Published: Tuesday, April 9 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT
Let’s look at some of the fallacies this Greek gentleman has written,
laying aside the fact the Greek economy is a total mess:First he
claims it’s his MODELS showing the deficit should be increased. MODELS???
The sophisticated models used by AGI and much of the financial world were a
significant part of the barney-frank induced housing bubble, the collapse of
which took our economy down.He goes on to say without a stimulus, we
cannot expect an employment lift. When slick willy took office he proposed a
modest $50B stimulus, but could not get it through congress. The economy did
just fine without it. Bush tried a $100B stimulus in early 2008 and it failed.
BO’s massive porkulus failed. Stimuli do not work.He says
slower government spending is another reason post-recession growth has been
slow. Government spending has INCREASED EVERY YEAR under BO! The only
“slowing” has been in the amount of increase in spending (besides
job creation, hampered by BO’s anti-private sector policies and
How can the deficit be shrinking when the number keeps growing? The notion is
counter intuitive. To us non-economists, spending more than you take in on a
long-term basis looks like a recipe for disaster.
Excellent editorial. Spot-on. This is macro-economics 101; spend to promote
growth, then with the economy humming along, then worry about debt.
Eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we will die(worry about the debt). The
recipe for disaster! Sounds exactly like what Cyprus, Greece, Spain and other
counties in Europe have done. Oh, but we are different, right?
The tea party island is shrinking fast. Will be easy to yell and throw tea when
the water is knee high.
Why do the recoveries of today look different than in years past? Could it be
that we are already so saddled with debt that the those in the business world
fear to expand their business into a failing situation? Perhaps the big
difference is that the debt itself is so large it drags on the economy.
Increasing that debt will slow things even more.
First of all, I'm going to faint (I can't believe the Dn even printed
this)! This is not "eat, drink, and be merry", this is being flexible
and smart which is good leadership whether in business or government.
DeepintheHeart:You confuse deficit with debt. The deficit is indeed
decreasing. Overall debt will increase as long as there is a deficit.But this editorial is correct. And the GOP economic mythology is as irrational
as anything we've seen in decades. What we need to do, though, in addition
to deficit spending during downturns is to increase tax revenue during economic
booms. This is the other half of the equation that Republicans cannot
understand, and it is the reason our debt is out of control.
Re: "Just 6 percent (6!) of respondents in a recent poll correctly stated
that [the deficit] had been shrinking . . . ."Yeah -- shrinking
from 40+% all the way down to 36.8% of current expenditures.The
public could well be forgiven for such an error. Point being, the deficit is
still WAY too high. And the Obama regime is still making noises to the effect
that being WAY too high is no big deal, with it's captive economists even
suggesting that a 20% deficit is somehow sustainable in the long term.What the economy actually needs is LESS competition for capital between the
private sector and sovereigns. That's the ONLY way to genuinely stimulate
growth of the private sector. And yes, such private sector growth would come at
the expense of the government's deranged and expolosive expansion, but real
people can't be expected to genuinenly mourn such a development.
Didn't Obama already attempt this and called it the "stimulus
package"? The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing
expecting different results.
"How can the deficit be shrinking when the number keeps growing?"One more example of the ignorance from the right.There is a
difference between deficit and debt. Use Google, it is a marvelous
tool. Or take a basic civics class. It's pretty simple.And then
these very same folks act as if they know what's best for the economy,
guns, health care, and education??? They act like they're Constitutional
scholars? No wonder our country is in the state that it's in!
This letter is deeply troubling. The writer would have us look to government
for solutions of government generated problems. Have we lost our mind? Does
anyone who pays taxes trust Washington's use of their tax dollars? Does
anyone who has read the Constitution agree that Washington has the right to
redistribute wealth, to seize your assets simply because you worked harder and
earned more than someone else? How does taking from the "rich guy" make
him want to work harder and to employ more people?
Economics should be prerequisite for commenting on money supply in context of
international economy. Otherwise writers should preface comments with "lets
go back to the twenties".
