It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by gorgi
Its reduce overall federal spending. That would be a major cut to the GDP and to peoples jobs, and there wont be a place to transfer those jobs over either.
Originally posted by gorgi
Apparently Dr.Paul does not realize that slashing pending during a hard economic time the economy will get far worse. There is a reason that no sane person takes him seriously.
Originally posted by The Old American
Originally posted by gorgi
Apparently Dr.Paul does not realize that slashing pending during a hard economic time the economy will get far worse. There is a reason that no sane person takes him seriously.
Dr. Paul's understanding of economics comes from his study of Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, and Milton Friedman, all clearly insane . I'm pretty sure Dr. Paul has at least an order of magnitude better understanding of economic principles than you, as observed by your comment.
/TOA
Originally posted by ModernAcademia
Originally posted by gorgi
Its reduce overall federal spending. That would be a major cut to the GDP and to peoples jobs, and there wont be a place to transfer those jobs over either.
Reducing wasteful spending will help lower inflation and people will buy more
people will buy more will mean more jobs
more jobs will mean more GDP
If jobs are essential then he'll keep them, if they are not then he will give the money back to the people by not taking it from them in the first place.
If people cannot afford to buy things people will lose their jobs
That's why both Cisco and HP just recently laid off alot of people, because people are buying less.
Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
Originally posted by gorgi
Apparently Dr.Paul does not realize that slashing pending during a hard economic time the economy will get far worse. There is a reason that no sane person takes him seriously.
You're funny. So we should just keep spending money that we don't have?
How much do they pay you for this?
Originally posted by DarthMuerte
reply to post by gorgi
That would be a major cut to the GDP and to peoples jobs, and there wont be a place to transfer those jobs over either.
My friend, while government jobs do "contribute" to GDP. The taxes taken to pay for those government jobs are a net loss to the economy. That tax money could be used for much more productive purposes. Productivity generally declines as the tax rate increases, as people choose to work less. The higher the tax rate, the more time people spend evading taxes and the less time they spend on more productive activity. So the lower the tax rate, the higher the value of all the goods and services produced. Government tax revenue does not necessarily increase as the tax rate increases. The government will earn more tax income at 1% rate than at 0%, but they will not earn more at 100% than they will at 10%, due to the disincentives high tax rates cause. Thus there is a peak tax rate where government revenue is highest. Point being, that cutting government jobs and reducing taxes will eventually lead to more private sector jobs which are more of an overall help to the economy. Well, this should "normally" be the case. However thanks to globalization and various free trade agreements, those jobs will be created just not here in the US. We have our wonderful politicians(of both parties) to thank for that.
Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
Originally posted by gorgi
Apparently Dr.Paul does not realize that slashing pending during a hard economic time the economy will get far worse. There is a reason that no sane person takes him seriously.
You're funny. So we should just keep spending money that we don't have?
How much do they pay you for this?
Originally posted by gorgi
Originally posted by The Old American
Originally posted by gorgi
Apparently Dr.Paul does not realize that slashing pending during a hard economic time the economy will get far worse. There is a reason that no sane person takes him seriously.
Dr. Paul's understanding of economics comes from his study of Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, and Milton Friedman, all clearly insane . I'm pretty sure Dr. Paul has at least an order of magnitude better understanding of economic principles than you, as observed by your comment.
/TOA
Those guys are crazy. Austrian school of thought is a joke and thats why no one takes them seriously. He doesnt. I try to show people economics by they prefer magic economics.
Originally posted by blah yada
reply to post by gorgi
He's talking about government spending, not consumer spending.Government spending does nothing to help the economy as it requires more borrowing and debt ceiling adjustment, deepening the mess.