Aquila we fundamentally see the fix differently. the New Deal kept us in the depression far longer than if he had taken a different tact.
we will not agree. You believe in a fundimental role for governemnt as the engine of economics. I dont.
I’m not so sure, I’ve heard different so called “experts” say one thing and others so called “experts” say another. I think it’s too complicated for a blanket answer. It would most likely depend on what industry or area of the economy you were in as to if you think it helped or hurt over all.
I believe that the government has a definite role if the national economy is on the verge of collapse. Unrest and skyrocketing criminal activity could follow. Not to mention the fact that we are currently in a state of war; we don’t need to go broke while pursuing our enemies militarily.
So far I’ve explained how these projects would generate business, create jobs, and stimulate the local economies of communities across America (which is key).
Could you explain to use what should be done and how that will help the tens of thousands of Mike Richards who are working for companies that are about to go belly up within the next few months? I’m interested in your thoughts.
When I worked for CIS we got a big laugh out of Rush, Hannity, and the Fox News lineup. For example, there was a piece of legislation that was supposedly crafted to provide funding for the troops, yet there were earmarks providing funding for various corporate pet projects (not all of them were even in Iraq) attached to the bill. The Democrats fought to have the earmarks removed and an actual war funding bill passed; the Republicans wouldn’t budge and eventually forced it through. Why, because Rush and Hannity were blabbing their mouths saying that the Democrats are against funding the troops, that he Democrats don’t care if they have the equipment they need, yadda, yadda, yadda. It’s all propaganda. But in all honesty, the Democrats do it too. My point is simply that anyone who puts much weight on Rush, Hannity, and the Fox News lineup (the majority of which is actually “commentary” not “news”) obviously isn’t doing their homework.
I think Obama chose Biden because he was the strongest on national defense and foreign affairs. Had Obama picked a “buddy” like Bush would have, that would have been cronyism. (Although, hold on, I don’t doubt that Obama will resort to cronyism too here and there. That’s politics.)
Can you tell me what “psychobabble” is and where Obama used it?
Obama did not use the word "psychobabble." I used to term to describe what Obama speaks; he speaks psychobabble. Rush used this word a lot when Clinton was president.
Psychobabble (a portmanteau of psychology or psychoanalysis and babble) is a form of prose using jargon, buzzwords and highly esoteric language to give an impression of plausibility through mystification, misdirection, and obfuscation. The term implies that the speaker lacks the experience and understanding necessary for proper use of a given psychological term. Frequent usage can associate a clinical word with less meaningful buzzword definitions. Some psychological buzzwords have come into widespread use in business management training, motivational seminars, self-help, folk psychology, and popular psychology. These words can be overused by laypersons in describing life problems as clinical maladies, when such nomenclature is not valuable, meaningful or appropriate
I’m not so sure, I’ve heard different so called “experts” say one thing and others so called “experts” say another. I think it’s too complicated for a blanket answer. It would most likely depend on what industry or area of the economy you were in as to if you think it helped or hurt over all.
I believe that the government has a definite role if the national economy is on the verge of collapse. Unrest and skyrocketing criminal activity could follow. Not to mention the fact that we are currently in a state of war; we don’t need to go broke while pursuing our enemies militarily.
So far I’ve explained how these projects would generate business, create jobs, and stimulate the local economies of communities across America (which is key).
Could you explain to use what should be done and how that will help the tens of thousands of Mike Richards who are working for companies that are about to go belly up within the next few months? I’m interested in your thoughts.
I agree that this is very bad. Not the worst since the great depression but the 1970's and early 80's certainly can compair.
the difference is unemployment isnt as bad now, and inflation has not gotten out of check.
at the end of the day, there were 2 major things that turned the economy around, Volker raised interest rates to soak up inflation and Reagan got pretty serious tax rate reductions in place. between those two things, the economy rebounded very well. It was painful but it was necessary after a half decade of failed Keynsian policy thru the late 1970's.
Now I do agree that government is going to have to do some things primarily because in large measure its been bad government policy that has gotten us here. (both too little regulation in some areas and then too much regulation in others).
I would change Mark to Market so that banks can mark loans accross the whole period of the note instead of the current value. That would unfreeze a LOT of money. For some reason, neither Bush's team nor Obama's team wants to do that and it baffels me.
I would cut capital gains tax to nothing, reduce taxes on small businesses, and provide incentive tax cuts to people who create jobs. just two name a few things.
what I wouldnt be doing is creating a massive spending bill and call it a stimulus package. there are some other spending items that could be done but the bulk would be in the form of tax cuts designed to get credit unfrozen and jobs created.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
the above answer is incomplete. I do believe that some spending is not as bad as other kinds of spending. and some spending can be a real bridge.
