Isn't this a fallacy? The idea that government can spend money at no cost to anyone else, because of a multiplier effect? Also, wouldn't this create a bad allocation of resources, because you are putting money into the hands of people who didn't earn it by producing a needed product or service? The losses include the cost of the bureaucrats to run the food stamp program, the time, effort and gas the recipients expend to obtain the food stamps etc.... it doesn't add to GDP. it's just consumption
Money is a sort of "token" to get things done, and those "tokens" purchase goods. But this system is a network, and suffers from problems any networks can suffer from. All distributions occur along the network. Even if you had everything everyone needed, the fact that you can't go from point A to B without passing through in between points, creates a problem for distribution. Costs can increase by way of travel. Also to keep an economy going, make sure you have a plunger :P
The multiplier effect just sounds like some Keynesian bs. yes, some people will make more money because of the increased spending, but it still only increases the amount of money in circulation. It has nothing to do with "real" growth. real growth imo is production of what people want. The multiplier effect also assumes that government spending is free. Real income per worker depends on real output per worker. incentives to produce, not incentives to spend.
Seems a lot of people confuse "values" with "money". Values are things that are useful in themselves because of their particular physical properties. Money are simply tokens used to represent certain quantities of use values.Thus, if through human labour new use values are created, say for instance through manufacture or agriculture, the economy grows and more money can be printed to account for these values or what is the same thing, buying power of money already in circulation goes up.
Yeah....Liberals a ruining the country. Implying the country wasn't already in a shit state BEFORE Obeezy took office. Let's not blame the brainless dipshit who led us into a war based on lies and cost us A trillion dollars, or the rampant Wall St. fraud that took place under his watch....which we had to pay for. Or his awful tax cuts for the rich who didn't need them in the first place. Bush came into office with a massive surplus, which he blew through.
Its basic economics. Republican methods usually put the money in the hands of the people, which is great for boom times, but actually makes things a lot worse during recessions and depressions. Democratic economic policy puts more money in the hands of the government, which doesn't look very good obviously, but is almost a sure fire cure for economic hardships.
I'd heartily agree with republican policy if America wasn't in such a hole right now, because thats the only situation where it works.
Newt's right on this one,...sorry dude liberal math starts with ALL of the money as if it is the governments even when it is in your own pocket, not the value that anyone has added to it yet,...and your thinking that these food stamp dollars come cheap,..they don't!.. they cost the rest of us! and create inflation.
Newt's right on this one,...sorry dude liberal math starts with ALL of the money as if it is the governments even when it is in your own pocket, not the value that anyone has added to it yet,...and your thinking that these food stamp dollars come cheap,..they don't!.. they cost the rest of us! and create inflation.
This guy is got to be pretty close to the dumbest person on You Tube, he seems to leave out in his liberal math that food stamps cost all tax payers in taxes. If he was honest he would have to say that every one dollar in food stamps equals negative one dollar for all tax payers.
On the street, a one dollar food stamp goes for 50 cents. It's been that way as long as I can remember. So it seems to me this multiplier ought to be trimmed a bit. If you cut it in half, we're back under a dollar. I wouldn't go that far -- I'd say we're lucky to break even.
The funny thing about your argument is that you go into great detail proving that which liberals are always denying, trickle down economics works! The difference here of course is that you must first confiscate the money from those who work for it. What do you suppose the negative multiplier of that is?The conservative model where you have more money because no one took it and you spend money into the economy and it trickles down works better.
This is severely idiotic. Gingrich makes a very fair point. Well...ya... food stamps might have a good multiplier effect...but food stamps do not represent economic growth of any kind. In case of food stamps, the multiplier effect is a worthless statistic.
If food stamps are "best bang for the buck", let's flood the country with food stamps.
This is the most retarded video response ever. Of course there is a multiplier effect. So if the multiplier effect is so great on food stamps why dont we just give them out to everyone in unlimited amounts? We would grow our economy out of the whole in a month according to liberal math. Well because theres something else in economics called inflation and when too much money is chasing too few goods it hurts all of us in a tax called inflation and guess who it affects the most?? Those at bottom!!
Hey Cenk! you are forgetting where the money comes from! You are a typical liberal moran! The washington post is a liberal source of information. Stop all the welfare bums from buying shit with our tax money like TV's and shit they don't need but also make corporations rich! You ever think about that you BUM!
The government can give me $10000 per week and I promise to spend every penny on lavish living thus keeping the economy moving along .i am sure there are lots of people who will volunteer to do the same . But hang on a minute isnt that why we are in so much trouble? people spending money that they havnt earned. May be I am an idiot like Newt.
Please ------- Why don't you just hire half the people to dig ditches and pay the other half to fill the holes in ---problem solved. progressive liberal economics
If he's going to argue against the multiplying effect, then he has to give up trickle-down economics, and all tax cuts to business owners to stimulate jobs. That's a pretty big idea he's arguing against, here.
Social Programs with Negative Multiplier Effects: Social Security (Currently running $5 billion more than what it's bringing in), Stimulus money (for every $1 spent, $ .80 came back in the form of Gross Domestic Product AND the $787 Billion spent were intended to create 3.5 million jobs-that's $225,000 per job. Sound efficient?), let's not get started with Medicair/Medicaid. Why? Because I don't have time to look up the stats. Rest assured it's running a deficit as well.
@911dispatcher Well thats 100% correct. Give every family $5000 dollars and it would be great (or if you dont buy that then u must admit it would be a hell of a lot better than giving the bankers $3trillion dollars). Would it be a loss? No. Its not like the value suddenly disapprears into thin air! thats $5000 dollars that will be used in cunsumption the vast majority of it in the US economy. Tax cuts sit in bank accounts and move offshore == zero benifit to the US people.
Well, gee, then why doesn't the government just send every family $5000 in food stamps? Within a month the economy would see that money increase to 184%. Do that every month and we'll quickly be on our way to prosperity!
If a little do so well, then won't a lot do a lot better?
Anyone seeing a problem with this? Based on what I heard, there's no down side to this. So why not give us all $5000 a month in food stamps? There would be no hunger in America...
Food stamps is for poor people. The more you cater to the poor, the more poor you have. The more poor you have, the more likely the Democrats will stay in power, or so that's the theory. Think of it this way. The Democrats rely on the so called "poor" votes to get elected, then what is their incentive to make people not poor? If people are no longer poor, they will no longer get "poor" votes....
@TheJerwy You people remind me of (probably ARE the same) the people who say "we dont need medicine, its a scam. Look how healthy people are, we dont need medicine" You know WHY people are healthy? BECAUSE WE HAVE MEDICINE! There was a time when we didnt "help" people get jobs and stimulate the economy. That time was the great depression. People were living in tents and stealing food. We were almost a third world country. Then the government decided that it didnt like that, so it changed.
@TheJerwy you mean they support public assistance? yes...if people that were once poor then they will still vote for that dem...why? because they share the same views. not because they are not poor. that isnt going to suddenly change their political views.
this clip will hurt gingrich badly if he plans on running for president, idk whether he understands the multiplier effect or not, if he does not, he will have to explain himself though, this is the type of thing a presidential candidate should know
@jkachovec Newt will never run, Ive heard that his ex-wife has something on him, if he ever did run for office again she would leak it. Besides whatever that is, he is not electable against Obama. An old fat white guy no matter how smart will not win. Face it the presidental election is a popularity contest and Newt just isnt popular across the board.
@Di1001 in fact they are creating and strengthening jobs. as shown in this video here. because the money from the food stamp goes directly into the economy. and stimulates it. their "handouts" are mathematically stupendous for the economy. in fact the worst thing for the economy would be to extend tax cut for the top 2%. because it doesnt go back into the economy. but instead goes into their personal back accounts as well as thei efforts to export jobs out of the country.
