Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[Majestik Møøse]

1 hour ago, HeloDude said:

Dude, you’ve lost me if your position is that someone can’t be against giving hundreds of billions of dollars to Ukraine without believing/being part of some “Russian propaganda” nonsense.

Russian propaganda is directly influencing conservative media and indirectly influencing you if you think that specific 0.01% of the budget is the problem to focus on. Best ROR of any defense spending program ever. Because fuck Putin, that’s why.

[Random Guy]

21 hours ago, brabus said:

Are you arguing business owners have increased their margins at the expense of employee pay, and that’s the root cause for non-owners feeling the significant financial squeeze over the last few years?

 

[Lord Ratner]

3 hours ago, Random Guy said:

Growth is a measure of spending, if the gov spends, growth increases by definition.

 

Edit: @HeloDude "GDP, the most popular way to measure economic growth, is calculated by adding up all of the money spent by consumers, businesses, and the government in a given period. The formula is: GDP = consumer spending + business investment + government spending + net exports."

I get that most Helo guys aren't sharp, but there's really no excuse here dude. You get this, right?

Yes, but the problem is that the formula does not subtract out deficit spending. That's not growth, which is explicitly the change in the size of the population and the increase or decrease in the productive output of the individuals in the population.

 

Adjust the "G" component downward by the deficit amount and the growth goes bye bye. 

 

You demonstrate perfectly the uselessness of modern economics. A bunch of novel concepts are created and measured with painstaking precision, yet the underlying metric is irrelevant in any practical situation. 

 

OER is a perfect example. When the practical reality of home prices became inconvenient, the fantasy of Owners Equivalent Rent was created to keep the charade chugging along.

 

It's funny, if the debt was so sustainable, why is the Treasury so anxious to get interest rates back down? Why did Japan just eat shit over an aborted tiny hike in their interest rates? Why is their currency diving? 

And regardless of the distribution of GDP, even *with* the deficit spending, growth is drafted by debt expansion

[Random Guy]

30 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Yes, but the problem is that the formula does not subtract out deficit spending. That's not growth, which is explicitly the change in the size of the population and the increase or decrease in the productive output of the individuals in the population.

All money is a liability on bank balance sheets (that means it debt). The source of money is bank loans, created to fund spending where current bank deposits are less than the planned spending amount (a deficit). If you apply your rule to subtract deficits (the loan) from spending (also the loan) the the result will always be zero.

 

30 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

You demonstrate perfectly the uselessness of modern economics. A bunch of novel concepts are created and measured with painstaking precision, yet the underlying metric is irrelevant in any practical situation. 

I didn't bring up growth--you did.

 

30 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

OER is a perfect example. When the practical reality of home prices became inconvenient, the fantasy of Owners Equivalent Rent was created to keep the charade chugging along.

When was I advocating for housing statistic X or Y? 

 

30 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

It's funny, if the debt was so sustainable, why is the Treasury so anxious to get interest rates back down? Why did Japan just eat shit over an aborted tiny hike in their interest rates? Why is their currency diving? 

Treasury is not anxious about rates. Where are you getting this?

What does Japan eats shit even mean? A .25% change to the floor rate in Japan hasn't led anyone to eat feces, lol. If folks levered in Yen to buy USG debt and that trade unwound that's not eating shit, it's pretty normal for one sided bets to unwind. 

 

30 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

And regardless of the distribution of GDP, even *with* the deficit spending, growth is drafted by debt expansion

Honestly not sure if you have any idea what you're talking about. Growth is a measure of spending, that's it. No one is counting actual output, because then someone would be recording all the unpaid labour.

[HeloDude]

2 hours ago, Day Man said:

- "giving hundreds of billions" (wrong)

"of dollars to Ukraine" (also wrong)

what are you missing here dude?

$175 Billion…sorry, there you go.

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-us-aid-going-ukraine

 

[HeloDude]

2 hours ago, Majestik Møøse said:

Russian propaganda is directly influencing conservative media and indirectly influencing you if you think that specific 0.01% of the budget is the problem to focus on. Best ROR of any defense spending program ever. Because fuck Putin, that’s why.

