/sci/ - Science & Math

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480790]

/sci/ I come baring gifts. Economics. 101. Ignore all other economic threads because they present nothing of import.

1/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480798]

2/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480801]

3/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480807]

4/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480810]

5/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480816]

6/133

[Anonymous No.3480817]

I am interest. But what's the purpose of this humungous slideshow? I could go on the St. Louis Fed's FRED database and find the same information.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480827]

7/133

[Anonymous No.3480833]

>>3480827

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480834]

8/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480841]

9/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480845]

10/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480852]

11/133

[Anonymous No.3480855]

MOAAAR

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480856]

12/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480863]

13/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480865]

14/133

[Anonymous No.3480872]

can you just mediafire this shit

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480873]

15/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480877]

16/133

[Anonymous No.3480878]

>>3480873
wtf happened in 2007?

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480880]

>>3480872
http://www.mimgroup.net/files/US_Model_Challenge.pdf

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480881]

17/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480888]

>>3480878
real estate collapse, August.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480894]

18/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480900]

19/133

[Anonymous No.3480902]

>>3480872

bump. cant you just rar it like he said?

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480910]

20/133

[Anonymous No.3480912]

>>3480878

The study began, which could have increased output from the teachers in it.

[Anonymous No.3480913]

>>3480888
but why the sharp increase in test scores?

>>3480902
see
>>3480880

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480915]

>>3480902
see
>>3480880

[Blackman No.3480916]

>133
.rar this shit or I'm calling the cops

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480922]

21/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480931]

22/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480938]

23/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480944]

24/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480953]

25/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480956]

26/133

[Anonymous No.3480958]

>>3480880

cheers mate

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480961]

27/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480966]

28/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480974]

29/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480980]

30/133

[Anonymous No.3480985]

>>3480790
This is all very dull and uninformative, does it get interesting?

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480987]

31/133

[resident /sci/ economist !!0CqB7P/574e No.3480990]

I like the one that said Southerners dont have educations.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480995]

>>3480985
define interesting.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3480998]

32/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481003]

33/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481009]

34/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481014]

35/133

[Anonymous No.3481021]

>>3480995
Something that contains some information which isn't just crap that's available publicly anyway. Maybe something aimed at educating people in understanding economics, rather than just showing graphs about a variety of things.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481025]

36/133

[Anonymous No.3481027]

The knowledge! It buuuurns!!!

thumbnail image downloader for mozilla
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bulk-image-downloader/

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481032]

38/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481034]

>>3481021
So you want a fairie tale? Do we need to put you to sleep?

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481039]

39/133

[Anonymous No.3481043]

did we drop number 37?

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481046]

40/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481052]

>>3481043
oops.
37/133

[Anonymous No.3481053]

>>3481034
So you're saying that economic theory is a fairie tail? I suppose if you're into endless graphs of current US economics its fine, but wouldn't it be nice to actually understand economics?

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481054]

41/133

>am a bit drunk. btw, saving best for last!

[Anonymous No.3481056]

A whole thread of correlation.

Lovely

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481063]

>>3481053
I suppose you think that economics is like physics?

42/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481073]

43/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481081]

>>3481056
You obviously understand nothing about economics.

>Entire field is correlation, with fairie tale causation.

44/133

[Anonymous No.3481083]

>>3481081

Don't get buttmad that you can't explain how shit works.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481084]

45/133

[Anonymous No.3481087]

>>3481063
Obviously not... I suppose you think that economics is entirely random and there is no way of even partly modelling it? Odd that it acts so deterministically, I suppose there's a chance that will happen with any random system though.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481089]

46/133
>>3481083
If I were buttmad, I wouldn't be info dumping. Now go back to your barbie dolls and delusions of knowledge.

[Anonymous No.3481092]

>>3481083

Marginal utility of the last dollar.
As handled by angry primate like yourself.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481093]

>>3481087
Of course it's not random, but that doesn't mean it's predictable either.

47/133

[Anonymous No.3481100]

>>3481093
As a matter of fact, it does.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481104]

48/133
>>3481100
So when I show you fractal.jpg, you can tell me at what level of precision you're viewing?

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481107]

49/133

[Anonymous No.3481108]

>>3481100
We can tell what tomorrows weather is likely to be like. The weather on a day 6 months from now? No clue, other than 'probably cold'.