@ravenmcgrath So let me get this straight. the government takes $6000 from me, runs it through government paid employees ( IRS at $75,000 a year) transmits it throught the treasury( Let's say 5 employees 5 x $75000 a year) to local welfare offices (2 employees x $60000 a year) produce the check/debit card (at least $.30 per check, I worked in the govenrment 21 years) the recipient spends it and it magically turns into $12000 of production. I no longer have $6000 to spend. Now what?
@ravenmcgrath The other thing not accounted for, is all the Government employees that I have to support the rest of their lives with pensions and benefits. What could i have done with my $6000? Invest in a company that hires new workers who all pay taxes? You are right about math though. It doesn't lie. The trouble is the numbers you are getting is from some government worker trying to justify his $75,000 to $150,000 a year, FOR LIFE job. His job depends on you believing his "numbers"
@seanndiane ...but the math....it makes sense... why would they lie about the money going AWAY from them. those food stamps go to the masses. not the gov employee. if anything they would say that food stamps are bad. but they are saying the opposite once again, numbers dont lie. and their numbers make sense...its almost common sense. i didnt need someone from the gov to tell me tax cuts for the top 2% are terrible for our economy. things like this are already known.
@seanndiane their number are just solidifying what people already know. some people just dont like to believe it. for whatever reason. im not one to trust the government, but their number just make sense. plain and simple. it like the gov saying, they sky is blue...duh. i didnt really need them to say any of that.
Idiots Turks! So look: Spend the taxpayer's 1 dollar to get 79 cents in the economy? WHAT?? Try it again. You, the taxpayer lost a dollar; it's SPENT on food stamps for someone. The farmers and others in the food chain earned some change LESS than One Dollar. And your government is MORE broke. Instead, ask: ** Where Are The JOBS? ** They are too few & gov. stimulus put them in the GOVERNMENT. Wrong place! Folks, we are going down the wrong road. Vote the socialistic Dems out of office.
The 1 HUGH problem you idiot liberals have with this crazy theory is the US doesn't have " the $1" to turn into $1.78 or whatever NUTTY number you agree on. If this theory were true, why wouldn't we borrow another $1 trillion from the Chinese, give foodstamps to ALL americans, and use the profit to pay off a big chunk of the national debt. Newt wasn't saying MATH is liberal. He's saying that on Planet San Francisco $1 turns into $1.78.
Newt a moron, e.g Farmworkers paid total of $0.20 by farmer for producing 1 unit food The Farmer's cost = $0.20 He sells to Wholesaler for $0.40 => Farmers profit $0.20 Wholesaler sells to Retailer for $0.65 => Wholesaler profit $0.25 Retailer sells to consumer for $1.00 => Retailer profit $0.35 Net Profit = 0.20 + 0.25 + 0.35 = $0.80 Foodstamp = $1; Profits = $0.80 Total $ in circulation = $1.80 $1 OUT of Gov Budget : $1.80 INTO the economy.
@SensiStarToaster I'm glad there was someone out there who could explain that correctly. Thumbs up for you. This is correct. And people don't seem to understand that the more money circulating in the economy, and the better the economy becomes from this government spending, the more money the government can make in the long run.
It's important to understand economics before you talk about economics. The prime example of this is... Newt.
@SensiStarToaster Um... according to math, you should be able to take the end result and plug it back into the formula you used to produce the begining. So if I take $1 from food stamps, .35 goes to retailer, .25 to wholeseller, .20 to farmworkers, i end up with 80 cents and then 20 cents not accounted for. I don't see how that produces more than 1 dollar in anyway.
@SensiStarToaster You have one problem stupid, where the government get the $1 from? THE TAX PAYER. What don't you understand about that. Government takes money from someone and gives it to someone else. That's not economic growth in that. $1=$1. You don't have any common sense. LIberals are working very hard to ruin this great country.
First off look at any statistics and you will see this country has not been great for a long time. Second yes it is economic growth since money is shifting hands back in the economy.
The problem with food stamps or any government benefit program which provides a safety net for people, is that long term it becomes a hammock.
These commentators keep people arguing about left and right, or republican and democrat, when in reality the real problem is rich versus poor.
However, even though capitalism will ensure there is a poor section of society, socialism encourages large unproductive government. Maybe a mixture of both are needed.
"Opponents of Keynesianism have sometimes argued that Keynesian multiplier calculations are misleading; for example, according to the theory of rational expectations, it is impossible to calculate the effect of deficit-financed government spending on demand without specifying how people expect the deficit to be paid off in the future."
@NonisMonster Seriously? WTF does classical economics (or any arguably rational explanation of the subject) have to do with the crap this guy is spewing? He clearly has no idea how business functions, the perils of double taxation and is simply regurgitating the line he swallowed from the clowns who've run up the national debt to levels (as a % of GDP) that haven't been seen since WWII, and have shown no restraint in borrowing more. The guy sounds like a shill for the current administration.
OK folks - lets get this straight. THERE ARE NO REPS & DEMS! There are conservatives and liberals (generally). There are liberal Reps and liberal Dems - they both spend our money like drunken sailors in a misguided attempt to do good or to deliver pork to their state or cause they like the power. Then there are conservatives who believe in limited government. Talking Dems & Reps is a straw dog conversation and keeps us from the solution in the voting booth. About 70% of America is conservative.
It's the 80-20 rule. 20% are always the exception. That's why I said generally. I find people usually use the exception to dodge the general concept. If we do not talk about the generalities and act accordingly - nothing gets done. Thanks for your comment though. :)
Every dollar the federal government spends on food stamps has to be taxed or borrowed out of the private economy. Taxing or borrowing for the $73 billion food stamp program costs the private economy much more than $73 billion due to the deadweight losses created. All people who don’t receive the food stamp benefits are thus made worse off.
this shit dont help the economy the tax payers pay for it, I pay for it why dont i just drop my pants an bend over because im basically getting fucked in the ass
Multiplier effect is just another version of the broken window fallacy. Works in your Keynesian fantasy world but the REAL economy is going to collapse regardless of your "multiplier effect"
The U.S needs a national sales tax and a simpler tax code. Simpler tax code means businesses can conduct their operations a little easier and individuals don't get screwed over by complexity.
ppl who watch Fox news and take them seriously are stupid ppl. hell even glenn beck is funny,b/c the dribble that comes out of his mouth is complete non-sense. the scary thing is that ppl actually take his words seriously, which in my opinion is the most dangerous thing facing America today.
Why don't you guys make your videos in hd? Is that only for members or what? HD is not a big deal i think you can afford a cam and put up videos in at least more than 360p, that's ridiculous.
Food stamps are the best stimulater of the ecomony, we have the most people on food stamps in history right now, and the economy is still in the tank. Makes perfect sense.
the part, that i doubt if the multiplier takes into account, is how much has that food stamp added to the deficit , the interest on the deficit, or how it might have been spent by a middle class person who had to pay for it in taxes.
nice of you to call bullshit when morons like the epic failure of the 90's there blurs the multiplier concept...on the other hand Gretta should have to wear an "I'm a moron" button on air for that non call...this tool is so powerful for sniffing out the true allocation of resources that the government quit using it, interestingly, around the time the empty suit and his party started screwing up our economy...Beck also mixes up the concept...I think they share a chalk board over at fox...
In an economy perishing from a lack of savings we are told that the option that most discourages savings is the best one. How can anyone look at America and think we don't spend enough and that if we could just get Americans to spend even more everything will be alright? How utterly absurd. When are we going to wake up and see that Keynesian theory is totally bankrupt? This economy is massively over "stimulated". When the bubble bursts, blowing up another one is not the solution.
@raidon129 You have it all wrong. The problem in America is not lack of savings, it is lack of production. You can't solve the production problem by saving more.
China saving money in $=Weaker Yuan=More Production
America saving money in $=Stronger dollar=Less Production
The only way to fix this is dropping the strong dollar, but if you do America's debts will overwhelm her.
Yes the economy is overstimulated. If the U.S. was the only economy in the world this would be a simple thing to fix.
