tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post2040224397005828037..comments2024-03-14T11:09:32.759-05:00Comments on Falkenblog: Spending, the Cause and Solution of all Government's ProblemsEric Falkensteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-18301836400154163662011-07-05T04:25:52.734-05:002011-07-05T04:25:52.734-05:00"alien astronauts"?
You meant "imm..."alien astronauts"?<br /><br />You meant "immigrant astronauts" I'm sure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-11834947908042672162011-06-30T20:16:27.018-05:002011-06-30T20:16:27.018-05:00MMT baby.MMT baby.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-54188031112860566442011-06-30T14:18:38.012-05:002011-06-30T14:18:38.012-05:00Are we in Warren Mosler territory?Are we in Warren Mosler territory?Patrick R. Sullivannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-12831705995480126922011-06-30T08:55:51.999-05:002011-06-30T08:55:51.999-05:00The purpose of taxes is to maintain the value of t...The purpose of taxes is to maintain the value of the government's money (which would otherwise be worthless). Note that taxes do not "fund" government as many people wrongly believe.<br /><br />What is scarce are real resources (e.g. labor). Money is just a number, and you can't run out of numbers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-84074967333241611632011-06-30T06:21:24.884-05:002011-06-30T06:21:24.884-05:00If money is not a scarce resource then why do we b...If money is not a scarce resource then why do we bother to work for it? Why does the government bother to levy taxes?<br /><br />I think you mean that that in a recession where the economy is operating below capacity, and interest rates are near zero, deficit spending will will bring the economy back to full capacity. Thus the deficits pay for themselves through increased economic activity. However in practice it seems that once the deficit spending stops, the economy falls back, tax revenue doesn't increase and the national debt goes up even over the long run. Something is rotten. Or least something in the bastardized version of Keynes our current government is using. The lame excuse we get for failure is we didn't spend enough trying to boost the economy. If only we had spent more it would have worked.<br /><br />I think something's wrong with the basic neoclassical macro model of the economy. Like thermodynamics neoclassical economics replaces vectors with scalars like aggregate demand. One of Samuelson's professors was a disciple of Willard Gibbs, early pioneer of thermodynamics. That's why modern macro looks like thermodynamics. However the physicists have conservation laws which stem from symmetry-- see Noether's theorem. I don't think the economists have anything like that. Macro seems cobbled together with faith-based rules. In other words, macro economics is not a science. We realized all this in the late 1970s, but now we find the old Keynes re-animated like Dr. Hans Gruber in the 1985 cult-film <i>Re-Animator</i>. It didn't work out too well for Gruber because "the dose was too high." Similarly we might overspend and get a monster instead of a recovery.zarkov01https://www.blogger.com/profile/01062623377758910681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-56762970791086756812011-06-30T01:10:15.550-05:002011-06-30T01:10:15.550-05:00From my point of view you and Obama are in the sam...From my point of view you and Obama are in the same economic camp. You both take the traditional fiscal conservative view that money is a scarce resource, and the government is running low on this resource and must replenish its supply. Otherwise the government will go bankrupt, or alternatively hyperinflation will ensue.<br /><br />Obama expressed his economic theory most clearly when he stated the government is "out of money". Yes, he really said that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com