Conservatives have no ideas what to do about recessions
POSTED BY: kpo
UPDATED: Monday, March 9, 2026 17:30
VIEWED: 29022
PAGE 22 of 25
So geezer, as you might have figured out by now, I HAVE been responding to your idea, over and over (and over and over) again. Since you haven't been explicit about "your idea" and its logic, I'll have to interpret it for you.
What you seem to be saying is "When in doubt, do nothing". And since- according to you- everything is in doubt- by default we should freeze our actions 100% of the time. We should never try anything different. In other words, by analogy you're arguing for not administering an antibiotic (see above example).
But since there are choices, there really is no such thing as "doing nothing". You can choose to administer an antibiotic- which you will have to argue the benefits and risks. You can also choose to not administer an antibiotic, but that ALSO requires a risk-benefit analysis.
Either way, you're obligated to demonstrate that your choice is the preferable option. I don't expect an answer, because it seems to me that you've talked yourself into a corner by saying this is all unknowable and no ideas can be discussed (including yours). You're suggesting that we take the position "When in doubt, do nothing", but are unable to explain how this is a reasonable view. You're therefore unable to disprove the thread title. 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Which idea is that? Whatever it is, you've undercut your own idea by saying it's impossible to have ANY ideas about the topic. If you have an idea and you think it's worthwhile, you should show us the reasoning why YOUR idea is worthwhile when all other ideas aren't.
the one I've been quoting since the beginning of this thread.
So you're going to play KPO's game.
The idea, as stated in the original article, is this.
Quote:
That is, conservatives favor the same set of economic policies when the economy is weak and when it is strong; when unemployment is high and when it is low; when few homeowners are facing foreclosure and when many are. The implication is that conservatives believe there is nothing in particular the government should do about economic cycles.
----
Quote:
Whether the government continues "business as usual" or does something different than usual, government is doing SOMETHING.
But that's not the point of the article. Liberals have a specific plan as to what to do different during recessions. They will increase deficit-financed spending to compensate for demand gaps in the private sector, ease monetary policy to raise inflation and support demand, and make mortgage modifications to reduce foreclosures and support consumption. They will do (if not already being done) or increase, these things in response to recession.
Conservatives do not make any changes in their economic policy during a recession, believing that recessions will end without additional action or intervention.
The author of the article seems to be suggesting that since conservatives don't do anything different during a recession, they have no ideas what to do about it. I figure that conservatives think that not changing their economic policy is the best idea as to what to do about a recession.
Of course you already understand this, and are joining the KPO train of diversion, dissembling, and feigned lack of understanding.
"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:What it seems to me is that conservatives (or you, at least) have a belief. If they have "an idea", they (or you, at least, since you're standing in for conservatives) seem unable to explain it.
Conservatives do not make any changes in their economic policy during a recession, believing that recessions will end without additional action or intervention.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:What it seems to me is that conservatives (or you, at least) have a belief. If they have "an idea", they (or you, at least, since you're standing in for conservatives) seem unable to explain it.
Conservatives do not make any changes in their economic policy during a recession, believing that recessions will end without additional action or intervention.
It's nice of you to provide your own troll sign. Saves me the trouble.
"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Conservatives do not make any changes in their economic policy during a recession, believing that recessions will end without additional action or intervention.- Geezer
What it seems to me is that conservatives (or you, at least) have a belief. If they have "an idea", they (or you, at least, since you're standing in for conservatives) seem unable to explain it.-signy
It's nice of you to provide your own troll sign. Saves me the trouble.-Geezer
Geezer, I'm using your own words. That doesn't make me the troll here. If you don't like the words you chose, that's your problem not mine. It's like KIKI said Oh, the HORROR of being quoted!
Now, if you think conservatives have an "idea", not a "belief" then let's come to a common definition of these two terms and then you can explain the "idea" part. I'm all ears. In fact, that's what I've been hoping for: an explanation.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Geezer, I'm using your own words. That doesn't make me the troll here.
When you purposefully fail to understand them, it does.
From your take on "believe", am I to understand that liberals will follow their ideas and increase deficit spending during a recession without actually believing it will work?
More smoke, mirrors, and ambiguities on your part, since you have nothing of substance to add.
"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."
ETA: and just to state it again...
(Not that I think it'll ever get discussed among all the distractions, deceptions, and small crimson fish KPO and SignyM deploy at every opportunity)
Quote:
My position is that, given the complexities of all the elements included in the economic state of the U.S., or the world, it's not possible to provide convincing evidence that any one particular economic theory ends recessions faster, with less negative economic fallout (government debt, loss of jobs, etc.), and with less risk of failure than any other.
Anyone proposing that any particular theory does meet these criteria should first provide a generally agreed to definition of that theory, and then show how the application of the theory, and no other factors, accomplished the end of several specific recessions, and did so meeting the criteria above (faster, less impact, less risk of failure).
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Liberals and other economic activists have hypotheses and mechanisms by which they THINK it will work. There is feedback between what is suggested, what is done, and the effects of that action which informs future ideas and future actions.
Conservatives appear to have no explanation at all for why they choose one set of actions over another- in fact, conservatives (you, in any case) disavow even the possibility of reaching an understanding about how economies work. Since your proposed course of action is not supported by any kind of evidence- in fact, you think the evidence is too complicated to be understood- that is the very definition of a belief: an idea for which no evidence can be found.
To quote
Quote:YOU have proposed a course of action, whether you accept it as a theory or not. YOUR theory is Do nothing different. What you cannot do, apparently, is show how the application of the theory, and no other factors, accomplished the end of several specific recessions. You can't show it in the data, and you can't even explain how it's supposed to work theoretically.
