Solar

Your last point is well taken.  This is where I believe practical application of Keynes may have been appropriate, not as a "green energy" measure,  but as a measure to protect the vast majority of American businesses from the volatility in the oil markets.  Instead we continued to subsidize big oil companies.  I don't get that...unless I stoop to pure cynicism.

Quote from: redwhiteblue on March 15, 2013, 05:42:40 PM
I don't fit I to anyone's pigeonhole.  I did not join this forum to argue a bunch of emotionally charged social issues with people who will never agree with me.  Joined this forum for the reason I initially stated.  As a math loving business student and former scientist I want the legislators to make conservative decisions with the most accurate models available.  I want our navy to operate under the theory that the earth is round and I want our budget to be based on Keynesianism.  And someday when someone devises a model that fits reality better than Keynesianism then I see no shame in ditching Keynes and moving on.

Having said that I believe that the Dems tend to practice Keynesianism Gone Wild. As a nation we need to spend responsibly.  I believe this sincerely but I don't feel my point of voice is to be heard by either political party.  I would have hoped that Republicans argue about which economic levers to pull.  Instead it is the same old supply side argument.  I do not understand this.

As a former scientist I believe that sincere debate is a path to greater understanding.  I am not here to cause trouble, but if it is a problem that I do not fit into anyone's pigeon hole then perhaps I joined the wrong forum.

I'm disgusted with both parties at the moment, so I won't be much help. More than anything else, we need honest people in Washington. Genuine representatives of the people, that care about the country. It's impossible to debate economic theory, when the people that will be implementing those theories, are dishonest.

Quote from: redwhiteblue on March 15, 2013, 06:03:51 PM
Solar

Your last point is well taken.  This is where I believe practical application of Keynes may have been appropriate, not as a "green energy" measure,  but as a measure to protect the vast majority of American businesses from the volatility in the oil markets.  Instead we continued to subsidize big oil companies.  I don't get that...unless I stoop to pure cynicism.

Yeah, that's a whole other can O worms, but truth is, Govt should simply get out of the way of the private sector and I have no doubt the best form of energy will win.
To use AGW like a weapon and force change on the country has been extremely damaging to the economy, and forcing alternatives down our throats simply killed a market that was doing fine, now people equate solar with socialists.
I am not a fan of Keynesian econ, I believe in a small Govt simply setting rules for trade to work within, not dictate losers and winners.

By the way, welcome to the forum Red White and Blue.
As Kram was saying, we just had an influx of trolls recently, so everyone gets a bit of testing, so to speak.
You won't find many Republicans here, we're mostly Tea party types, and solid Conservatives, if that gives you any idea of what to expect.

So grab a chair and kick up your feet, just don't touch the remote, I like the cartoon network.

I understand the Tea Party desire for less government...A LOT LESS GOVERNMENT.  But I also believe it is safe to assume that most Tea Party people don't want complete anarchy. (God I hope not anyway or I really did join the wrong forum).  We do need government.  And if we are to keep it small we need it to be functional and effective.

Our democracy isn't very functional right now,  but I still believe in it.  If we are to make it functional and effective and as inexpensive as possible we need Dems Repubs Tea Partiers and Libertarians to stop making noise and start making some decisions...with real numbers.

Quote from: redwhiteblue on March 15, 2013, 07:29:26 PM
I understand the Tea Party desire for less government...A LOT LESS GOVERNMENT.  But I also believe it is safe to assume that most Tea Party people don't want complete anarchy. (God I hope not anyway or I really did join the wrong forum).  We do need government.  And if we are to keep it small we need it to be functional and effective.

Tea party believes in Govt, we believe Govt is our servant, not the other way around.

QuoteOur democracy isn't very functional right now,  but I still believe in it.  If we are to make it functional and effective and as inexpensive as possible we need Dems Repubs Tea Partiers and Libertarians to stop making noise and start making some decisions...with real numbers.

Actually it's Republic, not Democracy, and I agree, it is extremely dysfunctional because it is not following the laws established as a Republic.
Don't expect much from the left, the current mess were in is due to RINO on the right capitulating to the left in power.

Quote from: redwhiteblue on March 15, 2013, 07:29:26 PM
I understand the Tea Party desire for less government...A LOT LESS GOVERNMENT.  But I also believe it is safe to assume that most Tea Party people don't want complete anarchy. (God I hope not anyway or I really did join the wrong forum).  We do need government.  And if we are to keep it small we need it to be functional and effective.

