Nate:The stimulus worked fine. It did exactly what every major
macro-economist said it would. It created some jobs, but not as many as we
needed, because it was too small by half. Redshirt:The Great
Depression and the Great Recession have taken longer to recover from because
they were SO much worse. Previous recessions were mild because of Keynesian
Is it necessary. That is the question I ask my self when I'm in the store.
I have a limit to what I can spend and stay in line of that boundary. If the
government wants to protect the border. They should stay in line of our borders.
I just saw on Fox News that Joe Biden racked up $585,000 and change on a one
night hotel bill in Paris. Any questions about why our country is $17 trillion
in debt? Sure makes me want to vote for Democrats doesn't the rest of you?
In the meantime, not a word about this on other news media! Imagine if it were a
Republican who squandered that kind of taxpayer money!
Let me understand this..... the deficit under Bush was not his fault... it was
the democrat congress. The deficit under Obama is his fault, even though the
responsibility of bringing forth a budget is ... congress'. How does that work? If you spend on the credit card, and run up the
balance.... not your fault. Others made you do it. if I spend money on the
credit card, it is all my fault that balance went up.Lets be super
dupper clear here. Every president, even the sainted Reagan, ran up the
deficit. The national debt has risen, under every single president, under the
stewartship of both parties, the national debt has gone up. Even in Utah, with
the so called balanced budget, the state debt is increasing by the day.So lets stop the partisan finger pointing....and start working on solutions
where each side has to give a little - just a little - to unblock the budgetary
log jam.Enough childish - It's their fault. If we don't
have adults in Washington - lets find some.
Redshirt:The von Mises Intstitute is a libertarian think tank and
has a "working relationship" with Ron Paul.Nobody cherry
picks like you do...
@Eric Samuelsen "...stimulative spending."We've done
stimulative spending for years now, and it hasn't stimulated. Why? Because
the money we spend toward stimulus has to come from somewhere. That somewhere is
taxation. It is first taxed out of the economy before it can be spent into
it."The way to solve debt is less spending."Correct."[D]ebt isn't causing any problems right
now....Incorrect. Public debt is the promise of future taxation.
When potential job creators see the government borrowing huge amounts of money,
they know that someone will have to be taxed to pay it back; and they know that
that someone is likely to be them. Knowing this, they prepare for the future by
holding onto their money and taking fewer risks."Solving
unemployment will go a long distance toward solving debt."Yes,
it will. So we need to stop killing jobs with employer mandates, excessive
regulations, and higher taxes.@pragmatistferlife "[W]e'll
never be without a debt."That doesn't mean we have any
right to expand the debt before we pass it on to our children.
To "ECR" since you didn't understand my previous posts let me
reiterate things and make it more clear.The Depression like the 2008
recession were/are prolonged because of 3 factors:1. Government
regulation2. Government taxation3. Spending on worthless
projects.Lets also go to the WSJ and see what they say about
government regulation and intervention:"How Government Prolonged
the Depression" states that the government's "antimarket policies
choked off powerful recovery forces that would have plausibly returned the
economy back to trend by the mid-1930s."Also see "The New
Deal Debunked (again)" at the VonMises Institute.
All of the governments of Europe have been in austerity budgets (cutting
spending to balance spending) for three years now and the only ones that are not
in recession are those that did not have a crushing debt burden to begin with.
Our growth is anemic at around 2% but it is better than any but China right now.
@Mountanman"Ryan (R) budget plan; Balances the federal budget."Ryan's budget repeals Obamacare except he keeps the 700 billion in
Medicare cuts in Obamacare AND he keeps all the Obamacare tax increases (a
trillion). He only gets rid of the benefits in Obamacare. Do you really believe
ANY Republican would seriously want that to be law? Nope.Ryan then
generates a ton of money by closing tax loopholes but never specifies any of
them he'd want to close. He has to make up so much money with that that
he'd have to go after things like mortgage deductions and other stuff that
the middle class benefit from significantly. Do you think any Republican would
even elaborate what loopholes they'd close let alone want that to be law?
Nope.Ryan's budget is a gimmick. He can do what he claims with
a bill that will never become law anyway so nobody will remember the insane
things he proposes to get to a balanced budget.
Redshirt1701 said, "Government intervention prolonged the Depression and the
current recession." I hate to blow a whole in your theory but Forbes
Magazine - that's Forbes, not some liberal rag - says that in his first
four years Reagan increased government spending by 8.7% while Obama, in his
first four years, increased it by 1.4%. So how can you claim that it was
"government spending" that prolonged the recession. If anything,
Reagan's spending seems to prove that government spending reduces the time
of a recession since the Reagan recession lasted from July 1981 to November
1982.. And it also proves that Obama's stimulus plan didn't spend
nearly enough. If you have other substantial prove I'd be interested in
TO "The Real Maverick" the problem that your ilk refuse to recognize is
that government can't fix the economy. Just look at history.The average time to fully recover from a recession is 18 months to 2 years.
