The US economy and politics

[jeff]

Yes--unlike, say

"When the carnival barker is pushing the same patent medicine at your regardless of the ailment, you can be sure that it's snake oil."

Praise from the Master...

Thanks, but I'm not Henry James (obscure lit reference opportunities should not be passed up).

"Keep more of their own money" is parrotting a well-worn and inaccurate cliche (in fact you don't and I'll explain why later). I'm not using that rhetorical trick. Pointing out that a "medicine" claimed to always be the cure to every variety of economic ill means it's probably bogus.

Rheumatism? My Mugwort Potion cures it. Liver problems? Buy my potion? Heart disease? Flat feet? Dizziness? Blood pressure too high? It lowers it. Blood pressure to low - don't worry, it raises BP, too. Same with tax cuts: whethever your problem - the only answer is a tax cut.

I'll try to take some time this afternoon to explain some tax policy consequences to y'all.

[esskreemr]

Yes, claiming that "They tricked me!" is much easier on the old ego than simply taking responsibility for ones own lapses of attention, I dareay.

So, basically what you're saying is that WE (a collective, I wasn't for the war at any time) are at fault because the information that we were given by the President of the United States was faulty and misrepresented?

[Tireur]

Faulty, some of it. Misrepresented is an assumption of yours.

And yes, the Brilliant Senators and Congressmen were duped by a drooling moron.

Let's elect one of them!

[esskreemr]

Faulty, some of it. Misrepresented is an assumption of yours.

Merely an assumption of mine? Wow, I must have a horrifying capability to influence the minds of hundreds of thousands of other people including the bipartisan 9/11 committee. They must have been reading my posts...

[Tireur]

We must have been reading different things about the 9/11 report. Everything I've read (and I read a variety of views and news) said there was no deliberate misrepresentation.

Can you show me where it said that?

[jBirch]

War is expensive and costs more then it gains. Unless the war is one of conquest and the spoils do indeed go to the victor. With the recent trend towards "intervention" to stabilise foreign states, the backlash is killing the US economy at all levels, while raising competition to US goals. Peace and internal stability are the best environments for economic growth and overall prosperity. The only way to increase the economy is at the expense of other nations. War is the best for innovation and invention. It is the duty of the ruler (or the President and Congress) to protect the people and increase their lot. If they don't, what's the point of them being there?

Tax cuts do work to stimulate the economy but only if spending is reigned in proportionally. Smaller government. The idea is that instead of tax money going towards the government, it is redirected into a darwinist marketplace.

Tax increases do work too, but only if government is increased and reinvested in the economy. This is where targetted subsidies and strategic investments pay off. The idea is that the government can coordinate marketplace investment to best position the national economy in relation to foreign competition.

You can not raise taxes and lower government and improve the economy. The reason is that the money ends up being wasted or invested in non-productive stocks (gold reserves, waste)

You can not lower taxes and increase government and improve the economy. This leads to deficits fast and furious: essentially spending more then you make and again being wasteful.

I'm sure Jeff's got a lot more particulars to say on this and will correct any errors I've introduced. Economic policy is a fun mind game that really has no "right answer" but rather several "optimal" answers. The problems come in actually implementing them, since someone is likely to perceive hurt somewhere and no one is going to vote for pain.

Hope this helps.

[grotto]

Yep, many folks weathered the economic fall of 2000 good for you. but a fair number really got thrown up against the wall. Real story. after 2000 I got laid off, was out of full time work for almost a year and a half, with sporatic consulting. burned through savings, 401k, essentially lost our house. (sold it for $800 over break even.) finally landed a job at a little over 1/2 of my previous salary. had to move for that, now my wife has not been able to find work in our new city for almost 8 months. Tax cuts or no. Our economy lacks basic confidence in this administrations ability to provide a stable environment to grow. Preoccupation with wars, a lack of a real domestic ecomonic plan (other than tax cuts.) and ignoring those in the median income brackets ( between 30 and 50k ) are what is going to kill the Bush presidency.

[esskreemr]

Yep, many folks weathered the economic fall of 2000 good for you. but a fair number really got thrown up against the wall. Real story. after 2000 I got laid off, was out of full time work for almost a year and a half, with sporatic consulting. burned through savings, 401k, essentially lost our house. (sold it for $800 over break even.) finally landed a job at a little over 1/2 of my previous salary. had to move for that, now my wife has not been able to find work in our new city for almost 8 months. Tax cuts or no. Our economy lacks basic confidence in this administrations ability to provide a stable environment to grow. Preoccupation with wars, a lack of a real domestic ecomonic plan (other than tax cuts.) and ignoring those in the median income brackets ( between 30 and 50k ) are what is going to kill the Bush presidency.

(irony)
I'm sure that this is just leftist propaganda to seek support for more "handouts" to the poor... right Inq?
(/irony)

Note use of my new posting language, HSML (Hyper Sarcastic Markup Language).

