I wish one of OUR Congress people would say what this Brit said in Parliament

[dixiegrrrrl]

short, clear, precise and accurate..give a listen.
edited to clarify: This was in the EU Parliament.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hivQvtR66U&feature=player_embedded#!

[ThatPoetGuy]

1. WTH?

"National differences cannot be eradicated; harmonization doesn't lead to prosperity.... You cannot spend your way to growth...."

It's right-wing boilerplate, down to its condemnation of Keynesian economists.

[dixiegrrrrl]

2. Nothing right wing about it.

" You cannot increase consumption without producing anything"
" You cannot debase a currency without consequences"
" You cannot keep borrowing forever"

what is right wing about that????

[ThatPoetGuy]

5. It's false, to begin with.

He's advocating cutting expenditures. That's all. This is a fake issue, used by deceivers, who really just want to shrink the government: remove government regulations on pollution, employment pay, consumer protection, worker safety, and so on.

Everything this man is advocating is exactly what the Tea Party is advocating.

National economies don't function like your checkbook, but political swindlers use that thinking to fool you into ideas that hurt you.

Here's an analogy that makes more sense.

You live in a town you love. You're one of five or six rich people in town, and everyone around you is poor. The town is struggling. What's the best thing you can do to save your town?

You could be a tightwad and keep your money to yourself. You could give money to the other rich people in town, which will accomplish nothing -- the rich people will invest it, or spend it elsewhere, on their vacation home or their yacht.

There are a couple of good ways you can stimulate your town's economy. One is investing in projects. You've always wanted a concert hall in town, so build one. Spend a million dollars on contractors, construction workers, laborers, suppliers, hardware, and so on. You get that concert hall,and hundreds of people get income.

And then they take their income, and they spend it. They're not rich, so almost all of it gets spent locally. They go out to dinner, and so the local restaurants don't have to close. The restaurant stays open, so the waiters can pay their mortgage. They don't get evicted, and homes aren't being foreclosed, so real estate values stay high. Real estate values stay high, so parents can take out good mortgages to pay for their kids' college education. And on and on and on. Every dollar that gets spent in your town makes the town better. No matter how many times those dollars are spent.

THIS is what stimulus does. This is what the Tea Party is trying to prevent. This is what that guy in the video is railing against.

Oh, and he avoids saying the name, but it's pretty clear he's condemning a Nobel Prize-winning Keynesian economist named Paul Krugman.

[bemildred]

3. Yep, 100% bullshit.

National differences come and go (history is full of that), harmonization leads to harmony (Duh?), you can spend your way to growth (in fact there is no other way, spending is "demand", no "demand", no growth).

[golfguru]

7. Spending with borrowed money is suicide

especially when the spending is for temporary projects which get finished and the jobs vanish. But the debt remains for ever with interest to be paid for ever, such as we are now paying China Billions EVERY YEAR just to service the Treasury bonds they own.

[bemildred]

8. Bullshit. Money is not real.

It is entirely a social fiction at this point, it has no relation to physical reality, and only a lubricating relation to the economy, like having enough oil in your car engine. They can print as much as they want and put as much or as little of that as they choose into the economy whenever they want and in whatever place they want. This has been clear since Bush the Younger's early years. We certainly do have economic issues, but they are a lot more fundamental than excess money supply in a diminishing marketplace.

[golfguru]

9. How are you doing financially?

Do you have any "real money" or is it all "social fiction"?

As for printing unlimited amount of money have you studied history? Weimar Republic? Peron's Argentina? Zimbabwe? They all tried printing lots of paper money. Those who ignore history will be doomed to repeat it.

[bemildred]

10. False dichotomy, social fictions can work fine, as long as everybody has "faith" in them.

I would wager I have read a hell of a lot more history than you. Lots of governments, societies, and cultures have debased money in one form or another - it is such an obvious way to make a quick profit - sometimes they get away with it and sometimes they do not, and that was even the case back when money was "real". One of the advantages of the present situation, where they just have to add a few zeros at the end of the "debt" every so often is that there is no reason whatsoever to expect it to have any effect as such on the real economy, or that the debt will ever actually be paid back.

