Quote:
Originally Posted by Archaea
Political rhetoric is tiresome at best, it's about spin and gamesmanship, not the academic pursuit of truth, correlation and even sometimes causation.
But political rhetoric likes to borrow from all realms in order to pretend to be accurate for the preservation of power.
Chino and Cali like to listen to liberal economists who spin current liberal economic theory, but when they use it as support for Obama's political positions, they have no more evidence than the next person.
I find it incredible that they, as advocates of Obama's economic policy, willingly accept the argument the economy is working and that the "stimuli" will actually turn the economy around. For example, we will never know if the economy would not have turned itself around, would not of stopped. And we have yet to see the effects of the inflation around the corner which is bound to happen as a result of the treasury bills being floated to fund the unprecedented government spending.
|
liberal economists like Tyler Cowen?
And don't worry about the inflation dude. The money printing is there to prop up a weak economy, not to finance the deficit. And it is being held as reserves, not being lent out to businesses. The following explanation is provided by "liberal economist" and Romney adviser Greg Mankiw.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/17/bu...my/17view.html
Economics is economics, dude.