Spending Cuts could weaken the economy further

[Oddball]

Politicians aren't allowed to administer bitter pills. The People won't let them. They will fire them, D or R, at the next available opportunity. If Obama and the Democrats in 2009 had said we can't afford a near trillion dollar stimulus, we can't afford to try to smooth out this dip, we're just going to sit back and let it play out,

Or, maybe you and your economic arsonists could just get the hell out of the way, and quit pretending that you're the ones best suited to put out the fire.

The best economy in Europe at this moment is Sweden. They're also doing much better than we are.

Maybe if we're actually looking for actual models that actually work, we ought to be looking at that one.

Sweden?!?!?...A country less populated than Los Angeles?

OK...I get it now....You're not serious.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I apologize......I assumed you understood the difference between a recession and what we have experienced.

In 2007 to 2008, we experienced a typical cyclical recession that was caused by normal and expected market saturation. Such recessions last anywhere from 6 to 18 months.

However, due to government intervention in the ledning industry, the recession was exasperrated by the housing bubble issue.

Then, to make matters worse, the presieential campaign INAPPRORPIATELY played on the recession....scaring the people...and giving people reason to "save" and not spend....including business owners. (I had no issue with the candidates campaigning about the housing bubble...that was caused by policy....but the recession was not).

Then, with majorities in both houses, the dems made things even worse with their "pay back" stimulus plan.

I hope that clears things up for ya

NO that's not what you said.

Excuse me?

It may not have been properly articulated...or you may have misconstrued what I said....but I am not a liar....THAT is exactly what my thinking was.

Unlike many on here...I do not adjust my posts to accommodate the criticsms.

Unlike many on here, I try to only respond to what a poster said, or what it appears he said. If you did not say, or appear to say, that governments can control the economy, then fine, you didn't.

 

[Jarhead]

How is life on mars?.....come on do I reallt need to post comments fron the rightwing blaming Obama foe everthing from killing the space program to communist indoctrination of school children?

Im sorry...I thought we were talking about economic policy.

lol...sure Obama gets the blame for lots of things he shouldnt....just as Bush did, and Clinton, and reagan, and Bush 1 and so on and so on.

I thought we were talking about policy enacted by legislation.

Doesn't the right wing blame Obama(his economic policy) for the national debt?

The right...myslef included, blames Obama for signing into law a stimulus bill that was supported by two democratic majorities that contrinuted greatlky to our debt.

The right also blames Obama for signing into law a healthcare reform bill that was supported by two democratic house majorities that appears to most of us as one that will NOT lower healthcare costs but WILL increease the burden on employers giving them reason to be skeptical about growth uintil they see howe much healthcare will affrect their operating costs...slowing down employment.

Truth is.....as for ME alone...I do not speak for anyone else.....I have an issue with any president that signs into law anything that is passed through two majorities of the houses that did not have noticeable bi partisan support.....and I did not see 3 moderate republicans as a sign of bi partisan support for the stimulus.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Or, maybe you and your economic arsonists could just get the hell out of the way, and quit pretending that you're the ones best suited to put out the fire.

The best economy in Europe at this moment is Sweden. They're also doing much better than we are.

Maybe if we're actually looking for actual models that actually work, we ought to be looking at that one.

Sweden?!?!?...A country less populated than Los Angeles?

OK...I get it now....You're not serious.

You're a libertarian for chrissakes. You really don't have standing to mock the seriousness of others. YOUR solution is based in political philosophy that can't garner double digit support in the best of times.

At least my example is a sovereign nation.

 

[Jarhead]

NO that's not what you said.

Excuse me?

It may not have been properly articulated...or you may have misconstrued what I said....but I am not a liar....THAT is exactly what my thinking was.

Unlike many on here...I do not adjust my posts to accommodate the criticsms.

Unlike many on here, I try to only respond to what a poster said, or what it appears he said. If you did not say, or appear to say, that governments can control the economy, then fine, you didn't.

My position is this....

Government can not prevent a recession....recessions are natural and cyclical....
However, government can slow the recovery...