@DarkwingScooter Yes we have a lack of production. But you can't have production without savings. A strong dollar doesn't necessarily mean less production. I realize that it makes it harder to export but there are always other things to produce. Things that we can make better than China. And if not then we'll have to deal with that reality and no amount of government spending is going to help that. But I wouldn't worry about the dollar being too strong. It will be worthless soon enough.
@raidon129 Most american industrial products are of significantly inferior quality to the competition these days.
The problem in America at the moment isn't lack of savings, it is the fact that for every dollar of value that is created 2 dollars of debt needs to be incurred. The problem is lack of investment, and no sane person would in invest in an economy like that in the long term.
Remember that all of China's savings are in dollars, it is the investment going elsewhere that is the problem.
@reignee11 Duuuuudddddde... Really?! Did you really just say that?! Did the current government put the economy where it is? Did the Republicans not do everything in there power to stand in the way of every motion the Dems started? Did every weak policy not become weak because Obama was too eager to compromise with the GOP? The Dems are weak-willed, but the GOP is actively spinning the downfall of our economy as an election strategy. Dude... just get out and read some...
@EternallyLearning1 Dems have been in power since 2006 spending like drunken sailors in a brothel. Republicans were marginally better and lost their way. The GOP does not agree with the current administrations ideas to drastically change this country. We were established to be different. Why do U want to make us over to look like Europe? They aren't thriving there either. The GOP is not "spinning" our downfall. I get out and read. I'm a business owner. This "spin" is my reality.
@EternallyLearning1 Dems have been in power since 2006 spending like drunken sailors in a brothel. Republicans were marginally better and lost their way. The GOP does not agree with the current administrations ideas to drastically change this country. We were established to be different. Why do U want to make us over to look like Europe? They aren't thriving there either. The GOP is not "spinning" our downfall. I get out and read. I'm a business owner. This "spin" is my reality.
I hate to tell you, but most americans are required to read Orwell's1984. So I have no idea where you come up with this theory that Republicans "barely got" the 2+2 thing. We TOTALLY GET IT. The Democrat Socialist Party USA, is trying to tell us 2+2=5 and they believe that if they tell us enough times, we'll believe it. Maybe if they tell us they are gonna deny us health care (like they intend to do) we'll scream 2+2=5 like the rest of you cool aid drinkers.(google jim Jones)
@comerbp82 ...WOW! You got me. Obviously you have mastered the art of debate. I shouldn't waste my time trying to voice my opinion against talented liberal spokesmen such as yourself. Enjoy your $1.00 in foodstamps, I'll wait for the news of economic prosperity created by it.
@seanndiane ...its right here. food stamps have a multiplier rate that almost doubles the single dollar that is originally put into the economy. proof doesn't get any better than this because its math...not bias...just math. math never lies. the reason why you dont hear any news of economic prosperity is because of the tax cuts that were given to the top 2%. that has really crippled this economy...also....math proves that as well. you cant deny mathematical fact.
@MrNiceGuy4TW You spoken like a true republican that ignore the facts and don't fact check, remember Gingrich told his wife that it don't matter if he live is life opposite to what he says, he said the only one that have the talent in is party to distort the truth to his mindless followers is him because the average republican party supporter just watch fox news they don't fact check anything... so these republican guys can get away with murder because of that...
@ddman10001 An article with such an asinine setting? There are a million articles in this world, and I am supposed to read an article about how handing out money supposedly generates money? I am should to waste my precious time reading a nonsense article with that nonsense theme? I just would never waste my time with an asinine premise like that.
@MastermindX Intriguing. In the UK we now have a Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition (although I think those words mean a different thing over here) and they are planning on cutting spending and raising taxes slightly, as opposed to the Labour party who don't want to cut as fast and keep racking up debt - is there any correlation here between American and UK politics? Or is it complete opposite lol?
@matt2689 I think for one the Lib-Dems are more akin to Libertarians here in the US- most of them vote Repuglican- who of course tend to be more in line with the Tories. There is a Libertarian third party- but they never get anywhere- you can't with a third party in the US. We're not a parliamentary system like in Canada, Britain, and most of Europe.
@matt2689 In my opinion, conservatism always sucks. We need to progress, not to conserve. But right now the European conservative-liberal (euro liberal = american libertarian) parties have a million better economic policies in contrast to the leftist parties that have become crazed and think the governments can give away money endlessly (see Spain).
Anyway the conservatives I was talking about are the GOP kind, which do not try to solve the economy, they only want to keep their power and money.
@genie0390 The $200,000 was already in the bank. And you think that a bank only lends the money it has?! The reason the banking crisis happened in 2007-08 is because banks were borrowing 3,4,5 times their asset bases from money markets and lending it to anyone and everyone - oooops look what happened.
Newt is a slimy opportunist that cares nothing about truth and has absolutely no concern about those in need. He is the epitome of the wealthy bureaucrat that laughs at the poor as he divorces his dying wife and deposits his million dollar paycheck.
This all great Cenk but ur avoiding the elephant in the room, inflation. But hey I guess the collectivists motto is to help the poor even if it kills the currency and collapses the economy, ultimately increasing poverty. Cenk is a welfare state collectivist and Newt Gingritch is a Military Industrial Complex collectivist, both are very dangerous
a dollar handed out in food stamps has a 1.84 multiplier effect?? How great!! funny however a dollar put into the hands of a consumer via a tax cut doesn't seem to have any effect according to Cenk who insists tax cuts don't increase employment and have positive effects
trouble with Cenk's analysis is that the dollar he refers to comes from taxpayers and Gov must print the dollar which increases money supply and inflation which takes away purchasing power
@genie0390 This is a well known economics principle. If you don't understand how it works, perhaps you could ask your economics professor for clarification. What? You don't have an economics professor? You are talking about a subject you have no knowledge of?
perhaps I should give back my Masters Degree in economics and finance and those two other prof designations I have!
if giving money to consumers is such a great thing with no negative offsets, I suggest we order the Fed to print trillions and hand it out. think of that multiplier effect. Wow!! u fuckin dumbass, why do you suppose governments in Europe are in such bad shape and why is America going down the sewer with a loud slurp??
@genie0390 That's b/c the rich use the money from more tax cuts by placing it into money accounts and NOT back into the economy. In fact, every study, including Wall Street Journal, showed that during Bush yrs the money accounts went UP while the economy tanked and it also showed that while the rich were getting more tax cuts they put more money into money accounts than before the tax cuts. It is quite simple. Now, tax cuts to the Middle class works bc they put it directly back into the economy.
as I recall in 1/18/2008 the Dems were in total control of Congress so why didn't go ahead,..oh I know the "stimulus" wasn't big enough and didn't include hundreds of billions for pet liberal projects like 37 million to save a marsh mouse near San Francisco
@genie0390 Unfortunately, politics doesn't work that way. There is always someone(republicans and affrighted dems) that either compromise or create awful political policies(like the Bush tax cuts).
If you want to pass it off as Obama's package, even though it was passed before he was elected, then I think it's fair you bash Republicans for it too.
@genie0390 Tax cuts for the rich don't get the majority shit! Give the tax cuts to the masses, they will spend more money, giving store owners more money to expand, expansion creates jobs. More stores/shelf space means more demand, more demand means the producers need more workers to make a product. More people working means more people have money.
Government needs to create a climate wherein businessmen feel more confident of the future! We need to eliminate uncertainties that Obowma created with his promise to fundamentally change America, his crazy income redistribution schemes etc. Business just hates uncertainties and surprises
I personally know a lot of business owners who say that they will not do very much in terms of expansion until Obowma is gone
@genie0390 Personal experience is no substitute for facts. I don't doubt you have the stories from those business owners, but I have my own from my bosses. My boss who owns a smaller construction company and takes home no more than 10k a month, have said the lack of business is because people are afraid to spend money because they don't have enough. Get them some more money, they may remodel the kitchen. Doesn't matter because it's hearsay, same as your story.
you are close to understanding what's going on in America
people don't want to spend money because of uncertainties and insecurity
Obowma wanting to fundamentally change America and his agenda of income redistribution, energy taxes, rising health care costs etc is scaring business and consumers
academics should stay in schools and keep pushing pencils, they know fuck all about managing things, which is exactly why their interests are in academics in the first place
@genie0390 I hate the damn healthcare bill too, but for a different reason. Healthcare did not go nearly far enough. Look at France, who, according to the WHO, have the best healthcare. Their costs are very low for the individual.
