Awesome
OFFICIAL WHITE HOUSE RESPONSE TO
Secure resources and funding, and begin construction of a Death Star by 2016.
This Isn’t the Petition Response You’re Looking For
By Paul Shawcross
The Administration shares your desire for job creation and a strong national defense, but a Death Star isn’t on the horizon. Here are a few reasons:• The construction of the Death Star has been estimated to cost more than $850,000,000,000,000,000. We’re working hard to reduce the deficit, not expand it.
• The Administration does not support blowing up planets.
• Why would we spend countless taxpayer dollars on a Death Star with a fundamental flaw that can be exploited by a one-man starship?
#1 by Richard Warnick on January 12, 2013 - 12:34 pm
Plus, the Death Star would be no more effective against al-Qaeda than another aircraft carrier or nuclear submarine.
#2 by cav on January 12, 2013 - 1:30 pm
Death-sub just doesn’t have the proper resonance.
“The Administration does not support blowing up planets.”
Fracking up planets…now, that we can get behind
#3 by Shane on January 12, 2013 - 3:18 pm
The death star would be 100% effective against terrorism. No more plant, no more people, no more humans, no more terrorism. Seems like a fool proof plan.
cav, blowing up planets is so immediate. Cracking means that the current supporters will be dead by the time the shit hits the fan…
#4 by Larry Bergan on January 12, 2013 - 7:12 pm
Whoever proposed a “death star” project has a great sense of humor.
I don’t believe Ronald Reagan would have fallen for it, but he DID fall for the Star Wars project – imaginary protective shield – which bilked our economy for years and probably still is.
Just who was it that said the government doesn’t create jobs? Eisenhower warned us that they will!
Hats off to George Lucas – creator of both the “death star” and “Star Wars” – who recently donated 3 of 4 billion dollars for education. I don’t know the details, but it seems like a good thing.
#5 by brewski on January 12, 2013 - 7:22 pm
It would actually be free since all Treasury needs to do is to mint a few of those trillion dollar coins and voila, it’s paid for. The magic of fiat currency. Just as the Weimars.
#6 by Larry Bergan on January 12, 2013 - 8:00 pm
Bush-the lesser took the wars OFF the budget, making the expenditures invisible and Obama put them back ON the budget, allowing the schemers to blame him for the war deficits.
Why did he do that, brewski?
#7 by brewski on January 12, 2013 - 8:06 pm
Budget? Budget? What budget?
Ohhhhh, you mean that thing that the Senate hasn’t passed in FOUR years in violation of the law. That budget?
http://www.politifact.com/tennessee/statements/2012/sep/28/bob-corker/bob-corker-says-senate-has-not-passed-budget-more-/
#8 by Shane on January 12, 2013 - 8:06 pm
Isn’t he cute when he spouts his tribes propaganda? Weimars? Adorable!
#9 by Larry Bergan on January 12, 2013 - 8:25 pm
I said:
brewski, immediately, responds with:
Exactly my point.
#10 by brewski on January 12, 2013 - 8:27 pm
Isn’t it cute when he knows when he is wrong and dodges every point entirely. It must be tough being wrong all the time, although I wouldn’t know.
#11 by Ronald D. Hunt on January 12, 2013 - 8:46 pm
Even if we simply printed the entire national debt, all $16 trillion dollars or so, we would only cause around 10-15% inflation from that.
Weimars republic isn’t even close to comparable to that, they where printing multiples of the amount of currency in circulation every week, by simply adding a few digits to the bills they printed every week/month.
For the US to come anywhere near close, we would be talking printing on the scale of $160 trillion dollars every 2 weeks , and increasing that figure every 2 weeks or so by 100%, and doing that for a year or two straight. This level of devaluation was intentional and known by the government to eventually crash the currency.
China has been doing something similar to keep the value of their currency down, not to the same extreme however, and they have been buying immense amounts of foreign debt, not just US debt, but debt from all over.
Really what we should do, is allow the SS trust fund to leverage itself through the federal reserve bank on a 10:1 ratio and purchase all US government debt. set the new debt limit to the lending capacity affording by the trust fund doing this, around $28 trillion dollars.
We can tie the special fed rate for SS to the employment rate, setting the rate to 1.5% when unemployment is below 4%, and setting the rate to 0.5% when the unemployment rate is above 4%.
A very Nice inflation control system, when unemployment is low, inflation gets reduced, and when unemployment is high, the extra SS revenue can be paid as a stimulus bonus check to seniors.
#12 by brewski on January 12, 2013 - 8:48 pm
Treasury spokesman said, “Neither the Treasury Department nor the Federal Reserve believes that the law can or should be used to facilitate the production of platinum coins for the purpose of avoiding an increase in the debt limit.”
