Obamanomics

[Chef Jim]

But I believe you can't refute it because you are a ding dong. A light weight ding dong at that!

 

So when beef prices rise due to inflation the farmer gets more money for his beef so he's happy? Dude you are the simplest of simpletons.

Edited September 25, 2013 by Chef Jim

[Tiberius]

Learn to speed read. I only spent three seconds.

 

Still a complete waste. But I have 27 extra seconds you don't.

 

So you agree with Tasker that its all monetary and not demand? Tard

 

On the plus side, he just argued that the ACA should be repealed, since rising health insurance costs are a good thing.

 

I never said that, but I'm glad you agree Obamacare will help lower costs!

[DC Tom]

So you agree with Tasker that its all monetary and not demand? Tard

 

http://www.walmart.com/ip/15210526?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=3&adid=22222222227000000000&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=21486607510&wl4=&wl5=pla&wl6=19880599990&veh=sem

 

Start here. Then get back to us.

 

 

I never said that, but I'm glad you agree Obamacare will help lower costs!

 

1) It won't.

2) If it does, that's bad, by your own argument. One of the benefits of inflation inflation of health insurance costs is that leads to more health insurance which is a good thing. By YOUR OWN logic, the ACA will reduce access to health insurance, because reducing costs will reduce the amount of health insurance available. You should, by your own economic argument, be the last person here to support the ACA.

[meazza]

Learn to speed read. I only spent three seconds.

 

Still a complete waste. But I have 27 extra seconds you don't.

 

So you're this guy?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utlsh7Dhr0M

[Tiberius]

So when beef priced rise due to inflation the farmer gets more money for his beef so he's happy? Dude you are the simplest of simpletons.

 

So my mom shouldn't have been happy when she got higher prices for the cattle she sent to market?? Wow! I suppose I should have just put up a picture of a cow up an argument like you did with the calculator. I thought maybe it took a simpleton to know a simpleton but calling you simple is giving you too much credit. Like when you said small business owners with more money wouldn't create new jobs

 

http://www.walmart.c...0599990&veh=sem

 

Start here. Then get back to us.

 

 

 

 

1) It won't.

2) If it does, that's bad, by your own argument. One of the benefits of inflation inflation of health insurance costs is that leads to more health insurance which is a good thing. By YOUR OWN logic, the ACA will reduce access to health insurance, because reducing costs will reduce the amount of health insurance available. You should, by your own economic argument, be the last person here to support the ACA.

 

No, you were not following the thread. Tasker asked me for a benefit of inflation, I gave one. Never said it was all good. Learn how to read the whole argument doof

 

http://www.walmart.c...0599990&veh=sem

 

Start here. Then get back to us.

 

 

 

 

 

 

So you are agreeing with Tasker or not? Looks like you don't want to defend his idiotic argument...

[Chef Jim]

So my mom shouldn't have been happy when she got higher prices for the cattle she sent to market?? Wow! I suppose I should have just put up a picture of a cow up an argument like you did with the calculator. I thought maybe it took a simpleton to know a simpleton but calling you simple is giving you too much credit. Like when you said small business owners with more money wouldn't create new jobs

 

No she shouldn't.

 

BTW your mom should have sold you and kept the cow.

Edited September 25, 2013 by Chef Jim

[TakeYouToTasker]

So you agree with Tasker that its all monetary and not demand? Tard

It's not simply that he's agreeing with me, it's that he's agreeing with virtually every single economist alive across every spectrum of economic debate. It's a topic that monetarists, Keynesians, and Austrians agree on; and it's lonely in that regard. But of course we've got your great mind in dissent.

 

Not only does every school of economic thought agree, but so does every major world government and every central bank. That's literally why the Fed uses CPI as it's measure of inflation. It intentionally discards the most volatile components (food and oil chief amongst them) of the broader price index (as opposed to you, and only you, who leaned soley on them to make your "argument") in order to measure core inflation, rather than the constantly fluxed market pressures of supply and demand.

 

But really, I suppose none of that matters because you have a few ideas. So tell me more, Rhodes Scholar.

Edited September 25, 2013 by TakeYouToTasker

[DC Tom]

No, you were not following the thread. Tasker asked me for a benefit of inflation, I gave one. Never said it was all good. Learn how to read the whole argument doof

 

No, I was following the thread. Explain how the benefits of inflation apply to beef, but not to health insurance.

 

So you are agreeing with Tasker or not? Looks like you don't want to defend his idiotic argument...

 

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone. I'm pointing out why you're an idiot,.

[OCinBuffalo]

I'll give you credit for saving Ocin's butt and the idiocy he was spewing by changing the subject,

 

You can't see it, but, do you feel that little bit of heat on you, center mass? That's the targeting laser I fixed on you yesterday. I come back today, and I see that you've been blown up quite nicely.

 

I don't have time this week to teach you basic economics, but, I was sure that somebody else did.

 

Perhaps someday we will cover how regulations in health care are designed to create a paying constituency for Democrats, on the back of raising cost for the rest of us. But, that requires accounting, finance, and perhaps even some management class. These are 200 level courses, and thus, not for you just yet.

