I invented nothing.rEvolutionist wrote:Let's refresh what has happened here: You invent a position for me, get called on it, refuse to admit it, then in another spot shift the goal posts, then continually demand that I name the economist who I got my idea from (despite there being absolutely no indication from me that I relied on any specific economist), continue to demand that I name an economist as a tactic to avoid owning up to your disingenuous debating, and then when I tell you specifically that I don't rely on one economist you act like you've got nothing to answer for. You dropped a lot of bollocks into this thread. Own it, or fuck off.
You said you had long ago "put to bed" the idea that cutting spending would be a good idea.
I suggested that I thought you relied on economists who never advocate a reduction in spending.
You say you don't rely on economists who never advocate a reduction in spending.
Assuming you haven't just made up your argument which you claim "puts do bed" the spending reduction argument, who do you rely on (in particular which economist do you rely on who advocates reduced spending)?
Logically, your possible answers are:
1. I don't rely on any economists for my position that the matter has been put to bed.
2. I rely on the following economists who have put the matter of reduced spending in a bad economy to bed, but I am aware that they sometimes do suggest reduced spending is a good idea -- these economists are: _______________________________[insert citations/names here]
3. I rely on the following economists who have put the matter of reduced spending in a bad economy to bed, and as far as I know they don't ever suggest reduced spending is a good idea. These economists are: _______________________[insert citations/names here]
4. Other -- ________________________ [insert my answer here]
Now, since you've written extensively before and you are so knowledgeable over years of study of the topic, it should be very easy for you to pick one of these choices.
