Liberals don't know economics

> Liberals don't know economics
> Nearly 70% of economists in the US are Democrats
forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/08/02/surprise-70-of-economists-support-hillary-not-trump-but-70-of-economists-are-democrats-anyway/#37363c183fba

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/wFcjR
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management
usdebtclock.org/
youtube.com/watch?v=CB-BW0-CF6Q&ab_channel=FoxNews
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

god I would bury my head between those legs for hours. not even memeing. if you don't find that attractive you're fucking gay

>Democrats
>Liberals
pick un

Archived it for you archive.is/wFcjR

Black pubic hair is very coarse, similar to that of an SOS pad. Hopefully she is shaved

Have you ever met an academic economist who knew fuck all about how real economies work?

Aren't liberals and Democrats the ones complaining that the system doesn't work, and that everything sucks?

I hate niggers, but I would impregnate and leave her.

Not gonna lie desu, for a nigress, i would fukin wreck that

Makes sense...

The vast majority of Liberals and Progressives are far smarter and superior to Conservatives, Nazis, and Libertarians.

Conservatism is a mental disorder.

How are the Democrats not liberal/neoliberal?

Still not human. Gross nigger bitch with nasty niggernipples and pubic weave head

since when have economists been right about anything though?

>calling others fags
>eating a nigger pussy

sounds like what any of her other baby dadies would do.

>people whose ideological livelihood must suck money from the populace more so than most to survive being highly represented in that subject
>activated my almonds

Its not THIS thread again is it?

>"economists" say that digging trenches then filling them back in again is a useful endeavor that will create wealth

yes, user. enjoying sex with a woman is now gay.

god this fucking board

must be why they all support refugees and say it helps us as well as increasing minorities in white areas.

And I can guarantee you 70% of those democrats' names end in a stein, cohn, witz or berg

Dems are just as capitalistic as Repubs for all intents (which is why Bernie was never going to get the nomination), so there's little point even looking into party lines

There's a difference between sex and bestiality.

And look at the pickle we are in. I know people say correlation does not equal causation, but regardless, I believe Democratic economists have made the case against themselves here.

Remember when genius liberal economist Paul Krugman said the stock market would crash if Trump was elected?

yes, user. bestiality with the opposite sex is now gay

Liberal != Democrat

>fucking retard

Have you ever considered that globalism sounds really nice to banker and political types but will fuck over everyone else? Does that help explain why so many economists are Dems?

Remember when Paul Krugman and several other liberal economists said the stock market would crash if Trump were elected?

50% of billionaires is USA are Democrats and 100% of those 50% have untaxable foreign assets

really makes you think

Wow it's almost like academic theoreticians have no idea how things work in practical reality.

"""""economists""""" professors, who are directly benefited by big government.

Did you just assume xer's gender you bigot

faggot

>economists
>forecasting market movements

See , explain to me how exactly the Democrats do not classify as neoliberal.

>a leaf calling anyone a faggot
I just reported you for hate speech and the fact that you used an incorrect pronoun when referring to me

Do you remember who was President when the economy crashed? Are you feeling okay?

There's always someone who graduates at the bottom of their class

>Krugman
that clown has never gotten anything right

That's why the economists at the Fed are suddenly hot on raising interest rates. They want to crash the economy and blame it on Trump.

Who the president was means nothing. The Clinton deregulation of banks coupled with the "give the niggers houses" programs his administration pushed paved the way for 2008. Banks historically have lent to individuals who are good credit risk. Under Clinton they came under fire for not lending to minorities on the basis of racism despite these minorities objectively poor credit risks. The rest is pretty fucking clear.

20 trillion in debt

Krugman is an embarrassment

>95% of academia is liberal
>only 70% of economists are

unifags get paid to write liberal trash and express liberal "thoughts" OP

the fact that economists are 6x less willing to do it than average should tell you liberals dont know shit. the official (liberal) line is so intolerably that 6x fewer people are taking the bribes

The only reason you wouldn't smash that shit is because you'd bust a nut before you ever stuck it in and then go limp.

