Jump to content

~*Official Utterly Useless Old Woman, AOC, and UBI Thread*~

SaysWho?
 Share

Recommended Posts

Signifyin(g)Monkey

Signifyin(g)Monkey

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, 2user1cup said:

Who is this? I'm glad I'm not on the twitters, it's another world of crazy and I'm busy enough

Twitter has made it so that my immediate response to about 30% of the posts in a given thread is “who is this person and why do I care about what they have to say on this issue?”

 

Also tweets format like shit on my phone.

 

Also Twitter and tweets are obnoxious words.

 

Also I’m clearly turning into a cranky old-timer. (and I’m only halfway through my thirties!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
legend

legend

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Signifyin(g)Monkey said:

Also I’m clearly turning into a cranky old-timer. (and I’m only halfway through my thirties!)

 

I have a pet hypothesis that people are turning into cranky old-timers at younger ages because technology is moving so quickly that even for those of us in our mid 30s, there are a lot of new high-impact technologies that didn't exist when we were kids or even young adults.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheGreatGamble

TheGreatGamble

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Damn straight.

 

Would love to see Democratic leadership go after Republicans as hard as they've gone after Omar. But oh wait, they aren't Muslim. Or a woman. Or a minority. Or an immigrant. 

Look, theres plenty of reason that nobody but idealists take the words of Omar or AOC serious. I mean, I love AOC, she seems like a sweetheart, but she's clueless of the issues. I always thought the right was just attacking her, pretending she's a ditz. Then I heard her interviewed by Anderson Cooper saying things like, "It shouldn't matter if im factually right, as long as i'm morally right", and on the green new deal and how to pay for it, "We write blank checks for stuff all the time, we can just write another". Even cooper was trying not to look completely perplexed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarSolo

MarSolo

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, TheGreatGamble said:

Look, theres plenty of reason that nobody but idealists take the words of Omar or AOC serious. I mean, I love AOC, she seems like a sweetheart, but she's clueless of the issues. I always thought the right was just attacking her, pretending she's a ditz. Then I heard her interviewed by Anderson Cooper saying things like, "It shouldn't matter if im factually right, as long as i'm morally right", and on the green new deal and how to pay for it, "We write blank checks for stuff all the time, we can just write another". Even cooper was trying not to look completely perplexed. 

 

Except neither of those statements are wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarSolo

MarSolo

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, TheGreatGamble said:

Facts dont matter if you're morally right? Thats the biggest load of shit ive ever heard. 

 

And no, its not ok to write blank checks for trillions. 

 

Facts don’t matter if you’re a Republican anyway.

 

And we’ve been writing blank checks for the past two decades for two wars started by Republicans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, MarSolo said:

 

Facts don’t matter if you’re a Republican anyway.

 

And we’ve been writing blank checks for the past two decades for two wars started by Republicans.

 

The answer to mismanagement is more mismanagement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheGreatGamble

TheGreatGamble

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, MarSolo said:

 

Facts don’t matter if you’re a Republican anyway.

 

And we’ve been writing blank checks for the past two decades for two wars started by Republicans.

Liars on both sides should be called out, her included. It's still ridiculous to assert that morals are more important than the facts. And you don't match mismanagement with more mismanagement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greatoneshere

Greatoneshere

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, TheGreatGamble said:

Liars on both sides should be called out, her included. It's still ridiculous to assert that morals are more important than the facts. And you don't match mismanagement with more mismanagement. 

 

Yeah, it's not "both sides" and worrying about AOC or Omar like you'd worry about Jim Jordan or Mark Meadows or the many other Republican sacks of shit in Congress is disingenuous and a straw man argument.

 

But you can keep repeating that it's all equal on all sides, which is ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Signifyin(g)Monkey

Signifyin(g)Monkey

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, TheGreatGamble said:

Facts dont matter if you're morally right? Thats the biggest load of shit ive ever heard. 

 

And no, its not ok to write blank checks for trillions. 

Regarding the writing of blank checks, I think she's basically regurgitating a vulgar version of MMT.

 

Theoretically, according to MMT's school of thought, if you borrow in your own currency, and the debt you accumulate through deficit spending is not owed to other countries, then there is no necessary limit on the amount of debt you can take on without collapsing the exchange rate. (talking government debt here)

 

But I think it's more complex than that, and she's hand-waving those complexities.  I would say there are two underlying theoretical questions that ought to be part of any debate over said proposition:

 

1.) is there a point at which the US deficit can no longer be financed via bond issue? (or is the dollar for all intents and purposes the 'immaculate investment' that there will always be demand for?) 

2.)if, at some point, it can't be financed via bond issue, will then simply issuing currency to fill the gap be more inflationary than financing the deficit via bonds? (or could it possibly collapse the exchange rate/be hyperinflationary?)

 

If the answer to both is 'yes', then AOC is clearly wrong.  If the answer to both is 'No', then she's actually technically correct, at least in the narrow sense of there being no real borrowing limit.  The answers aren't clearly established--Japan is the most interesting test case we have atm, IMO.

 

But I have zero confidence that she's thinking about any such nuances, or that they will actually be discussed--IMO, all we're likely to get is more platitudes.  Which is unfortunate, because I'd like to see more discussion of these details, and of MMT in general among mainstream economists--there's more mention of it now in the financial press, but at the moment it's not so much discussion as simple 'Nope, it's wrong' or 'Duh, it's right' declarations by economists and think-tanks who are being blinded by partisan self-interest, which is easier to do with theories that are considered 'fringe'.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
marioandsonic

marioandsonic

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, legend said:

 

I have a pet hypothesis that people are turning into cranky old-timers at younger ages because technology is moving so quickly that even for those of us in our mid 30s, there are a lot of new high-impact technologies that didn't exist when we were kids or even young adults.

At this point, trends, especially in technology, come and go so fast that analyzing them is almost like studying quantum physics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...