Clearly, meteorology isn't science.

[Anonymous No.3481112]

>>3481104
No, because I don't have the means to do so... That doesn't mean its not predictable, assuming the level of precision wasn't chosen _at random_ in which case it would be unpredictable.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481115]

50/133
>>3481108
Clearly meteorology has limits. Also, telling me the average of something is no more deterministic than me telling you I can predict the future:
>Future, you will continue to be more butt hurt.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481118]

51/133

[Anonymous No.3481119]

>>3481108
No no, see what you're doing is being a moron. The problem isn't that weather patterns are unpredictable, its that we don't have the means to predict them. Those are two vastly different things. Even so we can actually model weather a moderate way off into the future, just with lesser accuracy because our models aren't good enough. Ever heard of a tsunami warning?

[Anonymous No.3481120]

Economics is almost like chaos theory. You try to use past knowledge, correlation, "laws". You try to apply all these tools to try to "engineer" a wanted result. By the time you use those tools, the game changes completely. That's because the world is complicated, you can't set the clock back far enough to see where all the pieces where to a sufficient degree. Your iron clad economic tools change peoples behavior in the most unexpected way. Economics is a very young "science".

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481126]

52/133
>>3481120
Also it's based on this arbitrary thing called 'Value" which is described by f(x) = herp^derp

[Anonymous No.3481133]

Damn OP. If you're going to talk about economics, at least post some theory, rather than just data. I can find all of this crap at the World Bank website or stats.OECD.org anyway.

I have, for instance, evidence suggesting that the Augmented Solow model works like shit when estimated using panel data (LSDV, 2SLS and GMM). According to its framework, education has a pretty big negative impact on output per capita (which makes no Economic or intuitive sense).

[Anonymous No.3481134]

>>3481093
If you honestly believe there is no such thing as economic theory, you are a fucking moron. What do you think governments do to make economic decisions - consult a ouija board?

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481135]

53/133

[Anonymous No.3481142]

>>3481115
Sorry, was trying to use meteorology as an example of a system that follows known rules, but is still hard/impossible to precisely predict months in the future, much like economics.

Thank you for uploading these, I'm enjoying watching the 'hurr durr taxes bad!" crowd bust veins in their necks from the RAGEberries they have to choke back.

[Anonymous No.3481144]

>>3481134

Of course there's economic theory, it's just all fucking retarded.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481150]

54/133
>>3481134
They might as well. It is no different than a hypnotist performing a magic act or a self fullfilling prophet soothsaying.

[Anonymous No.3481152]

>>3481144
Of course, you know much better. I forgot to account for the fact that you are the smartest and most well educated person in the field of everything. Call the universities, cancel their economics degrees, OP says they're no good.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481157]

>>3481142
You ruined my prediction

55/133
More Info.

[Anonymous No.3481160]

>>3481150
Okay, so the US would be just as well off giving all of its funds to a non-US individual as it would be investing in education? Each has an equal chance of saving their economy? I'll write Obama and let him know.

[Anonymous No.3481166]

>>3481152

Don't appeal to authority to try to win your arguments.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481167]

>>3481152
Well, They're as good as Sociologists and Psychologists. That is the category they belong in.

56/133

[Anonymous No.3481170]

>>3481119

Tsunamis are caused by earthquakes.
They have nothing to do with the weather.
When a big fucking quake is detected,
it's pretty easy to say
"Get away from beaches and low areas".

You.
Fucking.
Retard.

[Anonymous No.3481171]

>>3481135
First slide I open
"They do not bearing a heavier burden"
stopped right there.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481173]

57/133
>>3481166
I AM ECONOMY. THE MARKET SAYS I AM RIGHT.

[Anonymous No.3481175]

>>3481166
Is this a joke? Why would you not appeal to authority to try to win your arguments? Is the earth flat - don't appeal to any authority for this, its not a valid way of arguing.

[Anonymous No.3481182]

>>3481175

Because it's fallacious

[Anonymous No.3481184]

>>3481142

>, but is still hard/impossible to precisely predict months in the future, much like economics.

