Thread: The strongest economy in the world

Down-to-earth GOP view on what obama's various policies are doing to the economy. It's pretty scary, but nothing I didn't expect.

!

Taxes didn't put the economy into its current state as far as I can see. Everyone wants lower taxes but we also have other obligations. Before the spending resulting from the downturn and change in government, Bush had spent the most of any president in history with the spending from 911. Loads of money was spent or lost on the debacle after 911. What a crime that was...is!

This senator from Nebraska should do more for his state. Why don't Nebraskans earn more? Are they lazy? People in NY and California make much more working hard. Hard work makes you money. That's the logic thrown out by every pro-capitalist nutter there is. If people in Nebraska aren't making enough why don't they get off their lazy butts and work like others do in the nation. Not all Americans are whining. It's called work. I wonder how many hours people spend watching Fox news each day. Just to watch Beck is an hour and he doesn't even have the news. Then there's Oreilly which would be another hour. Then there's much more. If these whiners turned off their boobtubes and put some effort into their work or used their brain and created some extra work maybe they wouldn't be complaining. Not everything in the video is wrong. I'm all for cutting spending and eventually reducing taxes but I'm also for lazy people getting up and working instead of playing on the Internet and watching talk shows. Talk shows are ruining the nation!

Yesterday,Greenspan, on Meet the Press, said that the best course of action to reduce the deficit is to let all the Bush tax cuts expire. Zakaria expressed the same view. Make the tax rate the same as under Clinton. The economy was just fine under Clinton. The Bush tax cuts were accomplished with borrowed money.
If the Republicans are serious about bringing the deficits down why don't they support ending the Bush tax cuts?

This thread goes way back.

At present (August 2010), I believe the strongest economy in the world is one of our neighbors: Singapore.

Which begs the question: Why is Thailand, a country in the same region, doing so poorly?

Some would say "all of the countries are doing poorly because of the global economic downturn."

That answer does not explain why Singapore is doing so well in terms of annual growth rate.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Yesterday,Greenspan, on Meet the Press, said that the best course of action to reduce the deficit is to let all the Bush tax cuts expire. Zakaria expressed the same view. Make the tax rate the same as under Clinton. The economy was just fine under Clinton. The Bush tax cuts were accomplished with borrowed money.
If the Republicans are serious about bringing the deficits down why don't they support ending the Bush tax cuts?

True. Saw that. But, you conveniently forgot to mention his reasons: the deficit is so fekin high and all of the spending is paid with BORROWED money. The unemployment extension is gonna be paid with BORROWED money. And the tax cuts would also be made on BORROWED money. From China. Which is why companies have tons of cash on their balance sheets. obama has made such a mess of the economy and there's such uncertainty about what new regs and taxes are coming next that no private firms want to hire or invest. Stagnant economy -- 2.4% growth? Off of a negative base? BS. The guy should be impeached.

Lazy people...in Nebraska?

All I am saying is that if money means effort like they say it does then those in NY and California generally make more so they are hard workers. Warren Buffet is a hard working person so he's wealthy. Why don't the rest of the people in Nebraska have billions by now? Shouldn't they have that amount too? I guess they just haven't got it in the brain or are lazy. At least that's what capitalism would say abou them. Warren Buffet faced all the same taxes as the rest of them. He even got teaxed worse because he's rich, right? What are the excuse of the lazy others who want all sorts of breaks from the system. It seems to me that success in America has nothing to do with taxes.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

new regs and taxes are coming next that no private firms want to hire or invest

These costs are always passed on to the consumer one way or another. Business is reluctant to take on more expense because nobody is spending money. Most job losses are stuctural now and will never be replaced. In my former life in corporate America, I never once brought back staff that had been streamlined. Simply learned to live without them.

Originally Posted by PaulBunyon

All I am saying is that if money means effort like they say it does then those in NY and California generally make more so they are hard workers. Warren Buffet is a hard working person so he's wealthy. Why don't the rest of the people in Nebraska have billions by now? Shouldn't they have that amount too? I guess they just haven't got it in the brain or are lazy. At least that's what capitalism would say abou them. Warren Buffet faced all the same taxes as the rest of them. He even got teaxed worse because he's rich, right? What are the excuse of the lazy others who want all sorts of breaks from the system. It seems to me that success in America has nothing to do with taxes.