With the platinum coin off the table, the White House chimed in Saturday, urging Congress to get to work.
“There are only two options to deal with the debt limit: Congress can pay its bills or it can fail to act and put the nation into default,” White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said.
#13 by Shane on January 12, 2013 - 9:42 pm
“With the platinum coin off the table…”
Even though there is no reason to say it is.
None of it matters anyway. The rethugs already blinked. The orange skinned cry baby has admitted he is screwed, and the public knows he is screwed, and blames the rethugs, and wall street does too.
In the meantime, Ronald just schooled your ass, proving that if you don’t know what it is like to be wrong all the time it is only because you don’t know that you are in fact wrong, and nearly all the time.
But I am sure you still won’t know……
#14 by cav on January 12, 2013 - 9:45 pm
B But, but, but…Benghazi!
#15 by Larry Bergan on January 12, 2013 - 10:44 pm
Back on topic, (sort of):
Can someone lend me 30 bucks so I can see William Shantner when he comes to town.
I love the guy! Humor is the best medicine.
Glad to get Shane and cav for free!
#16 by brewski on January 12, 2013 - 11:29 pm
Lesson #1
“Even though there is no reason to say it is.”
The Treasury said it is off the table. That is the reason to say it is.
Lesson #2
The M2 money stock is $10.5 trillion. Increasing it by $16 trillion would be 152% inflation.
Lesson #3
The President’s Budget states:
“the fiscal position gradually deteriorates mainly because of
the aging of the population and the high continuing cost
of the Government’s health programs…the deficit and the debt ratio begin to rise again in the period after 2022, with the debt-to-GDP ratio eventually far exceeding its previous
peak level reached at the end of World War II.”
RDH is wrong. You are wrong. I am right. I have the facts. You don’t. You got schooled.
This feels soooo good.
#17 by cav on January 13, 2013 - 12:01 am
Wages are flat, people are out of work.The rich are getting richer. What do you want?
#18 by brewski on January 13, 2013 - 8:27 am
I have no idea what that question means.
#19 by Larry Bergan on January 13, 2013 - 9:37 am
brewski:
What question?
#20 by Larry Bergan on January 13, 2013 - 10:10 am
Place finger between lips. Rapidly move up and down, while humming.
My solution.
#21 by brewski on January 13, 2013 - 10:11 am
“Wages are flat, people are out of work.The rich are getting richer. What do you want?”
#22 by Larry Bergan on January 13, 2013 - 10:20 am
brewski:
You beat me by a minute and ruined my point involving fingers!
I don’t hate you, but I wonder what you’re up to.
#23 by cav on January 13, 2013 - 10:40 am
“I have no idea what that question means.”
My point – Exactly!More! Or: It All! would have been suitable answers.
#24 by cav on January 13, 2013 - 12:25 pm
We’re a country of immense wealth.
MINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
From each according to his powerlessness to each according to his power.
#25 by Larry Bergan on January 13, 2013 - 1:42 pm
cav:
Enough with the punctuation!
#26 by cav on January 13, 2013 - 1:44 pm
When the price of prime rib goes up, retirees can just switch to chicken. And when the price of chicken goes up, they’ll switch to rice and beans. And when the price of rice and beans goes up, they’ll switch to cat food. Protein is protein.
Oldster Chow – made with Vegemite and pink slime. It’s got the nutrients old people need.
But brewski will never get old. And if he did, his retirement account, all of that compounded interest, and all of the money invested in the stock market, guns and ammo will see him through to perhaps his hundred and ten years. Beyond that…there’s just no telling.
#27 by cav on January 13, 2013 - 1:47 pm
#28 by Larry Bergan on January 13, 2013 - 1:49 pm
Actually, I don’t care how much you punctuate, as long as you stay.
#29 by cav on January 13, 2013 - 1:50 pm
Larry. I forgot about the rationing. My bad.
Now, I recall it being clearly stated in the bylaws: only twenty ‘!’ per month. NO EXCEPTIONS!!!!!!!
#30 by Larry Bergan on January 13, 2013 - 3:27 pm
Learn it, know it. live it!
#31 by cav on January 13, 2013 - 3:43 pm
My rebelliousness has ALWAYS been a problem.
(behind back: !!!!!!!!!!)
#32 by Ronald D. Hunt on January 13, 2013 - 8:34 pm
Lesson 1#
M3 is the statistic to look at not the M2, and the M3 is understated by available continuations.
Nor does printing have a 1 to 1 inflation ratio as it relates to volume(another lesson from the Weimar republic funny enough).
Money that can be put to work doesn’t create as much inflation as money that sits around.
