Madame Maddow Warns That Cutting Government Spending Means Money 'Taken Out of the Economy'
Don't you love it when left wingers reveal their actual views on economics?
Rachel Maddow, one of MSNBC's nightly Gang of Five, did this on her show Monday while talking with Chris Hayes of The Nation about Democrats and Republicans battling over the debt ceiling (video after page break) --
On the issue of the overall health of the economy right now, the prospect for a double-dip recession is not only real it is looming. What we just went through with the Great Recession was so traumatic to this economy that we're looking at a decade's long full recovery in terms of, it'll actually restructure the way the American economy is forever.
The Fed and the CBO are saying, as of last week, do not take any spending out of the economy right now. If you want to cut spending in the long run or think about something else, fine, worry about that and have deficit talks, but right now it is too fragile to do this. The Republicans' only demand is that money be taken out of the economy right now.
Got that? Cutting government spending constitutes money taken "out of the economy." Which it does, if one sees government spending as representing the economy as a whole -- and the higher as a portion of GDP, the better.
Maddow predictably gets it backward -- increasing government spending diverts money "out of the economy." True, much of it is filtered back through salaries for public workers and government contracts, but not until an inherently lethargic bureaucracy bites off a big chunk in the process.
Maddow also distorts where Republicans stand on the debt ceiling. Their "only" demand is not that "money be taken out of the economy right now," as she claims. (Again, just the opposite) They also demand that government not siphon more money "out of the economy" through stealth taxes on the most productive people in the country.
- Jack Coleman's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
wow
Submitted by Hoosier Conservative on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 6:44pm.
It's a miracle she has lived as long as she has without forgetting how to breathe.
Good old Randy... Maddow.......
Submitted by OldJarhead77 on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 9:57am.
Living proof that someone somewhere found a way to make pondscum talk!.......
And yet
Submitted by HockeyKid on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 6:51pm.
they hyperventilate if anyone suggests they might be socialists. Oy!
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
True colors
Submitted by Mutantone on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 6:59pm.
It seems that so many Marxist in the media and far to many in the congress they have to be removed the sooner the better for America
Like all good liberals,
Submitted by Chris Norman on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 7:00pm.
Like all good liberals, Maddow, views everything, including the economy, through the government window. The federal government must be involved in every facet of life.
Maddow is either as dumb as a
Submitted by celator on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 7:09pm.
Maddow is either as dumb as a stick when it comes to economics, or she enjoys presenting herself as the village idiot each and every night. Or she's a flat out, long time Marxist.
I think Maddow is so full of
Submitted by Chris Norman on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 7:13pm.
I think Maddow is so full of herself as being superior to everyone else, she thinks she can get away with saying anything she wants - and, to her few viewers, she very well may.
Chris,yep, I do think her ego
Submitted by celator on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 7:18pm.
Chris,yep, I do think her ego explains a lot about her blindness as to how she comes off. Sorta like Obama. Well, a lot like Obama. Heck, exactly like Obama.
We can all stipulate..
Submitted by liberalsarefunny on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 7:20pm.
that she is a genius...
Rick Maddow and Janie Weir separated...
Submitted by USMC8411 on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 7:23pm.
At Birth. Liberal belief in evolution is all askew...
http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2010/02/16/sp-Johnny_Weir_F_0501112728...
The Ice queen wears makeup, while maddow shuns it for being "feminine".
Maddow wears a cup, BELOW the waist, The ice queen wears 2 above the belt.
Maddow got stuck with the Adam's apple, and the male inflection. The ice queen celebrates the lispand the female inflection he practices so well.
Maddow dates women. The ice queen thinks he is one.
Exactly how much money are these turds taking out of the middle class and the poor for the enhancement of their very own bank statements?
maybe Janie
Submitted by OldJarhead77 on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 10:23am.
THATS FUNNY!!!.... The only thing I can think is that Janie and Rick (I call it Randy) we sent home Mis-identified twins.............. mismarked Janie as the girl and Rick as the boy.....