The only significant execptions to that are the Great Depression, and the 2008
Recession. Why is it that those 2 were not like the others?The
answer is simple, and is an irritant to liberals/progressives. Government
intervention prolonged the Depression and the current recession. If government
wants things to get better they have to figure out how to spend less, stop new
regulations, and lower tax rates. That is the formula for pulling out of a
recession that liberals will avoid until they are forced to change.
Nate, context is everything to have turned the trajectory while we're still
in the middle of a slow economy is as good as you could expect from anyone. BTW
we'll never be without a debt. We bascily never have been nor will we ever
Mman:The Ryan budget doesn't balance anything. It is all smoke. Even
the mirrors are gone this time.Henderson:But the GOP has
indeed dealt with Bush. They were so embarrassed about him that he was not
invited to the convention last year. They have been running against him for two
elections now. The problem is that they have no new idea on anything. Their old
economic ideas that have produced nothing but a mess have merely been recycled
and dressed up a bit. And this is exactly where they are again headed.
"There's nothing wrong with our principles," they say. "We just
need market them better." This is why the people they have abandoned (the
nonwealthy) are finally abandoning them. And they don't know where to turn.
Broken record time: our economy has two main problems right now. High
unemployment, and high debt. They cannot be solved together. The way to solve
unemployment is to have more money circulating in the economy; stimulative
spending. The way to solve debt is less spending. They have to be tackled
sequentially. As it happens, the debt isn't causing any problems right
now, while unemployment is. And solving unemployment will go a long distance
toward solving debt. Basic macro.
@Henderson "...Bush..."What exactly do you want Bush to do
about the current, unsustainable deficits? We can ask him to apologize for his
own, but then what? Obama is president now.@Henderson "As long
as our deficit goes down we will pay off our debt."This is
incorrect. As long as there is any deficit, we are going deeper in debt. Only
when there is a surplus do we begin to pay off our debt.@pragmatisferlife "...Obama has all ready reduced the trajectory of debt
accumulation."Same point. The trajectory we need is the one that
takes us to balance or surplus, not just to reduced accumulation.
Mountanman, your representation of the Ryan budget is totally wrong. Have you
actually researched it or have you simply been taken in by some of the
propaganda? While his budget MAY actually balance the budget in something like
twenty years, what will its side effects cost ordinary Americans?Balancing the budget on the backs of people who actually do the work is simply
@ Henderson. All good topics for sure but consider this: Ryan (R) budget
plan; Balances the federal budget.Democrat plan: $2 trillion in tax
increases and no spending cuts forever!Now, who is more concerned with the
economy and who is most concerned with only growing the government?I would
love to stay and debate all the issues you brought up, but I have to go to work.
I have massive taxes to pay before April 15th.Have a good day!
Other than give one set of politicians an excuse to propagandize against another
set of politicians, the national debt has not ever had an adverse effect on the
American nation. Until someone can, I will continue to believe that the weeping
and wailing of the conservatives is hogwash. The comparing of the
national debt to personal or family debt is hogwash. The rules and conditions
are different.The debt created by our local governments has much
more effect on our lives and wallets than the national debt, yet is covered up
by the smoke and mirrors of criticism of the national government. If you really
want to help your personal and family finance, pay more attention to
what’s going on in your own town and state.
@ Mountainman"GOP not talking about the economy? The economy is
about ALL they talk about."You're right. Absolutely right.
The GOP has never ever ever talked about:Obama's religionObama's birth certificateObama's professorObama's
ministerObama's vacationsObama's dog trainerObama's chefObama's hatred for white cultureObama being
a communist/nazi/insert whatever horrible thing you wantDeath panelsSocialist takeover of health careChoking high taxes on the wealthy (when
they're near all-time lows)Increases on the middle class (when they
were merely returning to the normal rate)A Libya cover-upChoking out
oil companies (when we are quickly becoming the world's #1 producer of oil.
Fuel is our #1 export!)A Mexican fast and furious cover-upBuying the
Hispanic vote with amnestyWanting to give women free birth controlwanting to take over our education systemWanting to take over our auto
industryWanting to trash America to avenge his great grandfatherWanting to take away our guns.And many many more! This
letter itself doesn't say one thing about the economy.The GOP
is definitely ONLY talking about the economy.
