What would you have done to save the economy?

[onecut39]

With supporters of the free market like you, who needs interventionists?

I know, you mostly support free markets, key word mostly.

However, it wasn't the war that led us out of the depression, but the end of the war when the government mostly allowed the market to take over and relaxed their controls.

War demand is what ultimately brought us out of the economy.

That spike in the early 1940s is because of war demand during a time of high government intervention in the economy.

During the Bush years, we were in two wars and had trillions in tax cuts. According to right wing "ideology", we should have had a sparkling economy.

Instead, only 3 million jobs were created in this country in 8 years. Which were lost at the end of Bush's second term to the tune of 750,000 a MONTH.

The problem is that we no longer supply our own war machine. That was outsourced too.

 

[shintao]

Nationalize banking and energy and abolish the military. Problem over.

Don't scare the neocons into a kleptomania shock. Kind of ease them into it.

I agree with your Nationalization of energy,........not sure about banks. I would like to umbrella all National Security items.

1.Water (Desalination)
2.Energy (The grid/Nuclear)
3.Oil
4.Housing
5.Transportation systems
6.Health Care

 

[ConHog]

Exactly what Obama did. I mean isn't that how yall run your own houses? Oops we're out of money, we better spend more.

Yeah, he's real smart.

 

[loosecannon]

I hear the complaints about Obama, so it's a fair question to ask, if not Obamas way, what was your solution to boosting the economy??

The very first thing I would have done is to extend to all distressed mortgage holders the exact same credit terms reserved for the "too big to fail" banks a the fed discount window.

That would have saved hundreds of 1000s or millions from mortgage default

It would have halted the collapse in housing prices

and it would have saved the mortgage securities from unraveling, saving many of the banks

 

[ConHog]

I would have sent each household in American $1M tax free, it would have been cheaper and far more stimulating.

 

[bornright]

Give every American a rebate on his taxes in the form of a debit card. This will continue for 5 years with a 25% rebate the 1st year and reducing it 5% each year. This debit card would be limited to a product made in America. All stores should mark these products to let buyers know which products could be purchased with this card.

This would immediately start putting people back to work or give opportunity for those that wish to improve their jobs. It would also show appreciation to those of us that do pay taxes. This would bring many jobs back to this country that have left and punish those that did leave. This would not completely solve the unfair trade practices that we have with other countries but it would bring it closer. This would cause American consumers to be more aware of what is made in the USA and embarrass many of the stores into stocking their shelves with products made in this country.

This is a temporary solution and would not be successful in the long run unless something could be done about Corporate and Union greed. Stock holders should be more involved with the companies that they own. Another major problem to the success of this is the bailout of the banks. Since this bailout banks have not opened up to small businesses and weakened their growth. Limiting the money would limit production of products that would supply this plan.

 

[Oddball]

Get the hell out of the way.

How is the government interfering with your efforts to produce more goods and services?

Surely, you're either joking or being purposefully obtuse.

quit pretending that spending is going to help.

Actually, spending is the only way to expand GNP.

Only by the convoluted way the federal gubmint calculates GP.

Printing up a bunch of money and using it to bail out state spending programs does nothing to create real wealth in the private economy.

 

[loosecannon]

I would have sent each household in American $1M tax free, it would have been cheaper and far more stimulating.

1,000,000.00 x 80,000,000.00 = $80 trillion or 50 times the current budget deficit and 5 times as large as GDP

 

[Toro]

I would have sent each household in American $1M tax free, it would have been cheaper and far more stimulating.

1,000,000.00 x 80,000,000.00 = $80 trillion or 50 times the current budget deficit and 5 times as large as GDP

Now you know why Republicans think you can cut taxes and eliminate the budget deficit at the same time.

 

[Shogun]

I would have sent each household in American $1M tax free, it would have been cheaper and far more stimulating.

1,000,000.00 x 80,000,000.00 = $80 trillion or 50 times the current budget deficit and 5 times as large as GDP

Now you know why Republicans think you can cut taxes and eliminate the budget deficit at the same time.

how does that not add to the deficit? Cutting taxes, as we've seen, doesn't imply spending those funds on anything that will spur the domestic economy.