 

[Full-Auto]

Excuse me?

It may not have been properly articulated...or you may have misconstrued what I said....but I am not a liar....THAT is exactly what my thinking was.

Unlike many on here...I do not adjust my posts to accommodate the criticsms.

Unlike many on here, I try to only respond to what a poster said, or what it appears he said. If you did not say, or appear to say, that governments can control the economy, then fine, you didn't.

My position is this....

Government can not prevent a recession....recessions are natural and cyclical....
However, government can slow the recovery...

Created uncertainty is not natural.


After debt deal, economy in deeper peril - Business - Eye on the Economy - msnbc.com

 

[Oddball]

The best economy in Europe at this moment is Sweden. They're also doing much better than we are.

Maybe if we're actually looking for actual models that actually work, we ought to be looking at that one.

Sweden?!?!?...A country less populated than Los Angeles?

OK...I get it now....You're not serious.

You're a libertarian chrissakes. You really don't have standing to mock the seriousness of others. YOUR solution is based in political philosophy that can't garner double digit support in the best of times.

At least my example is a sovereign nation.

Your example is a sovereign nation that doesn't even have the population of a major American city.....After that, they don't have a $14 trillion domestic economy....Nor do they have a bunch of politically motivated witch doctors, running around insisting that the only thing holding up economic growth is a failure to throw enough vestal virgins into the volcano.


Sweden......BWWWAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[NYcarbineer]

"What was the right thing to do in January of 2009?"

The "right" thing to do would have been to spend our one shot at stimulating the economy on private sector growth, not what your progressives gave us with the Obama Stimulus, where they used a trillion and a half borrowed dollars to hire more government workers, keep the ones we couldn't afford and do the usual liberal Don Quixote thing with phantom "green jobs" and high speed rail projects.

The "right" thing would have been to immediately inject capital into Main Street economies across the country by suspending employee payroll taxes and capital gains taxes. Another "right" thing to do would have been to allow American corporations that had made profits overseas to bring that capital here to invest without it being taxed. That wouldn't have cost us anything but because it would have helped "evil" corporations, people like you would rather cut off an arm or leg than to allow it to happen.

There were individual tax credits in the 2009 stimulus. The make work pay credit for 2 years. The child tax credit was expanded. The payroll tax was cut in 2010.

Suspend the payroll tax? That's the conservative plan, while in the next breath conservatives are ranting about the prospect of S.S. and Medicare going broke? Are you aware that's where the money for those programs comes from?????

 

[Jarhead]

Unlike many on here, I try to only respond to what a poster said, or what it appears he said. If you did not say, or appear to say, that governments can control the economy, then fine, you didn't.

My position is this....

Government can not prevent a recession....recessions are natural and cyclical....
However, government can slow the recovery...

Created uncertainty is not natural.


After debt deal, economy in deeper peril - Business - Eye on the Economy - msnbc.com

Thus the second line of my post...

Government policy CAN slow the recovery.

However, in this case, we have no choice but to slow the recovery...for if we continued the spending and increased our debt, it likely would have blown upo big time down the road.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Im sorry...I thought we were talking about economic policy.

lol...sure Obama gets the blame for lots of things he shouldnt....just as Bush did, and Clinton, and reagan, and Bush 1 and so on and so on.

I thought we were talking about policy enacted by legislation.

Doesn't the right wing blame Obama(his economic policy) for the national debt?

The right...myslef included, blames Obama for signing into law a stimulus bill that was supported by two democratic majorities that contrinuted greatlky to our debt.

The right also blames Obama for signing into law a healthcare reform bill that was supported by two democratic house majorities that appears to most of us as one that will NOT lower healthcare costs but WILL increease the burden on employers giving them reason to be skeptical about growth uintil they see howe much healthcare will affrect their operating costs...slowing down employment.

Truth is.....as for ME alone...I do not speak for anyone else.....I have an issue with any president that signs into law anything that is passed through two majorities of the houses that did not have noticeable bi partisan support.....and I did not see 3 moderate republicans as a sign of bi partisan support for the stimulus.