Well, if I'm saving to make a biz and I pay 5% tax, I'm gonna start that biz a lot fekin faster than if I pay 45% ain't I?
Buffett is smart, the main reason he is a billionaire.
NY and CA folks generally make more than Nebraskans and are harder workers? Nebraskans are lazy? You got proof for any of that? You mean like the CA & NY govt union employees who are bankrupting their states -- you can throw in the Bell City Council who all got their butts fired -- hey, the mayor made almost $800K a year from an impoverished town of 40,000 people. 55555 I would call these people rip-off artists not hard workers. So, you say CA & NY folks work harder. Says who and by what measure? How many folks are on welfare in these states. Let's take a look....Oh, CA leads the pack:
Welfare recipient case loads by state (the numbers are low but 2006 is latest data -- mixed years for different data so unsure.):
#1 CA 1.09 million
#2 NY 341,004
...
#39 Nebraska 27,079

Welfare Caseloads total recipients (most recent) by state

And let's not ignore where some of those sunny Californian welfare folks are cashing their money:

June 25, 2010|By Jack Dolan, Los Angeles TimesCalifornia welfare recipients using state-issued debit cards withdrew more than $1.8 million in taxpayer cash on casino floors between October 2009 and last month, state officials said Thursday.

California welfare recipients withdrew $1.8 million at casino ATMs over eight months - Los Angeles Times

$1.8 million?? In a place the size of California, that isn't even a grain of salt on a peanut.

To beat down a Republican and their discredited economics, you only have to hit them with the facts. Problem is, you have to do it again and again, because they go all quiet at first, sulky even- and then come back with the same old, same old discredited bullshit all over again, ad infinitum. It hardly makes for intelligent debate.

So heres the Facts (again ). The Bush tax cuts had no tangible positive impact whatsoever on the economy. None. It just drove the government deeper into debt, and made the richest 5% richer. There was no 'trickle down effect', no increase in domestic investment or employment- unless you consider financial speculation to be investment. The average American became both financially poorer and less well paid in real terms during the eight years of the Bush administration. Voodoo economics.

I'm just playing the devil's advocate Jet. Of course people ripping off the system burns me up. But I can't agree with all the 'work hard and you'll succeed' crap spouted by the rightwing. TV does show people who are successful no matter what's thrown at them. It's easy to argue that anyone who hasn't made it is a failure of sorts or their parents were in some way. One minute a talk news host will tout and example of a successful person who others should emulate and the next they'll say it's almost impossible for the little people to succeed unless X happens. You can't have it both ways. Just my view of it. I don't go for the black and white thinking that some have about the economy. There is some sort of balance in there. The government should be there to help all people not just to support a system that has a record of leaving many behind.

Here's an interesting link from a leftwing site...

"In an interview on NBC's 'Meet the Press,' Greenspan expressed his disagreement with the conservative argument that tax cuts essentially pay for themselves by generating revenue and productivity among recipients.
'They do not,' said Greenspan.
'I'm very much in favor of tax cuts but not with borrowed money and the problem that we have gotten into in recent years is spending programs with borrowed money, tax cuts with borrowed money,' he said. 'And at the end of the day that proves disastrous.'"

Alan Greenspan: Extending Bush Tax Cuts Without Paying For Them Could Be 'Disastrous'

^ Yes, and Paul Krugman before that thoroughly demolished that nonsense argument too.

For the Republicans to be calling for Bush' tax cuts to be made permanent when the US governments debt position and deficit is in the current shape is little short of criminal.

Originally Posted by sabang

^ Yes, and Paul Krugman before that thoroughly demolished that nonsense argument too.

I cannot stand Paul Krugman and his peurile Op-Eds in the NY Times.

For the Republicans to be calling for Bush' tax cuts to be made permanent when the US governments debt position and deficit is in the current shape is little short of criminal.

I agree that it's foolish (but sadly it may work) of the GOP to pretend these tax cuts should be kept from expiring after the same Repubs spent money like crazy during the GWB yers, and their control of both houses.

Medicare-D of 2003 is the death knell of the US.

As long as the economists seem to be so far apart on things, it would seem that the future really is uncertain. On that crash day back two years ago, everyone seemed to be a lot closer in their thinking. ( Unless of course this all was part of the Illuminati's master plan )

No matter how much the US government cuts taxes for the wealthy, it wont stop companies from investing overseas in developing countries where labour is cheaper. The tax breaks will flow down for sure, but not to US workers. In fact, more US company overseas investments means less jobs at home. Its worked OK for the past few decades only through the relative strength of the $US. Meaning cheaper imported goods and a better standard of living for the US middle and lower class. But at the cost of a gradually diminishing manufacturing base, and of course jobs in those industries. All funded by an artificially inflated $US trading value since Nixon dumped the gold standard in 1971 and replaced it with $US paper money with no intrinsic value except for faith in USAs productive capacity.