No, it’s really not.  I’m able to think for myself without having Putin influence me.  Your argument is the same as those saying someone was pro-Saddam Hussein if that person was against the invasion of Iraq.  I can be anti-Putin and also anti spending $175 Billion thus far on supporting Ukraine.  Nothing will ever get cut if the argument is “X is only tens of billions of dollars”.

[Majestik Møøse]

Thought experiment: If the cost of Ukraine assistance was a tenth of what it currently is but still as effective in pushing Russia’s shit in, would the same American commentators still be complaining? Of course they would, because it’s not really about the money, it’s about a combination of 1.) politically countering Democrat administration successes and 2.) actual sympathy towards Russian efforts.

[Day Man]

50 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

$175 Billion…sorry, there you go.

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-us-aid-going-ukraine

 

this graphic breaks it out better:

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/congressionally-approved-ukraine-aid-totals-175-billion

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, Random Guy said:

All money is a liability on bank balance sheets (that means it debt). The source of money is bank loans, created to fund spending where current bank deposits are less than the planned spending amount (a deficit). If you apply your rule to subtract deficits (the loan) from spending (also the loan) the the result will always be zero.

Yes, and zero (in the government spending component) would dramatically lower the GDP. We agree. 

And it's sad I need to add this, but not all govt spending is a loan. Taxation is the primary source. That's why government spending is in the GDP in the first place, because it is meant to capture the spending by the populace that was precluded through government taxation. If there was no deficit spending, this would actually be a fair measure, as taxation responds reliably to economic growth and contraction. 

 

1 hour ago, Random Guy said:

I didn't bring up growth--you did.

Sure you did:

"Growth is a measure of spending, if the gov spends, growth increases by definition."

 

1 hour ago, Random Guy said:

When was I advocating for housing statistic X or Y? 

You weren't. Just pointing out another silly metric used to portray the economic reality in a politically favorable light. 

1 hour ago, Random Guy said:

Treasury is not anxious about rates. Where are you getting this?

The secretary of Treasury. Good enough?

“We’ve raised the interest-rate forecast,” Yellen noted Friday in an interview with Bloomberg News. “That does make a difference. It makes it somewhat more challenging to keep deficits and interest expense under control.”

https://fortune.com/2024/05/25/deficit-debt-warning-janet-yellen-higher-rate-outlook-interest-expenses/

 

1 hour ago, Random Guy said:

What does Japan eats shit even mean? A .25% change to the floor rate in Japan hasn't led anyone to eat feces, lol. If folks levered in Yen to buy USG debt and that trade unwound that's not eating shit, it's pretty normal for one sided bets to unwind. 

https://www.wsj.com/economy/central-banking/boj-wont-raise-rates-when-markets-are-unstable-deputy-gov-says-6f4bf962

Right, they just had to backtrack on future hikes after a whopping .25% hike. That screams stability. The Yen devaluing by 1/3 in a few years is perfect normal too. 

 

1 hour ago, Random Guy said:

Honestly not sure if you have any idea what you're talking about. Growth is a measure of spending, that's it. No one is counting actual output, because then someone would be recording all the unpaid labour.

No, what's happening here is the normal people are talking about the actual economy using unambiguous terminology. You are attempting to convert the conversation into something more akin to academic economics. But the field of macroeconomics has been dead for decades. There's a reason investors don't lean on guys like Krugman to make money. Modern economics stopped being viable when it became a political tool to justify the utopian desires of elected fools. And no matter how many times the predictions are wrong, we just get more reasons why actually its very very complicated and you definitely can't use common sense. You've once again demonstrated this quite effectively. 

Edited August 14 by Lord Ratner

[HossHarris]

Will you morons just get a room already … for fucks sake 

[DirkDiggler]

Almost as if there’s already a room (or thread) for this stuff.

 

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, HossHarris said:

Will you morons just get a room already … for fucks sake 

Yeah dude, it's called base ops. Welcome to the orgy, fucko 🤣😂.