That's the hypocricy of the right. Democrats will vote foe any spending but Republican only are conservatives when Democrats are in power.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sweden?!?!?...A country less populated than Los Angeles?

OK...I get it now....You're not serious.

You're a libertarian chrissakes. You really don't have standing to mock the seriousness of others. YOUR solution is based in political philosophy that can't garner double digit support in the best of times.

At least my example is a sovereign nation.

Your example is a sovereign nation that doesn't even have the population of a major American city.....After that, they don't have a $14 trillion domestic economy....Nor do they have a bunch of politically motivated witch doctors, running around insisting that the only thing holding up economic growth is a failure to throw enough vestal virgins into the volcano.


Sweden......BWWWAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!

They also aren't playing golf when they're supposed to be managing their economy. Ironically since you want to break down government to the state or even local level, THOSE sized entitites would be by your own invented measure of the size where the Swedish model would work.

Vermont has something like 5% unemployment btw. That's our Sweden, isn't it?

lol

 

[Oldstyle]

"There were individual tax credits in the 2009 stimulus. The make work pay credit for 2 years. The child tax credit was expanded. The payroll tax was cut in 2010."

Now THAT is hilarious. The payroll tax cut of 2010 was a mad scramble by Obama to save face because President Clueless and his band of merry progressives had just totally FAILED with their stimulus. It's what's know as...too little...too late...in layman's terms. As for your "credits"? They didn't do diddly and you know it.

 

[Jarhead]

"What was the right thing to do in January of 2009?"

The "right" thing to do would have been to spend our one shot at stimulating the economy on private sector growth, not what your progressives gave us with the Obama Stimulus, where they used a trillion and a half borrowed dollars to hire more government workers, keep the ones we couldn't afford and do the usual liberal Don Quixote thing with phantom "green jobs" and high speed rail projects.

The "right" thing would have been to immediately inject capital into Main Street economies across the country by suspending employee payroll taxes and capital gains taxes. Another "right" thing to do would have been to allow American corporations that had made profits overseas to bring that capital here to invest without it being taxed. That wouldn't have cost us anything but because it would have helped "evil" corporations, people like you would rather cut off an arm or leg than to allow it to happen.

There were individual tax credits in the 2009 stimulus. The make work pay credit for 2 years. The child tax credit was expanded. The payroll tax was cut in 2010.

Suspend the payroll tax? That's the conservative plan, while in the next breath conservatives are ranting about the prospect of S.S. and Medicare going broke? Are you aware that's where the money for those programs comes from?????

I dont agree with the idea of suspending payroll tax.
It is a set number and an expected number...and easy to forecast as it is a number based on payroll...and anticipated payroll.

It is the "undetermined" that stunts a recovery.

 

[Full-Auto]

My position is this....

Government can not prevent a recession....recessions are natural and cyclical....
However, government can slow the recovery...

Created uncertainty is not natural.


After debt deal, economy in deeper peril - Business - Eye on the Economy - msnbc.com

Thus the second line of my post...

Government policy CAN slow the recovery.

However, in this case, we have no choice but to slow the recovery...for if we continued the spending and increased our debt, it likely would have blown upo big time down the road.

 

[Oldstyle]

"Suspend the payroll tax? That's the conservative plan, while in the next breath conservatives are ranting about the prospect of S.S. and Medicare going broke?"

Hate to break this to you, Sparky but once Obama and his crew of academic whiz kid economists realized that what they had done wasn't working...suspending the payroll tax...became "their plan" as well. It should have been their plan from the start but letting Americans spend their own money isn't something that progressives have EVER been comfortable doing.

 

[Oddball]

"There were individual tax credits in the 2009 stimulus. The make work pay credit for 2 years. The child tax credit was expanded. The payroll tax was cut in 2010."

Now THAT is hilarious. The payroll tax cut of 2010 was a mad scramble by Obama to save face because President Clueless and his band of merry progressives had just totally FAILED with their stimulus. It's what's know as...too little...too late...in layman's terms. As for your "credits"? They didn't do diddly and you know it.