Though it's undeniably true that Economics is nowhere nearly as exact/precise as, say, Physics, it's definitely not impossible to create accurate predictions of key economic variables for the next few years. Beyond that and it gets a lot more uncertain, due to possible groundbreaking inventions or some other totally unexpected exogenous shock (- you can still use the boom-bust cycle as a guideline though).
I see the main purpose of Economics as a tool to evaluate (fiscal) policies and suggesting ideas that lead to greater efficiency (and greater equity). Note that the world of Academia and Politics are currently too unrelated for Economics to have as big of an impact as it perhaps should. Or maybe the field isn't quite ready to be too heavily involved in decision making, since there are far too many loud-mouth 'hurr durr market fixes everything' people out there.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481186]

>>3481171
Oh come on, give the poor sclhob a break, he prepared 133 slides of this stuff. You break down too in a religious thread on /sci/. Don't try to have higher standards that you yourself can't fill.

58/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481195]

59/133

[Anonymous No.3481200]

>>3481170
You have stupidity of the highest degree... Do you know why you can say "oh shit an earthquake, there might be a tsunami"? Its not because they fucking just have a guess. Its because they can predict it - the whole fucking point of my post. The tsunami is a weather related disturbance which is predictable BECAUSE it follows earthquakes (among other things.)

You.
Fucking.
Retard.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481203]

>>3481175
Because instead of authority, why not cite the actual evidence?

60/133

[Anonymous No.3481209]

>>3481200

>Geology is Meteorology
Not the anon you were responding to, but that sounds pretty retarded to me, broseph.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481210]

61/133

[Anonymous No.3481213]

>>3481200

So first you used an appeal to authority, now you're just namecalling. And now you're making a false analogy.

Nice going

[Anonymous No.3481214]

>>3481209
What? I don't understand what you mean by geology is meteorology. Meteorology certainly involves geology, and if this is what your arguing then I think Wikipedia might be able to save the day...

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481215]

62/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481221]

63/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481230]

64/133

[Anonymous No.3481231]

Thank you based economy. I shall enjoy reading the last half of this in the morning.

cheers mate!

[Anonymous No.3481233]

>>3481213
Quoting more so than name calling, read the post I responded to. Now what false analogy did I use and where did I appeal to authority? I believe you're following the wrong line of discussion...

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481235]

65/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481244]

66/133

Half way there guys. We still on track?

>feel free to tip your waitresses

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481245]

67/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481249]

68/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481254]

69/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481257]

70/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481259]

71/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481261]

72/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481268]

73/133

[Anonymous No.3481269]

>>3481200
Good, good, let the butthurt flow.

I'm well aware of seismographs, pressure area flows, etc. It's wonderful science, neat models, etc. The five day forecast is great.

Now: tell me whether it will be raining between 2pm and 7pm on December 8th 2011? I know you can't. At least, not today. Meteorology just doesn't work that way. Too many variables, etc.

People piss and moan about economics not being a science, because it can't make accurate predictions. Will the market do well or poorly in a few months? Will it rain on a particular day?

Meteorology and Economics are both science. Econ is a little softer since it involves humans, but it still has it's own laws and rules, just like the weather does.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481271]

74/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481276]

>>3481269
The flaw in your argument, is that the economic system is based on two different sets of chaotic systems: Sociology and Psychology, while the weather is based on one.

There will be far fewer external perturbations to the meteorlogical forcast than to an economic one.

75/133

[Anonymous No.3481278]

I feel like this whole thing might have some liberal bias as it constantly points out conservatives failed policies. Are there equivalent liberal fuck-ups people can point out?

>>3481233
The only way that geology and meterology are tied together that I can think of is topographics

[Anonymous No.3481279]

>>3481269
What are you even talking about? That has nothing to do with the discussion... No one thinks that meteorology allows accurate predictions to the level of specification you're talking about, no one in this thread has ever suggested such a thing. I'm arguing that either weather nor economics are entirely random, and that sciences exist that allow us to make some predictions about what occurs in economic and weather systems. Saying tsunamis have nothing to do with the weather by the way is like saying being hit by a car has nothing to do with my broken leg - its completely stupid.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481280]

76/133

>>3481276
Also, the Metereological forecast doesn't affect the meteorlogical forecast.

[Anonymous No.3481284]

>>3481269

>Now: tell me whether it will be raining between 2pm and 7pm on December 8th 2011?

Yes. You didn't specify the location and it's pretty darned certain that at least one place on earth will have some rain during that time.

Just trollan here.

