Entertaining to watch all the cognitively under-developed Peterson people having a really bad year now under Trump/GOP administration:
Working with substantially higher funding limits, thanks to this spring’s two-year budget deal, Congress' spending leaders have fought about how and where to spend an extra $300 billion — not what to cut — making the Obama administration look like an era of austerity by comparison.
“Budgeting was supposed to mean: If you want more of something, you have less of something else,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. “But instead of ‘plus one, minus one,’ it became ‘plus one, plus one.'" https://t.co/eCBTus1kZu— CRFB.org (@BudgetHawks) October 21, 2018
3 comments:
"‘Plus one, minus one, ..." means all new fiat is created for the banks, etc. by the Central Bank - not for the general welfare but for the private welfare of the banks, etc. and for the rich, the most so-called "credit worthy."
"‘Plus one, minus one, ..." means all new deposits are created by the banks, etc. as "loans" for interest - not for the general welfare but for the private welfare of the banks, etc. and for the rich, the most so-called "credit worthy."
"‘Plus one, minus one, ..." means the fiat supply is not allowed to keep up with population growth.
"‘Plus one, minus one, ..." allows real gains from lazy, risk-free fiat hoarding - as if that's a recipe for continued progress.
"‘Plus one, minus one, ..." means of, by and for the banks and the rich, not the citizens in general.
Hard to argue with that AA.... perhaps best to vote for the faction that advocates for ‘plus one, plus one’ then....
Thank you, Andrew, for your consistent voice regarding privilege at the expense of general welfare. It has greatly broaden my perspective.
It’s a simple truth that, unfortunately, goes unnoticed despite the depth of intellectual thinking here. Sometimes, the forest is not seen for the trees.
Post a Comment