> This precisely shows me you're dishonest. Why pick those categories while ignoring the "agree" one? Because it shows evidence of dissent in the community of

> This precisely shows me you're dishonest. Why pick those categories while ignoring the "agree" one? Because it shows evidence of dissent in the community of economists polled. I am happy to admit all of the specifics into the discussion. I am adamantly opposed to painting over the real disagreements in the economics community, because I think it's important. > That you cite those two cases while ignoring so many counter to what you want to be true is dishonest and misleading at best. On the other hand, you seem to think that I should accept the top-level conclusion you want me to accept without any reference on your part to the real disagreement present in the polls. I don't think 'dishonest' is a fair characterization of my attempt to point out that you are presenting your favorite side of the argument without considering the dissent. > How did I err? Banks have unlimited capital available, borrowable at Fed rates. It does have an effect on the economy - it lets the economy grow at rates demanded by commerce instead of being constrained by too little capital or by being overflooded with capital. Please clarify here: what would 'over-flooded with capital' look like?