|
Mo_Steel posted:Oh boy, are we at the stage where we all post definitions to suit our fancy? Notice how those definitions states that "reduce a budget deficit, especially by reducing expenditures" instead of "reduce a budget deficit by reducing expenditures". Which means they don't preclude reducing the deficit through tax increases. http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/6254/economics/what-is-austerity/ quote:Austerity involves policies to reduce government spending and or higher taxes in order to try and reduce government budget deficits.
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 09:07 |
|
|
For the purposes of this discussion, we are using austerity to describe spending cuts and their associated ideological baggage that various governments are using to justify pursuing an ulterior agenda in the guise of fiscal responsibility, because that is how it's usually pursued and it's a good word for it. If you would prefer to use a different definition you can, but you will find it difficult to partake in the discussion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 03:59
|
|
|
Hmm...yes perhaps we've all just been confused and actually agreed with austerity all along!
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
Typo posted:Notice how those definitions states that "reduce a budget deficit, especially by reducing expenditures" instead of "reduce a budget deficit by reducing expenditures". You realize I'm mocking you for cherry picking definitions to make a worthless argument, and as a response you cherry picked not only from the definitions I linked but also went out to again cherry pick a definition, right? I'm concerned you may have missed it because I didn't spell it out plainly enough. I'll try again. Your posts in this thread thus far are obnoxious horseshit, and I'd much prefer to read posts by people who actually have some concept of modern economy who are willing to put in effort to present meaningful data and information about austerity as a response to the Great Recession and not be bombarded by lovely one-liners from you and a handful of other posters about "yeah but what about tax increases and that's not even the definition of austerity I meant, mine is much more broad than the thread discussion  ". My assumption is I'm not the only one so I hope if I cut your poo poo to the chase we won't slog through a dozen pages of your poo poo, but damned if I'm not a hypocrite for contributing to this shitheap pile more than two posts to explain to you how worthless your posts have been thus far, so I won't extend it out further. Hopefully that's clear enough, maybe you'll contribute something meaningful to the topic.e: Typo posted:oh D&D how I've missed you Apparently not, as now it's "lol d&d amirite". Can't fault a guy for trying I guess. 
Mo_Steel fucked around with this message at 05:09 on Jul 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:You realize I'm mocking you for cherry picking definitions to make a worthless argument, and as a response you cherry picked not only from the definitions I linked but also went out to again cherry pick a definition, right? I'm concerned you may have missed it because I didn't spell it out plainly enough. I'll try again. oh D&D how I've missed you
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
All those responses on page 1 and no one just answered 'poorly'? for shame 
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
JawKnee posted:All those responses on page 1 and no one just answered 'poorly'? Snake oil works wonders for the seller's wallet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 07:16
|
|
|
Typo posted:oh D&D how I've missed you Worthless pedantic arguments over the definition of words that everyone IRL understands is a time-honored tradition of D&D and one of the reasons why it's a bad sub-forum. So you might like to get off your high horse over there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 08:19
|
|
|
GulMadred posted:This wouldn't be a problem if Asdf32 would actually take pains to correct the misunderstandings and explain his contrarian position. But instead he just reiterates his premises (e.g. "austerity means decreasing the deficit"), sits astride his I'm-technically-correct-which-is-the-best-kind-of-correct high horse, and watches the thread get derailed. This isn't even technically correct: Austerity means cutting government spending and (maybe) raising more revenue. Whether a given austerity plan actually reduces the deficit as a percentage of GDP is, of course, not guaranteed. KingFisher posted:I mean I know you can't personally behave this way and max out your credit card every month because you know the *banks* wouldn't have given you that credit limit if you couldn't afford it. Actually this is exactly how smart countries deal with this situation: if someone maxes out their credit cards and can't service the debt, they can declare bankruptcy and the creditor has to gently caress off and be smarter next time instead of getting to enslave the debtor's kids.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 09:52
|
|
|
Austerity is a set of policies with a goal. It is not just a result.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
Austerity is throwing a shovel to a man in a well and urging him to dig to China. Or the middle of the South Pacific, in this instance.JawKnee posted:All those responses on page 1 and no one just answered 'poorly'? Nessus posted:Poorly. It does have the advantage of causing far less harm to the very wealthy than the poor, I suppose? Come onnnnn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 16:28
|
|
|
fspades posted:Worthless pedantic arguments over the definition of words that everyone IRL understands is a time-honored tradition of D&D and one of the reasons why it's a bad sub-forum. So you might like to get off your high horse over there. nah The fact that certain D&Ders are like the most easily riled up group of people on the internet might be though
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Actually that's part of my point. The definition of austerity is broad enough that it doesn't necesarily include context. Definitions don't include context, like EVER. By definition. Context is about where the term is being used. This thread is the context that tells us which meaning we're using. In the context of this thread, it is plainly obvious that we're discussing austerity in terms of bad economies and recovery from recession, not raising taxes in good times. Context shouldn't be a hard concept here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
