And I was trying to remind you that being an obscure political figure says nothing about the validity of ones argument. Hold an unpopular view likewise. Example, thinking the world was FLAT was very common 2000 years ago, and yet it wasn't now was it. The World was round even if the only person who held that view was some obscure Roman plebeian whose name was lost to the pages of history.
No you are obfuscating. There is nothing wrong with unconventional thinking as long as you can back it up with reason and evidence which is something you and Kotlikoff have not been able to do. When you have to start making stuff up and redefining the language and ignoring evidence, as you do then your unconventional thinking becomes delusion.
Here is another point you are missing, Bernanke has more credibility than Kotlikoff because Bernanke does not have a political agenda as does Mr. Kotlikoff. Further, Bernanke’s livelihood is dependent only on his performance as Fed Chairman and not on pushing books and other political material as is Mr. Kotlikoff.
YOU'RE the one with the case of Alpha Chimp syndrome. Somehow you have it in your head Bernanke and Greenspan have a clue as to how to fix the economy because both were elevated to the position of Federal Chairman.
Aside from the ad hominem, say what?
Well, guess what Joe. The FACT is this economy was driving off the edge of a cliff thanks to those two and they had NO CLUE. This is a simple fact of history. Anyone can read the Fed's meeting minutes. They ALL think the economy was prefectly fine, right up until a few months before the stock market crashed. And THESE are the same idiots you think are going to get us out? The same people who got us into this mess? Please, it's quite clear they bailed out their buddies in the top 1% and have been hoping all the little cogs wouldn't notice their lives slowly swirl down the toilet.
The fact is Bernanke and Greenspan had nothing to do with “driving the economy off the edge”. The economy was almost driven off the ledge by a Republican congress and president which deregulated the banking industry and Wall Street and allowed the trading of exceptionally risky derivative securities without recording the associated risk on corporate balance sheets.
I will grant you Bernanke was a little slow in recognizing the problem. But once Bernanke understood the problem, he has acted splendidly. Given the dysfunction of a Republican congress, Bernanke has been the savior of this economy, using monetary policy to cover the short comings in fiscal policy. And here is the rub; none of the people you cite saw the problem either. There is only one celebrity of note who predicted the problem with derivative securities and that was Warren Buffet (multibillionaire investor and Keynesian).
And as been pointed out to you numerous times, the only people bailed out in this crisis were the American people. But you are never one to let fact get in the way of your ideology. The reason government financing (i.e. bailouts) was needed is because the financial markets stopped working. Businesses could not go to banks or to Wall Street for the capital they needed to stay in business. And most of the so called “bailout money” has been paid back to the government with interest and capital gains. The government has made hundreds of billions on its “bailout investments” in the US economy. But those are one of the many facts you like to ignore in order to cling to your political ideology.
In "REAL" science when your models can't predict the biggest economic disasters in a century, when it's right in front of your face, well, usually said theories are tossed out along with the crack-pots so-called scientific career.
Economic models don’t predict fraud; they were never intended to predict crime or other abhorrent behaviors. Macroeconomic models don’t predict misrepresentation of data. Economists don’t have crystal balls that tell them credit rating agencies are going to erroneously rate securities. Economists don’t have “Minority Report” type psychics that tell them of future criminal or tortious actions before they occur. Therefore the economic models were not wrong.
Well, isn't that interesting? What? Did someone on MSNBC tell you it was time to kick granny to the curb? That's the thing I find the most interesting about Social Progressives, just how quick they'll turn right around and toss Grandma to the wolves. You'll never actually find "Greedy Capitalists" harming people, because they make money by trading with them. Not Progressives. They make their money off pointing a gun in someone's face and screaming "Social Good!" "Social Good!" which is why the Progressive Socialists who run Communist countries were (and are) some of the biggest mass murdering sociopaths to walk the earth.
lol....Europe finally promised one Turkey too many.
AS for Japan, I'm surprised they haven't erected a statue of Keynes in their Parliament. They are the example of what happens when you follow 25 years of progressive socialism. Unlike us, they have a deep culture shared by everyone. So, when times were tough, they pull together. They have a sense of shared burden. I know many Japanese who simply say they'll work until they die and never get a retirement. But, that's the way life is.
That is all nonsense and it doesn’t change the fact that Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are not debts as you and Kotlikoff have stated. They are entitlements enacted by congress and can be changed at any time, so for Kotlikoff to misrepresent them as debt as he has done, really blasts a big hole in his credibility.
I find your new found concern for granny rather amazing. You have wanted to throw both her and grandpa on the streets now for years. As I have told you before, healthcare financing is a big problem in this country. We are paying twice what other industrial countries pay for healthcare and those countries cover all their citizens and get better care to boot. Those countries clearly demonstrate that there is plenty of room for improving the US healthcare system and making it much less expensive while improving the quality of care. And Obamacare is an attempt to address that issue. And it is something that Kotlikoff ignores; it is like ignoring the freight train that is bearing down on your position.
I'm hoping we Americans do things our way... lets see how the Bankers like a the view of a hungry mob with pitchforks and fire
Americans are not doing things your way – thank God. And as a result our economy is in recovery and has been for the last 3 years. And we have taken action to mitigate our long term healthcare costs which even now in the early stages is bearing fruit.
Let me paint you a real world example, this one from Australia. An obese patient has a heart attack, patient uses the "Universal" healthcare. He doesn't do shit to change his diet and lifestyle. He has a second heart attack. He access his "Universal" Healthcare. He does nothing to change his diet and lifestyle. He has a third heart attack. At this point my friend told him he needed to diet. Do you know what he told her? To go F*ck herself. He 'Pays his Tax'. Her job is to fix him. He'll damn well eat what he likes to eat.
So? Do you understand that when there's no cost incentive people like this person suck out MILLIONS of dollars. This means that local schools, local parks, all those other 'Public' institutions are with LESS. Any of this making any sense to you Joe? Probably not because in Joe's world there's no such thing as limited resources. The sky's the limit. Dig holes and fill them in! That'll get those 'Animal Spirits' going....
No Joe. A comparison is just that - a comparison. You can either agree with parts of it or do not agree. What it isn't is a 'Lie'. A lie is a statement. Two completely different things.
That is hogwash Michael. You are doing your usual manure dump and creating more straw man arguments. No one is claiming that resources are unlimited. What is being said with respect to healthcare is that resources need to be better allocated. Our current system of allocating healthcare resources is sorely lacking. When other industrial countries can do twice as much and do it better and with half the resources as is the case; that says there are many opportunities for improvement in the US healthcare system. Obamacare is a first stab at making the US healthcare system more efficient and effective like those systems found in other industrial countries. You and Kotlikoff ignore those facts in order to push your political agendas. The US healthcare problem must be addressed regardless of the Medicaid and Medicare issues. Healthcare expenses currently account for 18% of GDP, if it is allowed to grow at historical rates, it will soon be more than 25% and it will impact our ability to generate domestic jobs. This has nothing to do with personal health habits. It has everything to do with how healthcare resources are allocated in our society.
As for your commentary on comparisons, you can say what you want, but it doesn’t make it true. You and Kotlikoff are making apples to oranges comparisons in comparing the US to Greece in order to create a false analogy. And that Michael is either dishonest or ignorant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apples_and_oranges
