Cafe Hayek - Latest Comments in Dog bites man

Re: Dog bites man

Alex Fabijanic — Sat, 09 May 2009 07:47:34 -0000

Smoke and mirrors business as usual - here's a debunk alongside with a good visualization:

I mean, you know how bad it is when not even Krugman is buying it

Re: Dog bites man

vidyohs — Fri, 08 May 2009 18:24:13 -0000

"Is running a large deficit necessarily the worst option available? There is no consensus on that, and there are *pretty* deep arguments on both sides.

Posted by: gappy | May 8, 2009 1:46:14 PM"

There is no consensus on that, yep you're right.

But, wow, what a surprise!

How could there be when you have roughly half of the Congress that embraces stealing from the wealth creators. Kind of hard to get a consensus on theft when thieves debate victims.

Re: Dog bites man

indianajim — Fri, 08 May 2009 15:26:42 -0000

gappy,

Interesting isn't it how these people who were supposedly "robber barons" were so altruistic. The myth is propogated by public school teachers who were trained primarily in public universities which are populated primarily by people whose understanding of economic history is indistinguishably close to zero.

Re: Dog bites man

gappy — Fri, 08 May 2009 11:58:45 -0000

I heard about the book on robber barons. I am interested, since I went to a university founded by one of them.

Re: Dog bites man

indianajim — Fri, 08 May 2009 11:17:59 -0000

gappy wrote: "Is running a large deficit necessarily the worst option available? There is no consensus on that, and there are *pretty* deep arguments on both sides."

The question you raise is too broad to answer rationally. Are deficits good or bad? It depends on many things. For one, it depends upon what the money borrowed is spent on. Historically, this nation has borrowed during wars. For example, there was a lot of borrowing during WWII; the war was won, so ex post these deficits appear to have had a positive impact upon the wealth of this nation (few will argue that we would have been better off not to defeat the Nazis).

On the other hand, borrowing to finance bailouts (ostensibly to prevent bankruptcies) only to see bankruptcies occur anyway will be judged by most to have been examples of wasteful deficits.

But the general idea that the government can make decisions that on average create more wealth than the private sector is at odds with the broad sweep of human history and US business history in particular.

If you want a good book that makes this point I recommend: "The Myth of the Robber Barons" by Burton Folson

The super-large deficits now being called for, given the proposed usages of the funds, are not easily confused with the deficits that funded WWII and are quite easily related to those that prolonged Japan's malaise and the Great Depression in the USA.

When in doubt apply Occam's razor:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

Re: Dog bites man

gappy — Fri, 08 May 2009 09:46:14 -0000

vidyohs and others, there is nothing wrong in being indignant against the obvious hypocrisies of the Left (although they are not the monopoly of the Left). But indignation in the long run is boring and is unpersuasive. Sometimes, reading the comments at Cafe Hayek reminds of being in a pub with friends and too much beer, ranting against the government. That's fun once in a while. But in the real-world one has to be more careful with his judgments. Is running a large deficit necessarily the worst option available? There is no consensus on that, and there are *pretty* deep arguments on both sides. As a right-wing liberal (NOT a conservative), I THINK they are a bad thing, but I base my beliefs on very provisional truths. But doubt and possibility seem unwelcome visitors here.

I think Russ is more nuanced in real life, but could not tell from many of his posts on Cafe Hayek. I just think he's more insightful at EconTalk. My point however is that there is nothing wrong in inspiring raucous comments. And there is not wrong in venting. But then, he and Don should not complain (as they occasionally do) about the tone of these same comments. In many ways, the quality of a blog is the quality of its readers.

Re: Dog bites man

indianajim — Fri, 08 May 2009 08:33:23 -0000

Reach Upward wrote:"Uncontrolled power and unbridled spending is one of the truly bipartisan things about national politics."

Yes, but, as Deirdre McCloskey keeps making clear, SIZE matters. The Reps. we now see are pikers in comparison to the Dems.

That is the Reps. are less bad by an order of magnitude that is not to be glossed over they way that your post might be read.

Again, Deirdre is correct.

Re: Dog bites man

Reach Upward — Fri, 08 May 2009 07:44:29 -0000

Yes, and the current administration is cutting almost everyone's taxes, too. (Just don't look down the road too far or you'll see open and broad tax increases -- "sacrifice" -- and hidden tax increases in the form of inflation.)

It makes this administration appear conservative in comparison to the likes of Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) who was reported in the 9/14/05 edition of the Washington Post to have said that there is simply no more fat to be cut from the federal budget.

Uncontrolled power and unbridled spending is one of the truly bipartisan things about national politics.

Re: Dog bites man

vidyohs — Fri, 08 May 2009 06:34:51 -0000

Gappy,

In a world where some sick people dreamed up socialism long ago, how does one talk about economics, markets, labor, or trade and not talk about politics in the same breath?

It's all politics.

Re: Dog bites man

dsm — Fri, 08 May 2009 06:20:29 -0000

The way I've blogged about this is to just normalize the numbers around the figure being cut. This puts it in a perspective that normal people understand:

Budget:      $3,400
Prj Deficit: $1,380
Budget Cuts:    $17

* All figures in $1,000,000,000

That tells you everything you need to know without the irrelevant marketing that the word "billions" provides the administration.