No offense but that's the worst oversimplification I've ever seen.

The fed is raising rates the way it should have 3-4 years ago. We've had negative real interest rates for so long that the markets have become embedded with systemic risk due to poor capital allocation.

It's a multifaceted issue with roots in the 2008 bailouts. Globally central banks and pumped $19T into financial assets which has inflated one of, if not the, worst bubble in history.

>Economists are mostly democrats
>therefore average democrats know economics

No.

Lefty billionaires push for higher taxes and government projects

Costs them nothing as the lion share of their wealth is tucked away in property, swiss accounts, foreign investments, etc.

Small fry millionaires and the working middle class are forced to carry the burden of the bottom classes, a weight which continually grows (i.e. feeding the seagulls and creating an artificial population)

the gap between the lefty billionaires and any new blood widens, all social mobility seizes completely. All under the guise of "helping those in need" but forcing others to foot the bill permanently.

I was more implying that Republicans generally think they know economics and are the party of the economy when they most certainly aren't and don't. The economy even grows faster under Democrats.

Economics is fucking voodoo pseudoscience.

oh and I almost forgot

This process leads to more assistance dependent people living off of this system, which in turn will continually vote for the same legislature that sustains them. It's a perfect plot that only secures itself further which each political victory.

Leftists are willingly pushing us into a permanent caste system. Where only peasants and billionaire royalty exist.

>the wealthy push for taxes on the wealthy

>banks lend to people with good credit risk

If it was their own money, maybe they would.

Back on planet earth, banks lend the money of other people. If the money is repaid, they pocket the interest. If it isn't, it's depositors who lose their life savings, not the bankers.

Here's why.

Norbot is a godsend.

That's not per capita you fucking retard.

>"Wealth is growing durr hurr"

>Apple and Starbucks made a killing so the wealth is growing guise!

are you implying underwriting doesn't exist?

Took like ten posts filled with stupidity to get to the truth.

Yeah and how many of those economists predicted the economic collapse of 2008?

Legs? Really? with that amaing rack sagging down upon that tight stomach?

On a conceptual level, drug use and the criminalization of drugs are used by the neoliberal state to quell the surplus population.

I don't have the graph on my phone but there's a clear correlation between the falling street price of heroin and the stagnation of real wages. Drug business becomes increasingly attractive to the underprivileged population, but the consequences of being caught propagate their lower socioeconomic status.

lol yeah adam smith was a retard

99% of the time economic principles have very strong explanatory power desu

>mfw I realized that people who really understand the economy employ economists and study economic trends, but aren't economists themselves

You don't get it. Historically speaking, lenders have always been the ones holding restraint as borrowers have always tried to get money they could never repay.

The Clinton admin changed the incentive system for lenders who could lend to illegals, sell the loan and be rid of the risk.

Those legs look like shit

Here's an idea that your shitty leftist brain can understand.

You know Mario Kart right? Of course you do, you probably played it every night in your ((liberal university))

Well here's the idea, you know the Blue shell right? How it's designed to home in on only the person in first place? Well imagine if the Blue Shell instead only went after the person in 3rd place - the racers in 2nd and 1st would be in a race of their own, completely untouchable - as the rest of the racers desperate struggle for their consolation prize.

That's the incentive for them, it's not "they just have big hearts" they're doing it because it benefits them and secures their class.

...

That's a poignant analogy.

>70% of scientists believe the earth is flat
>70% of them have aligned political views.


It's been less than 70% of the scientific community that's had and actual developmental impact for most of modern day knowledge.
I'm sure the percentage is fairly close for economists as well.

The same ones who couldn't spot a bubble from a mile away? They're shit. Hayek, Rothbard, etc BTFO them on every economic belief they've ever held. They also got cucked in college and their professors made them liberal.

>academic economist

Is there any other kind? Either you're giving your "academic" opinion of economics or you're actively participating in it.