Edited August 14 by Lord Ratner

[WTFAF]

The anti-Ukraine movement is Russian propaganda that MAGA has stupidly bitten off on because it’s a counter to a wildly successful venture by the current administration. For a pittance (<1% of our normal defense spending), we’ve enabled the Russian military to destroy itself by proving the overwhelming superiority of American weapons (very old ones, at that) in the hands of motivated locals. The effort has helped deter those who use FSU-derived weaponry while upending the idea that a modern Army can just steamroll a determined (and well-equipped) local populace at will. Taiwan would be wise to use the same posture to deter China.
Putin is a shithead sacrificing Russian youth to overcompensate for his insecurities. He is a tiny-dicked that deserves a horrible death, which he will eventually get because the oligarchs would rather make money than see it dissolve in a war.

Goddamn this is well said. I'm glad there aren't just retard Russian shills in here.

[DirkDiggler]

Ukraine and the Problem of Restoring Maneuver in Contemporary War | Institute for the Study of War (understandingwar.org)

Long but quite interesting read.

[Stoker]

5 hours ago, HeloDude said:

Your argument is the same as those saying someone was pro-Saddam Hussein if that person was against the invasion of Iraq.

That would only be true if the invasion of Iraq was relatively cheap and wildly successful at improving American security, which it was neither.

[Random Guy]

9 hours ago, HossHarris said:

Will you morons just get a room already … for s sake 

These guys think that they should stop activity in Ukraine because the US 'cannot afford' to purchase things denominated in dollars. 

The US gov can buy anything in dollars, whether the choose to borrow first, and give welfare to the already wealthy, or print it directly on the Fed ledger, nothing limits the US govs ability to make purchases in dollar terms except people willing to make things for dollars. That's it.

If you want to argue against Ukraine aid, do it in real terms. Your arguments about debt and deficits are nonsense.

[Random Guy]

9 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Yes, and zero (in the government spending component) would dramatically lower the GDP. We agree. 

Oh FFS lol. If you don't understand that all money is debt just stop posting and go read a book.

 

9 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

And it's sad I need to add this, but not all govt spending is a loan. Taxation is the primary source.

Taxation cannot be a source for spending, how does one tax something which doesn't exist yet? If you secede from the US to start your own state and create your own new currency, you have to distribute it first before you can tax it.

 

9 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

That's why government spending is in the GDP in the first place, because it is meant to capture the spending by the populace that was precluded through government taxation.

 

9 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

If there was no deficit spending, this would actually be a fair measure, as taxation responds reliably to economic growth and contraction. 

All money balances created are 'deficit spending'. Just do the math dude.

 

9 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Sure you did:

"Growth is a measure of spending, if the gov spends, growth increases by definition."

I think Helo dude brought up growth. "You" you be "You guys". This place is like a field of mushrooms, everyone is the same. You = y'all. 🤣

9 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

The secretary of Treasury. Good enough?

I see boiler plate non-speak there, IMO.

 

9 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Right, they just had to backtrack on future hikes after a whopping .25% hike. That screams stability. The Yen devaluing by 1/3 in a few years is perfect normal too. 

Yen floats, they can do whatever they want. Depreciation only improves foreign consumption of their output. 

 

9 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

No, what's happening here is the normal people are talking about the actual economy using unambiguous terminology.

Ah. 

9 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

 Modern economics stopped being viable when it became a political tool to justify the utopian desires of elected fools. And no matter how many times the predictions are wrong, we just get more reasons why actually its very very complicated and you definitely can't use common sense. You've once again demonstrated this quite effectively. 

Economics is a language, used by the ruling class to justify political decisions. It's like modern Latin. That's it. Everything is everywhere, always, just politics. And everyone on this forum is literally too stupid to get that. This is the problem. Fix that and you fix everything else. Go kill the priests or learn the language. Those are your options.

[Random Guy]

11 hours ago, HeloDude said:

$175 Billion…sorry, there you go.

