Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

In 2009, nobody paid taxes. How'd that work out?

The consumer didn't spend. Business didn't spend. Business didn't hire. If the government doesn't backstop the banking system (just long enough for it to recover) and it stops spending, the economy siezes up.

90s growth was driven by massive business productivity improvements vs. the 80s coming from IT, worker productivity tools, access to massive information to improve performance, communication and the initial benefits of the internet economy. If it says the 90s was all due to a tax cut, you'd better get a new source of info.

There's a time and place for everything. The time for spending increases as a patch is when nobody else is spending. The time to not spend is during the 2000s when you're kicking off multiple wars.

Consumers that make less than a certain amount (can't remember how much, I think $150k) got a free $400 for two years as well. "Making Work Pay", as they called it.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

One of the reasons Iran can engage in chest-beating is that it now sees itself as a regional hegemon. Solution? Help build up another country in the region that can check Iran's ambition.

The distance from the border of China to Iran is less than the distance from New York to Chicago.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

The distance from the border of China to Iran is less than the distance from New York to Chicago.

Invade Turkmenistan? Or is Tajikistan a better choice?

Wait, I got it! It'll also put 49 of 50 states at ease! Invade Georgia!

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

The distance from the border of China to Iran is less than the distance from New York to Chicago.

Border, sure. But Tehran is 800 miles closer to London than to Beijing. I don't see China bailing us out.

 

[joecct]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

Wow...youre an easy sell. Debt = spending + revenues.

From Aug 2009:

The numbers could hardly be more stark: Tax receipts are on pace to drop 18 percent this year, the biggest single-year decline since the Great Depression, while the federal deficit balloons to a record $1.8 trillion.

Other figures in an Associated Press analysis underscore the recession's impact: Individual income tax receipts are down 22 percent from a year ago. Corporate income taxes are down 57 percent. Social Security tax receipts could drop for only the second time since 1940, and Medicare taxes are on pace to drop for only the third time ever.

The last time the government's revenues were this bleak, the year was 1932 in the midst of the Depression.

As much as you may try to get Bush totally off the hook...the GOP was 'around' when the country ran into the worst crisis since the Depression.

Should I blame somebody's 4th marriage on the 1st wife? Time to accept responsibility, right mookie??

 

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

Border, sure. But Tehran is 800 miles closer to London than to Beijing. I don't see China bailing us out.

We could try rearming the Germans.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

90s growth was driven by massive business productivity improvements vs. the 80s coming from IT, worker productivity tools, access to massive information to improve performance, communication and the initial benefits of the internet economy. If it says the 90s was all due to a tax cut, you'd better get a new source of info.

The 90s growth was driven by the fact that businesses and individuals had money to spend, to finance those productivity improvements. the government was running a surplus in several of those years, and government spending as a % of GDP was the lowest it has been in about 120 years.

Give Clinton buckets of credit (see "Politicians We Admire" thread for more details). Back then the Republicans, having spent decades in the wilderness, were finally back in power in Congress due in large part to their Contract with America. They actually did practice fiscal restraint back then, and Clinton, give him credit, actually did seem to care about what was good for the country.

It's reduced government spending as % of GDP that is the key variable here. Less spending = less government borrowing = more credit available to business at same level of interest rates than otherwise would be there.




Funny how Clinton could work with Republican majorities in Congress to accomplish great things, and Reagan could work with Democratic majorities in Congress to accomplish great things (the end of the Cold War was a great thing and the recovery from the '78-'81 recession was a great thing; the '78-'81 recession actually was worse than the '08-'09 one, but the former recovery was dynamic while the latter "recovery" is quite anemic). To me talk of "obstructionist Congress" when you had supermajorities for two years and still control the Senate is just a lame excuse for [insert noun here].

 

[joecct]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

Possible nuclear meltdown alert:

Gingrich and Sharpton on MSNBC together tonight @ 6 (Politics Nation).

 

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

Possible nuclear meltdown alert:

Gingrich and Sharpton on MSNBC together tonight @ 6 (Politics Nation).

"Two Men Enter, One Man Leaves"!

 

[pirate]

The expense isn't really the problem, it's the availability of credit, which in turn is a problem because lenders know they will get bailed out.

Moral hazard works both ways: debtors and lenders alike are being sheltered from the consequences of their actions. In an ideal world, all the financial institutions that made those housing loans would have been destroyed in 2008, and all their executives would be homeless. The real tragedy of the failure to get real financial regulation (thanks, Congress) is that there is absolutely no reason why it won't happen again.

The worst grasshoppers of all are the banksters.

Bankers don't make people borrow and they risk their own capital. Who lends more money than bankers, encourages high risk people to borrow and risks other people's capital? Well that would be the government.

 

[geezer]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

If trend lines continue just as they are and Obama won a second term, the debt would increase 87% under him.

Increases by president:

Bush II 89%
Clinton 36%
Bush I 56% (1 term)
Reagan 189%
Carter 42% (1 term)

Every year of Reagan's presidency exceeded the debt growth rate of the most recent year of Obama's, in several cases by 3 times as much.