My position is that, given the complexities of all the elements included in the economic state of the U.S., or the world, it's not possible to provide convincing evidence that any one particular economic theory ends recessions faster, with less negative economic fallout (government debt, loss of jobs, etc.), and with less risk of failure than any other.
Anyone proposing that any particular theory does meet these criteria should first provide a generally agreed to definition of that theory, and then show how the application of the theory, and no other factors, accomplished the end of several specific recessions, and did so meeting the criteria above (faster, less impact, less risk of failure).
There is no such thing as government action or inaction having no effect on the economy one way or another. Whatever you propose- add more money or don't add more money or take money out of circulation, or decrease taxes or increase taxes or keep taxes the same, or increase spending or decrease spending or keep spending the same or do away with the government altogether - will have an effect on the economy. If you propose a course of action, even if that proposal is "Stay the course", you need to show that it is preferable to the myriad of other possible courses of action that might be taken. There is no such thing as being neutral, no matter WHAT you choose. It's possible that staying the course is indeed the best possible course of action, but you haven't demonstrated it, and you seem to be saying that NOTHING can be demonstrated.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Liberals and other economic activists have hypotheses and mechanisms by which they THINK it will work. There is feedback between what is suggested, what is done, and the effects of that action which informs future ideas and future actions.
And I'm just supposed to take your word for this? Show some evidence. The article doesn't.
Oh. I forgot. You can't 'prove' anything.
Quote:
Conservatives appear to have no explanation at all for why they choose one set of actions over another
Seems quite an assumption on your part, considering there are any number of conservative schools of economic thought.
Quote:
Since your proposed course of action...
Interesting statement, since I've proposed no economic course of action.
Blow all the smoke you want. You apparently are unable to defend liberal ideas in response to recessions.
My position is that you can't show with a high degree of certainty that ANY economic reaction to recession works.
Your task should be simple, if liberals do have ideas they think will work..
First provide a generally agreed to definition of that theory, and then show how the application of the theory, and no other factors, accomplished the end of several specific recessions, and did so meeting the criteria above (faster, less impact, less risk of failure).
"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Which you have not only failed to explain, but have severely undercut the possibility of any "school of thought", since (according to you) the data is just too complex for anyone to parse, liberal and conservative alike.
Seems quite an assumption on your part, considering there are any number of conservative schools of economic thought.
Quote:Then you're either saying "stay the course" (which is an unsupported belief so far), or you have no ideas whatsoever (looping back to the point of the thread), or you have an idea but you just refuse to tell us what it is.
Since your proposed course of action...- signy
Interesting statement, since I've proposed no economic course of action. - geezer
Maybe you're just a poor representative of conservative thought. Maybe it would be more accurate to say that GEEZER has no idea what to do about recessions?
Quote:Hmmm. I think I can. But that wasn't the point of the thread, was it? so Blow all the smoke you want. You apparently are unable to defend conservative ideas in response to recessions particularly as you can't seem to come up with any.
Blow all the smoke you want. You apparently are unable to defend liberal ideas in response to recessions. My position is that you can't show with a high degree of certainty that ANY economic reaction to recession works.
Case closed, in your own words.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Which you have not only failed to explain, but have severely undercut the possibility of any "school of thought", since (according to you) the data is just too complex for anyone to parse, liberal and conservative alike.
Seems quite an assumption on your part, considering there are any number of conservative schools of economic thought.
Not my job to explain them. I'm not proposing them as ideas that work on recessions.
Quote:
Since your proposed course of action...- signyQuote:Then you're either saying "stay the course" (which is an unsupported belief so far), or you have no ideas whatsoever (looping back to the point of the thread), or you have an idea but you just refuse to tell us what it is.
Interesting statement, since I've proposed no economic course of action. - geezer
Maybe you're just a poor representative of conservative thought. Maybe it would be more accurate to say that GEEZER has no idea what to do about recessions?
Who says I'm trying to represent conservative economic thought? I note what it is, as described by the article KPO cited.
Quote:Quote:Hmmm. I think I can. But that wasn't the point of the thread, was it? so Blow all the smoke you want. You apparently are unable to defend conservative ideas in response to recessions particularly as you can't seem to come up with any.
Blow all the smoke you want. You apparently are unable to defend liberal ideas in response to recessions. My position is that you can't show with a high degree of certainty that ANY economic reaction to recession works.
Case closed, in your own words.
I hope you're still purposefully misunderstanding my point, because otherwise you have the attention span of a housefly.
Why should I defend conservative ideas as to what to do about a recession when my position is that it's not possible to show that any ideas, be they liberal or conservative, actually have any significant impact on the length, effects, or recovery from recessions?
Listen, SignyM.
It should be easy for you.
You apparently are convinced that a certain set of actions in response to a recession will reduce its length and impact, and make the recovery more successful.
All you have to do is enumerate this set of actions (although they should probably be similar to those described in the article, since that's my basis for the whole discussion), then show where the application of those actions, and no others, ended recessions under the conditions noted. Then you need to show that other actions, or no action at all, did not end recessions under the conditions noted.
You are convinced/think/trust/believe (take your pick, or provide your own word) that the liberal ideas work. Shouldn't be hard to explain why and provide examples.
Do that and I'll discuss it with you.
Try to make it look like I'm proposing something I'm not, go off on the "Can't Prove" route, drag more red herrings into the discussion, and I'll ignore you.
"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME