« | »

Romer Says We’re Pretty Darn [Intercoursed]

From the Daily Caller:

Christina Romer lets loose on credit downgrade: We’re ‘pretty darn f—ed’


University of California, Berkeley Professor Christina Romer, formerly chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, appeared on HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” Friday night.

Romer — who resigned in 2010 after inaccurately predicting that the $800 billion stimulus would lower the unemployment rate — said that the S&P credit downgrade was a sign that the country is “pretty darn fucked.”

We realize that Mr. Mahrer’s show is really just one long obscenity, but doesn’t Ms. Romer kiss Obama’s cheek(s) with that mouth?

Besides, didn’t Ms. Romer help slip us the date rape drug – AKA ‘the stimulus’?

Maher asked Romer, “How uncontroversial is Keynesian economics?”

Romer said, “The basic idea that if you increase government spending or you cut people’s taxes that stimulates the economy and lowers the unemployment rate, is a very widely accepted idea. It’s in every economics textbook, that’s what we teach our undergraduates, and I certainly try to teach them the truth.

“It is a very known and accepted idea and fact and the empirical evidence is definitely there, and people just want to say the sky is green.”

What does cutting people’s taxes have to do with "Keynesian economics"? In fact, cutting taxes is the polar opposite of the Keynesian approach. Perhaps Ms. Romer is teaching in the wrong field of study.

Maher asked Romer how she felt about being “Palinized” by Republicans who aren’t economists. She said, “Policy would be better if we listened to the experts.”

Like her? For the record, Ms. Palin has met public and private payrolls and balanced public and private budgets. What has Ms. Romer ever done?

Maher then asked her if she agreed that the stimulus should have been bigger than the “half-assed” one passed in 2009. Romer agreed that “it should have been even bigger.”

So Ms. Romer wishes the stimulus had been ‘full-assed’ or maybe ‘ass-whole’?

Romer said that although the stimulus should have been bigger, it isn’t too late to pass another, larger stimulus now. “What I want is more now,” she said.

She’s an "expert" all right. If at first you don’t succeed — in completely destroying the economy – try, try again.

Romer said[,] “[S]omeone ought to be making the case for swinging for the fences, not [for] small programs.”

Apparently, there are still a few dollars out there that haven’t been gobbled up by the government. And we can’t have that. We still haven’t been ‘intercoursed’ enough for her tastes.

This article was posted by Steve on Monday, August 8th, 2011. Comments are currently closed.

17 Responses to “Romer Says We’re Pretty Darn [Intercoursed]”

  1. untrainable says:

    “The basic idea that if you increase government spending or you cut people’s taxes that stimulates the economy and lowers the unemployment rate, is a very widely accepted idea.”

    No wonder “economists” are always being hit by the “unexpected” (aka “REALITY”).

    OK, so after 3 years of increased government spending, the unemployment rate has “necessarily skyrocketed”, and the economy has not been stimulated in the least. (In fact if actual numbers instead of the bogus crap they’ve been giving us since Obie’s policies started were being used, they would show that the economy has had the proverbial rug yanked out from under it.) So let’s try the other “widely accepted idea” that is in “every economics textbook”. Cut people’s taxes and let’s give that 3 years to see what happens. Then maybe we can ammend every economics textbook with accurate, rather than simply “widely accepted” liberal tripe. Remember that it was once “widely accepted” that the Earth was flat.

  2. tranquil.night says:

    *snort* Great commentary Steve.

    One of the most bizarre traits of these people is how they so thoroughly can detach themselves from their own actions, and just observe the ensuing consequences as if they’re some neutral party. Or project their behavior on us, as is now a daily occurrence.

    Of course that’s how the Soviet’s and ChiComs organize their leadership too, through fall-guys and scapegoats. That plus an iron-fisted police/regulatory state are how you end up with 70 years of people living under total political tyranny and socioeconomic calamity without them being able to rise up and topple the top-tiers of power. These snakes like Putin and President Hu pretend to put themselves “above the fray” of all the atrocities happening under their reign, so that they can maintain their culture of personality brand and feign moral outrage when it’s learned their regimes are corrupt as sin, or they have to crack a few heads of some malcontents who want more economic freedoms.

  3. proreason says:

    Just a reminder.

    Ms Romer’s “analysis” of unemployment for the StickItToUs was done in 5 minutes on the back of an envelope.