Not only that, but the "tax cut" was only a fudging of the withholding tables, which amounted to somewhere around $11.00 a month...There was no reduction in the rates or tax liability.

P.T. Barnum was right...A sucker born every minute.

 

[Jarhead]

Doesn't the right wing blame Obama(his economic policy) for the national debt?

The right...myslef included, blames Obama for signing into law a stimulus bill that was supported by two democratic majorities that contrinuted greatlky to our debt.

The right also blames Obama for signing into law a healthcare reform bill that was supported by two democratic house majorities that appears to most of us as one that will NOT lower healthcare costs but WILL increease the burden on employers giving them reason to be skeptical about growth uintil they see howe much healthcare will affrect their operating costs...slowing down employment.

Truth is.....as for ME alone...I do not speak for anyone else.....I have an issue with any president that signs into law anything that is passed through two majorities of the houses that did not have noticeable bi partisan support.....and I did not see 3 moderate republicans as a sign of bi partisan support for the stimulus.

That's the hypocricy of the right. Democrats will vote foe any spending but Republican only are conservatives when Democrats are in power.

Going back to what I said earlier in this thread...
Our party system has a flaw......seems the minoriuty now spins the intentions of the mjaority...so the majority is forced to make decisions to minimize the spin....noit always what they believe is truly in the best interest of the country.

You, however, seem to believe that only one party does it. (although maybe you dont).

For example...the GOP were not looking to toss grandma off a cliff....they were looking to make sure that grandmas of the future have no choice but to jump off a cliff.

 

[Oddball]

You're a libertarian chrissakes. You really don't have standing to mock the seriousness of others. YOUR solution is based in political philosophy that can't garner double digit support in the best of times.

At least my example is a sovereign nation.

Your example is a sovereign nation that doesn't even have the population of a major American city.....After that, they don't have a $14 trillion domestic economy....Nor do they have a bunch of politically motivated witch doctors, running around insisting that the only thing holding up economic growth is a failure to throw enough vestal virgins into the volcano.


Sweden......BWWWAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!

They also aren't playing golf when they're supposed to be managing their economy. Ironically since you want to break down government to the state or even local level, THOSE sized entitites would be by your own invented measure of the size where the Swedish model would work.

Vermont has something like 5% unemployment btw. That's our Sweden, isn't it?

lol

Give up on the whole "managing the economy" thing, m'kay?...99% of those over-educated windbags couldn't manage a lemonade stand.

And you really don't want to try to make the case that the states are any better at managing their finances, do you?..Anyone with half a brain (which would obviously exclude you) knows that the "stimulus" was nothing more than a giant bailout of their fiscal mismanagement.

*snert*...Sweden...

 

[Truthseeker420]

The right...myslef included, blames Obama for signing into law a stimulus bill that was supported by two democratic majorities that contrinuted greatlky to our debt.

The right also blames Obama for signing into law a healthcare reform bill that was supported by two democratic house majorities that appears to most of us as one that will NOT lower healthcare costs but WILL increease the burden on employers giving them reason to be skeptical about growth uintil they see howe much healthcare will affrect their operating costs...slowing down employment.

Truth is.....as for ME alone...I do not speak for anyone else.....I have an issue with any president that signs into law anything that is passed through two majorities of the houses that did not have noticeable bi partisan support.....and I did not see 3 moderate republicans as a sign of bi partisan support for the stimulus.

That's the hypocricy of the right. Democrats will vote foe any spending but Republican only are conservatives when Democrats are in power.

Going back to what I said earlier in this thread...
Our party system has a flaw......seems the minoriuty now spins the intentions of the mjaority...so the majority is forced to make decisions to minimize the spin....noit always what they believe is truly in the best interest of the country.

You, however, seem to believe that only one party does it. (although maybe you dont).

For example...the GOP were not looking to toss grandma off a cliff....they were looking to make sure that grandmas of the future have no choice but to jump off a cliff.

No, i think we agree on the conclusion. I think both Democrats and Republicans are bought and sold by the corporations.