[OllieLotte]

11. Maybe you should put down the book and leave the cave?

Even a few minutes might prove to be beneficial to you.

[bemildred]

12. Oh my goodness, have I trampled on some taboo, made an heretical statement? nt

[ThatPoetGuy]

14. It's odd to come to DU and see Tea Party talking points,

or to hear such mindless recitation of historic pseudo-facts, punctuated by pseudo-quotations.

The Weimar Republic? Jeebus. It was Chartalist, not Keynesian, economics that led to hyperinflation. The Weimar Republic did exactly what Keynes himself told them NOT to do. Blaming Keynesian economics for the Weimar hyperinflation is like blaming the invasion of Iraq on pacifism: the comment is either insane, poorly-informed, or intentionally misleading.

"We never would have invaded Iraq if those pacifists hadn't pushed us to do it."

Your misquote is apt: the Weimar Republic failed to follow intelligent, Keynesian policies, and that led to hyperinflation; it's a mistake you seem to want us to make again.

[golfguru]

18. If avoiding debt is Tea Party talking points

that is news to me. I have lived my entire 6 decades
using Bohemian finance plan....pay everything in cash.
I just do not buy anything I can't pay for in cash. The
first new car I bought took me 4 years to save up for.
I drove the cheapest used clunkers I could find before that.
But from then on, I have not paid a single penny to buy
all new cars for interest. Actually I collect bank interest
while I am saving for the next car. And since it is not
financed I can bypass buying full collision coverage!
More savings!!

Now in my retirement years I am debt free and solvent!
I recommend this method highly based on actual lifelong
experience.

I can't think of any country or an individual who has done
well in the long run by carrying large debt burden and
paying interest all along.

[OllieLotte]

22. The Millionaire next door.

Should be required reading in high school.

[Yavin4]

16. If you got an acceptance letter from Harvard University's Graduate School of Business...

but you didn't have the money for the tuition, you would borrow the money and spend it on your education. Would you not? Of course you would, because a Harvard MBA has tremendous market power, and it will open doors for you in your career.

Spending with borrowed money is suicide. Spending on worthwhile projects with borrowed money is how you build an economy.

[golfguru]

17. Borrowing for investment is never bad

As you cite education as one example. That is an investment. Or starting a business which has demand.
Or buying a house you can afford.

Borrowing to spend on non-necessities such as a luxury
car, large flat screen TV, a McMansion, a grand vacation etc are the kind of things it is unwise to borrow for.

I can never understand why some people buy stuff using credit cards which they can not pay off every month. They are actually paying significantly more compared to cash purchase if they include the exorbitant interest rates.

[Yavin4]

19. Correct. In The U.S., We've Been Borrowing and Spending on Rich People and the Military

two items which did nothing to improve our economy. IOW, they were wasteful.

Borrowing and spending on, and I'll use your term, "investments", like infrastructure is the kind of productive spending that Keynesian advocated. For example, building an airport would do wonders for a local economy. It creates jobs, increases travel, and contributes mightily to the local economy.

[golfguru]

21. Please see post #20 n/t

[golfguru]

20. Could'nt agree more on cutting military spending

and I mean drastically. We are STILL spending Billions in Iraq & Afghanistan not to mention Libya. What is next? Rebuilding Libya? Why do we maintain 700+ bases around the world with borrowed money?

All that would not even be so bad if we had surpluses to burn. But to borrow from China to protect China's oil supply from middle east with borrowed money is as stupid as it gets.

[Claudia Jones]

4. they do

We have people in Congress saying those things.

It is pure right wing propaganda.

[dixiegrrrrl]

13. what the hell is right wing about mathamatical reality?

" You cannot keep borrowing forever".

[golfguru]

6. +1 Trillion

Everything he said is dripping with economic reality.

[Yavin4]

15. Keynes Never Advocated Borrowing and Spending Money Primarily on the Wealthy and Corporations

He never imagined the whole globalization scheme: outsourcing jobs, moving factories overseas.

It's not that Keynes is wrong. Rather, it was never applied correctly.