 

For now, let's see if you can pass TTYT's "Economics for Morons" class first, before any of us waste any more time on you.

It's not simply that he's agreeing with me, it's that he's agreeing with virtually every single economist alive across every spectrum of economic debate. It's a topic that monetarists, Keynesians, and Austrians agree on; and it's lonely in that regard. But of course we've got your great mind in dissent.

Nothing like "disagreeing" with everyone...and basing that position on nothing other than "OCinBuffalo is dodging my question!"

 

Perhaps I will try to get attention by disagreeing with gravity? Do some youtube thing?

 

Anyhow, this is precisely what I hoped to bring out. Well done TTYT.

 

I wonder, does gatorman think himself Columbus? That we are all arguing the world is flat, and only he has the vision to see that it is round?

 

Or, is that giving him entirely too much credit? A fanatic, at the very least, understands his own fanaticism.

 

Perhaps gator is a fanatic...parrot? Perhaps his brand of fanaticism is more based on how well he parrots, and is devoid of all understanding of what is being parroted? I mean, in a sense you can't say he's being unoriginal, when he has no idea WTF he is even saying, right?

Edited September 25, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[3rdnlng]

The reptile is actually a reptile. Those of you that "discuss" things with him are wasting your time. He's a troll that slithers along the ground. You guys should know better.

[Alaska Darin]

The reptile is actually a reptile. Those of you that "discuss" things with him are wasting your time. He's a troll that slithers along the ground. You guys should know better.

Smashing stuff is fun.

[Tiberius]

It's not simply that he's agreeing with me, it's that he's agreeing with virtually every single economist alive across every spectrum of economic debate. It's a topic that monetarists, Keynesians, and Austrians agree on; and it's lonely in that regard. But of course we've got your great mind in dissent.

 

Not only does every school of economic thought agree, but so does every major world government and every central bank. That's literally why the Fed uses CPI as it's measure of inflation. It intentionally discards the most volatile components (food and oil chief amongst them) of the broader price index (as opposed to you, and only you, who leaned soley on them to make your "argument") in order to measure core inflation, rather than the constantly fluxed market pressures of supply and demand.

 

But really, I suppose none of that matters because you have a few ideas. So tell me more, Rhodes Scholar.

 

You saying it does not make it true. Please site something that shows increased demand doesn't cause inflation. I dare you putz! Please, all these economists you say...show one! Just one!

 

And now you want to fall back on core inflation, you didn't say that, you just asked about any inflation. You asked for an example and I gave you one. Now you want to exclude food and fuel?? You realize increased demand on fuel with lead to price increases all across the economy with no money increase in the overall economy? You disagree?

 

No, I was following the thread. Explain how the benefits of inflation apply to beef, but not to health insurance.

 

 

 

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone. I'm pointing out why you're an idiot,.

 

I knew you wouldn't agree with him, because his argument is silly.

 

 

To answer your question, the beef farmers benefits, but consumers do not with higher prices. Higher medical costs do benefit the medical industry, if you own Vanguard Admiral Funds Health Care Stock, you can benefit, too, but most people do not like the higher prices though they lead to more research and investment in better care.

 

Smashing stuff is fun.

 

Yes! I'm having a ball!

 

Let's hear your opinion!

[Chef Jim]

 

 

You saying it does not make it true. Please site something that shows increased demand doesn't cause inflation. I dare you putz! Please, all these economists you say...show one! Just one!

 

And now you want to fall back on core inflation, you didn't say that, you just asked about any inflation. You asked for an example and I gave you one. Now you want to exclude food and fuel?? You realize increased demand on fuel with lead to price increases all across the economy with no money increase in the overall economy?

 

So you want to include fuel and food in your argument about your mom selling a cow? Good. What if the cost of fuel rises at a higher rate than the increase in beef prices (oh that's never happened)? Is she then happy about getting more money for her beef? And we haven't even gotten in to the other costs associated with raising cattle. That my friend is why you're a simpleton.

[Tiberius]

So you want to include fuel and food in your argument about your mom selling a cow? Good. What if the cost of fuel rises at a higher rate than the increase in beef prices (oh that's never happened)? Is she then happy about getting more money for her beef? And we haven't even gotten in to the other costs associated with raising cattle. That my friend is why you're a simpleton.

 

What is this...what if that! Sure, nothing exists in a vacuum, so what? If I'm simple and can still see through your nonsense, what does that make you? I mean, you make no sense at all

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/19/business/as-crop-prices-surge-investment-firms-and-farmers-vie-for-land.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

 

 

Behind the rush is the age-old driver of farm booms: high crop prices. Corn, in particular, has been soaring, reflecting demand overseas and, domestically, for ethanol. High prices mean good profits for farmers, and many are using their growing incomes to bid for land. Sensing opportunity, investment firms are buying, too. David Taylor, of Oskaloosa, Kan., said he was saddened to sell his family’s farm but that the prices were too good to resist. Four generations had planted corn and soybeans on the 146-acre spread. But after living through the Midwest farm crisis of the 1980s, when land values plunged, and realizing that his children would not follow in his footsteps, he sold the farm at auction in December.

