Why Obamanomics Has Failed

[Mr. Peepers]

That still doesn't address the bottom 1/3 who pay absolutely nothing...Speaking of deflection.

That's funny, they all pay payroll taxes. They all have federal income tax dollars coming out of their paycheck no matter what they earn. They pay state, local, sales and property taxes too. Absolutely nothing? I think not.

This is interesting:

Ezra Klein - Do the poor really pay no taxes?

 

[Oddball]

That still doesn't address the bottom 1/3 who pay absolutely nothing...Speaking of deflection.

That's funny, they all pay payroll taxes. They all have federal income tax dollars coming out of their paycheck no matter what they earn. They pay state, local, sales and property taxes too. Absolutely nothing? I think not.

This is interesting:

Ezra Klein - Do the poor really pay no taxes?

We're not talking about FICA here, Mr. Movethegoalposts.

 

[Mr. Peepers]

A tax is a tax, no matter what it is for. Why should an investor pay 15% taxes on the millions he is raking in, yet I pay 30% (40% if you factor in state and local taxes) on my meager income that I actually have to work for? Hmm? And if you whine "but but... they grow the economy and create jobs". No. No they obviously don't. The tax breaks we are discussing PROVE that beyond any doubt.

By the way, FICA is a tax imposed by the federal government that is taken out of my paycheck or MY INCOME every two weeks. How is that not an income tax? Why do you cons only consider "federal" income taxes as the end all be all in taxation fairness?

 

[Oddball]

Sorry, that dog don't hunt.

Income taxes are income taxes...The bottom 1/3 of Americans don't pay them.
FICA is FICA...Nobody gets out of paying it.

The only one going butbutbutbut here is you.

 

[Cuyo]

That still doesn't address the bottom 1/3 who pay absolutely nothing...Speaking of deflection.

That's funny, they all pay payroll taxes. They all have federal income tax dollars coming out of their paycheck no matter what they earn. They pay state, local, sales and property taxes too. Absolutely nothing? I think not.

This is interesting:

Ezra Klein - Do the poor really pay no taxes?

We're not talking about FICA here, Mr. Movethegoalposts.

Why not? The programs FICA pays for are over 1/3 of the total budget. It also happens to be the 1/3+ I hear the most bitchin' and moanin' about from conservatives. But the fact that everyone pays these taxes "Doesn't count?"

 

[Oddball]

Doesn't count when the subject is income taxes.

If y'all want a FICA cut, I'm there...But the nobody in congress will do it, because they'll drive that Ponzi scheme into bankruptcy even faster than it's going right now....Besides, they need to keep skimming the excess off the top to keep their welfare state silliness afloat.

 

[The Rabbi]

The economy is coming back, just not as fast as we would like. It is not a issue of Doom and Gloom as the GOP wants you to think.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/09/bu...s.html?_r=1&hp

It is? WHy is unemployment remaining stubbornly high? Why is the only growing component in GDP government spending? Why is everything stagnating? And with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts months away things will get worse, not better.
And btw your link doesnt work. I mean like I can't link to the story. That it doesnt work to support your argument is a given.

WHY haven't the Bush tax cuts, the magic elixir WORKED? They have been in place through the whole crisis!

The Kennedy tax cuts were too. They must also be a complete failure since they didnt stop the meltdown in 2007. Or 1990. Or 1987. Or....
Are you really this stupid?
Let's see what happens when the Bush tax cuts expire in January.

 

[Oddball]

It is? WHy is unemployment remaining stubbornly high? Why is the only growing component in GDP government spending? Why is everything stagnating? And with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts months away things will get worse, not better.
And btw your link doesnt work. I mean like I can't link to the story. That it doesnt work to support your argument is a given.

WHY haven't the Bush tax cuts, the magic elixir WORKED? They have been in place through the whole crisis!

The Kennedy tax cuts were too. They must also be a complete failure since they didnt stop the meltdown in 2007. Or 1990. Or 1987. Or....
Are you really this stupid?
Let's see what happens when the Bush tax cuts expire in January.

That's one of them there rhetorical questions, isn't it?