Warren Buffet agrees that the rich should pay more taxes because they can afford it. It's not income redistribution, it's called fairness. Yes, that money may go to social programs that help the poor, the people who need help. The rich need nothing, they want more.
@genie0390 he explains it in the video. You give a tax cut to a person with 200k in the bank, he's going to just put it in the bank and save it. That doesn't help the economy. It's the gov't giving money to the rich in the form of a tax cut, that doesn't stimulate the economy. On the other hand, give the same money to a poor person that needs to spend it, and it stimulates the economy nearly immediately.
the person with the 200K puts money into the bank which means the bank has more money to lend, there is a much more significant multiplier effect here in terms of increasing spending!
the problem with current day America is Obowma with his talk of fundamentally changing America, his income redistribution crap, increasing health care costs to business, what he did with secured creditors in GM case etc,..all this creating uncertainties which business hates with a passion
@genie0390 Ah ha! I have a counter to this one too. Yes, the person with 200k in the bank will probably put the money in the bank. But giving 2% of people 10k on average to put in the bank would not equal the 1 to 200 hundred dollars of the other 98%. That 2%er would have to make 44 times the amount of a normal 98%er. Those other 98% put money in the bank too except for the very lowest who have to spend it now.
@genie0390 But one of the major problems with our economy was the banks making bad loans. America has and is going through a phase of passing the debt to the highest bidder. It's been proven time and time again that trickle-down economics doesn't work and I don't agree with redistribution of wealth, but I think we should ALL be doing our part to help the economy strengthen. Obama shouldn't have renewed the Bush Tax Cuts, for anyone.
ooh, I've never heard the term "virtuous cycle" used as an antonym for "vicious cycle". I'm going to have to use that sometime.
6663000 1 month ago
Liberal math = bad math
Codeeist 1 month ago
Isn't this a fallacy? The idea that government can spend money at no cost to anyone else, because of a multiplier effect? Also, wouldn't this create a bad allocation of resources, because you are putting money into the hands of people who didn't earn it by producing a needed product or service? The losses include the cost of the bureaucrats to run the food stamp program, the time, effort and gas the recipients expend to obtain the food stamps etc.... it doesn't add to GDP. it's just consumption
VanessaTexasGal 1 month ago
As a liberal I have never thought math was on my side till today. Thanks Newt.....
/facepalm
Neosaigo 2 months ago 7
Comment removed
Neosaigo 4 months ago
Money is a sort of "token" to get things done, and those "tokens" purchase goods. But this system is a network, and suffers from problems any networks can suffer from. All distributions occur along the network. Even if you had everything everyone needed, the fact that you can't go from point A to B without passing through in between points, creates a problem for distribution. Costs can increase by way of travel. Also to keep an economy going, make sure you have a plunger :P
SymbolicSoliloquy 5 months ago
The only 2012 presidential candidate that won't cut food stamps?
Ron Paul “I Don’t Think Cutting Food Stamps For The Poor Is The Right Priority”
Check him out!
vechorik 6 months ago
The multiplier effect just sounds like some Keynesian bs. yes, some people will make more money because of the increased spending, but it still only increases the amount of money in circulation. It has nothing to do with "real" growth. real growth imo is production of what people want. The multiplier effect also assumes that government spending is free. Real income per worker depends on real output per worker. incentives to produce, not incentives to spend.
Chaaarge 6 months ago
Seems a lot of people confuse "values" with "money". Values are things that are useful in themselves because of their particular physical properties. Money are simply tokens used to represent certain quantities of use values.Thus, if through human labour new use values are created, say for instance through manufacture or agriculture, the economy grows and more money can be printed to account for these values or what is the same thing, buying power of money already in circulation goes up.
SensiStarToaster 6 months ago
So who pays for the food stamps?
Dalessiokiller 7 months ago
@Dalessiokiller That's like asking who pays for money....
Partyffs 6 months ago
Yeah....Liberals a ruining the country. Implying the country wasn't already in a shit state BEFORE Obeezy took office. Let's not blame the brainless dipshit who led us into a war based on lies and cost us A trillion dollars, or the rampant Wall St. fraud that took place under his watch....which we had to pay for. Or his awful tax cuts for the rich who didn't need them in the first place. Bush came into office with a massive surplus, which he blew through.
2000-08 NEVER HAPPENED! Morons..
jschultzVII 7 months ago
Its basic economics. Republican methods usually put the money in the hands of the people, which is great for boom times, but actually makes things a lot worse during recessions and depressions. Democratic economic policy puts more money in the hands of the government, which doesn't look very good obviously, but is almost a sure fire cure for economic hardships.
I'd heartily agree with republican policy if America wasn't in such a hole right now, because thats the only situation where it works.
yootubematt 8 months ago
@yootubematt Wait wait wait......a sensible and reasonable US citizen?
Now i have seen every thing, hmm you sir just gave me hope for the US, but i think you and your kind are to few to save the US.
Partyffs 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Newt's right on this one,...sorry dude liberal math starts with ALL of the money as if it is the governments even when it is in your own pocket, not the value that anyone has added to it yet,...and your thinking that these food stamp dollars come cheap,..they don't!.. they cost the rest of us! and create inflation.
VintageAutoRadio 10 months ago
Newt's right on this one,...sorry dude liberal math starts with ALL of the money as if it is the governments even when it is in your own pocket, not the value that anyone has added to it yet,...and your thinking that these food stamp dollars come cheap,..they don't!.. they cost the rest of us! and create inflation.
VintageAutoRadio 10 months ago
This guy is got to be pretty close to the dumbest person on You Tube, he seems to leave out in his liberal math that food stamps cost all tax payers in taxes. If he was honest he would have to say that every one dollar in food stamps equals negative one dollar for all tax payers.
damiaxxx 10 months ago
On the street, a one dollar food stamp goes for 50 cents. It's been that way as long as I can remember. So it seems to me this multiplier ought to be trimmed a bit. If you cut it in half, we're back under a dollar. I wouldn't go that far -- I'd say we're lucky to break even.
OneEyedJack1970 10 months ago
The funny thing about your argument is that you go into great detail proving that which liberals are always denying, trickle down economics works! The difference here of course is that you must first confiscate the money from those who work for it. What do you suppose the negative multiplier of that is?The conservative model where you have more money because no one took it and you spend money into the economy and it trickles down works better.
napamike 11 months ago
young jerks...
ralphmotorhead 11 months ago
This is severely idiotic. Gingrich makes a very fair point. Well...ya... food stamps might have a good multiplier effect...but food stamps do not represent economic growth of any kind. In case of food stamps, the multiplier effect is a worthless statistic.
If food stamps are "best bang for the buck", let's flood the country with food stamps.
Mrparrot73 1 year ago
This is the most retarded video response ever. Of course there is a multiplier effect. So if the multiplier effect is so great on food stamps why dont we just give them out to everyone in unlimited amounts? We would grow our economy out of the whole in a month according to liberal math. Well because theres something else in economics called inflation and when too much money is chasing too few goods it hurts all of us in a tax called inflation and guess who it affects the most?? Those at bottom!!
icebox222 1 year ago
"typical liberal moran!" I lol'd and lol'd!