 

What? People benefiting from inflation? Investing in rising prices?? Oh, and what's driving the rising prices?? Increased demand??? Can't be! All the economists according TakeitToTasker say different. How can this be?

 

Fools!

[OCinBuffalo]

What is this...what if that! Sure, nothing exists in a vacuum, so what? If I'm simple and can still see through your nonsense, what does that make you? I mean, you make no sense at all

 

http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0

 

What? People benefiting from inflation? Investing in rising prices?? Oh, and what's driving the rising prices?? Increased demand??? Can't be! All the economists according TakeitToTasker say different. How can this be?

 

Fools!

Hilarious. In the last 2 posts I believe you've used 4 distinct logical fallacies, and, there's a good chance you don't even know what that means.

 

Here's the best part:

Yes, the "rich" guy, who owned a 146 acre farm benefits from high prices, and sells his land, benefits

Another "rich" guy, will buy that land, and either use it to grow corn and/or feed corn for cows, etc., and, since he paid a premium for the land at auction, his business model says he can, and must, now charge a premium for the output.

 

(The next step here should be obvious, but, since it's you: The new owner "rich" guy now raises his prices for corn, milk, and anything else that is produced on his land. Why shouldn't he? The market will bear it, and the inflationary pressure is headed in that direction anyway. All of these dopey green agenda things have now seen to it that food costs more....for the "poor". Nice work liberals)

 

So, the "poor" guy now has to pay more for both his Corn Chex, AND, his milk, perpetually. Unlike the rich guys above, he has no way to protect himself from the price increases, AND, he has little/no way to change his income. Example: The average Wal Mart employee can only work so many hours/get so much of a raise each year.

 

Thus, the rich guys have benefited from inflation, as they, and anyone who holds assets always does.

And, the poor always gets screwed by inflation, as they, and anyone who holds debt, or must pay for things in real time, always does.

 

gatorman: staunch supporter of the 1% here to tell us inflation is no big deal. Unmitigated moron, arguing against his own supposed goals, screwing the poor and elderly, rather than helping them.

 

And, telling us all that we don't know, what we so obviously do, at the same time.

 

Priceless idiocy.

Edited September 25, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Tiberius]

Hilarious. In the last 2 posts I believe you've used 4 distinct logical fallacies, and, there's a good chance you don't even know what that means.

 

Here's the best part:

Yes, the "rich" guy, who owned a 146 acre farm benefits from high prices, and sells his land, benefits

Another "rich" guy, will buy that land, and either use it to grow corn and/or feed corn for cows, etc., and, since he paid a premium for the land at auction, his business model says he can, and must, now charge a premium for the output.

 

(The next step here should be obvious, but, since it's you: The new owner "rich" guy now raises his prices for corn, milk, and anything else that is produced on his land. Why shouldn't he? The market will bear it, and the inflationary pressure is headed in that direction anyway. All of these dopey green agenda things have now seen to it that food costs more....for the "poor". Nice work liberals)

 

So, the "poor" guy now has to pay more for both his Corn Chex, AND, his milk, perpetually. Unlike the rich guys above, he has no way to protect himself from the price increases, AND, he has little/no way to change his income. Example: The average Wal Mart employee can only work so many hours/get so much of a raise each year.

 

Thus, the rich guys have benefited from inflation, as they, and anyone who holds assets always does.

And, the poor always gets screwed by inflation, as they, and anyone who holds debt, or must pay for things in real time, always does.

 

gatorman: staunch supporter of the 1% here to tell us inflation is no big deal. Unmitigated moron, arguing against his own supposed goals, screwing the poor and elderly, rather than helping them.

 

And, telling us all that we don't know, what we so obviously do, at the same time.

 

Priceless idiocy.

Are you writing from inside an asylum?

[OCinBuffalo]

Are you writing from inside an asylum?

Yep, there it is again: another argument of fallacy.

 

Can't argue with the content, make it about me.

 

So weak. Typical Democrat. Weakness abounds.

[Tiberius]

Yep, there it is again: another argument of fallacy.

 

Can't argue with the content, make it about me.

 

So weak. Typical Democrat. Weakness abounds.

Your argument was so stupid I didn't know what to make of it. So you think its bad for the "rich" to make a profit? Or are they rich or "rich" because they can profit? Now people making money is bad? You are getting like Chef

[Chef Jim]

What is this...what if that! Sure, nothing exists in a vacuum, so what? If I'm simple and can still see through your nonsense, what does that make you? I mean, you make no sense at all

 

http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0

 

 

 

 

What? People benefiting from inflation? Investing in rising prices?? Oh, and what's driving the rising prices?? Increased demand??? Can't be! All the economists according TakeitToTasker say different. How can this be?

 

Fools!

 

So is this the argument you're going to use to say inflation is good?

[Tiberius]

So is this the argument you're going to use to say inflation is good?

 

"Nothing is good or bad that thinking doesn't make it so"

 

Hamlet