McCain: "Economics is Something That I've Really Never Understood"

[JimH52]

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/12/mccain-economic.html

McCain: "Economics is Something That I've Really Never Understood"

John McCain says that when it comes to economics he will have to rely upon others because, though he's tried, he doesn't really get it himself:

McCain said ... "The issue of economics is something that I've really never understood as well as I should. I understand the basics, the fundamentals, the vision, all that kind of stuff,'' he said. "But I would like to have someone I'm close to that really is a good strong economist. As long as Alan Greenspan is around I would certainly use him for advice and counsel."

McCain said his staff hates it when he discusses his shortcomings on economics, even though he has read widely and studied the subject. "I've never been involved in Wall Street, I've never been involved in the financial stuff, the financial workings of the country, so I'd like to have somebody intimately familiar with it," he said of a potential vice president.
________________________________________________________________

But give that guy a war and he can handle it....FOR 100 YEARS IF NEED BE!

 

[ScreamingEagle]

McCain: "Economics is Something That I've Really Never Understood"

Just like every other liberal...

 

[jillian]

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/12/mccain-economic.html

McCain: "Economics is Something That I've Really Never Understood"

John McCain says that when it comes to economics he will have to rely upon others because, though he's tried, he doesn't really get it himself:

McCain said ... "The issue of economics is something that I've really never understood as well as I should. I understand the basics, the fundamentals, the vision, all that kind of stuff,'' he said. "But I would like to have someone I'm close to that really is a good strong economist. As long as Alan Greenspan is around I would certainly use him for advice and counsel."

McCain said his staff hates it when he discusses his shortcomings on economics, even though he has read widely and studied the subject. "I've never been involved in Wall Street, I've never been involved in the financial stuff, the financial workings of the country, so I'd like to have somebody intimately familiar with it," he said of a potential vice president.
________________________________________________________________

But give that guy a war and he can handle it....FOR 100 YEARS IF NEED BE!

McCain's repeatedly acknowledged that he knows nothing about the economy. And he proves it whenever he talks about it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

McCain's repeatedly acknowledged that he knows nothing about the economy. And he proves it whenever he talks about it.

As opposed to the democrats that would never admit they do not know something.

 

[jreeves]

McCain's repeatedly acknowledged that he knows nothing about the economy. And he proves it whenever he talks about it.

One thing he does have right about the economy he doesn't believe in earmarks...which he has 0 dollars in earmarks. While Obama and Hillary have funded their 'own bridges to no where'. As President Mccain will not stand for pork barrell projects, which is one reason why the federal defecit is jacked. That along with social spending consuming 56% of the federal budget.

 

[jillian]

One thing he does have right about the economy he doesn't believe in earmarks...which he has 0 dollars in earmarks. While Obama and Hillary have funded their 'own bridges to no where'. As President Mccain will not stand for pork barrell projects, which is one reason why the federal defecit is jacked. That along with social spending consuming 56% of the federal budget.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight... like earmarks are the biggest problems facing our economy right now.

This is why people like you have no credibility.

Blah blah blah social spending ... blah blah blah.

Stop paying for an unnecessary war in Iraq... oooh, look, an extra 200 million a year.

Yay! Amazing how that works.

And wanna talk earmarks? Let's talk about the bridge to nowhere and remind you that your beloved repubs ran things for 6 years and fed at the trough more than any dem ever thought to all the while whining about smaller government so they could shaft the middle class and feed their rich little friends and corporations.

You really that vapid?

Wait, don't answer that.

 

[JimH52]

As opposed to the democrats that would never admit they do not know something.

Right Sgt. Who really wants to go back to the budget surplus days of the Clinton administration? Budget surplus, no war, respected throughout the world, and no torture chambers in other countries.

WHAT A NIGHTMARE!

 

[jreeves]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight... like earmarks are the biggest problems facing our economy right now.

This is why people like you have no credibility.

Blah blah blah social spending ... blah blah blah.

Stop paying for an unnecessary war in Iraq... oooh, look, an extra 200 million a year.

Yay! Amazing how that works.

And wanna talk earmarks? Let's talk about the bridge to nowhere and remind you that your beloved repubs ran things for 6 years and fed at the trough more than any dem ever thought to all the while whining about smaller government so they could shaft the middle class and feed their rich little friends and corporations.

You really that vapid?

Wait, don't answer that.

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/fed_budget.htm



FY 2006 Federal Govt. Spending of $2.8 Trillion Consumed >
26% of the Economy, or $9,223 per man, woman and child,
or 36% of the economy counting regulatory compliance

The Social Spending portion consumed 56% of total spending,
and has increased 14 Times Faster Than The Economy

and - individual incomes pay 82% of all federal revenue
compared to a 51% share in 1950


Here are a few sample color graphics
from the Full Federal Government Spending Report
Today's economy is 8 TIMES more federal government-spending-dependent, compared to prior generations.

The left chart shows total federal spending as a share of the economy - growing from 3% of the economic pie prior to the New Deal, to 26% of today's economy.

Had total federal spending been reduced following World War II, equivalent to reductions of the defense spending ratio, the current federal spending ratio would be about 13% of the economy - - instead of today's 26% ratio - - resulting in 50% less spending and taxes.

Political leaders chose, instead, to eat up all defense reductions PLUS much more via massive social spending - - much financed by debt.

Who was it that said we are a nation of small government with a predominant free-private sector? Well, we used to be - - but, no longer. Does this impact the future economics and freedom of our younger generation. You bet.

Summarizing: the federal share of the economic pie increased 800%.

A POWERFUL, REVEALING PICTURE - FEW HAVE SEEN
Question: What has caused the explosive growth of federal spending faster than the economy?

Answer: look for the line in this chart that has risen the most over that period.

