patrick.net

tatupu70 says

theoakman says

Everyone who thinks deflation is an endless cycle ignores the fact that every period of deflation was self correcting.

How was the Great Depression “self-correcting”? Please elaborate.

it wasn't. That's why I said "the one they tried to fight".

theoakman says

tatupu70 says

theoakman says

Everyone who thinks deflation is an endless cycle ignores the fact that every period of deflation was self correcting.

How was the Great Depression “self-correcting”? Please elaborate.

it wasn’t. That’s why I said “the one they tried to fight”.

All evidence to the contrary, of course.

tatupu70 says

theoakman says

tatupu70 says

theoakman says

Everyone who thinks deflation is an endless cycle ignores the fact that every period of deflation was self correcting.

How was the Great Depression “self-correcting”? Please elaborate.

it wasn’t. That’s why I said “the one they tried to fight”.

All evidence to the contrary, of course.

Contrary to what?

theoakman says

Contrary to what?

Contrary to the story that you are trying to sell.

tatupu70 says

theoakman says

Contrary to what?

Contrary to the story that you are trying to sell.

Oh really? The great depression didn't last longer than every other recession as a result of a deflationary episode? There is a reason they referred to it as the "great" depression. Would you like me to draw a picture to help you understand?

theoakman says

The real story is that the GDP numbers were fudged and real GDP cannot be calculated because you cannot calculate real GDP using inflation numbers when your inflation numbers were completely biased by the fact that the government was heavily involved in price fixing goods and services.

Ahhh. Now I see how it works. Numbers are real if they agree with you. But they are fake or fudged if they don't.

I guess you never have to admit that you're wrong that way, huh?

The only problem with that theory is that the alternative of "not doing anything" clearly did NOT cause things to ever get better.

Any rational person would look at the data and claim FDR's policies were working. And that if anything, there should have been more intervention.

When the intervention stopped, things got worse. Not sure how anyone could see this and think that not doing anything was a better solution. When not doing anything clearly made things worse in 1937.

Finally, WWII got us out of the depression. That was one huge government intervention. Intervention worked. Non-intervention didn't. Any other explanation is just BS.

tatupu70 says

theoakman says

The real story is that the GDP numbers were fudged and real GDP cannot be calculated because you cannot calculate real GDP using inflation numbers when your inflation numbers were completely biased by the fact that the government was heavily involved in price fixing goods and services.

Ahhh. Now I see how it works. Numbers are real if they agree with you. But they are fake or fudged if they don’t.
I guess you never have to admit that you’re wrong that way, huh?

No, the fact that you think you can adjust for inflation when prices are being artificially fixed explains why you cannot trust the numbers. I don't expect you to understand any of this because it goes way over your head.

theoakman says

No, the fact that you think you can adjust for inflation when prices are being artificially fixed explains why you cannot trust the numbers. I don’t expect you to understand any of this because it goes way over your head.

lol--is it your contention then that GDP did NOT improve during FDR's term? And unemployment did not go down?

And that things didn't get worse when government intervention stopped?

tatupu70 says

theoakman says

No, the fact that you think you can adjust for inflation when prices are being artificially fixed explains why you cannot trust the numbers. I don’t expect you to understand any of this because it goes way over your head.

lol–is it your contention then that GDP did NOT improve during FDR’s term? And unemployment did not go down?
And that things didn’t get worse when government intervention stopped?

Like, I said, you have trouble following a single argument. It results in you stuck in perpetual arguments with everyone. As a high school teacher, I would compare you to the students that needs everything written out and underlined so you they can follow it.

Let me try.

GDP did not improve nearly as much as the numbers reported claim. If it did, unemployment would have improved beyond 10%.

theoakman says

GDP did not improve nearly as much as the numbers reported claim. If it did, unemployment would have improved beyond 10%.

OK let me get this straight--

Oak: FDR's government intervention made the Great Depression longer.

Tatu: Actually, if you look at the numbers, government intervention improved things. GDP rose, unemployment fell.

Oak: You can't believe the government numbers

Tatu: So GDP didn't rise? Unemployment didn't fall?

Oak: Well, GDP didn't rise that much.