TheFunkadelicFan 1 year ago
Hey Cenk! you are forgetting where the money comes from! You are a typical liberal moran! The washington post is a liberal source of information. Stop all the welfare bums from buying shit with our tax money like TV's and shit they don't need but also make corporations rich! You ever think about that you BUM!
kelsogrande 1 year ago
The government can give me $10000 per week and I promise to spend every penny on lavish living thus keeping the economy moving along .i am sure there are lots of people who will volunteer to do the same . But hang on a minute isnt that why we are in so much trouble? people spending money that they havnt earned. May be I am an idiot like Newt.
ahian5620z 1 year ago
Please ------- Why don't you just hire half the people to dig ditches and pay the other half to fill the holes in ---problem solved. progressive liberal economics
THOMAS8845164 1 year ago
`Everything Newt spews is thoroughly disproved Republitard rhetoric.
Asymmatrix 1 year ago
If he's going to argue against the multiplying effect, then he has to give up trickle-down economics, and all tax cuts to business owners to stimulate jobs. That's a pretty big idea he's arguing against, here.
ManicEightBall 1 year ago
I shudder to think of what Rupert Murdock is going to do to the WSJ now that he owns it. Tabloid economics. O_o
panterguy 1 year ago 2
Social Programs with Negative Multiplier Effects: Social Security (Currently running $5 billion more than what it's bringing in), Stimulus money (for every $1 spent, $ .80 came back in the form of Gross Domestic Product AND the $787 Billion spent were intended to create 3.5 million jobs-that's $225,000 per job. Sound efficient?), let's not get started with Medicair/Medicaid. Why? Because I don't have time to look up the stats. Rest assured it's running a deficit as well.
Ricovaca1987 1 year ago
*consumption. (before I get knocked for spelling ;)
SensiStarToaster 1 year ago
@911dispatcher Well thats 100% correct. Give every family $5000 dollars and it would be great (or if you dont buy that then u must admit it would be a hell of a lot better than giving the bankers $3trillion dollars). Would it be a loss? No. Its not like the value suddenly disapprears into thin air! thats $5000 dollars that will be used in cunsumption the vast majority of it in the US economy. Tax cuts sit in bank accounts and move offshore == zero benifit to the US people.
SensiStarToaster 1 year ago
Well, gee, then why doesn't the government just send every family $5000 in food stamps? Within a month the economy would see that money increase to 184%. Do that every month and we'll quickly be on our way to prosperity!
If a little do so well, then won't a lot do a lot better?
Anyone seeing a problem with this? Based on what I heard, there's no down side to this. So why not give us all $5000 a month in food stamps? There would be no hunger in America...
911dispatcher 1 year ago
Caution...Monkeys...I mean Liberals will throw feces.........
keith1535 1 year ago
Food stamps is for poor people. The more you cater to the poor, the more poor you have. The more poor you have, the more likely the Democrats will stay in power, or so that's the theory. Think of it this way. The Democrats rely on the so called "poor" votes to get elected, then what is their incentive to make people not poor? If people are no longer poor, they will no longer get "poor" votes....
TheJerwy 1 year ago
@TheJerwy You people remind me of (probably ARE the same) the people who say "we dont need medicine, its a scam. Look how healthy people are, we dont need medicine" You know WHY people are healthy? BECAUSE WE HAVE MEDICINE! There was a time when we didnt "help" people get jobs and stimulate the economy. That time was the great depression. People were living in tents and stealing food. We were almost a third world country. Then the government decided that it didnt like that, so it changed.
grendelee 1 year ago
@TheJerwy you mean they support public assistance? yes...if people that were once poor then they will still vote for that dem...why? because they share the same views. not because they are not poor. that isnt going to suddenly change their political views.
ravenmcgrath 1 year ago
i loled @4:00
jkachovec 1 year ago
this clip will hurt gingrich badly if he plans on running for president, idk whether he understands the multiplier effect or not, if he does not, he will have to explain himself though, this is the type of thing a presidential candidate should know
jkachovec 1 year ago
@jkachovec Newt will never run, Ive heard that his ex-wife has something on him, if he ever did run for office again she would leak it. Besides whatever that is, he is not electable against Obama. An old fat white guy no matter how smart will not win. Face it the presidental election is a popularity contest and Newt just isnt popular across the board.
WickedCrazzzeee 1 year ago
I would much rather have a paycheck than food stamps! The left isn't making jobs. They are giving hand outs when people need a hand up!
Di1001 1 year ago
@Di1001 in fact they are creating and strengthening jobs. as shown in this video here. because the money from the food stamp goes directly into the economy. and stimulates it. their "handouts" are mathematically stupendous for the economy. in fact the worst thing for the economy would be to extend tax cut for the top 2%. because it doesnt go back into the economy. but instead goes into their personal back accounts as well as thei efforts to export jobs out of the country.
ravenmcgrath 1 year ago
@ravenmcgrath So let me get this straight. the government takes $6000 from me, runs it through government paid employees ( IRS at $75,000 a year) transmits it throught the treasury( Let's say 5 employees 5 x $75000 a year) to local welfare offices (2 employees x $60000 a year) produce the check/debit card (at least $.30 per check, I worked in the govenrment 21 years) the recipient spends it and it magically turns into $12000 of production. I no longer have $6000 to spend. Now what?
seanndiane 1 year ago
@ravenmcgrath The other thing not accounted for, is all the Government employees that I have to support the rest of their lives with pensions and benefits. What could i have done with my $6000? Invest in a company that hires new workers who all pay taxes? You are right about math though. It doesn't lie. The trouble is the numbers you are getting is from some government worker trying to justify his $75,000 to $150,000 a year, FOR LIFE job. His job depends on you believing his "numbers"
seanndiane 1 year ago
@seanndiane ...but the math....it makes sense... why would they lie about the money going AWAY from them. those food stamps go to the masses. not the gov employee. if anything they would say that food stamps are bad. but they are saying the opposite once again, numbers dont lie. and their numbers make sense...its almost common sense. i didnt need someone from the gov to tell me tax cuts for the top 2% are terrible for our economy. things like this are already known.
ravenmcgrath 1 year ago
@seanndiane their number are just solidifying what people already know. some people just dont like to believe it. for whatever reason. im not one to trust the government, but their number just make sense. plain and simple. it like the gov saying, they sky is blue...duh. i didnt really need them to say any of that.
ravenmcgrath 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE PIPA/KNOWLEDGE NETWORKS POLLL
THE AMERICAN PUBLIC ON INTERNATIONAL ISSUES
Study Finds Widespread Misperceptions on Iraq
Highly Related to Support for War
Misperceptions Vary Widely Depending on News Source
FOX Viewers More Likely to Misperceive, PBS-NPR Less Likely
Marly61 1 year ago
Idiots Turks! So look: Spend the taxpayer's 1 dollar to get 79 cents in the economy? WHAT?? Try it again. You, the taxpayer lost a dollar; it's SPENT on food stamps for someone. The farmers and others in the food chain earned some change LESS than One Dollar. And your government is MORE broke. Instead, ask: ** Where Are The JOBS? ** They are too few & gov. stimulus put them in the GOVERNMENT. Wrong place! Folks, we are going down the wrong road. Vote the socialistic Dems out of office.
visitorxox 1 year ago
The 1 HUGH problem you idiot liberals have with this crazy theory is the US doesn't have " the $1" to turn into $1.78 or whatever NUTTY number you agree on. If this theory were true, why wouldn't we borrow another $1 trillion from the Chinese, give foodstamps to ALL americans, and use the profit to pay off a big chunk of the national debt. Newt wasn't saying MATH is liberal. He's saying that on Planet San Francisco $1 turns into $1.78.
seanndiane 1 year ago
Liberal Math: 2+2 = 4, Conservative Math: 2+2 = Jesus
TheIntolerantAtheist 1 year ago
@TheIntolerantAtheist 2+2 = Tax cuts. Disagree & ur a lousy lib. ;)
Cross3061980 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheIntolerantAtheist Liberal Math: 2+2 = 22, Conservative Math: 2+2 = 4
Tsugua21 8 months ago
Wow, Newt doesn't know squat about economics.
thetotalvidwatcher 1 year ago
Funny how the GOP never complains about spending when they're trying to fund one of their bullshit wars. smh
whoiscarlito 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Don't talk about fucking economics on TV if you DON'T FUCKING UNDERSTAND IT!