Lesson 2#
The projections in these things are “only if” projections, that is to say, they are only true if current policy stays in place, and the projections are generally conservative and are often take out of context by people like you repeating the worst case scenario rather then the most likely one.
lesson 3#
“high continuing cost
of the Government’s health programs”
Are you stupid?, wait silly question. Of course you are!
Health care costs are a economy wide issue, public, private, and otherwise. The private sector will crash cost wise long before the government does, as the private sector has no means to control health care cost inflation, nor is it in there interest to.
Retirement has similar problems, What do you think is going to happen as the rate of seniors drawing down whats left of their 401K’s is going todo to the market?, Ohh thats right you hadn’t thought of that because you are to busy castigating the most successful government program in history Social Security!
Fuck the think tanks brewski, left, right, center, they are ALL, and I do mean every single last one of them are LYING to you.
For once in your ignorant life go and read the government report on what your currently bitching about(whatever that happens to be). Read the SS report, look at the ASSumptions made in their projection, Understand the fallacy to relying on projections that are so easily swayed by even minor fudging of likely outcomes.
brewski is wrong. You are wrong. I am right. I have the facts. You don’t. You got schooled.
#33 by Shane on January 13, 2013 - 9:02 pm
Hey brewski, about lesson 2…
Companies don’t raise prices because they say “hey look, more money was printed!” they raise them because demand has gone up. But right now we are in a liquidity trap. The problem IS a lack of demand. That is why despite 4 years of predictions from people who don’t actually understand economics (like you) we haven’t had inflation. We wish we had inflation. That would actually help the problem, at least if it was a nice steady low level. But we aren’t seeing it. Because people aren’t demanding stuff. Because we are busy firing the government employees and not creating enough extra money to influence people.
Again, 5 minutes with about anything written by Krugman would be good for you.
Seriously, we know you don’t understand. You have proven this before. Over and over. But at least try to learn.
If we have short term rates at pretty much zero, and still can’t get people to spend extra money to jump start the economy, printing money is not going to cause some run away inflation, because we are trapped and there can be no boom to cause the massive readjustment of value.
We are looking at a slump that the policies you are talking about are making worse, and the same people who accurately predicted this have also pointed the way out. And the people who claimed this could never happen again (right up until the second it did) support your reasoning. Does that really not tell you something? Are you that dense?
#34 by brewski on January 13, 2013 - 9:11 pm
“Companies don’t raise prices because they say “hey look, more money was printed!” they raise them because demand has gone up.”
False.
Go take a few courses in advanced monetary theory and get back to me when you have even a small fuck of an idea of what you are talking about.
If demand was what drove prices, then places like Zimbabwe (where I have been), Argentina (where I have been) and other places with low demand and high inflation would not exist.
But they do which proves you are dead wrong.
You make it way way too easy for me to clinic you.
#35 by brewski on January 13, 2013 - 9:33 pm
“it is clear that monetary policies, which financed huge budget deficits and were supported by political leaders, were the cause.”
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/09/1970s-great-inflation.asp#axzz2Hv82meDt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation_in_Zimbabwe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentine_economic_crisis_(1999–2002)
http://www.brookings.edu/views/papers/bdp/bdp114/bdp114.pdf
#36 by brewski on January 13, 2013 - 9:41 pm
RDH,
M3 is about $16 trillion, so printing another $16 trillion would get you about 100% inflation.
Show me your calculations, support, data and research that gets you to a 10-15% inflation rate.
Or are you just making shit up?
#37 by Ronald D. Hunt on January 13, 2013 - 11:30 pm
“M3 is about $16 trillion”
After the audit of the Fed we know for a fact that, that number is vastly understated.
In just the year of the Audit the Fed created over $23 trillion credit dollars, Nobody knows how much the Fed created in the surrounding years.
FYI very little inflation sense, QE1-3(4?) haven’t created any inflation either.
Simple observation can tell much of this story.
By your accounting, under Bush we should have had 400%-500% inflation, that never happened.
The Fed has been, and is being ran by a bunch of print happy drunken retards. And yet we have generally low inflation.
Yes a few things on the CPI are pushing that figure up, Oil, Health care, but these items are not going up due to currency valuation changes.
Hell we are still in a situation where deflation could be an issue, if you where to put pressure on the many trillions of dollars that corporate America is sitting on, and get them investing again, you very easily could have a situation where the increased demand for money could increase its value.
Very example of hyperinflation involves Nations very purposely massively increasing the volume of currency, the Weimar republican, Argentina, and Zimbabwe, for example where increasing the volume so much that they had to add digits to the printed currency every few weeks.
Nothing drives public perception about the valuation of a currency like new bills with extra digits every few weeks!, infact inflation in the Weimar republic was inconsistent from one region of that Nation to the next based on whether that region had yet received the latest next highest domination bills.
