Hence why I said "half".Burwhale wrote:
Pretty much all other countries had some sort of stimulus plan. Ours worked. Dont think its luck. Most economists backed the stimulus and agreed it was the right thing to do.
Liberal? Not really. I have no idea who I'll vote for...Burwhale wrote:
As where many other countries ( that arent now). I know you are a liberal voter Spark, but you gotta give credit where its due.
Not all economies are the same. A stimulus for America doesn't make a whole lot of sense because of our already massive debt situation. Australia, on the other hand, has managed its debt quite well.Burwhale wrote:
What are you talking about . Last time I checked Australia didnt go through a recession, and our unemployment stayed at very low levels. As far as I know, Rudd was at the reigns. Sounds like the economic plan worked pretty well.Cybargs wrote:
Obama is like Rudd. No economic plan. The best thing a country could have is a leader who has a strong understanding of economics.
Having a shit ton of steel and coal and someone who wants to buy a shit ton of steel and coal kept Australia afloat.Burwhale wrote:
What are you talking about . Last time I checked Australia didnt go through a recession, and our unemployment stayed at very low levels. As far as I know, Rudd was at the reigns. Sounds like the economic plan worked pretty well.Cybargs wrote:
Obama is like Rudd. No economic plan. The best thing a country could have is a leader who has a strong understanding of economics.
Economist. They were the same ones that drove this bus into the ditch.Burwhale wrote:
Pretty much all other countries had some sort of stimulus plan. Ours worked. Dont think its luck. Most economists backed the stimulus and agreed it was the right thing to do.
Not really... politicians and bankers played a bigger part -- as did speculative traders.Kmarion wrote:
Economist. They were the same ones that drove this bus into the ditch.Burwhale wrote:
Pretty much all other countries had some sort of stimulus plan. Ours worked. Dont think its luck. Most economists backed the stimulus and agreed it was the right thing to do.
Economics may be considered a science, but it's not like a hard science. There are widely varying views among economists about how effective a stimulus might be.Kmarion wrote:
Bankers aren't economist? Make no mistake, those politicians had so called "economist" in their ears. They didn't just all of a sudden show up to endorse the stimulus.
There is a theory for everything. Most economist are usually motivated by self interest. Calling someone an expert is just an excuse to not think for yourself.Many of us find the stock market too intimidating to put money into, or at least we would if we had the money to invest in the first place. How do you decide what stocks to pick? We can't even pick where to go for lunch half the time and we understand lunch.
Yes, as it turns out, the majority of professionally managed funds picked by stock market experts (70 to 85 percent) actually underperform the Dow or S&P indexes, which are technically supposed to represent the average performance of the market to begin with.
I'll agree with your last sentence for sure. You never want to consult only one "expert" on any topic, and certainly not with your investments.Kmarion wrote:
The title economist is self promoted. Do you realize that "Stock Market Experts" are wrong most of the time?There is a theory for everything. Most economist are usually motivated by self interest. Calling someone an expert is just an excuse to not think for yourself.Many of us find the stock market too intimidating to put money into, or at least we would if we had the money to invest in the first place. How do you decide what stocks to pick? We can't even pick where to go for lunch half the time and we understand lunch.
Yes, as it turns out, the majority of professionally managed funds picked by stock market experts (70 to 85 percent) actually underperform the Dow or S&P indexes, which are technically supposed to represent the average performance of the market to begin with.
Well, are you saying that we shouldn't study economics? If so, good luck investing.Kmarion wrote:
In the case given I was not assuming they were wrong. It was a statistical fact. It's easy to try to predict human behavior. It's nearly impossible to get it right. Economist usually try to reconcile their predictions after the fact, no matter how wrong they were. Their ambiguity is akin to John Edward. The majority of it is bullshit.
As with anything else, opinions among economists vary wildly. Some are hardcore socialists, some are hardcore libertarians. Like with commercials where '9 out of 10 doctors recommend X', any politician can pull up a panel of economists and find support.Kmarion wrote:
Bankers aren't economist? Make no mistake, those politicians had so called "economist" in their ears. They didn't just all of a sudden show up to endorse the stimulus.
Doctoring the panel, eh?JohnG@lt wrote:
As with anything else, opinions among economists vary wildly. Some are hardcore socialists, some are hardcore libertarians. Like with commercials where '9 out of 10 doctors recommend X', any politician can pull up a panel of economists and find support.Kmarion wrote:
Bankers aren't economist? Make no mistake, those politicians had so called "economist" in their ears. They didn't just all of a sudden show up to endorse the stimulus.
Guys I meant Australian economists talking about the Australian economy. I wasnt referring to the US economy etc. Our economists said it was the right thing to do. China did have a role in helping us out of the crisis, but one of the biggest contributors for us was consumer spending. We literally spent our way out of the crisis. That was one of the primary contributors. Of course there were many others, but that would be off topic.Turq wrote:
I don't think it's correct for Burwhale to say that most economists supported the stimulus, because that's ignoring various free market economists who were against the stimulus.