Also, it's not necessarily that much more difficult to make predictions when many humans are involved; their behaviour tends to average out and extreme opinions/behaviour cancels each other out.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481286]

77/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481289]

78/133

[Anonymous No.3481291]

>>3481278
One great example of their being tied together is when geological events cause meteorological events, such as earthquakes causing tsunamis...

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481292]

79/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481299]

80/133

[Anonymous No.3481300]

>>3481269
Meteology's flaws mostly come from lack of data and computing power. We have governing equations for the atmosphere but they are impossible to solve analytically so we have to do numerically. Unfortunately we dont have the computing power for the resolution we need to incorporate all important processes. Combine that with lack of data for an initial values and you get models that will diverge from reality.

[Anonymous No.3481303]

>>3481291
a tsunami is not a meteorological event

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481304]

81/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481306]

82/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481310]

83/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481312]

84/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481314]

85/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481321]

86/133

>I haven't been this excited since the time I slipped on a dime and fell on some quarters.

[Anonymous No.3481323]

Well shit, OP. I just noticed the first slide has Singapore's Marina Bay Sands on it. I fucking love Singapore.

Little factoid about the country: It heavily emphasises education, but once people finish their undergraduate nobody gives a fuck about completing a Master programme. Also, Singaporeans sleeping next to you in a university library are incredibly annoying.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481327]

87/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481329]

88/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481331]

89/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481333]

90/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481335]

91/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481341]

92/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481342]

93/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481346]

94/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481352]

95/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481357]

96/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481359]

97/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481362]

98/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481365]

99/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481368]

100/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481371]

101/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481376]

102/133

>being an economist is hard work. Can you imagine?

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481382]

103/133

[Anonymous No.3481386]

>>3481382

Wow.... and here i thought this data had some credibility.

just wow

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481389]

104/133

>we're gonna learn something soon, I can feel it!

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481409]

>>3481386
You'd crack too if you had to prepare 130+ mind numbing graphs


105/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481412]

106/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481419]

107/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481421]

108/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481425]

109/133

[Anonymous No.3481433]

mfw taking the laugher curve seriously.

Your data doesn't even fit the curve, in your own graphs.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481432]

110/133

>After this, I expect you all to be acutely aware of just how much god damn work it is to be an economist.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481436]

111/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481438]

112/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481447]

>>3481433
You seem to have misconstrued the purpose here.

113/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481451]

114/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481454]

115/133

>mfw 133 = 133 minutes wasted of OP's life while sobering up.

[Anonymous No.3481455]

>>3481419
New Mexico is Best Mexico

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481459]

>>3481454
116/133

[Anonymous No.3481461]

>>3481447
>colorado
>no competitive industry center

Nigga dont know about the Denver/Boulder area

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481465]

117/133

>CHURN CHURN THE GRAPHS, MAKE SWEET SWEET BUTTER OF THAT FINE BOVINE DATA

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481469]

118/133

[Anonymous No.3481471]

>>3481386
That pic made me lol, because it's pretty much true.

Anyway thanks for dumping this OP, it pretty much confirms what I already knew -- we're in deep shit because our government has been catering to rich jackholes.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481479]

>>3481471

Always here to help. Feel free to fax this presentation to your local congressman.

>http://www.conservativeusa.org/mega-cong.htm


119/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481484]

120/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481486]

121/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481492]

122/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481496]

123/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481502]

124/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481504]

125/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481518]

126/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481532]

127/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481542]

128/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481546]

129/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481549]

130/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481557]

131/133

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481569]

132/133

[Anonymous No.3481572]

>>3481479

Hold on, you actually believe this stuff? I thought this thread was a joke.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481591]

133/133

>Feel free to contact James Sanderson regarding this wonderful presentation.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3481596]

>>3481572
This thread will be many things to many people.

To you, it apparently means you are purely inanimate.

[Anonymous No.3481602]

>mgw OP makes concrete assertions about statistics which are affected by 100s of different factors

[Anonymous No.3481609]

>>3481602

That's exactly what im saying. This presentation was about as nebulous as it can get. It's also laughably bias. The trick is to cover up your bias, not expose it.

[Anonymous No.3481611]

>>3481569

You realize Dubai is now bankrupt right, and that explosive US growth is not a good method for revitalizing the economy.

[Anonymous No.3481614]

>>3481602

>Implying every factor has a substantial impact on these variables.