The BIG CULPRIT (rising red line) is SOCIAL SPENDING, which grew 14 times faster than the economy - - to a new high - - more than eating up the long-term decline of defense spending ratios shown by the black line in the chart. The full report (link below) shows once the social spending ratio rose above 5% of national income in the late 1960s, citizen trust in government plummeted to half prior levels - - and inflation-adjusted median family incomes stagnated for all families and fell for single wage-earner families. Note social spending (red line) stopped rising in the early 1980s as if it hit a brick wall, and then fell - - and other data show trust in government surged, only to fall back later as social spending ratios again climbed. This is a powerful finding that deserves more attention. (the full report contains a link to a special report and chart on citizen trust polling data).

This trend (red line) is unique in U.S. history.

National security was the prime reason our founding forefathers formed a federal government. The declining black trend line is defense spending, which in 2001 had dropped to 3.7% of the economy's national income, below where it started - following a 5-decade downward slope. The black defense line for 2003-06 increased to 4.9% of national income as shown in the graphic. This multi-decade declining defense ratio camouflaged a new direction for government - - surging social programs and spending.

This trend calls into question our nation's focus and readiness to detect and deter major national security challenges - - compared to the priority focus outlined by our nation's founding fathers.


WHERE DOES THE MONEY GO ??
Following is a pie chart showing the major spending components of a Federal Budget - and its huge red cloud

The Government Spending Report and the Government Growth Report show the federal government increased its spending at a rate much faster than growth of the economy (nearly twice as fast) since the end of World War II). Where does the spending go?

Last fiscal year the federal government spent $2.8 Trillion - - or about $9,223 for each man, woman and child in America, up 6% over the prior year.

The left chart displays this $2.8 Trillion as a pie, with each major spending component shown as a percent of the total.

The BIGGIE is that HUGE RED CLOUD in the chart called SOCIAL PROGRAM Spending, which consumes 56% of the budget. (To place this in perspective, in 1948 social spending was but 10% of the federal budget - - prior to the New Deal it was near zero).

This graphic is reviewed in more detail in the full Federal Spending Report - - next link.

Additionally, also shown in the following link, the average federal government employee earns twice as much as the average private sector worker - - in addition to significantly more job security.


You have just reviewed a summary report on Federal government spending.

Suggest you read the full Federal Government Spending Report
with easy to understand eye-opening pictures


Wow, look at that it does seem social spending is a problem. Saying that defense spending is the problem, is like having a rotweiler latched down on your arse and saying that the chihuahua yapping in front of you is the real problem.

 

[jillian]

And why would I need Michael Hodges to distort truth for me, cookie?

I figure if it's a site you rely upon, given how misinformed you are, I'm not really interested.

Thanks anyway.

 

[Diuretic]

He - if he were president - wouldn't have to have an academic level of knowledge of economics, just the ability to understand briefings, surely. Frankly I think a bit of honesty is refreshing.

 

[jillian]

He - if he were president - wouldn't have to have an academic level of knowledge of economics, just the ability to understand briefings, surely. Frankly I think a bit of honesty is refreshing.

It is... but problem is he doesn't know what he's listening to and thinks the people who haven't been relevant since Daddy Bush's admin (last time we had a recession) are the people to listen to.

 

[jreeves]

Right Sgt. Who really wants to go back to the budget surplus days of the Clinton administration? Budget surplus, no war, respected throughout the world, and no torture chambers in other countries.

WHAT A NIGHTMARE!

Yeah, African embassy bombings, Uss Cole, tucking and running in Somalia.....

 

[Dr Grump]

Yeah, African embassy bombings, Uss Cole, tucking and running in Somalia.....

Wow, they're really bad things..

 

[jreeves]

And why would I need Michael Hodges to distort truth for me, cookie?

I figure if it's a site you rely upon, given how misinformed you are, I'm not really interested.

Thanks anyway.

Here you go, here's another site for you. Since you have problems with Hodges.

http://www.centrists.org/pages/2003/12/1_guest_budget.html

 

[jreeves]

Wow, they're really bad things..

Yeah considering, OBL said that we were just a 'paper tiger'. He said anytime the US suffered causalities they would just run away. Couldn't have anything to do with 9/11 huh? Him viewing us as weak?

 

[BrianH]

I wonder how many presidents have fully understood economics to the T. While a little big incriminating...at least he's honest. I like that in a president...Democrat or Republican.

 

[eots]

I wonder how many presidents have fully understood economics to the T. While a little big incriminating...at least he's honest. I like that in a president...Democrat or Republican.

i wouldn't count that one statement as a sign of his honesty

 

[BrianH]

Fair enough... I guess I shouldn't generalize. i should have said, at least he was honest about THAT. Does that strike you fancy a little better.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight... like earmarks are the biggest problems facing our economy right now.

This is why people like you have no credibility.

Blah blah blah social spending ... blah blah blah.

Stop paying for an unnecessary war in Iraq... oooh, look, an extra 200 million a year.

Yay! Amazing how that works.

And wanna talk earmarks? Let's talk about the bridge to nowhere and remind you that your beloved repubs ran things for 6 years and fed at the trough more than any dem ever thought to all the while whining about smaller government so they could shaft the middle class and feed their rich little friends and corporations.

You really that vapid?

Wait, don't answer that.

Wrong again. the Democrats controlled the House from 1952 to 1994 and during those 42 years controlled the senate all but a couple 2 year periods. We have a HUGE deficit because Democrats created HUGE social programs that are not even LEGAL, you know the ones that take over HALF the Budget EVERY year and are GROWING?

You whine about 200 million? WHAT A JOKE.

 

[CharlestonChad]

Just like every other liberal...

Get your facts straight. If liberals run the media, then they probably know a good bit about economics.