Originally Posted by
degsmeRIGHT.. more definitional logic based on your BELIEF..... logical fallacy after logical fallacy.
Actually the econometric data for Keynesian vs. Supply Side economics is equally well documented,
Actually, you mean we can only use lefty morals.
Nope. More definittional fallacy from you
Our "moral" obligation to help the "poor" triumphs over the "rich's" right to their personal property.
Nope you cannot point to me invoking this in any way. I have been scrupulous about simply keeping this in terms of Marginal Utility and ROI. In essence I have been focussed on the majority of the "moral" arguements you make about the importance of efficient markets. thus you are engaged in a strawman fallacy
. Such is the dishonesty of the left.
and now you are engaged not only in strawman logical fallacy but ad hominem.
Take your "definitional logic" and put it where the sun don't shine.
Ah yes, you want to be able to make up the arguement as you go. No adherence to logical reasoning necessary. Sorry nope
You aren't fooling me. Morality is what YOU say it is, facts are what YOU say they are. Nonsense!
more strawman fallacy. More ad hominem fallacy. You haven't offered ANY actual data to support your claims but you accuse others of makingup facts LOL!!
As for your silly contention regarding the econometric data, if that was so, how could the notion that the "stimulus" failed be so widely and generally accepted?
Because the GOP engaged in a propoganda campaign that misrepresented what was projected by the Stimulus and the Dems made the POLITICAL mistake of not responding adequately.
again you are engaged in logical fallacy - namely Appeal to Popularity. by that line of reasoning, in the 1200s the earth was flat... which is a ludicrous notion.
You simply claim things that aren't so and I reject them.
Um sorry I've documented where the stimulus
1) proejcted to create/save between 2.5 and 3 million jobs
2) where it created/saved between 3 and 4.5 million jobs (Conservative economists LIKE
The Economist put the number at around 3 million - which still is in the range of success)
OTOH, you have offered not a single shred of evidence to support ANY of your claims. You claimed that under GWB we averaged 4% growth in the year after the tax cut. I showed that when tracked on a quarterly basis, what you had was a single 6% spike and then back to 22% underperformance
You claimed that the underperformance from 2001-2007 was due to the extended post 9/11 recession. I showed independent econometric data that
1) documented the advers economic impact of 9/11 at about $50 billion in a $12 Trill economy
2) that the economic downturn was over within 1 quarter and simply went back to the anemic GOP based growth that underperformed
You keep making claims that INDEPENDENT FACTS REFUTE
and you have yet to offer a FACT BASED refutation of anything I have cited.
FACTS MATTER LUkEY
they really do... you can't just make shit up about GDP growth rates and pretend its so
you cannot point to something that is a logical fallacy (appeal to popularity) as a way of refuting actual econometric data.
well you can - but you then come across as either ignorant, dishonest or foolish.