Just because a factor has a tiny effect on a variable doesn't mean it's really noteworthy.

[Anonymous No.3481648]

>>3481609
I know right.
>>3481614
You go into a conversation assuming certain things so you don't have to explain every tiny detail, I wasn't implying anything that is wrong at all. Everything I implied was right.

[Anonymous No.3481697]

INB4 SHITSTORM:
>>>/b/344430714

[Anonymous No.3481751]

>referring to 'bottom scale' and 'left scale' instead of x and y axes
>stopped reading there

[Anonymous No.3481791]

>>3481303
You can argue that, but meteorologists still deal with them.

[Anonymous No.3481881]

>>3481791
speeeeeeed. silly man, meteorology is not a science. Just look at all the meteorologists against climate change

[Economy !!jLQAYUXZOCx No.3483410]

Bump

[Anonymous No.3483441]

>Ignore all economic threads because they present nothing of import.

[Anonymous No.3483448]

>2011
>not using .ppt

[Anonymous No.3483459]

Perhaps you should send those pictures to the fucking tea party morons and give them a basic lesson in economics. "Yeah, cut spending during a depression even though the US can borrow money at a ridiculously low interest rate. That will help."

[Anonymous No.3483470]

>>3480834
redneck states are uneducated, by the looks of that.

Amnotsurprised.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3483478]

>>3483459

> increase spending massively during great depression
> jobless rate balloons to double digits and stays there for a decade
> we didnt spend enough

Haha.

[Anonymous No.3483492]

>>3481321
Right, try to stick to reality please:

>>3483478

[Anonymous No.3483503]

>>3483478
And your solution is to cut spending during a depression? Great. By the way, the plans that were discussed in Congress would both slow down growth, which does way more harm to the fiscal standing of the country than borrowing money very cheaply.

If the Republicans would have gotten their way they would let the poor die on the street too. Fortunately, the fat rednecks that vote for them are also dependent on Medicare and social security, so they can't go all the way.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3483512]

>>3483503

Less government theft of labor will always help the economy. A person living on the dole takes from the economy, whereas a person working for a private business adds to the economy. Broken windows, ever heard of them?

[Anonymous No.3483545]

>>3483512
> A person living on the dole takes from the economy
That's extremely short-sighted and also a huge oversimplification. People don't just live on the dole for fun. Social security makes the country's workforce more productive and also has the side effect of giving people money to consume and help the economy. Other people would argue that a social safety net is also simply morally right, but others would rather let the poor starve. (Which ends in riots, so not a good idea either)

>working for a private business adds to the economy
Great, then stimulate businesses. Reagan's voodoo economics did nothing like that, they only added to the country's debt (even he had to raise taxes), neither did Bush's tax cuts stimulate job growth (see here >>3480834). Republicans repeatedly fucked up and the free market fundamentalists still cling to their ideology, even if it's not backed by facts.

[Anonymous No.3483548]

>>3483512
Libertty has demonstrated that h hates himself and would never have a country allow him to be born within it. It's clear that he just doesn't want to live, but refuses to an hero, and would rather watch the world kill him first.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3483555]

>>3483545

Your emotional and moral argument for dole unders has no relevance to economics.

Stimulation only occurs with less government. Republicans do not support the free market, they support the regulated market, just like democrats.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3483565]

>>3483548

I clearly disagree that every person ever born died from violence due to no gubbmint. Everyone agrees with me.

[None !.X9p7owdWI No.3483567]

>>3481591
>>3481591
>>3481591
>>3481591
>>3481591
download link for the whole rpesentation please?

[Anonymous No.3483571]

hey liberty, who you going to vote for president if you're going to?

[sage me home No.3483573]

>>3483512
define massive. But before you do, let me point out that every economist that called for actual massive spending got disappointed by the miniscule amount and limited time that it was doled out. further, monies allotted for say high speed rail in Wisconsin and Indiana were refused by the governors of the state, thus killing potential jobs before the start gun.

But this repeated bullshit about broken windows is false. The story was crime had gone down as windows were fixed but the actual fact of the matter was that abortion was legalized 18 years prior, consequently the birthrate dropped and subsequently there were less thugs on the street to do the crimes in the first place.

This isn't science that you're babbling, it's all rightwing Koch brothers and Richard Scaife talking points., ie, made up shitty pseudo-Grimm fairy tales.