 

[Toro]

1,000,000.00 x 80,000,000.00 = $80 trillion or 50 times the current budget deficit and 5 times as large as GDP

Now you know why Republicans think you can cut taxes and eliminate the budget deficit at the same time.

how does that not add to the deficit? Cutting taxes, as we've seen, doesn't imply spending those funds on anything that will spur the domestic economy.

I was just pointing out the "fuzzy math" as he was making up numbers from thin air. This type of "fuzzy math" thinking demonstrates how many on the Right believe you can cut taxes and eliminate the deficit.

 

[Shogun]

ahh.. right on. I didn't read the whole thread.

On what page was your solution to the question of the OP?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I would have asked the Congress to fund several nation-wide massive building projects:

Rebuilding the electrical grid, including the planning and construction of nuclear power plants; building inter and intra urban railways; and building canals for transportaton of goods/people and flood control.

That is an actually good idea. When the government pays for labor, they get part of theback in taxes, so the overall costs is reduced by about 35% that can be used toward buying materials, etc.

An even better idea a big government guy like you would love:

Just confiscate 100% of everyone's income and have the government supply everything that's good for you and nothing that isn't. Just think we wouldn't have to worry about eating the "wrong" foods, driving the "wrong" cars or listening to the "wrong" TV and radio programs.

Or we could just have everyone work for the government then there would never be any unemployment.

Economy fixed.

 

[loosecannon]

Printing up a bunch of money and using it to bail out state spending programs does nothing to create real wealth in the private economy.

I am sure that your point seems really salient. unfortunately it isn't nearly as salient as it may intuitively appear.

for example: the large majority of our economy does nothing to create real wealth.

But it does great deal to create more money.

And the way our system works creating more money, distributing it, and thereby making possible a larger and larger number of transaction units is the primary basis of our economy.

While creating more actual (not artificial) wealth is a very secondary function of our economy.

So iow you are more wrong than right. Welcome to the assbackwards world of fiat currency and monetarism.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Printing up a bunch of money and using it to bail out state spending programs does nothing to create real wealth in the private economy.

The best way to pay off trillions in debt is with highly inflated dollars.

The next government stimulus program will be to build more printing presses.

 

[Oddball]

Printing up a bunch of money and using it to bail out state spending programs does nothing to create real wealth in the private economy.

I am sure that your point seems really salient. unfortunately it isn't nearly as salient as it may intuitively appear.

for example: the large majority of our economy does nothing to create real wealth.

But it does great deal to create more money.

And the way our system works creating more money, distributing it, and thereby making possible a larger and larger number of transaction units is the primary basis of our economy.

While creating more actual (not artificial) wealth is a very secondary function of our economy.

So iow you are more wrong than right. Welcome to the assbackwards world of fiat currency and monetarism.

I know how fiat money and monetarism work to debase the currency, condescendapottamus.

Just printing up more money can't make anyone spend it on anything that creates more stuff for people to build and purchase, in any meaningful long-term sense...One needs look no further than the housing industry to see this.

 

[Toro]

ahh.. right on. I didn't read the whole thread.

On what page was your solution to the question of the OP?

I don't have any solutions. I just make it up as I go along.

 

[kyzr]

How about eliminating the short-sale of stocks? That way the capital raised by corporations could be used to create jobs instead of having the short-sellers steal the investment and put it in off-shore acounts.
I won't buy stocks until the SEC does something to protect investors from short-sellers.

 

[Toro]

How about eliminating the short-sale of stocks? That way the capital raised by corporations could be used to create jobs instead of having the short-sellers steal the investment and put it in off-shore acounts.
I won't buy stocks until the SEC does something to protect investors from short-sellers.

That's a terrible idea. It is anti-market.

Shorts are usually right about a bad company. The market and the regulatory structure is heavily weighted against the shorts. It is difficult to short. There are structural regulatory and political biases against shorting. Shorting increases information about a company into the market. If it were easier to short, the market would be more efficient.

It also provides an opportunity to make money in bear markets. I am heavily short a sector right now (though I might change my mind tomorrow).

The market is about price discovery, not cheerleading. Shorts offer a valuable service to the market, and regulators should make it easier to short, not harder. Shorts are not the problem. The problem are cheerleaders who think the market should go up all the time.