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-us-aid-going-ukraine

 

That counts spending on US purchases for the US as Ukraine aid. IOW, it doubles counts: if I give you an apple, and I buy a pear to replenish my fruit stand, I haven't supported you with 2 pieces of fruit. The footnotes in the CFR piece admit this double counting, just FYI.

[Lord Ratner]

7 hours ago, Random Guy said:

Oh FFS lol. If you don't understand that all money is debt just stop posting and go read a book.

 

Taxation cannot be a source for spending, how does one tax something which doesn't exist yet? If you secede from the US to start your own state and create your own new currency, you have to distribute it first before you can tax it.

 

 

All money balances created are 'deficit spending'. Just do the math dude.

 

I think Helo dude brought up growth. "You" you be "You guys". This place is like a field of mushrooms, everyone is the same. You = y'all. 🤣

I see boiler plate non-speak there, IMO.

 

Yen floats, they can do whatever they want. Depreciation only improves foreign consumption of their output. 

 

Ah. 

Economics is a language, used by the ruling class to justify political decisions. It's like modern Latin. That's it. Everything is everywhere, always, just politics. And everyone on this forum is literally too stupid to get that. This is the problem. Fix that and you fix everything else. Go kill the priests or learn the language. Those are your options. 

This guy is almost as good as General Chang was in his glory days 🤣😂

[HossHarris]

7 hours ago, Random Guy said:

That counts spending on US purchases for the US as Ukraine aid. IOW, it doubles counts: if I give you an apple, and I buy a pear to replenish my fruit stand, I haven't supported you with 2 pieces of fruit. The footnotes in the CFR piece admit this double counting, just FYI.

Unless you buy the pear from me as well

[tac airlifter]

8 hours ago, Random Guy said:

Economics is a language, used by the ruling class to justify political decisions. It's like modern Latin. That's it. Everything is everywhere, always, just politics. And everyone on this forum is literally too stupid to get that. This is the problem. Fix that and you fix everything else. Go kill the priests or learn the language. Those are your options.

You have an intriguing perspective but your hubris and delivery is off-putting.  Is every conversation in your life a lecture or do you dialogue at all?  If “everything is always politics” then we can disregard all your points as political spin meant to manipulate rather than educate. 

[Lord Ratner]

42 minutes ago, tac airlifter said:

You have an intriguing perspective but your hubris and delivery is off-putting.  Is every conversation in your life a lecture or do you dialogue at all?  If “everything is always politics” then we can disregard all your points as political spin meant to manipulate rather than educate. 

It's academics taken to its illogical extreme. You see the same thing in climate science. Absolute certainty in theories that have been mistaken for facts, and every time the theory is unable to predict the future, reasons are found after the fact to justify the theory's failure. When you question the theory, you are deemed too stupid. 

The Soviets called them useful idiots. Unfortunately they predominate in academia and politics. They proliferate during the good times, and skitter away like roaches when things get ugly.

 

But I think our resident economist is more like General Chang than he is like Paul Krugman. It was a good run.

[Boomer6]

Reminds me of the scientist Boyd referenced that declared the ideal missile would need to be shaped like a boomerang...

[Random Guy]

35 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

It's academics taken to its illogical extreme. You see the same thing in climate science. Absolute certainty in theories that have been mistaken for facts, and every time the theory is unable to predict the future, reasons are found after the fact to justify the theory's failure. When you question the theory, you are deemed too stupid. 

The Soviets called them useful idiots. Unfortunately they predominate in academia and politics. They proliferate during the good times, and skitter away like roaches when things get ugly.

 

But I think our resident economist is more like General Chang than he is like Paul Krugman. It was a good run.

Lol what? At what point were we discussing a theory? Lay it out for us.

[Random Guy]

1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:

You have an intriguing perspective but your hubris and delivery is off-putting.  Is every conversation in your life a lecture or do you dialogue at all?  If “everything is always politics” then we can disregard all your points as political spin meant to manipulate rather than educate. 

What did you want to dialogue?