To get this subject slightly back on track, does anyone think that any of the piigs could benefit from Iceland style austerity? Its probably silly to try to extrapolate the success of such a small country to for instance Portugal, but I really like the way Iceland implemented imf forced austerity. (I use austerity in the general fiscal sense, cutting spending and increasing taxes. Not the d&d sense) The capital income tax rate was doubled from 10% to 20%, the corporate income tax was increased from 15% to 20%, the social security contribution (SSC) was increased from 5.34% to 8.65% and fishing levies (important in Iceland) were increased. In addition a whole slew of new taxes were imposed (e.g. a net wealth tax, an inheritance tax, a financial activities tax (FAT) etc. etc.) https://thefaintofheart.wordpress.com/2015/06/12/is-iceland-krugmans-inadvertent-case-for-the-monetary-policy-offset-of-fiscal-policy/
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Trent posted:Definitions don't include context, like EVER. By definition. Yeah and? The context of austerity in the recent financial crisis applies to Greece, the UK, Iceland and a few other countries with varrying results. Do you agree or disagree. I take exception to the definition where people pretend austerity only means Greek failure. Also, to be clear, austerity isn't a reaction to recession. It's a reaction to debt.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
KingFisher posted:The children do not "deserve" to suffer, but they do at the will of their parents, therefore any suffering a Greek child endures is at the direct will of their parents and the Greek nation. edit: removed Radbot fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Jul 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Also, to be clear, austerity isn't a reaction to recession. It's a reaction to debt. It's a reaction to growth dumbshoe.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Also, to be clear, austerity isn't a reaction to recession. It's a reaction to debt. Hahahaha, sure buddy. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 23:08
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Yeah and? asdf32 posted:I take exception to the definition where people pretend austerity only means Greek failure. It means Greek failure, British failure and several other kinds of failure in proportion to the severity of the service cuts. The most successful austerity is the least austerity, and the most successful stimulus is the most stimulus.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
Trent posted:And you made a stupid comment about a definition not including context. Austerity prior to the debt crisis would have prevented the debt crisis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Austerity prior to the debt crisis would have prevented the debt crisis. Are you playing with definitions again, or are you claiming that countries should cut services when everything is fine in order to prevent theoretical future calamities? It doesn't even make sense since austerity is only austerity in a meaningful sense if it is a variation from the norm. Sane banking regulations would have prevented the world financial crisis. Greece had its own self-made problems, but the current "solutions" are not really about saving Greece, they're about not inconveniencing Germany et al.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 04:31
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Austerity prior to the debt crisis would have prevented the debt crisis. Actually implementing austerity would have worsened the debt crisis further, as the severe cut to their GDP growth alongside comparatively minor savings via gutting economically stimulating programs would have had its effects occur sooner, and given more time up to this point to worsen. It was estimated that greek debt would have hit 154% of GDP by 2016 had it maintained its current programs; right now, after implementing austere cuts, it sits at 177%. Shockingly enough, short term payment of fractions of the debt are not worth long term losses of the ability to pay the debt.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 04:34
|
|
|
To prevent a debt crisis, I am going to sell my stove and then lease it back at an inflated price. Also I am going to stop buying my insulin to save on the monthly medicine costs. Now I will never have to worry about debt.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Austerity prior to the debt crisis would have prevented the debt crisis. No it wouldn't have. Austerity only works if it's executed by a bunch of unicorns with MBAs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 12:46
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:No it wouldn't have. I didn't see any loving unicorns. Do you even know what austerity means?  And asdf32 talks a lot of economic poo poo, but he doesn't worry about the outcome. That is the dumbest way to argue or talk about economics. It isn't just theory, it is outcomes, so you better discuss those if you want people to care about what you have to say. The outcome is the important part, not some loving Ron Paul porn-fiction. Pohl fucked around with this message at 14:29 on Jul 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
How do you think most countries avoid debt crisis?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 14:36
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:How do you think most countries avoid debt crisis? Generally by having control over their own money supply.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:To prevent a debt crisis, I am going to sell my stove and then lease it back at an inflated price. hey I didn't know you were an Arizona politician
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 14:42
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:How do you think most countries avoid debt crisis? By not doing austerity? Or are we going into the household finances = state finances thing?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 14:46
|
|
|
uh austerity before the crisis would not have been austerity, as "austerity" commonly used refers to cutting spending in response to a downwards conjuncture in the economy, not countercyclical spending
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 14:57
|
|
|
probably the most resolutely keynesian european country, norway, weathered the 2008 crash with barely any economic perturbations at all
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 14:58
|
|
|
