Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The US is merely following along the timeline of the aftermath of a massive housing bubble.
The market creates the most wealth for most of the people, most of the time. It does not create all the wealth for all the people, all of the time.
The market creates the most wealth for most of the people, most of the time. It does not create all the wealth for all the people, all of the time.
who said it did? A liberal doesn't fool anyone by completely changing the subject when he has lost a debate
The market creates the most wealth for most of the people, most of the time. It does not create all the wealth for all the people, all of the time.
You probably should have stayed in school.
The market creates the most wealth for most of the people, most of the time. It does not create all the wealth for all the people, all of the time.
who said it did? A liberal doesn't fool anyone by completely changing the subject when he has lost a debate
You probably should have stayed in school.
who said it did? why change the subject whenever you lose? How will you learn?
Dude, I'm sure you thought it was fine, but I'm not interested in learning by listening to talk radio and reading bumper stickers.
My take, if anyone cares:
1) Repeal Obamacare
gotta replace it with something better
Dude, I'm sure you thought it was fine, but I'm not interested in learning by listening to talk radio and reading bumper stickers.
If I've said anything that was not perfectly consistent with Rush Limbaugh or Milton Friedman please say exactly what is was or admit you lost yet another point. Thank you.
Depends what it is. If its a bridge to nowhere, sure. If it is to pave a road we paved five years ago, OK. But ALL infrastructure eventually needs to be replaced. It's no different than a business re-investing in it's plant and equipment to account for depreciation. So we should be spending more on infrastructure when the economy is weak, then cut it back when the economy is strong.
The underlying problem is that we have too many homes and too much debt. We created an asset bubble which collapsed. This is a "balance sheet recession," unlike the typical recessions in the last century from WWII onward. (The recession in 2001 was a balance sheet recession as well with the collapse of the Tech Bubble.)
People mistake the existence of excess cash on corporate America's balance sheet as symptomatic of the lack of demand or confidence or whatever. This isn't true. A balance sheet recession by its nature is highly deflationary. When asset prices collapse, either the stock of debt will collapse or government steps in to absorb that debt to avoid a depression. IOW, the balance sheet of the private sector is transferred to the public sector. Debt for the government balloons and the balance sheets of corporations and individuals expands. This MUST happen if the stock of debt is unchanged, i.e. absorbed by the government. So savings shoot way up for individuals and businesses while the government runs massive deficits. It happened in Japan and it is now happening here.
There have been several econometric studies which have concluded that illegal aliens are a net benefit to the economy despite whatever they may cost the social welfare system. Even if you question that, it will raise the cost of doing business as it will raise the cost of labour.
And no, cracking down on insider trading in Congress will have zero affect on the economy, even if it is the proper thing to do. I can promise you, no business leader is thinking "Congressmen are benefiting themselves to the tune of $50,000 a year using their position of influence. Therefore, I'm not going to invest $100 million in a plant."
Wrong again.
Nobody said there was never a lack of demand nor recessions.
Government programs mitigate recessions by replacing lost income and supporting demand. .
Wrong again.
Nobody said there was never a lack of demand nor recessions.
You said, as long as magical liberals can intervene there will never be a lack of demand. I said, typical magical liberal thinking.
Government programs mitigate recessions by replacing lost income and supporting demand. .
They can replace income only by stealing it from someone else, unless you really do believe they do it with magic?
They support demand in one place by taxing it away in another unless you really do believe they do it with magic.
The liberal reduces income and demand by privately stealing, taxing, borrowing, and inflating, but wins votes from blind and ignorant liberals by spending the ill gotten gains very publicly.
Its sort of like a Mafioso who lives in a mansion trying to impress his neighbors with gold chains and white Cadillacs all the while hiding the source of his wealth.
Now you know how liberals stay in power and how they prolonged the Great Depression for 10 years.
There have been several econometric studies which have concluded that illegal aliens are a net benefit to the economy despite whatever they may cost the social welfare system. Even if you question that, it will raise the cost of doing business as it will raise the cost of labour.
For every study you show me about how great illegal immigration is for the economy I can show you one about how bad it is for the economy. Illegal immigration has become politicized to such a degree that most analyses are little more than spin doctoring the numbers one way or the other to produce an intended result according to that political agenda. This is a phenomenon is all too common in our society and it happens in a multitude of hot button issues (which I will not name for fear of tossing a grenade in the room).
Now let me address this in sections. First, the argument that illegals do the jobs American won't do is flat out horseshit. When Arizona's immigration laws were passed and farmers had to get rid of illegal labor they were surprised that there were puh-lenty of American citizens lining up to take those jobs and given the unemployment rate that is far more the case now than when I lived in Arizona. Just this summer the Oregon State Fair was advertising for 300 minimum-wage jobs that lasted ten days long. I figured it would be a great job for my teenage daughter. They said they would start taking applications at 9:00 AM on a Monday. I showed up with my daughter at 8:00 AM. There were people camped out in tents to be in line....men and women in business suits standing there trying to get a position at the food court..fights were breaking out to get to the front of the line. The newspaper said over 1,000 people had shown up, some from as far away as Seattle, and they started lining up on Saturday. Trust me....Americans will take those jobs.
Now you raise a very good point about increasing the price of labor and as I pointed out in a different thread, that will lead to price increases across the board. That's why it's vital to accompany this with decreased financial demands for business by reducing their tax burden and the cost burden that comes as a result of excessive regulations and government red tape.
And no, cracking down on insider trading in Congress will have zero affect on the economy, even if it is the proper thing to do. I can promise you, no business leader is thinking "Congressmen are benefiting themselves to the tune of $50,000 a year using their position of influence. Therefore, I'm not going to invest $100 million in a plant."
Agreed...but here's what does happen. When members of Congress are getting paid off by...oh say...Fannie & Freddie or Countrywide they have a tendency to do things like oppose policy that is in the best interests of the economy in favor of policy that is in the best interests of those institutions and hence themselves. They also have a tendency to do things like the following "hypothetical" scenario:
Take a "hypothetical" Senator from Nevada...let's call him Harold Redd. Now he argues that tourism to Laughlin, Nevada is negatively impacted by a crappy two lane highway that Arizonans must take to reach Laughlin. Instead they take the interstate which goes through Las Vegas and why bother going to Laughlin if you are going through Vegas anyhow? So he attaches an earmark to a bill that...oh gives free lunches to the poor...and that earmark sets aside massive sums of money for a new interstate that will run from Arizona directly to Laughlin. Now to make sure that the property owners will sell he proposes offing those owners a price that is incredibly above value. It passes....and guess who they discover owns all that property? Why it's Senator Redd who bought the property at below market value just before the legislation went through. What this criminal has done is effectively laundered millions of taxpayer dollars into his own pocket. That's money that could be spent on other incentives and programs that will help the economy but has instead been grabbed by a corrupt politician.
- broad and often unsubstantiated bromides one could write on a bumper sticker, .
I'm not arguing that corruption is a good thing. We should do what we can to stamp it out. But if the question is "What can we do to get the economy moving again?" eliminating corruption is not the answer. That's something that benefits the economy over the next 20 years but has little effect over the next 20 months.
