablet thelostanddamned time timeisonmyside. unsolved unused usarmy videogames viruses wakoopa wave wii windows windows>all world wow www xbox xbox360 zomg_conspiracy