But there are a number of things that we could say, like infrastruture, that may have been neglected. i would have that as a seperate SPENDING bill designed to bring the infrastruture up to date over a defined period of years. that kind of spending would be very seperate from stimulus.
Stimulus ought to be about getting businesses back doing what they do without the government handing them money or creating unsustainable work for them.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
Obama did not use the word "psychobabble." I used to term to describe what Obama speaks; he speaks psychobabble. Rush used this word a lot when Clinton was president.
Psychobabble (a portmanteau of psychology or psychoanalysis and babble) is a form of prose using jargon, buzzwords and highly esoteric language to give an impression of plausibility through mystification, misdirection, and obfuscation. The term implies that the speaker lacks the experience and understanding necessary for proper use of a given psychological term. Frequent usage can associate a clinical word with less meaningful buzzword definitions. Some psychological buzzwords have come into widespread use in business management training, motivational seminars, self-help, folk psychology, and popular psychology. These words can be overused by laypersons in describing life problems as clinical maladies, when such nomenclature is not valuable, meaningful or appropriate
Kind of like Rush's term, "Radical leftwing agenda"? lol Look at all the buzz words in that one. Think of all the times Rush has called Democrats "traitors". Bro... Rush is a specialist in psychobabble in his COMMENTARY (because Rush isn't news by any stretch of the imagination). I know how misdirecting Rush is, I worked for CIS and had to answer questions from friends at church about garbage he was saying all the time.
I agree that this is very bad. Not the worst since the great depression but the 1970's and early 80's certainly can compair.
the difference is unemployment isnt as bad now, and inflation has not gotten out of check.
at the end of the day, there were 2 major things that turned the economy around, Volker raised interest rates to soak up inflation and Reagan got pretty serious tax rate reductions in place. between those two things, the economy rebounded very well. It was painful but it was necessary after a half decade of failed Keynsian policy thru the late 1970's.
Now I do agree that government is going to have to do some things primarily because in large measure its been bad government policy that has gotten us here. (both too little regulation in some areas and then too much regulation in others).
I would change Mark to Market so that banks can mark loans accross the whole period of the note instead of the current value. That would unfreeze a LOT of money. For some reason, neither Bush's team nor Obama's team wants to do that and it baffels me.
I would cut capital gains tax to nothing, reduce taxes on small businesses, and provide incentive tax cuts to people who create jobs. just two name a few things.
what I wouldnt be doing is creating a massive spending bill and call it a stimulus package. there are some other spending items that could be done but the bulk would be in the form of tax cuts designed to get credit unfrozen and jobs created.
From my perspective, if it were that easy and that obvious, there would be significant groundswell to do it. I'm thinking that there is something about the idea you presented that makes both the Bush and Obama Administration hesitant to implement it. I'll have to do research... but it's an idea. Personally, I don't think enough cash would be freed up.
the above answer is incomplete. I do believe that some spending is not as bad as other kinds of spending. and some spending can be a real bridge.
I look at it this way... I'd much rather see many of these businesses (many of which will get a tax cut in addition to contracts) get a contract to work on two year projects than see them fold in six months and all their employees filing for unemployment.
Quote:
But there are a number of things that we could say, like infrastruture, that may have been neglected. i would have that as a seperate SPENDING bill designed to bring the infrastruture up to date over a defined period of years. that kind of spending would be very seperate from stimulus.
I could swallow a separate bill, but the problem is politics. It's like the Republican war funding bills, they were loaded with pork to corner the Democrats into voting for their pet corporate projects and giveaways. I believe the Democrats in Congress and the Obama Administration know that the Republicans have to be cornered into voting to fund updating infrastructure... because the Republicans are the one's who neglected it by slashing the funding to give massive tax breaks and tax cuts to companies like ENRON.
Quote:
Stimulus ought to be about getting businesses back doing what they do without the government handing them money or creating unsustainable work for them.
The government isn't "handing" money to businesses. They will have to perform the work that they do. And it is only expected to be temporary to keep these businesses afloat until the economic storm breaks.
road building is a good thing and it is a spending project. It aint stimulus.
and there aint no way on earth you will convince an economist that FDRs spending projects pulled America out of the depression. No way at all. WW2 got us out of the depression. That is a simple fact. all of FDRs efforts for the first 12 years prolonged the depression because it hooked business and individuals on the government dole. (Heroin).
And..."heroin"? Isn't that a "buzz" word? I can hear some folks right now..."Heroin bad...stimulus package must be bad. Me against stimulus bill." lol Well... sadly, that's how political polemic works today. Later bro.
The government isn't "handing" money to businesses. They will have to perform the work that they do. And it is only expected to be temporary to keep these businesses afloat until the economic storm breaks.
and my point wasnt the "handing business money" my point is that the work becomes unsustainable. That is the reason why government "stimulus" is a drag on an economy not a stimulus.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
Linear Mode