gently caress your austerity, I'm walking up to this place for breakfast: http://www.yelp.com/biz/big-kitchen-cafe-san-diego It may be really horrible. I just need some food, and to explore my new environment. I've lived here awhile, and this place is incredibly close, but I've never heard of it. So it is a big secret or it sucks. By close I mean 4 blocks, I'm a walking. Then the store for alcohol. Pohl fucked around with this message at 15:11 on Jul 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Austerity prior to the debt crisis would have prevented the debt crisis. This is incorrect, or if correct, irrelevant. The periphery governments (sans Greece) were fiscally responsible prior to the economic crisis. The debt crisis itself occured due to large increases in deficits caused by the recession together with private liabilities owed to northern European banks being taken onto the public balance sheet of southern European countries, occurring in a context where the countries are on an ersatz gold standard created by the Euro. Countries with post-WW2 monetary systems such as Japan, the UK or the US can swallow all those things with zero difficulty. It could be considered to be correct in the sense that sufficiently large austerity would have led to a large enough surplus and small enough (maybe even negative) government debt to weather the storms, but this is an irrelevant technical point since such a large surplus would be economically ruinous and is well outside what is normally considered required for fiscal probity, correctly so given that the crises would have been impossible in a properly designed Eurozone. This all allowing the use of 'austerity' to mean 'increasing the state budget surplus at any time' rather than its more usual usage pointed out by Comrade Lenin.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
Shooting all the bankers for the past twenty years would have prevented the debt crisis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Shooting all the bankers for the past twenty years would have prevented the debt crisis. I have a good friend that is a "banker", but I'd sacrifice him for the greater good. He's a VP at a major bank in New York. We can't talk anymore without fighting because he can't accept any loving criticism at all and he defends his business tooth and nail. I don't even have to bring it up, he loving does, because he is so defensive. I gave up arguing a long time ago and just ask him how he is going to feel when his family is hanging from light poles around town. You might think I'm joking, but I'm not. He doesn't find it funny; neither do I. I also don't find it funny when he talks about how much money he has and what he does with it. He isn't pushing it in my face (yes he does), it is more a matter of he has no idea how everyone else lives. When I tell him he is rich he cries that he is poor and putting his loving kids through school is costing him a fortune. They are all under 10, send them to loving public school. He pays more per month for a parking space than I pay for rent in San Diego. He bought his neighbors apartment for a million bucks and knocked down the wall to expand his space. His wife is not only a Dr., she is a major player in the NY medical scene, and makes more than him. To make this short, he is liberal at heart, but thinks he is overtaxed and that is effecting his ability to live "normally". I put that in quotes, because he believes that poo poo. Like I said, we fight a lot. Pohl fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Jul 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
Pohl posted:To make this short, he is liberal at heart, but thinks he is overtaxed and that is effecting his ability to live "normally". I put that in quotes, because he believes that poo poo. edit:   Look at these poor, woebegotten six figure earners. Won't someone think of the beachhouses!! ex post facho fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Jul 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
a shameful boehner posted:edit: Haha, thanks. I had that in mind when I wrote my post. Is he a bad person? Nope. Does he deserve what he earns? Sure. The problem is, he believe that everyone else is beneath him and they deserve nothing. That is where the problem comes in. He can't see any sort of parity, and his only goal or insight is to maximize profits for his company. He never had to work a regular job, and he doesn't see why people would bitch about it. He told me a funny story during the financial crisis that they were hiding a bunch of other poo poo, and if anyone found out, the crash that happened was just a start. I believed him, because like I said, he is a good friend of mine, why would he lie about that when he was in fact defending the financial industry. (actually he bitched that he had to work more to hide the evidence, but whatever)... I don't talk to him anymore because I kinda came to hate him. This isn't true, I still talk to him as a person but once anything about money comes up I hang up or log off. Edit: He was always most entertaining during tax season, because he wouldn't pay someone else to do his taxes. It was the funniest poo poo ever watching live how he was quibbling about his taxes. Just loving lol. Edit 2: He doesn't need a beach house, he takes his family to his parent's beach house every weekend/holiday. Who needs a beach house when you alread have one? Pohl fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Jul 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
Institute mandatory minimum wage jobs for all Americans, for a period of 6mos-3 years depending on random chance... BUT the trick is you just have to keep checking every week to see if you still have to keep that job, we don't tell you in advance. Because it's not just about the job, it's about the desperate feeling of never being able to get out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Shooting all the bankers for the past twenty years would have prevented the debt crisis. Shooting all the people for the past twenty years would have prevented the debt crisis, global exploitation and climate change.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 09:07 |
|
|
Pohl posted:I gave up arguing a long time ago and just ask him how he is going to feel when his family is hanging from light poles around town. You might think I'm joking, but I'm not. no offense dude but you probably shouldn't talk this way to people irl even if you do on the internet, it's a good way to lose friends and friends are awfully important even if they are assholes sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 20:17
|
|