Basically, the debt has increased the same amount under Obama as under Bush II and Bush I and Carter. The only exceptional differences over the last 40 years were that Reagan exploded debt growth and Clinton cut it. Every other president during that time, including Obama, has been the same.

If you compared actual growth of the debt (in number of dollars) rather than PERCENT growth, I'm sure you'll find that GW rang up more actual debt than Reagan did. All that the huge "percent change" numbers mean is that we had a relatively tiny debt back then.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

Bankers don't make people borrow and they risk their own capital.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

If you compared actual growth of the debt (in number of dollars) rather than PERCENT growth, I'm sure you'll find that GW rang up more actual debt than Reagan did. All that the huge "percent change" numbers mean is that we had a relatively tiny debt back then.

It also means, in the immortal words of Joe McGrath, "See this quarter? It used to be a nickel."

If you think a Republican president over the last four years would have rolled up less debt than Obama I have an Alaskan bridge to nowhere to sell you. This debt is about inherited wars, inherited entitlement programs, inherited tax breaks, an inherited recession, and Obama's stimulus. I suspect the last accounts for well under 5% of the total contribution to debt.

 

[geezer]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

It also means, in the immortal words of Joe McGrath, "See this quarter? It used to be a nickel."

If you think a Republican president over the last four years would have rolled up less debt than Obama I have an Alaskan bridge to nowhere to sell you. This debt is about inherited wars, inherited entitlement programs, inherited tax breaks, an inherited recession, and Obama's stimulus. I suspect the last accounts for well under 5% of the total contribution to debt.

I do not. And I have no reason to think we'd be better off with a Republican next year, which is why I see no reason to change captains right now.

although I might consider it if we could get a Bush to run.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

I do not. And I have no reason to think we'd be better off with a Republican next year, which is why I see no reason to change captains right now.

I am all for a Republican in 2016 assuming it's not a complete moral and intellectual cripple like Palin. You have to clean out the Augean stables of the White House from time to time. But for now the infection deep in the GOP is too virulent a strain to let them anywhere near power for a while.

Romney would have probably been an acceptable GOP candidate during another period when the herp-a-derps weren't running the party -- he'd have been a sort of amiable bumbler like Coolidge. But not now.

 

[pirate]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

funny when somebody that understands how the world works suddenly plays dumb when it suits their political agenda, are you saying the FHA is more or less of a knee-slapper when it comes to risking other people's money?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

Consumers that make less than a certain amount (can't remember how much, I think $150k) got a free $400 for two years as well. "Making Work Pay", as they called it.

Wow. $400 bucks. They're rich.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

funny when somebody that understands how the world works suddenly plays dumb when it suits their political agenda, are you saying the FHA is more or less of a knee-slapper when it comes to risking other people's money?

I'm saying it's hysterical if you really believe that the risks bankers and in general people sitting on boards of large corporations take are personal, and can result in serious consequences for them.

The moral fable of free enterprise (those who strive and risk are rewarded) is true for 98% of business people. However, the guys who sit on the boards of the largest financial enterprises are merely playing card games for their own enjoyment, with other people's lives. Based on what they did to the world economy, every single person in a decision-making capacity at the largest banks and investment houses during the early 00's should be either broke or in prison. None are.

The "way the world works," in this case, is if you are a billionaire the global economy is a casino you play in for pocket change, and no matter how many lives you smash you'll never be held responsible. That's not capitalism, it's just a very polished kleptocracy.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

The 90s growth was driven by the fact that businesses and individuals had money to spend, to finance those productivity improvements. the government was running a surplus in several of those years, and government spending as a % of GDP was the lowest it has been in about 120 years.

It's reduced government spending as % of GDP that is the key variable here. Less spending = less government borrowing = more credit available to business at same level of interest rates than otherwise would be there.

Actually only folks outside the corporate world (and those with political wiring) would put tax rates at the top of the list for making corporate investment spending decisions.

Corporate management almost always has access to capital. What matters is ROIC (return on investment capital) of the initiative. In the 90s, return on capital was a no brainer...and it showed in financial results and individual wealth generated. The tax rate was a footnote at best to the massive growth of the 90s.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Elections 2012:What unites us is greater than what divides us

I'm saying it's hysterical if you really believe that the risks bankers and in general people sitting on boards of large corporations take are personal, and can result in serious consequences for them.

The moral fable of free enterprise (those who strive and risk are rewarded) is true for 98% of business people. However, the guys who sit on the boards of the largest financial enterprises are merely playing card games for their own enjoyment, with other people's lives. Based on what they did to the world economy, every single person in a decision-making capacity at the largest banks and investment houses during the early 00's should be either broke or in prison. None are.

The "way the world works," in this case, is if you are a billionaire the global economy is a casino you play in for pocket change, and no matter how many lives you smash you'll never be held responsible. That's not capitalism, it's just a very polished kleptocracy.

Yeah, but we didn't give them $400.