You really should give it a rest because any and everything you claim can be refuted with a simple google search. Go bother /x/ or /k/ or somebody else. better yet, drop dead.

[Anonymous No.3483574]

>>3483555
>Your emotional and moral argument for dole unders has no relevance to economics.
There was a economic argument too (backed by empirical evidence of the failure of tax cuts and less government to stimulate the economy). A social safety net is beneficial for the economy and the quality of life of the population (which is ultimately the goal of economic development). There are also studies which have shown that people are happier in countries with more financial equality.

>Stimulation only occurs with less government
That's a nice dogma, but not backed by anything. I doubt you even have any credibility regarding the whole issue. People like you often tend to forget which government services they conveniently use.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3483591]

>>3483571

I do not vote as it is an act of aggression.

>>3483573

feds: i will give you some of the money for the rail i want to build, you must provide the rest
states: we don't have it, so we can't

I agree that the massive amount of minorities killed in the womb helped the crime rate go down. Of course government doesn't force abortions, so they are not responsible for any benefits from them.

>>3483574

There is never a benefit given by stealing from those that actually are in demand. NEVER.

Regulations, taxes, and spending massively increased during the great depression. The unemployment rates surged to double digits after the smoot-hawley tariffs were enacted and did not come down for the entirety of the decade.

[Anonymous No.3483600]

>>3483591
aggression against who? and if you don't vote, do you expect the current system to correct itself on its own?

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3483604]

>>3483600

Anyone that will have something thrust upon them they do not consent to.

Do I expect the state to correct itself? Of course not, the state cannot succeed at anything other than initial acts of aggression.

[Anonymous No.3483611]

>>3483604
That means you never do anything that isn't done absolutely voluntarily by all participants? You never try to convince anyone of your opinion (that would be pretty aggressive). You never take into account the opinions and feelings of others?

If you were consistent in your ideology, you'd probably have very few friends.

But enjoy being forced to accept the will of the majority. You choose not to make your voice heard, so you obviously accept the system.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3483617]

>>3483611

aggressive =/= initial act of aggression

And yes, I support consent by all.

Those that vote have indeed voiced their opinion and cannot complain after the fact.

[Anonymous No.3483618]

Econ 101 is always intro to micro, you're a faggot OP

[Anonymous No.3483631]

thanks op.

[Economy !!hHmjaQDJiWC No.3483659]

>>3483631
np.

[Anonymous No.3483706]

so what is the tldr op?

[Anonymous No.3483712]

>>3483659
Briefly sum up your policy recommendations

[Anonymous No.3483837]

>>3483712
Tax hikes based on capital costs. Induce government infrastructure projects. Enable small businesses to focus on business, not social welfare.

[Anonymous No.3483842]

>>3483706
America is badly managed. Politicians don't know shit about it. They need to be educated.

[Anonymous No.3483935]

>>3480938
That chart is misleading and should be normalized with population groat.

[Anonymous No.3483937]

bump for job

[Anonymous No.3483948]

bump for awesometastic
>>>/b/344482617

[illuminati !AI9Lue1M.E!!KyzG4KHXtor No.3483950]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy When you can generate this kind of economy. You'll become valuable once more.

[Anonymous No.3483951]

>>3483935
then do so, feel free. present the information you believe is right.

[Anonymous No.3484101]

I think liberty died in the face of facts and rationality

[Anonymous No.3484137]

>>3480856
all of my hate.

[Economy !!jLQAYUXZOCx No.3484320]

>>3484137
football is very important.

[Economy !!jLQAYUXZOCx No.3484330]

>>3483567
see:
>>3480880

[Anonymous No.3484404]

So you're a libertarian then?

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3484437]

>>3483837

Your plans have been consistently raped by time, reason, logic, and rationality.

[Anonymous No.3484471]

>>3484437
only in your world of delusion. feel free to present facts.

[Liberty !!nQrIRh+JHbs No.3484476]

>>3484471

The great depression.

[Anonymous No.3484490]

>>3483950
What lead you to decide this was the optimal system? I can see that there are fewer optimizations built in to the system, than a market economy.

[Anonymous No.3484779]

>>3484476
eh? you cite an environment with minimal regulation as your evidence for minimal regulation?

good luck with your facts, brah.

[Anonymous No.3485173]

bump for riot