<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: That Giant SUCKUP Sound</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/11/22/that-giant-suckup-sound/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/11/22/that-giant-suckup-sound/</link>
	<description>The Business End of the Blogosphere</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 14:04:29 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: BizzyBlog &#187; Reason Online: Clinton Admin Credited Deregulation for Good 1990s Economy</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/11/22/that-giant-suckup-sound/comment-page-1/#comment-126101</link>
		<dc:creator>BizzyBlog &#187; Reason Online: Clinton Admin Credited Deregulation for Good 1990s Economy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Nov 2008 18:08:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/?p=7713#comment-126101</guid>
		<description>[...] was GOP-inspired, but that isn&#8217;t what caused the situation that I like to refer to as The Great SUCKUP (The Seemingly Unlimited Cash Kitty Under [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] was GOP-inspired, but that isn&#8217;t what caused the situation that I like to refer to as The Great SUCKUP (The Seemingly Unlimited Cash Kitty Under [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dscott</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/11/22/that-giant-suckup-sound/comment-page-1/#comment-126082</link>
		<dc:creator>dscott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 15:35:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/?p=7713#comment-126082</guid>
		<description>$350 to $700 billion was literally sucked out of the economy to rescue companies that made poor decisions.  Way to go Socialists, they took money that would have been used to engage in successful business and gave it to morons to offset their losses.  From this point of view, the misallocation of resources is even worse as it prevented that money from creating jobs in viable enterprises.  

Watch the money supply, now that Paulson and the rest of the clever idiots realize what they did, did not work, they will start printing money big time.  

BTW-If deficit spending and massive spending by government would bring the economy out of recession, then why in blazes did it go into recession in the first place with huge annual budget deficits?  Schumer apparently is still clueless and is proposing an additional $700 billion in bailouts.  I believe this meets a definition of insanity: &quot;Doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.&quot;

If you must do something, then at least don&#039;t do the wrong thing.

Myth: Government Spending ‘Stimulates’ the Economy

&lt;i&gt;So is this the right recipe to boost a flagging economy? Keynesian theory sounds good, and it would be nice if it made sense, but it has a rather glaring logical fallacy. It overlooks the fact that, in the real world, government can’t inject money into the economy without first taking money out of the economy. Put more bluntly, Keynesianism only looks at one-half of the equation. It conveniently ignores the fact that any money that the government puts in the economy’s right pocket is money that is first removed from the economy’s left pocket. As such, there is no increase in what Keynesians refer to as aggregate demand. The bottom line is that Keynesianism doesn’t boost national income, it merely redistributes it.&lt;/i&gt;


http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/myth-government-spending-stimulates-the-economy/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>$350 to $700 billion was literally sucked out of the economy to rescue companies that made poor decisions.  Way to go Socialists, they took money that would have been used to engage in successful business and gave it to morons to offset their losses.  From this point of view, the misallocation of resources is even worse as it prevented that money from creating jobs in viable enterprises.  </p>
<p>Watch the money supply, now that Paulson and the rest of the clever idiots realize what they did, did not work, they will start printing money big time.  </p>
<p>BTW-If deficit spending and massive spending by government would bring the economy out of recession, then why in blazes did it go into recession in the first place with huge annual budget deficits?  Schumer apparently is still clueless and is proposing an additional $700 billion in bailouts.  I believe this meets a definition of insanity: &#8220;Doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.&#8221;</p>
<p>If you must do something, then at least don&#8217;t do the wrong thing.</p>
<p>Myth: Government Spending ‘Stimulates’ the Economy</p>
<p><i>So is this the right recipe to boost a flagging economy? Keynesian theory sounds good, and it would be nice if it made sense, but it has a rather glaring logical fallacy. It overlooks the fact that, in the real world, government can’t inject money into the economy without first taking money out of the economy. Put more bluntly, Keynesianism only looks at one-half of the equation. It conveniently ignores the fact that any money that the government puts in the economy’s right pocket is money that is first removed from the economy’s left pocket. As such, there is no increase in what Keynesians refer to as aggregate demand. The bottom line is that Keynesianism doesn’t boost national income, it merely redistributes it.</i></p>
<p><a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/myth-government-spending-stimulates-the-economy/" rel="nofollow">http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/myth-government-spending-stimulates-the-economy/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