But US blue collar and unskilled labour earn among the lowest wages of any developed country. Thier purchasing power and standard of living is dependent on the relative strength of the $US rather than any competitive trading edge now.
Basically, the people of USA have been living the high life on credit to the rest of the world since they stopped being competitive with a trade surplus and started being nett consumers financed by ever increasing international debt.

However, the blue collar and unskilled labour force in USA have already had their incomes trimmed to the bone in the name of world competitiveness over decades gone by. They dont have any buffer to give when jobs run out. The only choice for the government, other than a massive drop in living standards for their main voter base, is to keep the party going as long as possible through increased international borrowing.

Originally Posted by PaulBunyon

As long as the economists seem to be so far apart on things, it would seem that the future really is uncertain. On that crash day back two years ago, everyone seemed to be a lot closer in their thinking. ( Unless of course this all was part of the Illuminati's master plan )

USA pipped the rest of the world in manufacturing for almost a century due to their extremely competitive business philosophy. Hold the price of labour down and allow tax incentives for business investment worked extremely well for USA in a competitive world market until they got lazy and started relying on an inflated trading value of their currency. It all started to go down hill in 1971 when USA ran out of gold backed money after the Vietnam war and demanded the rest of the world accept only $USs backed by the promise of future productivity for trade. Since the USA had been the worlds powerhouse of manufactured goods until then there was no reason to think the $US wouldn't be backed by actual value in real tradable goods. But that wasn't to be as history now shows. The power to simply print the worlds trading currency was too much of a temptation. And no one could have expected a country like China would grow economically to such an extent that they could not only out compete USAs manufacturing base, but to exacerbate it by buying up US debt and turning the country into a nation of debt ridden consumers rather than wealthy producers.

Now USAs economy relies on consumption rather than production. Its a no win situation. Borrow more and hope the rest of the world swallows the promise to pay it back in real goods in the hope it can keep the consumption based economy going and growing. The country goes deeper and deeper into debt to maintain living standards. But as we all know, this strategy can not go on forever and somewhere down the line the rest of the world will stop accepting US credit. Thats going to cause a lot of problems in USA as the $US devalues on the world market and the price of all things imported skyrockets. The average Americans standard of living must drop significantly as prices go up, and up. Called inflation.
With the US manufacturing already shipped overseas and working class peoples wages already cut to the bone, there isn't much room to move in rebuilding USAs manufacturing industry of old. Massive unemployment as the consumer nation can not afford to consume anymore and can not afford to support the service industries built around consumption. Massive inflation as a country without a sufficient manufacturing base and a declining currency trabable value forces prices up. A real cut in living standards for Americas middle to lower classes with the high potential for civil unrest.

Originally Posted by sabang

$1.8 million?? In a place the size of California, that isn't even a grain of salt on a peanut.

Alright...I knew I'd get blasted for that. You don't have to throw salt on the wound, ya wanklette.
Uggh. Klugman is a crashing dunce, IMO. Just wants a socialist nation.
Since bambutt has tripled the deficit within 18 months in office, major spending cuts are needed and yes I still want tax cuts. His tax bill will increase EVERYBODY's tax rates. That's less spending, so less demand and fewer jobs. Yes, companies -- not only big corps -- go overseas for cheaper production. Blame the unions for outrageous wages. Or blame shoppers for wanting low prices.
The US does not have a mfg base anymore. It needs to shift people to higher value work. The car bailouts are a laughing stock. The govt runs GM now. Its latest product: the Chevy Volt that costs a whopping $41,000. But hey, the taxpayers will subsidise buyers with a $7,500 rebate. The car battery powers the engine for 40 miles and then switches to gas. Erm, if your commute is less than 40 miles round trip, shouldn't you be using public transport? Oh, and you can't just plug it into a regular socket to recharge. You gotta spend about $2,500 for a special socket.

I'd quite like to see an objective evaluation of the auto bailouts actually.
I'm pretty much still of the view they should have let Chrysler fail.

