Comments on: Republican Stimulus Opposition Explained via Game Theory [Image]

By: nona

nona — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 08:46:28 +0000

so what you are saying here is that creating $1 trillion out of thin air is a good idea?

(some will be paid for via taxes, and some via the creation of new government debt)

simple fact, dump $'s into the system...the $ loses value.

By: nona

nona — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 04:46:28 +0000

By: dwinkle

dwinkle — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 18:12:09 +0000

You mean kind of like every person in the world who voted against their current leader? I don't think this is nearly as profound as you think it is. Why do you think Dems opposed invading Iraq under Bush when they supported it under Clinton just a year earlier?

By: Stumbler

Stumbler — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 23:37:44 +0000

So how does this use game theory???

By: DannyBoy

DannyBoy — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 15:47:30 +0000

this is not a game theory matrix. if you added the democrat's position on the same issues- you could find the NE(s) and your dominant strategy.

By: Emily

Emily — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 02:17:05 +0000

Republicans oppose the stimulus plan because they understand that sucking money out of the hands of American citizens and pumping it into the belly of an ever-growing federal government is a policy destined for failure. Its just basic economics. The number of Americans who earn 250k+ annually is not a large enough group to fund a multi trillion dollar stimulus package, especially because they (just like the rest of america) are losing their jobs left and right, thereby becoming dependent on the gov themselves. Its a self-perpetuating cylce of destruction and anyone who thinks spending money we dont have on shit we dont need is an idiot.

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 08:01:41 +0000

> If a republican supports the stimulus and it's effective, that would undoubtedly be a success.

But it would be a political victory for the Democrats, therefore to the Republicans it equates to a failure. This doesn't mean all Republicans want Obama to fail, just that the Republican party as a whole does.

By: Some Honkey

Some Honkey — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:39:30 +0000

This is nearly asinine. Any given republican politician's goal is to be reelected. If a republican supports the stimulus and it's effective, that would undoubtedly be a success. There isn't a republican conspiracy to sabotage Barack Obama, despite what millions of morons (who most likely watch the daily show and the colbert report) think. Also, the reason some people oppose the stimulus/bailout is because not everyone subscribes to Keynesian economics. Free market economists oppose the plan for innumerable reasons; the most obvious being the fact that creating billions of dollars all at once might turn an ordinary cyclical contraction into a decade-long depression.

And for the record, I'm an apathetic non-voter (although I'm a fan of Ron Paul); I stumbled on this page and was compelled to comment by the overwhelming idiocy of your theory that the evil fat-cat republicans are purposefully trying to ruin the economy so that they might be vindicated decades from now.

By: Brosan

Brosan — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 22:04:42 +0000

I'm not sure I follow the logic: "If they support him and he succeeds, they fail."
If I support the president & he succeeds, don't I succeed also? That would be bi-partisanship. From what I have read, the Republicans were locked out of the negotiations for the stimulus bill. Lamely, they did the same thing to the Democrats on major legislation when they were in power. This is Washington politics, as usual. Could Republican opposition to the stimulus bill be based on their beliefs for solving the economic crisis? Would you vote for something if your ideas weren't even considered? The Democratic Congress doesn't care if the Republicans are on board. They can pass anything they like on a straight party vote. This is not bi-partisanship. Bi-partisanship involves the art of compromise. I believe that making fun of a political party, either party, because they won't do what the other party wants, is ridiculous. Why have two parties if they have to think the same way? I truly hope our new president can forge an atmosphere of cooperation & bi-partisanship in the future.

By: Game Theory on GOP Obstructionism « Where’s Eric Cantor?

Game Theory on GOP Obstructionism « Where’s Eric Cantor? — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:06:25 +0000

[...] Theory on GOP Obstructionism Jump to Comments Here’s a great, albeit short, post on why the GOP opposed the recovery package. Namely, game [...]

By: CarlM

CarlM — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:40:34 +0000

Correct, Maxo. Grendel, like too many, you allowed those on the far right to tell you what the motivation was of those who opposed the war in Iraq. NOBODY wanted failure there.

By: CarlM

CarlM — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:36:12 +0000

But that's not the only possibility. They could have admitted that tax cuts don't automatically translate into immediate spending in the same way that immediate spending translates into immediate spending. (From what I've been hearing, most economists believe that IN THE CURRENT ECONOMIC CLIMATE, tax cuts would not translate into spending in anywhere near the same way they would during healthy economic times.) They could have jumped on board and made it a bipartisan stimulus package. In this way, they could have stolen the thunder from the president.

I believe that in this scenario, they have put all their eggs in one basket .. and if the economy turns around, it will be seen as turning around in spite of the Republican stonewalling. This will NOT be good for the Republican party.

By: Maxolasersquad

Maxolasersquad — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:26:27 +0000

And who hoped for that? I don't recall one public figure coming out in support of failure in Iraq.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:20:08 +0000

"So, not only should you not be rude when you correct people, but you should also be right."

i lol'd

but seriously, it's a cute and eerily accurate image!

By: Bill Harrison

Bill Harrison — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:52:25 +0000

It is sad that a country considered, at least by many, to be a bastion of freedom and democracy, is reduced to being governed by groups (mobs?) of people whose primary concern is continuing or regaining their hold on power. This is particularly true in this current crisis but is a reality probably of any government. Governments are run by people and people usually have their best interests in mind.

How about a New Game.... the old one hasn't worked so well. A game where WIN is redefined. Lemee see... how about WIN being defined as restoring our economy - at least to pre-Bush levels. How about WIN including restoring our honor to pre-torture levels?
We need to change the paradigm. Redefine WIN. LOSE is easy to define - it's where we're at. I hesitate to mention that I am a lifelong democrat - that's a label that lends itself to defining WIN in terms of party. I also happen to be a lifelong American. I would rather define WIN in those terms.
The old games didn't work. Let's dump the checkers on the floor, turn the board over and see if there is another game on the back.
Or better yet, let's stop playing games and get down to the serious business of restoring America for our children.

By: Grendel

Grendel — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 07:49:40 +0000

but you can hope and plant for failure in Iraq and still not be anti-American..right?

intellectual honesty....so rare these days...

By: Grendel

Grendel — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 07:48:07 +0000

wow..reminds me of Democratic politicians for the last 8 years. Oh, but that's different....

Intellectual honesty, look into it....

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 04:26:00 +0000

Tim,

You can disagree with the stimulus without being anti-American, but you can't hope, and plant for, its failure without being so.

By: Daniel Miessler

Daniel Miessler — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 04:24:35 +0000

It's an unordered list style I came across a while back. Thought it looked cool.

By: TIMM

TIMM — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 03:23:32 +0000

Wow. First I'm a racist for not voting for Obama, and now I'm wishing the death of America in some sad pathetic partisan tantrum.

That is one hell of an insult.

Bravo.

-=T=-