Ilovesaxthrice 1 year ago
SensiStarToaster 1 year ago 25
@SensiStarToaster I'm glad there was someone out there who could explain that correctly. Thumbs up for you. This is correct. And people don't seem to understand that the more money circulating in the economy, and the better the economy becomes from this government spending, the more money the government can make in the long run.
It's important to understand economics before you talk about economics. The prime example of this is... Newt.
Viper718xx 1 year ago
@SensiStarToaster Um... according to math, you should be able to take the end result and plug it back into the formula you used to produce the begining. So if I take $1 from food stamps, .35 goes to retailer, .25 to wholeseller, .20 to farmworkers, i end up with 80 cents and then 20 cents not accounted for. I don't see how that produces more than 1 dollar in anyway.
bluefootedpig 11 months ago
@SensiStarToaster Your a very stupid liberal! $1=$1
Tsugua21 8 months ago
@SensiStarToaster You have one problem stupid, where the government get the $1 from? THE TAX PAYER. What don't you understand about that. Government takes money from someone and gives it to someone else. That's not economic growth in that. $1=$1. You don't have any common sense. LIberals are working very hard to ruin this great country.
Tsugua21 7 months ago
@Tsugua21
First off look at any statistics and you will see this country has not been great for a long time. Second yes it is economic growth since money is shifting hands back in the economy.
proatheism 7 months ago
@SensiStarToaster Good job Mr. Google.
Gayboose 1 month ago
this dude needs to be fucking president
sactowncr1minal 1 year ago
The problem with food stamps or any government benefit program which provides a safety net for people, is that long term it becomes a hammock.
These commentators keep people arguing about left and right, or republican and democrat, when in reality the real problem is rich versus poor.
However, even though capitalism will ensure there is a poor section of society, socialism encourages large unproductive government. Maybe a mixture of both are needed.
dazzagazza6969 1 year ago
"Reality has a well known liberal bias, and apparently so does math".
-Stephen Colbert
Satire to live by.
drpeppa2357 1 year ago 47
@drpeppa2357 Now that is a Colbert!
hemek 1 year ago
Taken from Wiki:
"Opponents of Keynesianism have sometimes argued that Keynesian multiplier calculations are misleading; for example, according to the theory of rational expectations, it is impossible to calculate the effect of deficit-financed government spending on demand without specifying how people expect the deficit to be paid off in the future."
The difference here: Newt is closer to the truth.
dd1781 1 year ago
Comment removed
dd1781 1 year ago
1. Cenk is citing Keynesian theory, something not "everyone" agrees with.
2. Cenk is doing the very thing he accuses Next of doing... He gives a simplistic explanation of a complicated economic theory.
3. Cenk doesn't mention how debt (derived from Gov. spending) adversely affects the "benefits" of food stamp spending.
Continued.....
dd1781 1 year ago
This man is a moron. HIs understanding of economics is embarrassing to those of us in the profession.
tedbare 1 year ago
@tedbare I really hope you weren't talking about yourself, that you don't subject students to the follies of classical economics.
NonisMonster 1 year ago
@NonisMonster Seriously? WTF does classical economics (or any arguably rational explanation of the subject) have to do with the crap this guy is spewing? He clearly has no idea how business functions, the perils of double taxation and is simply regurgitating the line he swallowed from the clowns who've run up the national debt to levels (as a % of GDP) that haven't been seen since WWII, and have shown no restraint in borrowing more. The guy sounds like a shill for the current administration.
tedbare 1 year ago
No Box Cutters for you.
maverick47sucks 1 year ago
OK folks - lets get this straight. THERE ARE NO REPS & DEMS! There are conservatives and liberals (generally). There are liberal Reps and liberal Dems - they both spend our money like drunken sailors in a misguided attempt to do good or to deliver pork to their state or cause they like the power. Then there are conservatives who believe in limited government. Talking Dems & Reps is a straw dog conversation and keeps us from the solution in the voting booth. About 70% of America is conservative.
politicodave 1 year ago
@politicodave You have a tendency to brush everyone with the same color.
bulluni 1 year ago
@bulluni
It's the 80-20 rule. 20% are always the exception. That's why I said generally. I find people usually use the exception to dodge the general concept. If we do not talk about the generalities and act accordingly - nothing gets done. Thanks for your comment though. :)
politicodave 1 year ago
Every dollar the federal government spends on food stamps has to be taxed or borrowed out of the private economy. Taxing or borrowing for the $73 billion food stamp program costs the private economy much more than $73 billion due to the deadweight losses created. All people who don’t receive the food stamp benefits are thus made worse off.
quizerry 1 year ago
this shit dont help the economy the tax payers pay for it, I pay for it why dont i just drop my pants an bend over because im basically getting fucked in the ass
justincracks 1 year ago
republicans are of the devil everyone with a heart and mind knows that
brotmann86 1 year ago
@Zander73
strangely enough that's what many Russian people believed about Vladomir Lenin,..turns out they were wrong
far-left shit don't work
genie0390 1 year ago
Multiplier effect is just another version of the broken window fallacy. Works in your Keynesian fantasy world but the REAL economy is going to collapse regardless of your "multiplier effect"
WilliamTheSinner 1 year ago
The U.S needs a national sales tax and a simpler tax code. Simpler tax code means businesses can conduct their operations a little easier and individuals don't get screwed over by complexity.
TheCOOLbigGOV 1 year ago
@TheCOOLbigGOV
politicodave 1 year ago
@TheCOOLbigGOV
10/4 - I agree - - good comment (maybe this one will post)
politicodave 1 year ago
Cenk, you crack me up!!! Ha XD 4:00
SkreetGil 1 year ago
Newt Gingrich is just a man desperately clinging to relevance. That’s why he goes around trying to pick fights with anybody. Fade away already man.
jeddawie 1 year ago
ppl who watch Fox news and take them seriously are stupid ppl. hell even glenn beck is funny,b/c the dribble that comes out of his mouth is complete non-sense. the scary thing is that ppl actually take his words seriously, which in my opinion is the most dangerous thing facing America today.
Gmc42082 1 year ago
Reality has a well-known liberal bias! Lol! Awesome. My new favorite quote. I am going to make a sign with that for the Stewart-Colbert rally in DC.
july7nyc 1 year ago
Newt just gave a textbook operational definition of normative economics.
Mxyzptlk562 1 year ago
Any school subject is liberal...even English is liberal.
Geez......make Education and common knowledge liberal.
Mika20 1 year ago
Why don't you guys make your videos in hd? Is that only for members or what? HD is not a big deal i think you can afford a cam and put up videos in at least more than 360p, that's ridiculous.
ComeLeVent 1 year ago
when are you going to run for something cenk! we are all waiting and ready to vote for you.
freshblooms 1 year ago
8 viewers failed basic math in High School.
Diatonic5th 1 year ago
Bill Clinton got some pussy and Newt Gingrich got screwed.
sage0857 1 year ago
It's Maths. Get used to it.
Mazsimiliian 1 year ago
Food stamps are the best stimulater of the ecomony, we have the most people on food stamps in history right now, and the economy is still in the tank. Makes perfect sense.
Mixaboy 1 year ago
the part, that i doubt if the multiplier takes into account, is how much has that food stamp added to the deficit , the interest on the deficit, or how it might have been spent by a middle class person who had to pay for it in taxes.
yaHookerses 1 year ago
And that...is the perfect demonstration that Gingrich knows nothing about economics.
Freshmanwave 1 year ago
So let me get this straight...Our most socialized welfare aspect is one of the biggest boons to our capitalist economy?
chenalos 1 year ago
Food stamps get spent and stimulate.
$700 billion tax breaks stay in offshore bank accounts.