@ Henderson. GOP not talking about the economy? The economy is about ALL they
talk about. Wake up and listen and stay off your left wing talk shows and you
might actually learn something!
"Gross public debt as a percentage of GDP has increased each year since
Obama took office" Here's the problem simply..debt is up but GDP
growth is down. Why is GDP growth down, read Shauns letter it states it
perfectly, and BTW Shaun thank you for once again reminding folks that money is
actually created out of thin air. How many times have we read here..ahhh, ahhh
you can't create money out of thin air..yes you can, and yes we do. Second point is that Obama has all ready reduced the trajectory of debt
accumulation from 1.4 trillion to just under a trillion this year, and it's
projected to be closer to 600 billion by 2016. So mtman you've got reality
Why doesn't the GOP want to talk about the economy anymore? Is it because
they have no real solutions? Is it because their mindless mantra of "free
market, deregulation, and low taxes" is what got us into this mess in the
first place? What's really funny is that the deficit has
actually decreased since Obama has been President.In fact, we had a
higher spending percentage under Reagan than under Obama. So if folks like this
letter writer hate spending then they must have really despised Reagan. As long
as our deficit goes down we will pay off our debt. However, do republicans even
want the debt to be paid off? I think a large debt is exactly what the Norquist
scarecrow desires. Without it, he cannot convince others that the government is
incompetent and needs to be "drowned."The question I have
is, where were these people when Bush was President? Why did they suddenly
become concerned with the debt when Obama became President?Why
weren't they concerned when Bush decided to start 2 wars? Or sign a
completely unfunded handout to Big Pharm?
Ah yes. Blame that Obama. But please be sure to totally ignore Congress and
the REAL historic causes of the current mess.
Focusing on the debt while ignoring the economy is like grabbing a hose to water
your lawn as your house burns down. We need to fix our economy FIRST
before focusing on the debt.We've tried "fixing" debt
during bad economic times and the results were not good. Just as the economy
began to recover, Roosevelt caved to pressure from repubs who wanted to balance
the budget. Our economy took a hit and we went into another recession.Right now is NOT the time to cut spending or focus on the debt. Focus on the debt only ONCE the economy has recovered.The bigger
question is, what were we doing from 2000-08 when the economy was good? Why was
spending so high then? What happened to Clinton's surplus? Who passed and
signed NCLB, Medicare part D, who sent us to 2 wars in the middle-east, and who
was President when our economy crashed?
"We don't have a spending problem, we have a revenue problem",
Barrack Obama= Clueless!
@JoeBlowObama has been president now for four years. He's in
his second term. I've seen pictures of him proudly signing the legislation.
At what point do you think he begins to take ownership of his spending?(The answers to your questions are no and yes.)
Gross public debt as a percentage of GDP has increased each year since Obama
took office:2009 - 85.2%2010 - 93.2%2011 - 98.7%2012 - 104.8%This is a bad trajectory. According to the current
spending plan, it will level out somewhat in the next few years, and then begin
to climb again. We need a better plan.Last year the U.S. spent about
$359 billion on interest payments. Imagine the other uses to which we could put
this money, if we were not so deep in debt.
Yes, the debt has grown. With the biggest economic meltdown since the Great
Depression, two large and unfunded foreign wars, unfunded Medicare Part D and
tax cuts, all predating the 2008 election, the debt couldn't do anything
but go up.The folks who today clutch their pearls and write letters
to the editor to express their angst about the debt were perfectly OK with the
causes of huge deficits ten years ago. And now that the chickens
have come home to roost, these chicken-hawk conservatives neither acknowledge
their roles in creating this debt nor their responsibilities in fixing it.
Money is brought into circulation by people borrowing money from banks. Banks
literally create money out of thin air by your signature on a promissory
note.During the boom years when credit was easy, the money
supply(newly created borrowed money) exploded. When the recession hit the demand
to borrow(create money) fell dramatically. Also people started to pay debt down
which will shrink the money supply.Essentially our money supply took
two big hits in this recession. The only way to sustain the economy is for
government to spend money and for the federal reserve to make credit so cheap
that people start borrow(create money) again.
I agree that the debt is a huge concern. However, I am puzzled as
to why so many put all of the blame on Obama.Do you realize that
Obama cant spend a dime without congress approval?Or that any taxing
changes must go thru congress?Do you also realize that the deficit
has also ballooned under complete GOP control?2 Serious question.Had John McCain been elected instead of Obama, what effect do you think
that would have had on the deficit?Had Mitt Romney been elected this
year, do you believe that the deficit would be lower?I am in
agreement with many that the deficit is a serious problem. We just differ on