Obama just threw over $1 trillion into the economy, dummy
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 7:48pm.
Worked out real good, didn't it?
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
pie
Submitted by Tjexcite on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 8:01pm.
It is all one big closed system pie. Nothing in nothing out just one big pie. Who can and how can we split the one big pie up so that no rich white will not have the biggest piece with none left for the little people.
Well yea, the whole idea of
Submitted by redfish on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 8:47pm.
Well yea, the whole idea of 'economic stimulus' is to put money in the economy. That line of argument is if the money were returned the private sector that the businessmen might act conservatively and put it into savings it rather than spend it, and that at least keeping spending where it is, rather than withdrawing it, gives people certainty.
I don't know how this falls into the category of exposing liberal bias.
You're right, this is more a
Submitted by ant on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 1:02am.
You're right, this is more a case of stupidity, ignorance, or just plain lies than it is about bias. Kinda like the jury that's out on you. I have my suspicions, though, about what category you fit in.
Its a case of people having
Submitted by redfish on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 5:54pm.
Its a case of people having different arguments. Liberals believe economic stimulus works. whatever, they're entitled to their arguments.
Well yea, the whole idea of
Submitted by redfish on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 8:47pm.
Well yea, the whole idea of 'economic stimulus' is to put money in the economy. That line of argument is if the money were returned the private sector that the businessmen might act conservatively and put it into savings it rather than spend it, and that at least keeping spending where it is, rather than withdrawing it, gives people certainty.
I don't know how this falls into the category of exposing liberal bias.
So, Conservatives should 'act
Submitted by ant on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 1:14am.
So, Conservatives should 'act right' and put (stimulus) money into savings and that would spur the economy? But, by the same token the excuses listed among big-spending libtards, like Pelosi Galore, is that stimulus will work by giving people (other) people's money to spend. So, are you saying conservatives receiving 'stimulus' must save money to help the economy, but welfare, UC, andfood-stamp spending is good? Am I reading you right? Please explain. If you can't, I will just assume you picked the wrong day to quit sniffing glue.
She must be right -- she's a Rhodes Scholar
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 8:55pm.
Maybe it was Maddow who explained to then-Speaker Pelosi how every one dollar in unemployment compensation produces two dollars in the economy. "Unemployment is the best stimlus we can have," uttered Pelosi (or words to that effect).
Maddow's utopian society is one where all wealth flows to the government, which it then redistributes it to the public. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."
Galvanic:
Submitted by SickofLibs on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 8:57pm.
Here's the actual footage.
Thanks. She's had several. I was thinking about this one . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 11:07pm.
PELOSI: "This is something that is not only good for these families; it's the right thing to do in a downturn in our economy. But it's also the right thing to do to grow our economy. Economists tell us that unemployment insurance — the non-partisan Urban Institute estimated that unemployment insurance returns $2 to the economy for every $1 spent. This is money that is needed by families to buy necessities, to heat their homes as Edrie said, and immediately injects demand into the economy — creating jobs."
A watchdog group asked her office if they could point to the economist(s) Pelosi was allegedly citing. They couldn't name one, but referred the group to a couple of network TV news sites.
Pelosi's math lends to an absolutely wonderfulk debt-erasing plan.
1. Put every American worker on unemployment -- 100%
2. Borrow $14 trillion dollars from China.
3. Hand out the $14 trillion to the 100% unemployed
4. Quicker than one can say "Uh, let me re-read my statement," it turns into $28 trillion thanks to Pelosi theory
5. Tax the 100% unemployed at 100%; recover $28 trillion
6. Repay China the $14 trillion (with the interest). leavingth $14 trillion minus the interest paid to China, to pay off our national debt. BINGO!
7. What about the 100% unemployed Aemericans? Simply borrow more $$, double it through Pelosi-math, repay the loan with half the $$ and let the unemployed keep the other half.
It's brilliant if you understand Pelosi-nomics.
No wonder she spouts such garbage
Submitted by Blonde on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 9:53pm.
