4 ms·

Absolutely! Yes. Didn't Simpson-Bowels ( the bi-partisan deficit reduction committee) cite the Reinhart-Rogoff 90% limit as part of the justification for long

Absolutely! Yes. Didn't Simpson-Bowels ( the bi-partisan deficit reduction committee) cite the Reinhart-Rogoff 90% limit as part of the justification for long run austerity policies. I'd go further. Lets lay down the gauntlet here and proclaim: there is no long term deficit problem in the USA.

calinet6 14y ago
Bingo! This basically changes everything (or at least disproves the major argument against the deficit issue, since there is no proof that economic growth will be negatively affected by the debt). Too bad this can't be used more publicly in the political arena, since if anyone so much as mentions the economic theory people will be like "Reindeer-Stroganoff what?"
- bubbleRefuge 14y ago
  Yeah you're right. To wonky. Its to ez for j6p to equate the household budget/debt analogies with that of the Federal government. Especially with the false analogy reinforced every 5s by politicians/pundits on Fox News/CNN.
  - tunesmith 14y ago
    That one's always bugged me, because it's easy to imagine a Keynesian household budget, too. Imagine a multi-generational household where the patriarch has savings but where the living expenses are covered by his descendants. Then the banking system go crazy for a couple of months - a kid has a business idea that will make money but has lost bank funding. The patriarch has the choice whether to invest savings to get the business off the ground (increasing the probability of the kid contributing to living expenses in the future), or instead just tell the kid to tighten his belt, at the expense of the patriarch's own future living standard.
- pc86 14y ago
  Reindeer Stroganoff sounds delicious.
jerf 14y ago
This (and the rest of the thread dangling underneath it) is a false dilemma; "either Reinhart-Rogoff must be correct or Keynesianism must be correct".
at-fates-hands 14y ago
I'm pretty sure the military families and your parents drawing social security might say otherwise: "Fully two-thirds of the national debt is owed to the U.S. government, American investors and future retirees, through the Social Security Trust Fund and pension plans for civil service workers and military personnel. China, it turns out, holds less than 8 percent of the money our government has borrowed over the years." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/04/who-do-owe-most-that-16-trillion-to-hint-it-isnt-china/ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/04/who-do-owe-most-t...
- bubbleRefuge 14y ago
  Are you saying that a sovereign nation using a floating fx non-convertible currency regime cannot meet any financial obligation ? Or won't ?
  - kaonashi 14y ago
    There's always the risk of voluntary default; either the Republicans are bluffing on not raising debt-ceiling, or they aren't.

calinet6 14y ago

Bingo! This basically changes everything (or at least disproves the major argument against the deficit issue, since there is no proof that economic growth will be negatively affected by the debt). Too bad this can't be used more publicly in the political arena, since if anyone so much as mentions the economic theory people will be like "Reindeer-Stroganoff what?"

bubbleRefuge 14y ago
Yeah you're right. To wonky. Its to ez for j6p to equate the household budget/debt analogies with that of the Federal government. Especially with the false analogy reinforced every 5s by politicians/pundits on Fox News/CNN.
- tunesmith 14y ago
  That one's always bugged me, because it's easy to imagine a Keynesian household budget, too. Imagine a multi-generational household where the patriarch has savings but where the living expenses are covered by his descendants. Then the banking system go crazy for a couple of months - a kid has a business idea that will make money but has lost bank funding. The patriarch has the choice whether to invest savings to get the business off the ground (increasing the probability of the kid contributing to living expenses in the future), or instead just tell the kid to tighten his belt, at the expense of the patriarch's own future living standard.
pc86 14y ago
Reindeer Stroganoff sounds delicious.

jerf 14y ago

This (and the rest of the thread dangling underneath it) is a false dilemma; "either Reinhart-Rogoff must be correct or Keynesianism must be correct".

at-fates-hands 14y ago

I'm pretty sure the military families and your parents drawing social security might say otherwise: "Fully two-thirds of the national debt is owed to the U.S. government, American investors and future retirees, through the Social Security Trust Fund and pension plans for civil service workers and military personnel. China, it turns out, holds less than 8 percent of the money our government has borrowed over the years." http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/04/who-do-owe-most-that-16-trillion-to-hint-it-isnt-china/ http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/04/who-do-owe-most-t...

bubbleRefuge 14y ago
Are you saying that a sovereign nation using a floating fx non-convertible currency regime cannot meet any financial obligation ? Or won't ?
- kaonashi 14y ago
  There's always the risk of voluntary default; either the Republicans are bluffing on not raising debt-ceiling, or they aren't.