Post Keynesianism is the way, all other economist except maybe functionalist are wrong.

...

Conservatism often takes the form of the rich and powerful finding any meme they can to keep the mindless shitkickers in line. They will sell them any spook they can in order to get as many people on their side as possible protecting the wealth of the rich. Most of the time this takes the form of "muh tradition".

The last those in power want is for someone to rock the boat so they convince the masses that wealth doesn't matter, what matters is pointless free shit like tradition and that anyone who wants to redistribute the wealth hates tradition and all the spooks the masses have been brainwashed into believing.

I'm not saying pride in one's nation or traditions is necessarily a bad thing, but it is what it is. The rich will say anything to stay rich and "muh tradition" has been an excuse to maintain the status quo since ancient Roman and before.

Is that why we are 3 Tril in debt?

Since when were we past Keynesianism?

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management
>Initially successful with annualized return of over 21% (after fees) in its first year, 43% in the second year and 41% in the third year, in 1998 it lost $4.6 billion in less than four months

>lost $4.6 billion in less than four months

>Myron S. Scholes and Robert C. Merton, who shared the 1997 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for a "new method to determine the value of derivatives"

>lost $4.6 billion in less than four months

>requiring financial intervention by the Federal Reserve

Yeah. They should have. They didn't, because they needed cheap credit to keep the normies quiet and hide the fact that the House Negro had done nothing to fix any of the country's real economic problems. Positive real rates would have resulted in another crisis---and ruined any chance of electing Hillary in 2016.

>Want power and money
>Know how to get money and become powerful
>Do those actions
It's like people with those jobs know a left wing society caters to them.

>> Liberals don't know economics
>> Nearly 70% of economists in the US are Democrats
appeal to authority

economics is a joke degree btw

Isn't that the whole argument of socialism/communism you fuckin tard. That wealth doesn't matter, only community and tradition. Pretty sure you're projecting your kike ideologies onto red-blooded capitalism.

>economics is a joke degree
Spoken like someone who never went to college.

>he thinks a high income tax affects the super rich
Protip: the super rich don't make their money from a fucking salary.

I was kinda joking, however post Keynesianism is exactly past Keynesianism blame it on the naming from economist. After all what is Neo Keynesianism and why its less new than New Keynesianism

I think you're conflating social conservatism with economic conservatism, an amateur mistake indeed.

Also, in what world does wanting to keep your money and the culture that created it a bad thing?

The "masses" are largely plebs with low IQs and they do a perfectly fine job surviving and thriving even when you don't throw food and goods at them.

The only difference is that when you give them hand out the "safety net" becomes a hammock that they'll literally fight and kill for to keep.

Spoken like someone who got an economics degree.

Yes, I will upsize thanks and throw in 3 cheeseburgers.

>OP proving his own point
Nothing to see here folks, move along

>Under Clinton they came under fire for not lending to minorities on the basis of racism despite these minorities objectively poor credit risks.
Do you have a source for this? It sounds like an oversimplification but if it were true it would probably be the best argument against affirmative action out there.

Ill sum it up:
>the rich want NWO and use multinational groups to destroy the state and make it into basically a local government to sustain the rich via monopolies
AKA Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged

>One trillion Dollar debt
Yep, libshits.

>it's depositors who lose their life savings
Wow is this 1929 again? No they won't lose their live savings. The entire economy adjusts making the value of money worthless because it is no longer backed up with anything of value.

19 trillion
usdebtclock.org/

>implying roasties aren't infinitely more fun to play with

That's fucking right
Breasts are for patricians

You mean those same economists that constantly are wrong about shit?

youtube.com/watch?v=CB-BW0-CF6Q&ab_channel=FoxNews

That was all Bush's fault.

Congress makes the rules, not the president. Redo that chart for who controlled Congress. You will get a completely different picture.

economists are fucking kikes.

>archive.is/wFcjR
archive is NOT the fucking pictures/videos set of OP pic