Her degree(s).....politics.
By definition, political "experts" are economic illiterates.
I have nothing else to add.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
J, Cecil must be spinning in his grave by now
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 10:16pm.
...at very high RPMs.
Thanks to her and a few others, the once vaunted Rhodes Scholarship is now about as impressive as a Nobel Peace Prize.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
A Rhodes Scholar?
Submitted by thestalkinghorse on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 10:06pm.
She is a Rhodes Scholar!
With no comprehension of how the economy works. It's incredible, she's just like Obama.
This is what the Rhodes
Submitted by Van Halen on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 10:38pm.
This is what the Rhodes Scholar and Ivy League bunch produce. Raving Leftwing fools who are
wrong
wrong
WRONG
about everything.
Just look at what they've done to our country these last three years and what they've done to their own media companies. Everything they touch, they ruin.
Sure is
Submitted by KornKing on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 10:19am.
The only problem is that she's a Randi Rhodes Scholar
Bill Clinton was Real
Submitted by Comrade Jim on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 11:04am.
a randy Rhodes Scholar.
Wow can this biach
Submitted by hbnolikeee on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 10:09pm.
cook the books or what?
If this is the sort of twisted BS being taught at Oxford...
Submitted by Dave. on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 10:19pm.
...just be glad you didn't go there.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
The fact that the Left have
Submitted by Van Halen on Wed, 06/29/2011 - 10:36pm.
The fact that the Left have the unmitigated gall to say ANYTHING about Palin or Bachmann and yet hold up this raving idiot Maddow week after week as some kind of brilliant journalist thinker...
No wonder she is in liberal arts
Submitted by octavioj on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 12:29am.
Let me explain it to you Dr. Maddow,
Economy 100% = Private sector % + government % . So every % that comes out of government gets AUTOMATICALLY returned to the private sector. Is that hard? Not really. Unless you are a statist...
We should qualdrupple the deficit
Submitted by chazski on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 9:07am.
As I understand the Keynes theory of deficit spending, every dollar the government spends produces $1.50 in the economy, thus you have economic growth. If that theory is valid, it seems to me we should immediately find some succ.., er, I mean, some benevolent nation with more money than they can use and borrow like ten trillion or so dollars, less than 2/3 of our present national debt, and pump it into the economy with more shovel-ready projects. After a year, the ten trillion would grow to fifteen trillion and we could raise taxes just enough to get back the ten trillion and pay back the debt. That would leave the economy with five trillion additional dollars and that would certainly boost the economy. In fact, we could do that every year, increasing the national wealth by five trillion with each pop. If we distributed that to every person equally, like the dems like doing, it would mean $16,000 to each person each year. Of course, we could use that money to pay off the existing national debt in just a few years. Them we could pay everyone the full $16,000 every year.
I think the real problem, however, will be how to actually spend ten trillion each year. Obviously, all the bridges will be repaired and all the pot holes filled in no time, so we’ll have to find something really big to do. And since all these shovel-ready projects seem to have something to do with roads, I think there could be nothing bigger than setting to work and paving all our roads, every last one, from every back water country road to every mile of the interstate system and paving them all with actual gold. Gold is completely impervious to weather, lasts forever and would require no maintenance. Best of all, it would be basically free, just like all the entitlement programs which Princess Maddow likes so much, because it would all be done with borrowed money which we would repay. When all of our streets and roads were finally paved with gold, we would finally be the nation so many around the world believe us to be and we could all live happily ever after.
It’s a very good thing that Princess Maddow, Happy Matthews, Mr. Ed, Little Larry and the other guy apparently don’t read NewsBusters as much as they should because they probably will not see this suggestion. If they did, I’m certain that it would make perfect sense to them and we would have the whole More Stupidity Nobody Believes Completely network, MSNBC, advocating it from here on. And Obama would probably call it his idea and pursue it.
Yeah, but,
Submitted by texasborngranny on Thu, 06/30/2011 - 1:21pm.
not cutting government spending means taking more money out of MY pockets!!!