[Maeve_Mari]

Yep, many folks weathered the economic fall of 2000 good for you. but a fair number really got thrown up against the wall. Real story. after 2000 I got laid off, was out of full time work for almost a year and a half, with sporatic consulting. burned through savings, 401k, essentially lost our house. (sold it for $800 over break even.) finally landed a job at a little over 1/2 of my previous salary. had to move for that, now my wife has not been able to find work in our new city for almost 8 months. Tax cuts or no. Our economy lacks basic confidence in this administrations ability to provide a stable environment to grow. Preoccupation with wars, a lack of a real domestic ecomonic plan (other than tax cuts.) and ignoring those in the median income brackets ( between 30 and 50k ) are what is going to kill the Bush presidency.

Absolutely. I haven't been laid off yet, but anticipate having to tell the same story when it happens. Our economy hasn't any confidence or strategic plan for the future. Millions of working Americans are on the edge of this very scenario and the continued foolery and inadequacy from this administration is going to push us over.

[grotto]

I think this is just normal. As time passses and people progress in their jobs they make more and feel more secure.

I know this is not true for everyone, but I do believe it to be the norm.

I think you would be astonished by the responses you got if you asked professionals in their mid 30's if they felt more secure.

[Tireur]

I think you would be astonished by the responses you got if you asked professionals in their mid 30's if they felt more secure.

I'm sure If John Kerry were President and people were flying airplanes into our buildings wreaking havoc with the markets, especially following the huge dot-com bust near the end of the previous administration, we would all feel nice and secure.

Because he has a secret plan.

[jeff]

How clever of the recession (as defined by The Authorities) to have started before 9/11, so we could say 9/11 caused it. Remember: peak NYSE and NASDAQ were in March 2000. And, it wasn't just the recession - the phrase 'jobless recovery' comes into play here. The "technical" recession was brief, but the job statistics haven't been good *since* the recession - in fact, have not kept up with % job application population increase.

[esskreemr]

I'm sure If John Kerry were President and people were flying airplanes into our buildings wreaking havoc with the markets, especially following the huge dot-com bust near the end of the previous administration, we would all feel nice and secure.

Because he has a secret plan.

Ah, yes the "secret" plan. What part exactly is so secret?

[Maeve_Mari]

I'm sure If John Kerry were President and people were flying airplanes into our buildings wreaking havoc with the markets, especially following the huge dot-com bust near the end of the previous administration, we would all feel nice and secure.

Because he has a secret plan.

Grotto means more secure in their jobs and careers.
I'm quite certain the next Al Queda act won't be directed solely against people in their 30's!
There are terrific and silent numbers of qualified professionals on the very edge of economic doom. If we don't see a substantial economic recovery plan we're all going to need the Royal Saudi's to finance our next ventures too!

[Tireur]

How clever of the recession (as defined by The Authorities) to have started before 9/11, so we could say 9/11 caused it. Remember: peak NYSE and NASDAQ were in March 2000. And, it wasn't just the recession - the phrase 'jobless recovery' comes into play here. The "technical" recession was brief, but the job statistics haven't been good *since* the recession - in fact, have not kept up with % job application population increase.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to say it was caused by 9/11, but you can't tell me it played no role.

Can you?

[Tireur]

Ah, yes the "secret" plan. What part exactly is so secret?

Uh, the part he doesn't explain?

You know the part beyond the wild promises.

[grotto]

I'm sure If John Kerry were President and people were flying airplanes into our buildings wreaking havoc with the markets, especially following the huge dot-com bust near the end of the previous administration, we would all feel nice and secure.

Because he has a secret plan.

Actually this goes across political administrations. People in my generation (mid 30's) are generally not secure feeling. We are ready to be downsized, reclassified, outsourced, and generally given the heave ho, at the drop of the shareholders dividends.

I was a consultant at a big multi-national where nearly 1/2 of the cubicles were recently vacant because the folks were reorganized out of existence. This was during the Clinton "golden years", most of my peers have a nasty twitch from seeing similar situations.

[Maeve_Mari]

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to say it was caused by 9/11, but you can't tell me it played no role.

Can you?

Absolutely the impacts of 9/11 furthered the demise of a strong economy. But that was three years ago. It's time our administration got up off it's skinned knees, brushed off the dirt, and put in place a recovery plan so we can move back to economic growth.

[Tireur]

Not trying to argue for the sake of argument, but everything I read says the econmomy is growing.

I suppose everyone expects a recovery with no bumps.

[grotto]

Not trying to argue for the sake of argument, but everything I read says the econmomy is growing.

I suppose everyone expects a recovery with no bumps.

yes you are correct on that account. economy is growing, businesses are showing profits etc. Unfortunately there seem to be a disconnect between corporate profit taking and new job growth, salary growth, expansion etc. Until Joe and Jane USA feel that they are not in jeapordy (and I am not talking about Al Queda.) the recovery will be flat. I bet that lots of folks out there are running to the end of their credit lines, and consumer spending will once again grind down, unless their is some real job growth in this country. (other than putting on a smock at walmart.)