Our democracy isn't very functional right now,  but I still believe in it.  If we are to make it functional and effective and as inexpensive as possible we need Dems Repubs Tea Partiers and Libertarians to stop making noise and start making some decisions...with real numbers.

All I want is an efficient and honest government, that adheres to the oath they all take, to defend and uphold the constitution.

We don't have that. It's the basis of all of our problems.

I did not sign up for this forum to be a troll but a fundamental disagreement exists here.  I hope I present myself as respectfully but strongly disagreeing with a point made here.

Compromise does not equal capitulation.  Members of the left and the right have adopted this attitude and it is always harmful.  We are in this boat together. If half the oarsmen refuses to paddle anywhere but east and the other half refuses to paddle anywhere but west.  And the mates with the buckets refuse to bail water because they don't like the captain...we shall sink.

Quote from: redwhiteblue on March 16, 2013, 09:56:19 AM
I did not sign up for this forum to be a troll but a fundamental disagreement exists here.  I hope I present myself as respectfully but strongly disagreeing with a point made here.

Compromise does not equal capitulation.  Members of the left and the right have adopted this attitude and it is always harmful.  We are in this boat together. If half the oarsmen refuses to paddle anywhere but east and the other half refuses to paddle anywhere but west.  And the mates with the buckets refuse to bail water because they don't like the captain...we shall sink.

Not to worry, no one sees you as a troll.
But there has been no compromise since Husein has been in office, it is the left dictating the message, which is why we are gaining a trillion in debt yearly, it's why we will see 2 trillion added to the debt yearly after 2016, it's why the laws on immigration have been tossed aside, etc etc...

There hasn't been any compromise for a long long time, and I don't mean just the left, but the RINO in the GOP are guilty as well, they have been pushing a corporate cronyism type Govt and have completely ignored the base, the Tea party base, the people that are sick of seeing the Constitution trampled, as well as the Bill of Rights.

Using your analogy...When you have RINO and socialists paddling in the same direction from both sides of the boat, then the destination is obvious.
The base wants to change course, and plug the leaks before we sink.

Who is Hussein? What office does he hold?  How did he get there?

Quote from: redwhiteblue on March 16, 2013, 10:45:29 AM
Who is Hussein? What office does he hold?  How did he get there?

Barack Husein Obama.
How did he get here? We've been asking the same question for years.

Quote from: Solar on March 16, 2013, 11:29:21 AM

Barack Husein Obama.
How did he get here? We've been asking the same question for years.

He and the lib's are giving money away for free.

Quote from: walkstall on March 16, 2013, 12:43:12 PM
He and the lib's are giving money away for free.

Lets not forget cell phones.

Quote from: redwhiteblue on March 15, 2013, 05:17:35 AM
I am a business student and I consider myself to be conservative fiscally but not a "fiscal conservative.". By this I mean that I want my government and the legislators therein to make careful, responsible fiscal decisions based upon real numbers and accurate information. I understand that I am committing a political foul here but classical "trickle down" economic theory was shown to be incorrect a long time ago.  Yes folks, Keynesian theory has been shown repeatedly to be the most accurate (not perfect but most accurate).

Being incorrect isn't committing a political foul.  How would you define "trickle down economics"?  If you want to argue against it, you need to make the case that a new business, for example, doesn't create jobs, and could have started without some capital investment from someone else who earned that capital.

Quote
Why do "fiscally conservative" politicians and talking heads cling to an outdated and incorrect economic theory as if it is religion.

I could have told you that you were a college student being indoctrinated by a Marxist professor who has never contributed anything on the positive side to the economy.  It is normal for youngsters, like yourself, to see an older person who has no clue what they are talking about and buy into their BS.

Quote
I ask this because...let's face it.  Paul Ryan's budget proposal is a farce and frankly embarrassing to anyone who takes business seriously.

Explain.

Quote from: redwhiteblue on March 15, 2013, 06:21:24 AM
I agree with you to a great extent kramarat.  Almost by definition Government is flawed because it is impossible to please all of the people all of the time.  I also recognize that Keynesiasm is flawed, but I ask for this discussion that we separate Keynesian theory from the practical application of the theory.

I consider myself conservative because I desire judicious application of Keynesian theory.  Spending money to improve roads and rails in my humble opinion is a business saavy expenditure for it will decrease wear and tear on semi tractor trailers and increase the efficiency with which goods are shipped.  Spending money on military hardware that the generals don't even want just because the factory is in someone's congressional district is a terrible expenditure.

Incorrect.  The free market is the answer to all economic problems.