PhilipPorter 1 year ago
Look at his dishonest, disgusting, plotting smile. Fucking sickening.
WigglyMalmsteam 1 year ago
Comment removed
WigglyMalmsteam 1 year ago
nice of you to call bullshit when morons like the epic failure of the 90's there blurs the multiplier concept...on the other hand Gretta should have to wear an "I'm a moron" button on air for that non call...this tool is so powerful for sniffing out the true allocation of resources that the government quit using it, interestingly, around the time the empty suit and his party started screwing up our economy...Beck also mixes up the concept...I think they share a chalk board over at fox...
imataxslave 1 year ago
In an economy perishing from a lack of savings we are told that the option that most discourages savings is the best one. How can anyone look at America and think we don't spend enough and that if we could just get Americans to spend even more everything will be alright? How utterly absurd. When are we going to wake up and see that Keynesian theory is totally bankrupt? This economy is massively over "stimulated". When the bubble bursts, blowing up another one is not the solution.
raidon129 1 year ago
@raidon129 You have it all wrong. The problem in America is not lack of savings, it is lack of production. You can't solve the production problem by saving more.
China saving money in $=Weaker Yuan=More Production
America saving money in $=Stronger dollar=Less Production
The only way to fix this is dropping the strong dollar, but if you do America's debts will overwhelm her.
Yes the economy is overstimulated. If the U.S. was the only economy in the world this would be a simple thing to fix.
DarkwingScooter 1 year ago
@DarkwingScooter Yes we have a lack of production. But you can't have production without savings. A strong dollar doesn't necessarily mean less production. I realize that it makes it harder to export but there are always other things to produce. Things that we can make better than China. And if not then we'll have to deal with that reality and no amount of government spending is going to help that. But I wouldn't worry about the dollar being too strong. It will be worthless soon enough.
raidon129 1 year ago
@raidon129 Most american industrial products are of significantly inferior quality to the competition these days.
The problem in America at the moment isn't lack of savings, it is the fact that for every dollar of value that is created 2 dollars of debt needs to be incurred. The problem is lack of investment, and no sane person would in invest in an economy like that in the long term.
Remember that all of China's savings are in dollars, it is the investment going elsewhere that is the problem.
DarkwingScooter 1 year ago
Newt is talking to Republicans... they barely got the 2+2=4 reference. He certainly doesn't expect them to understand economics.
comerbp82 1 year ago 20
@comerbp82 Looking at the current state of the economy almost 2 years later it appears that the liberals don't understand economics either.
reignee11 1 year ago
@reignee11 Duuuuudddddde... Really?! Did you really just say that?! Did the current government put the economy where it is? Did the Republicans not do everything in there power to stand in the way of every motion the Dems started? Did every weak policy not become weak because Obama was too eager to compromise with the GOP? The Dems are weak-willed, but the GOP is actively spinning the downfall of our economy as an election strategy. Dude... just get out and read some...
EternallyLearning1 1 year ago
@EternallyLearning1 Dems have been in power since 2006 spending like drunken sailors in a brothel. Republicans were marginally better and lost their way. The GOP does not agree with the current administrations ideas to drastically change this country. We were established to be different. Why do U want to make us over to look like Europe? They aren't thriving there either. The GOP is not "spinning" our downfall. I get out and read. I'm a business owner. This "spin" is my reality.
reignee11 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EternallyLearning1 Dems have been in power since 2006 spending like drunken sailors in a brothel. Republicans were marginally better and lost their way. The GOP does not agree with the current administrations ideas to drastically change this country. We were established to be different. Why do U want to make us over to look like Europe? They aren't thriving there either. The GOP is not "spinning" our downfall. I get out and read. I'm a business owner. This "spin" is my reality.
reignee11 1 year ago
I hate to tell you, but most americans are required to read Orwell's1984. So I have no idea where you come up with this theory that Republicans "barely got" the 2+2 thing. We TOTALLY GET IT. The Democrat Socialist Party USA, is trying to tell us 2+2=5 and they believe that if they tell us enough times, we'll believe it. Maybe if they tell us they are gonna deny us health care (like they intend to do) we'll scream 2+2=5 like the rest of you cool aid drinkers.(google jim Jones)
seanndiane 1 year ago
@seanndiane you be dumb yo, just fyi
comerbp82 1 year ago
@comerbp82 ...WOW! You got me. Obviously you have mastered the art of debate. I shouldn't waste my time trying to voice my opinion against talented liberal spokesmen such as yourself. Enjoy your $1.00 in foodstamps, I'll wait for the news of economic prosperity created by it.
seanndiane 1 year ago
@seanndiane thanks
comerbp82 1 year ago
@seanndiane ...its right here. food stamps have a multiplier rate that almost doubles the single dollar that is originally put into the economy. proof doesn't get any better than this because its math...not bias...just math. math never lies. the reason why you dont hear any news of economic prosperity is because of the tax cuts that were given to the top 2%. that has really crippled this economy...also....math proves that as well. you cant deny mathematical fact.
ravenmcgrath 1 year ago
@seanndiane you be dumb yo, just fyi
comerbp82 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@seanndiane you be dumb yo, just fyi
comerbp82 1 year ago
Gingrich is scum. Truly a piece of garbage.
bodeezy 1 year ago
Gingrich thinks everyone is an idiot, just ask his wife.
Zlibservacratican 1 year ago 2
@Zlibservacratican *wives
masterkayaki 1 year ago 2
I haven't read this Wall street journal article, but I am certain it's highly absurd. So there, Gingrich won, Pelosi lost.
MrNiceGuy4TW 1 year ago
@MrNiceGuy4TW You spoken like a true republican that ignore the facts and don't fact check, remember Gingrich told his wife that it don't matter if he live is life opposite to what he says, he said the only one that have the talent in is party to distort the truth to his mindless followers is him because the average republican party supporter just watch fox news they don't fact check anything... so these republican guys can get away with murder because of that...
ddman10001 1 year ago
Comment removed
MrNiceGuy4TW 1 year ago
@ddman10001 An article with such an asinine setting? There are a million articles in this world, and I am supposed to read an article about how handing out money supposedly generates money? I am should to waste my precious time reading a nonsense article with that nonsense theme? I just would never waste my time with an asinine premise like that.
MrNiceGuy4TW 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrNiceGuy4TW So you can spend your time getting your elementary school degree?
MastermindX 1 year ago
Conservative math is easier and more fun for the average American. It's based on just making up stuff.
MastermindX 1 year ago 2
@MastermindX Intriguing. In the UK we now have a Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition (although I think those words mean a different thing over here) and they are planning on cutting spending and raising taxes slightly, as opposed to the Labour party who don't want to cut as fast and keep racking up debt - is there any correlation here between American and UK politics? Or is it complete opposite lol?
matt2689 1 year ago
@matt2689 I think for one the Lib-Dems are more akin to Libertarians here in the US- most of them vote Repuglican- who of course tend to be more in line with the Tories. There is a Libertarian third party- but they never get anywhere- you can't with a third party in the US. We're not a parliamentary system like in Canada, Britain, and most of Europe.
TageSavage 1 year ago
@matt2689 In my opinion, conservatism always sucks. We need to progress, not to conserve. But right now the European conservative-liberal (euro liberal = american libertarian) parties have a million better economic policies in contrast to the leftist parties that have become crazed and think the governments can give away money endlessly (see Spain).
Anyway the conservatives I was talking about are the GOP kind, which do not try to solve the economy, they only want to keep their power and money.