    Somebody showed her the famous graph that shows employment moving upward in 10 of 10 post-WWII recessions before 15 months had passed. She then asked somebody when the recession started, and they lied that it had begun in late 2007 (since the marxists lie that Dubya started it). As an brilliant economist, she subtracted the months and realized that something like 15 months had passed since the (fantasy) start of the recession.

    Ergo, she then drew the famous chart.

    Since they “knew” that employment was going up anyway, they were thrilled to have an instant $890 billion to sprinkle around their criminal supporters in the unions and crony capitalists.

    That’s the whole story in 100 words.

  4. Petronius says:

    “What I want is more now,” Romer said.

    Yes, isn’t that what they always say?

    How clever to call for more stimulus spending at the very moment when the debt rating agencies and markets are screaming –– “Stop!”

    Yes, Romer, Maher, and all the rest of them want what I call the “smoking ruins solution” — For does it ever occur to these people that the debt costs associated with funding such spending programs may cause greater strife and dislocations in the future than the immediate problems that the stimuli were designed to address?

    No, they still want more. And they want it now.

    Total US debt to GDP ratio = 98.4%.

    And now they want more.

    We have had Stimulus 1 and 2, TARP, TALF, Cash for Clunkers, QE1 and QE2, etc., all of which have failed to produce their advertised results.

    And now they want more.

    $3.6 trillion in annual spending and $1.4 trillion in annual deficits.

    And now they want more.

    The US debt is soaring to levels that were unthinkable a few years ago. It is very shocking, but the US government still keeps spending and spending money that it does not have, and keeps borrowing and borrowing money that it eventually can’t pay back.

    And yet the leviathan wants more.

    • proreason says:

      Petronius, see if you agree with this analysis.

      GDP is a bad metric for measuring the “growth” of an economy because it doesn’t factor in growth in debt.

      What has happened since 2008 (and actually, before that as well; it has just been worse since 2008) is that the marxists have borrowed 5 trillion dollars (the growth in the debt) and spent it by giving it away to their cronies in the unions and crony capitalists and to buy votes (unemployment insurance). So the 3-year GDP of about 53 trillion is actually 48 trillion, 10% lower than “officially”. There has been no growth at all. It’s negative growth.

      And that is why some people can’t understand why unemployment is so high even though GDP “growth” has “recovered” albeit modestly. In the real world, the “growth” was borrowed and spent on unproductive government payoffs.

      It’s kind of like you took a 8% salary hit, but have gone out and borrowed 10% every year for 3 years running. But you told your wife that everything is ok because your income has increased.

    • Petronius says:

      Yes, pro. GDP is not a very reliable yardstick anymore.

      There was no real economic “recovery” in 2009-2010. The recession actually became worse because real GDP has been overstated as a result of the growth of the government component. In other words, the private sector component is shrinking but the formula hides this fact.

      GDP growth also failed to keep pace with growth in money creation (inflation).

      A better test might be the old misery index. Certainly most Americans have felt the pinch, as their personal finances have grown worse year over year.

      The Federal debt has leveraged the economy but for little or no actual gain. At some point there must be a reckoning and deleveraging must occur. Otherwise the interest on the national debt will absorb everything we have.

    • proreason says:

      You’re right. It’s even worse than I stated, because even the “growth” (fake because it was borrowed) has been growth in government, and government creates little or no value.

      As I suggested in another post recently, we should have private vs public GDP. Private GDP is down, big-time. Public GDP is up bigger-time.

      And this is an extremely serious systemic problem because in addition to the massive amount of new debt, we have a massively expanded bureaucracy, which is nearly impossible to unwind, and which places a crushing overhead on the private economy.

    • Right of the People says:

      Yes, Romer, Maher, and all the rest of them want what I call the “smoking ruins solution” — For does it ever occur to these people that the debt costs associated with funding such spending programs may cause greater strife and dislocations in the future than the immediate problems that the stimuli were designed to address?


      To answer your question, which I’m sure was rhetorical, in one word: YES!

      It’s all part of the master plan. I’m sure Soros and his minions had this all plotted out except they didn’t count on the fortitude and resilience of the American people. I’m sure they expected the US to have been lowered to third world status by now and the emergence of a new world order already beginning.

      Soros is getting old and I’m sure this is something he wants to see before he takes his place at the knee of his master, Satan. I think we’re in for more dirty tricks. 2012 is going to be a roller coaster ride of unprecedented horror if they can get their way.

      Fasten your seatbelts everyone, the ride is going to get bumpy once we hit full tilt bozo mode.