The point is government intervention WORKED. No intervention (1937) DIDN'T WORK. History is very definitive.

tatupu70 says

theoakman says

GDP did not improve nearly as much as the numbers reported claim. If it did, unemployment would have improved beyond 10%.

OK let me get this straight–
Oak: FDR’s government intervention made the Great Depression longer.
Tatu: Actually, if you look at the numbers, government intervention improved things. GDP rose, unemployment fell.
Oak: You can’t believe the government numbers
Tatu: So GDP didn’t rise? Unemployment didn’t fall?
Oak: Well, GDP didn’t rise that much.
The point is government intervention WORKED. No intervention (1937) DIDN’T WORK. History is very definitive.

The fact that you think that economic intervention ended in 1937 shows you have no knowledge of the Great Depression. The fact that you think it started in 1932 also shows you have no knowledge of the great depression.

Achieving 10% unemployment is hardly what I would call a success story.

theoakman says

The fact that you think that economic intervention ended in 1937 shows you have no knowledge of the Great Depression. The fact that you think it started in 1932 also shows you have no knowledge of the great depression.

If I thought the Great Depression started in 1932 you might have a point.

So do you have any real basis to your theory that FDR's policies extended the Great Depression? So far you've offered nothing.

tatupu70 says

theoakman says

The fact that you think that economic intervention ended in 1937 shows you have no knowledge of the Great Depression. The fact that you think it started in 1932 also shows you have no knowledge of the great depression.

If I thought the Great Depression started in 1932 you might have a point.
So do you have any real basis to your theory that FDR’s policies extended the Great Depression? So far you’ve offered nothing.

"It" referred to economic intervention.

theoakman says

“It” referred to economic intervention.

Right--I forgot. The government is ALWAYS intervening and is ALWAYS the cause of whatever problem we are experiencing. No matter what it is.

But, again, how's about you present a case for why FDR made the Depression longer?

tatupu70 says

theoakman says

“It” referred to economic intervention.

Right–I forgot. The government is ALWAYS intervening and is ALWAYS the cause of whatever problem we are experiencing. No matter what it is.
But, again, how’s about you present a case for why FDR made the Depression longer?

I've already done it for you 2 or 3 times over the years. It never sticks so I won't bother.

You're main problem is you always inadvertently create a straw man argument because you either don't read carefully or you refuse to understand what anyone is ever arguing. Half the time, I give up with you simply because every other post requires me to clarify what a pronoun was referring to.

theoakman says

You’re main problem is you always inadvertently create a straw man argument because you either don’t read carefully or you refuse to understand what anyone is ever arguing. Half the time, I give up with you simply because every other post requires me to clarify what a pronoun was referring to.

lol--that's why you give up? Perhaps you might learn to write more effectively.. Just a thought.

(tip 1: learn the difference between your and you're)

tatupu70 says

theoakman says

You’re main problem is you always inadvertently create a straw man argument because you either don’t read carefully or you refuse to understand what anyone is ever arguing. Half the time, I give up with you simply because every other post requires me to clarify what a pronoun was referring to.

lol–that’s why you give up? Perhaps you might learn to write more effectively.. Just a thought.
(tip 1: learn the difference between your and you’re)

lol. No, even when I write a coherent sentence, you misconstrue it.

theoakman says

I’ve already done it for you 2 or 3 times over the years. It never sticks so I won’t bother.

How about you link to it then if it's too much trouble to write it again?

theoakman says

The fact that you think it started in 1932 also shows you have no knowledge of the great depression.

I'll stop now, but if you said this sentence to 100 people, 100 of them would say "it" referred to the Great Depression.

theoakman says

You are referring to the TARP. I was talking about the stimulus.

Ah I see...the ARRA you mean? First-time home buyer tax credit being a part of it....that worked very well right?

Keynesian economics says that the government ought to replace a drop in private spending with an increase in public spending to save jobs and stop further economic decline. What Keynesian economics doesn't realize is that the public spending itself comes from the private tax payers, so in some senses - the government is essentially a machinery to take money from one pocket to put it to another pocket. Whether the government is doing this efficiently better than the market participants is a question that can be answered easily. There is no recovery after what the government has done, which means it has done a useless job.

I don't know. I intend to keep my GLD until $250