User talk:Rclose

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Hi, you added quite a lot to New Testament. That is great if it is entirely your own work, and that you could submit it according to the copyleft restrictions of the GNU Free Documentation License. The story you added looks very similar to http://www.thebereans.net/ref-bibreliable.shtml, which is replicated many times on many sites, but that does not implicate the right to publish it under GFDL on Wikipedia. Could you check this please? (You might also add your original source to the bottom of the article.) Gebruiker:Dedalus 07:28, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Hey there. If you have data on factory farming that factory farming increases food illness, please share it. Otherwise, that doesn't make sense. a) antibiotics are ALWAYS useful for staying healthy - that's why people take them, just as animals do. It's medicine; medicine is good.  b) factory farming generally takes more care to avoid cross-contamination because they have the resources to take that care, while smaller farms will likely not have those resources and will be more likely to insufficiently wash or process food products before sale. If you have contrary info, please re-post your food illness statements to the factory farming page, along with your relevant citations. Thanks 65.246.216.100 02:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words
It was my first edit and I appreciate the feedback :-)

Tim 14:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Keynes
Hi,  I thought I better reply to your post over at Talk:2008–2009 Keynesian resurgence here as some editors don’t like to see long discussions on article talk pages unless its specifically about improving the article.

First that’s bad about how the stimulus funds have slowed down projects at your firm, and Im sure there will be other cases like that. Still on balance Im hearing the stimulus package is having a large positive effect on spending and confidence.

Your point about it not being in the interests of Government employees to listen to Austrian School economists  is no doubt true, though many of us believe there are many other reasons why its good those guys don’t have too much influence on policy decisions.

Borrowing more money can help both nations and individuals get out of debt if the extra funds are used to enhance earning potential, though I accept it doesn’t always work out that way.

One of the key reasons Keynesian policy works as a whole is that it recognises and addresses the vital role that confidence has in economic activity. Sudden falls in folks confidence of future economic prospects is one the reasons why downturns can be so severe. In the short term, only the state can reliably step in to boost demand and so help folks confidence to recover  - so they carry on investing and spending instead of hoarding funds. For the Austrian School the best remedy is to let folk suffer and learn from their mistakes. One problem with this view is that the business cycle can move very slowly in relation to the average persons working life. So after suffering years of economic hardship, by the time the economy naturally recovers they’ll often be too old or just too crushed to put the lessons to good use. Even newcomers may not learn from recent history, or may learn the wrong lessons as many economic dynamics are continually changing. Another problem is that once folk get used to the fact that the government wont come to the rescue they’ll likely be even more cautious, further depressing economic activity even over the long term. Of course there are advantages to the Austrian approach, such as no bailouts for fat cat bankers.

Its not true to say Keynes predicted or wanted money to become worthless. He expressed a desire to rearrange the economy so it would be harder for an ultra rich few to live of their capital and rents,  those changes would also be associated with it being easier for regular folk to earn a good living, and with more leisure time for all. He certainly didn’t advise states to loose their agricultural sectors -  when that happens it’s invariably a result of unfettered, market forces.

Just my little opinion, thanks for the question,  God bless. FeydHuxtable (talk) 15:48, 26 June 2009 (UTC)