Sarah Palin: bat****, or howling-at-the-moon bat****?

[notyoueither]

I beleive this is where I call you a... ****, is it?

[KrazyHorse]

I have a suggestion.

Master the subject before you begin to give lessons.

I wouldn't call myself a master of the subject. I am, however, more than educated enough to lecture on VERY BASIC economics like this.

The fact that you don't even understand this after my previously patient pedagogy proves your perennial pinheadedness.

You, yourself said something similar, dip****.

The difference between my saying something similar and you understanding me to have said something similar seems to me significant and sublime.

[KrazyHorse]

at NYE once more lacking an understanding of the existence of BOTH A SUPPLY CURVE AND A DEMAND CURVE

[notyoueither]

This is beyond very basic, doofus.

You are way out of your depth, but you want to continue to sell your face.

Here's a clue. Economics is a very complex field, and mastering the math and some of the lingo is not enough to make you any sort of expert. What you lack is a full understanding of the field, including contrary positions, that can not be gained by reading a few blogs and being able to cough up a couple textbooks of equations.

[KrazyHorse]

Marginal consumers of labour are those who are priced out of the market by an increase in the total cost to them of purchasing labour. Marginal suppliers of labour are those who are priced out of the market by a decrease in the total return to them of selling labour. Marginal ***** are smarter than you.

[notyoueither]

at NYE once more lacking an understanding of the existence of BOTH A SUPPLY CURVE AND A DEMAND CURVE

I understand them implicitly, moron. I work in the everyday world, every day, and sometimes nights.

What you have zero clue about is your limitations.

On one hand employers set the rates according to budget, and no more. The poor dumb ****s are paying for thier own insurance. Haha!

Could that be the case with public healthcare paid thorugh taxes? NEVAR! The employees run the asylum. Exports will plunge!



Fool.

[KrazyHorse]

This is beyond very basic, doofus.

You are way out of your depth, but you want to continue to sell your face.

Here's a clue. Economics is a very complex field, and mastering the math and some of the lingo is not enough to make you any sort of expert. What you lack is a full understanding of the field, including contrary positions, that can not be gained by reading a few blogs and being able to cough up a couple textbooks of equations.

You don't have to understand how to do quantum field theory in order to solve a sliding block problem. I know how to solve the sliding block problems of economics. You have demonstrated that you are incapable of learning even this from me.

[KrazyHorse]

I understand them implicitly, moron. I work in the everyday world, every day, and sometimes nights.

You're an irrational cog in a rational machine.

[MORON]

This is going nowhere....we need a picture (but of what?)

[notyoueither]

Marginal consumers of labour are those who are priced out of the market by an increase in the total cost to them of purchasing labour. Marginal suppliers of labour are those who are priced out of the market by a decrease in the total return to them of selling labour. Marginal ***** are smarter than you.

But, as you've demonstrated, oh master, the marginal consumer of labour is not priced out by deductions to the employees wages. They don't care!

Thanks for the lesson, ****.

[notyoueither]

You don't have to understand how to do quantum field theory in order to solve a sliding block problem. I know how to solve the sliding block problems of economics. You have demonstrated that you are incapable of learning even this from me.

You've proven you have nothing to teach.

Yes, there's plenty of abuse, but if I wanted that I would become a Catholic and go to mass.

[MORON]

Tax dollars are summoned out of the press?

[KrazyHorse]

the marginal consumer of labour is not priced out by deductions to the employees wages

You're a complete ****wit.

Employees don't get priced out when those deductions GO TO PURCHASE SOMETHING THEY WANT (e.g. health care). A tax to fund the provision of universal health care is NOT the same as a purchase of health care on the employee's behalf because under universal health care the employee can gain the benefit (health care) without providing his labour.

OMFG.

[notyoueither]

So ****ing what?

People still need to eat. They still need houses. They still need clothes, holidays, IPods, computers, and a lot of other **** they need money for to get, including lessons from twerps like you, although for what godforsaken reason I can only guess on the last point.

People still need to work. Only employers will have a larger pool of people in good health, who are not working in some other job just for the benes, to choose from.

The economy with public healthcare, or at least a larger public mandate (thinking the Swiss, Germans) would be more effecient than any that we can conceive of that actually exists without. And hense, public healthcare will not be detrimental to exports! Which was the argument all along, you ****trumpet.

[KrazyHorse]

How do you continue breathing without the aid of a respirator, you moron?