Mtnmn:Yes, this is what Obama did with the stimulus, and it worked.
It just didn't work well enough, because the stimulus was too small for the
size of the mess we were in. And 4word Thinker, there are several
reasons why our recessions look different today than they did 30 years ago. One
significant reason that is ignored by most economists and all politicians is
that businesses, instead of hiring American workers when things start to
improve, either pocket the profit that was created by forcing the rest of the
work force to be more productive or hire Indonesians, Bangladeshis, and
Vietnamese to do work Americans used to do. When corporations are hauling in
record profits but are not hiring Americans, it is not because they cannot
afford to.Productivity is seen by businesses as a panacea, but for
the average worker, productivity improvement means one thing: less job security.
When workers are more productive, businesses can get by with fewer of them,
which is one reason why our economy is dominated now by services and financial
shenanigans. A service-based economy simply cannot thrive in the long run.
@DeepintheHeart"How can the deficit be shrinking when the number keeps
growing?"National debt is increasing. The deficit is the number
just for the year. Since it went from around 1.4 trillion for 2009 to around 1.1
trillion for 2012 and projected to be 900 billion for 2013 yes the national debt
is still rising, but the deficit is actually falling at the fastest rate in over
half a century.
People tend to confuse the "deficit" with the federal debt, and because
of this confusion, respondents say it is getting bigger. My first take on this
headline was that these experts are morons, but after some reflection I can see
what bigger deficits could lead to a more speedy recovery, but only if the
deficit increased because of leaving more resources in the hands of job creators
(and I am not talking about the government, which should not be the employer of
last resort). "Those who understand interest, collect it; those who
don't, pay it." HJG From this we may learn that debt is not a
positive unless you are the creditor; not the debtor.
Mike Richards:I hate to break it to you, but evidently everyone here
agrees it's OK for the federal government to take money from some people
and give it to others, as you put it. How's that? Well,
we're using the Internet on this electronic web site, which began it's
existence as a federal research project, money forcefully taken from the
successful and given to universities to research - gasp! - how to make computers
communicate with each other.So, you really should be writing your
opinions on paper with pencil, and handing them out to people on the street,
because this medium we participate in is ill-gotten, by definition. We're
all complicit in this massive theft.Do you feel badly about that?
Somehow, I don't. Actually, I think the Internet has been a tremendous
economic spur, has helped increase access to wide amounts of information we
wouldn't have been able to as easily access without it.
If this year I spend 120% more than I madeBut last year I spent 130% more
than I made And two years ago I spent 140% more than what I madeMy
deficits have decreased But it is still economic insanity because the
debt is growing every year. And as the author admits – deficits do
not work to stimulate job growth like they once did.
@10CC,Read Article I, Section 8. How many times in that Section is
Congress allowed to tax us to maintain the military? Do you have
any idea of the purpose of DARPA? For that matter, do you have any idea why we
have an Interstate Highway system? It was all military related. Just was we
now have roads to drive on because we were willing to spend defense dollars
developing a system that allowed the military to travel from coast to coast in
the minimum time possible, we also have the Internet which is PRIVATELY funded
having been built using transmission protocols developed by ARPANET which was
part of DARPA. Citizens authorized the basic funding for those
projects because of our need to defend ourselves and to move people and
information quickly if attacked. Just as commercial aviation learned from
military aviation, those of us who provide Internet connections to others
understand that military funding can benefit us in non-military ways. The Internet was not developed by nor is it owned by the government.
Government funded studies for packet switching which is part of the TCP/IP
protocol used to transmit information.
Counter Intelligence: See my comment above. Our debt is increasing
only because we decrease taxes during economic booms instead of increasing them.
Oh, and because we start unfunded wars and refuse to pay for big Medicare drug
programs. But that's another topic.Mike:Really,
what you need to do is go off to some corner of Canada where no one will find
you and start a country based on your interpretation of the Constitution. Then
you can live happily in your little 1787 utopia. Everyone can have all the guns
they want, there will be no government involvement in health care, and nobody
will have to pay taxes. We wish you well.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments