Quote:Oh dear...  I don't even know where to start, or whether it's worth it or not...  You're just gonna ignore what I say and just make up some more non-sense.

 

1st off, your "theory" on the laffer curve is cute and may garner you some nods of approval from your neo-con friends (wink wink, Malabar), but it's just not accurate.  I mean, I have this theory called the Anchorman Curve.  In the Anchorman Curve, you give all your money to me, and then inflation goes down, wages go up, the middle class grows, and women all want you.  (It's like RAINNN on your wedding day...  It's a free ridddddeeeee when you're already late!)
 

 

Yes, you specifically, JJ...  See, just because I say something doesn't make it true, just because.  Inflation went up because of the monetary policy started in the 60's and then exacerbated by Nixon, and then the great oil crisis came to head under Carter.  So to blame it all on "liberals" would be foolish, but not beneath you. Kensyian economics actually models this issue.  

 

Two democrat administrations and one administration that pioneered abandoning the bretton woods system, founding opec, instituted wage and price controls etc. etc. and you want to blame conservatives?  Good luck with that.  


 

However, to say that the laffer curve was the only way to resolve this problems is ridiculous.  Keynsian eonomic models and theories would have gotten us out of this mess just as easily, and probably with more benefits to workers.  Reagan can put another coal on the fire of whatever perdition he resides with in.  Millionaires and Billionaires can thank Reagun, I tell him to go kick rocks.

 

The laffer curve was the theory about optimizing revenue.  That's actually not directly correlated to the idea of leaving more money in the private sector to stimulate the economy without direct devaluation of the currency or the inefficiency that plagues public works. 20 million jobs created tells YOU to kick rocks.


 

As for the minimum wage discussion...  You're changing the topic.  The miminum wage has been stagnant to getting lower in terms of dollars...  That's the point.   That's why your boy Trump thinks it needs to be looked at and possible raised.  Obviously, minimum wage isn't the gold standard of how an nation/economy is doing.  There you go again...  Deflecting.

 

No, not getting off that easy.  You called me out by name.  You insinuated that just because i don't read or comment on every post in a thread that i am in some way DENYING FACTS.  You did this based on a post about LIVING WAGE and how SENSIBLE Eisenhower was.  a.) emotional qualifiers don't pass as fact.  b.) I then pointed out to you what the minimum wage was with Eisenhower and then further elaborated that in reality our current minimum wage is mathematically in line with the rate under Eisenhower.  


 

You can point out that it was higher in inflation adjusted dollars in 1968, but that negates the idea that Eisenhower's rate had anything to do with it!  


 

And as for government expansion under Obama...  Care to elaborate?  Or are you just parrotting what you hear on Fox News and your boy Hannity/Limbaugh?  Federal employment under Obama has actually DECREASED!!!!