  5. BigOil says:

    When will you illiterate rubes understand – if you read the textbooks you would know Keynesian economics works. Our elites from academia have deemed it so.

    Ms Romer should thank her lucky stars she has a tenured position in an ivory tower, because she is not qualified to mop my effing floor.

  6. JohnMG says:

    …..Romer said that although the stimulus should have been bigger, it isn’t too late to pass another, larger stimulus now. “What I want is more now,” she said……

    Somebody tell me once again, what is the definition of insanity?

    • proreason says:

      Don’t waste words with the conventional definition. Use this one:

      Insanity is being liberal.

  7. Not so fast says:

    DUH, Ms. Romer, everyone here knew that when Barack Hussein Obama was elected President and then appointed people like you to high government positions!

  8. Rusty Shackleford says:

    What has has me in absolute, hitting-myself, drooling-like-an-idiot wonderment is this:

    If there are people on the blogoshpere, such as we have here, who can recognize and identify the problem in such simple terms that even I can understand it, then certainly there has to be a person or persons somewhere in the general vicinity of the decision-making process who can do likewise.

    It baffles me utterly that there are people who have the responsibility for so much money and who choose quickly and unwisely to shovel it into the furnace before it’s even printed. What naturally then comes to mind is the ship heading for an iceberg, and when warned, the captain orders full speed ahead, and the boilers are being fed with tax dollars.

    Then, the money supply has to end somewhere. There’s what the government takes in in taxes…that’s what they like to call “revenue” but is really just theft at this point…then they have to decide what to do with it…and they seem to always sacrifice the practical use of money for the emotional use of money. That is, in a microcosm sense, if the car needs a new radiator and the wife wants a new bracelet, the husband opts to buy the bracelet and walks to work or gets a ride with a co-worker. Obviously, this puts the husband at a disadvantage and inconveniences the co-worker, even if the husband coughs up cash to pay the co-worker’s gas tab. But, the wife is happy and will continue to support hubby emotionally and so forth. Her car is fine but she won’t let him use it for work.

    This is the democrat machine in a nutshell. A co-dependency that like all co-dependencies, is doomed to fail and will most likely end in violence. That would be street riots such as are happening in Great Britain right now. Don’t tell me they’re not economically driven. “We want our free stuff!!!” And the labor party has been giving it to them for years. They have run out of other people’s money. As has Greece, Portugal, Spain, Ireland and now Italy. Austerity measures are now necessary and unfortunately, the fact that they are socialist nations only will make their socialism worse. They have drained their own coffers and are now whoring themselves out to other nations that are more solvent…and that means bad loans. Fanny and Freddie on steroids; The fast track to the losing side of things.

    Poverty cannot be solved by giving poor people money, said O’Rourke. He’s right. But it not only applies to just the poor person…but persons and nations and like my grandad used to say, “Don’t throw you’re money down a rat-hole unless you want to have rich rats.”

    The whole thing about the debt ceiling is, I’m afraid, just round one. Austerity measures are going to have to be taken by this administration. I doubt it will though and instead, use it as a stepping stone to get another marxist elected in 2016. Why? Because if we have a conservative government elected in 2012, they will make the hard decisions and do the difficult things and that means entitlement programs will be slashed and crime will go up and, no two ways about it, the delayed action that was started with Johnson’s plans and all the generations on welfare, now getting their goodies lessened, will act out in a most ferocious manner. Anyone who has anything nice better think twice before going anywhere near a welfare neighborhood.

    It’s nice to sit here and say , “would’a, could’a, should’a” as regards the 1960’s and the beginnings of the welfare plantation….but instead I’m just cringing about the next 20 years that this administration has created. By draining the coffers of trillions of dollars that my kids and their kids and their kids’ kids will be paying for, we have dug our way into a very deep hole. It is not un-doable. I’m just saying that it’s going to take generations. And given the entitlement mentality of today’s generations, I doubt we are on a path to anything but hell.

    • TerryAnne says:

      You apparently need to move here to DC. ;) This area is rife with “yes” people, those who’d much rather say what those above them want to here versus what really needs to be said. Most of DC is deemed “intelligent” because they went to the “right” university; however, most of them know that they “ain’t so smart” and could easily be out on their ear if they do the wrong thing. So pandering and brown-nosing becomes the business of the day.

  9. Reality Bytes says:

    Freudian wishful thinking on her part don’t you think?

« Front Page | To Top
« | »