In order to make the USA look like any of your hyperinflation examples, we would have to create petrillions of dollars.
Actually a study of the lag between volume increases and real inflation in the Weimar republic would be very interesting to see. Especially, if you could break it down regionally, or even find the valuations from foreign exchanges.
#38 by Ronald D. Hunt on January 13, 2013 - 11:58 pm
I propose a thought experiment here,
I create 100 $1 trillion dollar coins, and assume that these can be broken down into small denominations with ease, in that the nature of it being a $1 trillion dollar coin doesn’t get in the way of its usability.
I then at complete random give them to 100 people in New York. And that I told no one, and for the sake of this experiment control the media such that no news about this ever gets out.
Now this would certainly create inflation, but the question is how long would it take for the market to realize this inflation? how much inflation?, Over what period of time would this realization occur?, What is the lag to the first noticeable change in the inflation rate?
Now realize the Fed has already done with at least once sense 2006!,
#39 by cav on January 14, 2013 - 1:02 am
If you give 100 $ trillion to 100 New Yorkers, won’t you be affecting the already bizarre wealth divide, making the un-gifted 99.99% that much poorer by comparison? And what about the notion that those of great wealth have a different relationship with the Creator?
Of course there’s always the possibility one of them would kick Jamie Dimon’s ass.
This thought experiment is making my head hurt.
#40 by Shane on January 14, 2013 - 10:03 am
Initially I was confused by this response, however in rereading my post I see that the fault is mine. The paragraph you quote from is not mine, but actually from Paul Krugman. I was typing on my phone and neglected the quotation marks. Do I feel silly? Egg on my face…
I will inform Dr. Krugman that if he ever manages to take a course in advanced monetary theory and gets even a small fuck of an idea what he is talking about that he will then be worthy of learning at your feet.
#41 by cav on January 14, 2013 - 10:35 am
Ha!. Punctuation IS important
#42 by brewski on January 14, 2013 - 10:54 am
Ask Dr. Krugman how there are numerous periods of history, including in the United States, where there was high inflation and low demand.
Up to the 1960s many Keynesian economists ignored the possibility of stagflation, because historical experience suggested that high unemployment was typically associated with low inflation, and vice versa (this relationship is called the Phillips curve). The idea was that high demand for goods drives up prices, and also encourages firms to hire more; and likewise high employment raises demand. However, in the 1970s and 1980s, when stagflation occurred, it became obvious that the relationship between inflation and employment levels was not necessarily stable:
You also might consult John Maynard Keynes.
In 1919, John Maynard Keynes described the inflation and economic stagnation gripping Europe in his book “The Economic Consequences of the Peace”. Keynes wrote:
“Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the Capitalist System was to debauch the currency. By a continuing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some.” [...]
“Lenin was certainly right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.”
Keynes explicitly pointed out the relationship between governments printing money and inflation.
“The inflationism of the currency systems of Europe has proceeded to extraordinary lengths. The various belligerent Governments, unable, or too timid or too short-sighted to secure from loans or taxes the resources they required, have printed notes for the balance.”
#43 by Shane on January 14, 2013 - 12:16 pm
All of that is very true, and matters. Until the liquidity trap.
It is funny how you are so well educated that you always miss the basics…..
#44 by Ronald D. Hunt on January 14, 2013 - 12:31 pm
well educated?!?,
Hardly, he is just regurgitating talking points from libertarian websites, And keys actually changed several positions after further study of the depression, and the failure of hoovernomics.
1919 is rather early in Keys career, he had better works later in his life.
#45 by brewski on January 14, 2013 - 3:06 pm
Keynes is a libertarian? Who knew?
#46 by Larry Bergan on January 14, 2013 - 7:33 pm
“Idiocracy” is a great movie. I’m glad the video clip at #27 didn’t give away what was killing the environment. You’ll just have to watch the movie.
#47 by Ronald D. Hunt on January 14, 2013 - 9:43 pm
In his early career, he toke more from the writings of neo-classical economic theory rather then from the understandings of his own observations and studies.
Many components of neo-classical economics would fit nicely with libertarian positions, that doesn’t make them correct, neo-classical theory is most debunked by Keys himself later in his career.
Remember that in the next two decades following 1919, that most of Europe and the USA, drop the gold standard and move to fiat currency.
All of the really … “fun” stuff happens later!, years ending in 29 and such, black colored Tuesdays, and so forth.
#48 by Ronald D. Hunt on January 14, 2013 - 9:46 pm
I suggest reading,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_General_Theory_of_Employment,_Interest_and_Money
#49 by brewski on January 15, 2013 - 4:34 am
“Remember that in the next two decades following 1919, that most of Europe and the USA, drop the gold standard and move to fiat currency.”
And?