If I may lapse into some 'econospeak', the point about the tax cuts for the rich is that, as it turned out, tax rates for them are already at a point where the further Bush tax cuts had no discernible Multiplier effect on the economy at all. Arguably, they may even have been damaging- by fueling more financial speculation and thus contributing to the asset price bubble. So to extend them now would be, well, just plain stoopid. US Government can't afford it.

If the gov't is to look at some tax stimulus measures, it could much more productively look at incentives for companies to hire more labour.

US interest rates are effectively into the minus numbers in real terms when inflation is factored into it. Unemployment at 10% or closer to 20% depending on how you do the math. Wages for blue collar workers and unskilled labour are among the lowest in the western world. The "too big to fail" companies which were unable to compete on the open market are being bailed out by a government which is effectively broke and surviving on borrowed money. USA has a trade deficit, importing more than they export, adding to the countries debt. Manufacturing has moved overseas to cheap labour developing countries. The federal government (and most states), run at a loss, which is politely called a deficit in economic terms. That is, they spend more than they earn in taxes.
More tax relief for the wealthy aint going to fix the problem.

The problem is that country spends more than it earns and is now surviving on credit. Credit from individuals and countries who actually operate efficiently and earn more than they spend.

The real problem with USAs economy is their overvalued currency which stifles export industries and adds to unemployment. An overvalued currency that makes imported goods cheaper than goods made by American workers.
And the only reason USAs currency is overvalued on the world market is because they have a virtual monopoly on the worlds trading currency since the $US replaced gold back in 1971. USA is the whole worlds "TOO BIG TO FAIL" enterprise. A country badly managed and running at a loss. A country being bailed out and given virtually unlimited extended credit only because it controls the worlds default trading currency. Something that can not go on forever and is certain to fall in a great heap sooner or later.

One has to remember that this experiment in world finance with the $US replacing gold as the worlds trading currency has only been going for 39 years since 1971. Before that USA was a productive country with a nett surplus in trade.

I think the USD is overvalued too, and the Sino's aren't helping with their 'beggar thy neighbour' low yuan policy.

If the trade figures continue to deteriorate, might have to resort to some limited Tariff measures against the Chinese. Will also help pay down the government debt.

Chrysler. GM...ya, that new $41,000 Chevy Volt (with the $7,500 taxpayer-funded rebate) is gonna be a big hit. Ford...doing OK without a bailout, innit?
Get the govt out of biz and let the free market run. The financial reform has only served to make the big banks stronger because so many local banks (except the one Maxine Waters bailed out) are closing. The libbies shot themselves in the foot yet again with this bill. The small banks fail, where are folks gonna put their money and do biz? No choice. They gotta do it with the big banks. Libbies fek it up once again.

There are loads of S&L's left in the states Jet, at a guess well over one hundred. The weaklings were merged or failed- thats life. You're not seriously saying they shouldn't have bailed out the financial sector are you? They had to, and by the looks of things it won't cost a lot of money anyway.

The US government is sitting on a handsome paper profit on Citi (first exit later this year) and made money (but not enuff) on GS and some other institutions. And to state the obvious, the GOP would not have done substantively different- they started the bailouts anyway. I know it's all very trendy to spout the 'Libertarian wisdom' of Ron Paul these days, but in reality the Republican party is about as Libertarian as Castro.

Originally Posted by sabang

I think the USD is overvalued too, and the Sino's aren't helping with their 'beggar thy neighbour' low yuan policy.

If the trade figures continue to deteriorate, might have to resort to some limited Tariff measures against the Chinese. Will also help pay down the government debt.

Tariffs would probably help in the long term, but no doubt would infringe on some free trade agreements. In the short term, they would result in shortages of manufactured goods in USA until the US manufacturing industry could gear up to meet the domestic demand. That could take up to a decade or so. Prices would have to rise as the made in USA goods would be more expensive with the higher cost of labour. That wouldn't be popular with the voters. Even if 20% are out of work, thats 80% of voters who still have a job and want cheap goods no matter where they come from.

I think it is the international community that would squeal a lot more than the electorate Panda. Jobs are the big thing now. Anyway, tariffs are something to be resorted too- the 'threat' of tariffs is probably more meaningful short term. Plus there are 'procedural' rather than formal tariff measures that should not be underestimated- the Frogs are the past masters of that.

Truth be told, the 'Champion of free trade' USA is, selectively, a whole lot more protectionist than it makes out to be. The worlds largest per capita consumer of sugar pays double the world price for it, because of Protectionism. No overseas ownership of media or airlines, highly nationalistic Defence procurement policies etc, etc...