Right wingers, don't be shy

So the answer is no specifics? I guess I can chalk up to agreement then.

 

Again you're incoherent. This is a chance for right wingers to confirm what economic school of thought they adopt. I've merely informed you that I expect vague reference to Austrian economics (nothing concrete mind you as the Austrians have so little to offer in terms of understanding economic phenomena) and a shunning of neoclassical economics

 

OK. Sounds good. If you think of anything I had missed earlier about political involvement in the economy, you just let me know. Otherwise all bases covered?

I type on a phone usually that is slow. Words are sometimes left out of posts. Everyone else can read them, lets get working on it over there Reviver.

 

Yep, you've fallen to the Austrian trick. Roger that!

 

That's a damn honest post. There's no shame in that.

 

They've never contributed much to understanding economics.

In the US, we saw almost 35 years or solid growth due to the combination of New Deal policies and Keynesian economics.

 

This is what I see most with the righties.

And I think that they also have a tendency to think in terms of personal checkbooks, when the larger macro issues are counterintuitive. You have to be able to apply statistics and empirical to reality.

 

Thank you. You will note however on this occasion that nobody has called me a liar.

 

Riever is a good guy. He's well versed in economics.

 

Threads like this are hilarious. Pompous words, without definition, being bandied about, vague definitions, implied (or stated!) ridicule.. these are pure political forum.

Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing. Macbeth, William Shakespeare

 

I wasn't referring to him in particular. If I were, I would have said so.

 

Which words do you need defined? Happy to help!

 

This policies lengthened the Great Depression. Imagine the growth if GovCo hadn't had spent so much money.

 

The biggest problem with that era was conservatism. It required world war for Keynesianism to be fully embraced

 

Which policy is "this"?

Half? A third of what we had?

 

There had never been such a stable, long term, economic growth until Keynesianism and the NEw Deal was embraced in the US. I think the rest of the world generally followed suit (or led the way, as Keynes, Wicksell, Ohlin and others were from Europe).

 

Is that why libs like war so much?

 

I'm not interested in playground tactics dear boy. Please try and say something relevant to the thread

 

You mean like "right wingers, don't be shy"?

 

Just matter of fact. Look at how many right wingers have actually referred to the political economic school of thought that they support. Getting info out of them is notoriously difficult.

 

Like your response to Krugman's trillion dollar coin idea?

 

Again, can I ask you to be relevant to the thread? Its not much to ask

 

As I suspected, the thread isn't about economics. It's school-yard trolling.

 

You're the one trolling. Refer to your political economic school of thought! Austrian, neoclassical, perhaps anarchist? Please give content rather than trying to de-rail a thread with schoolyard prattle

 

Yeah, that's got to be it. LOL