Re: Dog bites man

indianajim — Fri, 08 May 2009 06:06:28 -0000

Sorry about the typos above: my comparative advantage is not in typing. (gappy: there is content in this apology, i.e., "comparative advantage".)

:>)

Re: Dog bites man

indianajim — Fri, 08 May 2009 04:53:08 -0000

gappy,

Damn right I'm angry (my liberty is more at risk now than it has been in my 53 years as an American), but I'd be angrier if I did not have a constructive way to channel it. I post frequently here, often with economic insights and references, sometime with sarcasm, sometimes just for fun, sometimes to thank Don and Russ, sometimes to engage disagree with grumpy gappy that this is an "angry mob". On the contrary sir we are patriot. BTW, since you like content, do you know that George Washington's army drank rum in tremendous quantities; thank God they were an angry and "fired up" bunch, don't you agree?

Re: Dog bites man

indianajim — Fri, 08 May 2009 04:42:25 -0000

Michael,

Yes I hope for the same thing that the American people will await from what the public choice people call "rational ignorance" and cast vote that toss the Obama-enablers out of the Congress. It would be a great day for liberty if the likes of Reid and Specter were ousted. BTW, consider my characterization of Arlen:

Specter is to Pennsylvania as Dracula was to Transylvania: A cunning ancient menace seducing the locals and roaming abroad to exploit those beyond his borders of the resources to sustain his crumbling empire.

Voila: Count Arlen (Dracula) Specter

Re: Dog bites man

gappy — Fri, 08 May 2009 04:32:13 -0000

This is one of increasingly many posts by Russ and Don about . I am not objecting to their message, but their economic content is often nil. Their goal is not to make you indignant, not to challenge you with concepts from public policy, catallaxis, or whatnot. The replies usually are raucous and have no content whatsoever. Nothing wrong with it, but then the moderators should be aware that they are catering to the angry mob. They shouldn't object to foul language and the endless, pointless diatribes between Muirgeo and the rest of the world. I would happier with a sparser Cafe Hayek, but with longer, more thoughtful posts.

Re: Dog bites man

michaelsmith — Fri, 08 May 2009 02:56:26 -0000

The looter-in-Chief Obama and his power-lusting administration obviously think the American people are really, REALLY STUPID if it believes we will fall for this alleged "budget cutting" effort or be impressed by the recent boast that Obama will "cut the deficit in half".

We can only hope that enough Americans are awake to deliver a serious knee-capping to this gang of thieves in the mid-term elections. Otherwise, our goose is cooked. We can't survive four full years of this level of looting and destruction.

Re: Dog bites man

SaulOhio — Fri, 08 May 2009 02:51:40 -0000

$3.4 trillion minus $17 billion is still $3.4 trillion.

Re: Dog bites man

Randy — Fri, 08 May 2009 01:00:37 -0000

Great post, Morgan. When I think of it in terms of the effect on my family, I just focus on that 44.66% of GDP. I figure that's the percentage of what I earn that the government takes, one way or another. That is, much of what I pay in taxes is in the form of hidden sales taxes. So, are the "services" I receive from government worth 45% of what I earn? Ha. Not even close. 10% maybe.

Re: Dog bites man

GIl — Thu, 07 May 2009 22:03:28 -0000

Sure you can be call a right-winger. Not all righties support Republicans just as not all lefties support Democrats. After all, Left-Libertarians are primarily concerned as to the legality of drugs.

Re: Dog bites man

Andrew_M_Garland — Thu, 07 May 2009 17:23:10 -0000

Sorry, the links in my original post seem to be OK. But, they only showed up (to me) after I did the repost.

Re: Dog bites man

Andrew_M_Garland — Thu, 07 May 2009 17:21:41 -0000

(This is a re-post to display the provided links)

This graphic at PageTutor.com shows

what the current National Debt of $11 trillion would look like stacked in $100 bills
. $11 trillion is $11,000 billion, or $11,000,000 million.

Notice the figure of a man in the lower-left corner, which gives the graphic some scale. Here is a link to the entire presentation

Re: Dog bites man

Dr. T — Thu, 07 May 2009 15:33:43 -0000

TrUmPiT said: "I think the cuts made were token cuts to appease libertarians and other right-wingers."

Please do not call Libertarians right-wingers. We do not support most of the items on the Republican Party platform. It has been decades since Republicans actively supported small government, personal liberties, and federalism. Republicans and libertarians have few areas of overlap.

Re: Dog bites man

Lee Kelly — Thu, 07 May 2009 14:14:52 -0000

Mark T,

Of course it doesn't say "cost-effective", because without real prices its impossible to test whether anything is really cost-effective.

Re: Dog bites man

Ike Pigott — Thu, 07 May 2009 14:07:21 -0000

Guys... I'll say it again, and maybe it will stick:

Keynesian stimulus spending is like prescribing leeches to a hemophiliac.

Re: Dog bites man

Methinks — Thu, 07 May 2009 13:40:20 -0000

Indeed, IJ. Be careful what you wish for, eh?

Re: Dog bites man

indianajim — Thu, 07 May 2009 13:23:57 -0000

Methinks,

If Obama's Bills are "porkulus", the owing to their miniature size Bush's are only "pigletus". We liberty lovers thought we had is bad under W, but now that Obama supersized pigletus into porkulus, we might pine for the "good ole days".