That would be a big difference between your stimulus and ours. Consumer spending vice government spending. Developing a stimulus package that stimulates consumer spending would actually work, vice what our epic fail did.Burwhale wrote:
Guys I meant Australian economists talking about the Australian economy. I wasnt referring to the US economy etc. Our economists said it was the right thing to do. China did have a role in helping us out of the crisis, but one of the biggest contributors for us was consumer spending. We literally spent our way out of the crisis. That was one of the primary contributors. Of course there were many others, but that would be off topic.Turq wrote:
I don't think it's correct for Burwhale to say that most economists supported the stimulus, because that's ignoring various free market economists who were against the stimulus.
Brilliant post. I also think that a renewed effort for beyond Earth space exploration would result in inspiring a new generation of scientists and engineers - something that can't be given a dollar figure.Kmarion wrote:
You believe this because you are thinking small. NASA has helped to create millions of jobs in the Tech and Medical industries. MRI's, cell phones, articfical limbs, infrared tech, LED tech, GPS..etc. Technology used to study space probe photographs is now being used to analyze human chromosomes. Other advances developed for monitoring changes in the Earth's atmosphere are now being used for the early detection of breast cancer. Light emitting diodes built for Space Shuttle plant experiments are being used to perform brain cancer surgery. It goes on and on.Turquoise wrote:
Not really... NASA isn't a major employer. Besides, the market is better at motivating research than the government.Kmarion wrote:
It matters. It's about jobs amrite? Do you really think the US is throwing in the towel?
Of course it matters.
Even if you aren't willing to think indirectly it's easy to recognize the 24k jobs that will be lost as a result of canceling the shuttle program. Those relatively few federal dollars are just going to go to the Russians to ferry humans to orbit at 50 million a pop. The shuttle program is also just a single part of NASA. They employ (some of the nations brightest) people all over the country (Ames, JPL, Goddard). The amount they employ may be small in comparison to what the military does, but the military isn't operating on 0.58% of the budgets discretionary spending. The military isn't making us money every time it launches a private rocket or sells a patent neither. The return we get, even if you take the pure scientific benefit out, is easily worth it.
Scientist are naturally motivated to research. NASA has plenty of them.
NASA is part of "the market" silly goose. Believe it or not, NASA is not in the business of building rockets.
China. China China China.Spark wrote:
Half of that was just good "luck" from Rudd's point of view - the stimulus plans, I think, have helped a lot though.Burwhale wrote:
What are you talking about . Last time I checked Australia didnt go through a recession, and our unemployment stayed at very low levels. As far as I know, Rudd was at the reigns. Sounds like the economic plan worked pretty well.Cybargs wrote:
Obama is like Rudd. No economic plan. The best thing a country could have is a leader who has a strong understanding of economics.
Dwarfed, as minty says, by the fact that China hasn't stopped wanting every last piece of iron ore in the country.Burwhale wrote:
Guys I meant Australian economists talking about the Australian economy. I wasnt referring to the US economy etc. Our economists said it was the right thing to do. China did have a role in helping us out of the crisis, but one of the biggest contributors for us was consumer spending. We literally spent our way out of the crisis. That was one of the primary contributors. Of course there were many others, but that would be off topic.Turq wrote:
I don't think it's correct for Burwhale to say that most economists supported the stimulus, because that's ignoring various free market economists who were against the stimulus.
No. I'm saying we shouldn't line up to worship them, citing them every time we want to make an argument. As you said, the science leaves a lot to be desired.Turquoise wrote:
Well, are you saying that we shouldn't study economics? If so, good luck investing.Kmarion wrote:
In the case given I was not assuming they were wrong. It was a statistical fact. It's easy to try to predict human behavior. It's nearly impossible to get it right. Economist usually try to reconcile their predictions after the fact, no matter how wrong they were. Their ambiguity is akin to John Edward. The majority of it is bullshit.
Don't forget coal as well.Spark wrote:
Dwarfed, as minty says, by the fact that China hasn't stopped wanting every last piece of iron ore in the country.Burwhale wrote:
Guys I meant Australian economists talking about the Australian economy. I wasnt referring to the US economy etc. Our economists said it was the right thing to do. China did have a role in helping us out of the crisis, but one of the biggest contributors for us was consumer spending. We literally spent our way out of the crisis. That was one of the primary contributors. Of course there were many others, but that would be off topic.Turq wrote:
I don't think it's correct for Burwhale to say that most economists supported the stimulus, because that's ignoring various free market economists who were against the stimulus.
Then what are you going to use as evidence for an argument regarding economic policy?Kmarion wrote:
No. I'm saying we shouldn't line up to worship them, citing them every time we want to make an argument. As you said, the science leaves a lot to be desired.Turquoise wrote:
Well, are you saying that we shouldn't study economics? If so, good luck investing.Kmarion wrote:
In the case given I was not assuming they were wrong. It was a statistical fact. It's easy to try to predict human behavior. It's nearly impossible to get it right. Economist usually try to reconcile their predictions after the fact, no matter how wrong they were. Their ambiguity is akin to John Edward. The majority of it is bullshit.
Last edited by Turquoise (2010-03-17 16:33:56)
I can level with that... I don't worship them either...Kmarion wrote:
I said worship. There are some that believe that because a so called "economist" said something then it is good 'nuff.