MastermindX 1 year ago
@genie0390 The $200,000 was already in the bank. And you think that a bank only lends the money it has?! The reason the banking crisis happened in 2007-08 is because banks were borrowing 3,4,5 times their asset bases from money markets and lending it to anyone and everyone - oooops look what happened.
matt2689 1 year ago
@matt2689 The actual multiples for lending were MUCH higher than that. Conservatives just don't understand math.
johnedwards1968 1 year ago
@johnedwards1968 Ahhhh you mean banks were borrowing even more money from the markets than I thought? Wouldn't surprise me lol!
matt2689 1 year ago
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
ThisIsMyDeen 1 year ago 2
Newt is a slimy opportunist that cares nothing about truth and has absolutely no concern about those in need. He is the epitome of the wealthy bureaucrat that laughs at the poor as he divorces his dying wife and deposits his million dollar paycheck.
xephyr1000 1 year ago
Reality tends to have a liberal bias.
Sir, I reject your reality and replace it with my own. - FOX news
MrLawrenceV 1 year ago
This all great Cenk but ur avoiding the elephant in the room, inflation. But hey I guess the collectivists motto is to help the poor even if it kills the currency and collapses the economy, ultimately increasing poverty. Cenk is a welfare state collectivist and Newt Gingritch is a Military Industrial Complex collectivist, both are very dangerous
ShatterNWO 1 year ago
@genie0390
typical youtube spam that is...
you have no idea what ur talking about ^^
41stgaming 1 year ago
liberal math really IS a scream!
a dollar handed out in food stamps has a 1.84 multiplier effect?? How great!! funny however a dollar put into the hands of a consumer via a tax cut doesn't seem to have any effect according to Cenk who insists tax cuts don't increase employment and have positive effects
trouble with Cenk's analysis is that the dollar he refers to comes from taxpayers and Gov must print the dollar which increases money supply and inflation which takes away purchasing power
genie0390 1 year ago
@genie0390 This is a well known economics principle. If you don't understand how it works, perhaps you could ask your economics professor for clarification. What? You don't have an economics professor? You are talking about a subject you have no knowledge of?
BrotherAlpha 1 year ago 2
@BrotherAlpha
perhaps I should give back my Masters Degree in economics and finance and those two other prof designations I have!
if giving money to consumers is such a great thing with no negative offsets, I suggest we order the Fed to print trillions and hand it out. think of that multiplier effect. Wow!! u fuckin dumbass, why do you suppose governments in Europe are in such bad shape and why is America going down the sewer with a loud slurp??
genie0390 1 year ago
@genie0390 That's b/c the rich use the money from more tax cuts by placing it into money accounts and NOT back into the economy. In fact, every study, including Wall Street Journal, showed that during Bush yrs the money accounts went UP while the economy tanked and it also showed that while the rich were getting more tax cuts they put more money into money accounts than before the tax cuts. It is quite simple. Now, tax cuts to the Middle class works bc they put it directly back into the economy.
dfrutled 1 year ago
@dfrutled
you're saying that Obowma's Stimulus package is working?? give me a break
you're analysis is not exactly what is happening
genie0390 1 year ago
@genie0390 everyone knows that the usa needed a stimulus package you putz
OpRedDawn 1 year ago
@OpRedDawn
everyone, except the misty eyed liberals, knows that governments don't create viable jobs, business does!!,..you the putz!!
genie0390 1 year ago
@genie0390 except that, ya know, even bush knew that a stimulus package was needed. Do you wear a helmet?
OpRedDawn 1 year ago
@OpRedDawn
so that's why Bush did a big stimulus package??
genie0390 1 year ago
@genie0390 "Bush calls for $145 billion stimulus package " 1/18/2008
Fucking idiot. Go sit in the corner and hit your head against the wall
OpRedDawn 1 year ago
@OpRedDawn
STFU you little liberal weasel
as I recall in 1/18/2008 the Dems were in total control of Congress so why didn't go ahead,..oh I know the "stimulus" wasn't big enough and didn't include hundreds of billions for pet liberal projects like 37 million to save a marsh mouse near San Francisco
you liberal retards really slay me
genie0390 1 year ago
@genie0390 Yeah, because pork is something that only dems put in.... great generalization. Oh wait, you're from costa rica. Stfu
OpRedDawn 1 year ago
@genie0390 Unfortunately, politics doesn't work that way. There is always someone(republicans and affrighted dems) that either compromise or create awful political policies(like the Bush tax cuts).
edeal86 1 year ago
If you want to pass it off as Obama's package, even though it was passed before he was elected, then I think it's fair you bash Republicans for it too.
It's the honest thing to do!
johnedwards1968 1 year ago
@genie0390 Tax cuts for the rich don't get the majority shit! Give the tax cuts to the masses, they will spend more money, giving store owners more money to expand, expansion creates jobs. More stores/shelf space means more demand, more demand means the producers need more workers to make a product. More people working means more people have money.
Just wondering, what would you do?
ILikeTheThingsIDo 1 year ago 2
@ILikeTheThingsIDo
Government needs to create a climate wherein businessmen feel more confident of the future! We need to eliminate uncertainties that Obowma created with his promise to fundamentally change America, his crazy income redistribution schemes etc. Business just hates uncertainties and surprises
I personally know a lot of business owners who say that they will not do very much in terms of expansion until Obowma is gone
you may not like it but it's true
genie0390 1 year ago
@genie0390 Personal experience is no substitute for facts. I don't doubt you have the stories from those business owners, but I have my own from my bosses. My boss who owns a smaller construction company and takes home no more than 10k a month, have said the lack of business is because people are afraid to spend money because they don't have enough. Get them some more money, they may remodel the kitchen. Doesn't matter because it's hearsay, same as your story.
ILikeTheThingsIDo 1 year ago
@ILikeTheThingsIDo
you are close to understanding what's going on in America
people don't want to spend money because of uncertainties and insecurity
Obowma wanting to fundamentally change America and his agenda of income redistribution, energy taxes, rising health care costs etc is scaring business and consumers
academics should stay in schools and keep pushing pencils, they know fuck all about managing things, which is exactly why their interests are in academics in the first place
genie0390 1 year ago
@genie0390 I hate the damn healthcare bill too, but for a different reason. Healthcare did not go nearly far enough. Look at France, who, according to the WHO, have the best healthcare. Their costs are very low for the individual.
Warren Buffet agrees that the rich should pay more taxes because they can afford it. It's not income redistribution, it's called fairness. Yes, that money may go to social programs that help the poor, the people who need help. The rich need nothing, they want more.
ILikeTheThingsIDo 1 year ago
@genie0390 he explains it in the video. You give a tax cut to a person with 200k in the bank, he's going to just put it in the bank and save it. That doesn't help the economy. It's the gov't giving money to the rich in the form of a tax cut, that doesn't stimulate the economy. On the other hand, give the same money to a poor person that needs to spend it, and it stimulates the economy nearly immediately.
nicklesaj 1 year ago
@nicklesaj
the person with the 200K puts money into the bank which means the bank has more money to lend, there is a much more significant multiplier effect here in terms of increasing spending!
the problem with current day America is Obowma with his talk of fundamentally changing America, his income redistribution crap, increasing health care costs to business, what he did with secured creditors in GM case etc,..all this creating uncertainties which business hates with a passion
genie0390 1 year ago
@genie0390 You're using opinion not facts and even your opinion is completely wrong. You must be a young kid? Teen?
dfrutled 1 year ago
@dfrutled He could just be an idiot.
UnderlordZ 1 year ago
@genie0390 Ah ha! I have a counter to this one too. Yes, the person with 200k in the bank will probably put the money in the bank. But giving 2% of people 10k on average to put in the bank would not equal the 1 to 200 hundred dollars of the other 98%. That 2%er would have to make 44 times the amount of a normal 98%er. Those other 98% put money in the bank too except for the very lowest who have to spend it now.
ILikeTheThingsIDo 1 year ago
@genie0390 But one of the major problems with our economy was the banks making bad loans. America has and is going through a phase of passing the debt to the highest bidder. It's been proven time and time again that trickle-down economics doesn't work and I don't agree with redistribution of wealth, but I think we should ALL be doing our part to help the economy strengthen. Obama shouldn't have renewed the Bush Tax Cuts, for anyone.
nicklesaj 1 year ago
kill the selfish conservatives
GTR66960 1 year ago