 

[JimH52]

The economy is coming back, just not as fast as we would like. It is not a issue of Doom and Gloom as the GOP wants you to think.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/09/bu...s.html?_r=1&hp

It is? WHy is unemployment remaining stubbornly high? Why is the only growing component in GDP government spending? Why is everything stagnating? And with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts months away things will get worse, not better.
And btw your link doesnt work. I mean like I can't link to the story. That it doesnt work to support your argument is a given.

You need to be a registered member of the Times to see this link. If you aren't you won't...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/09/bu...s.html?_r=1&hp

 

[JimH52]

A quote from the Times article

The Greek government took a major step forward in overhauling its debt-plagued economy by forcing through, in principle, a pension bill that would dramatically cut the cost of Greece’s welfare state by increasing the retirement age and slashing benefits.

While European authorities are continuing to assess the debt situation, the “fear factor” has abated, at least for now, said Peter Cardillo, chief market economist for Avalon Partners.

“The market is finally beginning to realize we are not heading for a double-dip recession and the global economy is continuing to grow,” Mr. Cardillo added,

In the United States, banks stocks also rose, as they did on Wednesday.

I found out today that Warren Buffet is, by far, wealthier than Mister Aussie Murdock. That made me smile...

 

[skookerasbil]

July 6, 2010
Welcome to the Double-Dip Recession
By Louis Woodhill

Whether or not the National Bureau of Economic Research ultimately agrees, we are now entering the second dip of a double-dip recession. This is because jobs are what really matter to most Americans, and the employment situation is getting worse, after a scant four months of getting better.

From a theoretical point of view, another recession is what we should expect right now. This is because both GDP and employment are driven by private business investment, and huge tax increases on both business income and capital investment are now only six months away. However, the oncoming recession is also visible in the numbers.

In terms of total employment (BLS Household Survey), there have been nine recessions since 1950. The current downturn is the worst by far. Total employment declined for 25 months from its peak in November 2007, and the total job loss in percentage terms (5.93%) was nearly twice as great as that of any previous post-war recession. The recovery from the employment downturn has also been the most anemic. If the average rate of increase in total employment seen in the past six months were to be sustained (which it probably will not be), it would take until March 2013 to get back to the number of jobs that we had in November 2007. In the meantime, the number of working-age Americans would have increased by almost 10 million.

It is illuminating to compare the current recession with what had previously been considered the most severe post-war downturn, that of 1981-1982. Both recessions were caused by a sudden, sharp decline in the velocity of money. Although only 2.00% of total jobs were lost during the 1981-1982 downturn, the decline in jobs lasted almost as long (20 months vs. 25 months) and the peak unemployment rate was actually higher than that of the current recession (10.8% vs. 10.1%).

The striking difference between the 1981-1982 recession and the current one is in the speed of recovery. By six months after the December 1982 jobs trough, 79% of the lost jobs were back. This time, it's only 15%. During the fifth and sixth month after the employment trough in December 1983, the total number of jobs increased by more than 1%. In contrast, over the past two months, total employment has actually declined by 0.25%.

RealClearMarkets - Welcome to the Double-Dip Recession



From RealclearPolitics.com s0ns.........the site all the k00ks like to throw out there when the Obama numbersa re falling like a stone in H2O.








Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooops!!!!!

 

[boedicca]

And now we'll see some barking moonbat chime in that the double dip will be BOOOOOSSSHHHHH's Fault.

 

[skookerasbil]

Mind the gap: why the bond markets are signalling a depression
Something potentially momentous has happened in financial markets in the past two months.

By Jeremy Warner
Published: 6:00AM BST 08 Jul 2010

16 Comments

FTSE 100
Virtually unnoticed, the yield on long dated pan-European sovereign debt has slipped below that on equities. So what, you might say; that's what happens when shares go down and bonds go up. But in fact this reversal in the traditional relationship between bonds and equities is an extraordinarily unusual event. It's happened only three times in the past 50 years. Alarmingly, all three of those occasions have been in the past decade. What are markets trying to tell us?

There are two ways of looking at the phenomenon. Either it is an aberration, and therefore a buy signal for stock markets, or much more worrying, it marks the final death knell for Europe's 60-year love affair with equities, and therefore the start of a generalised retreat from risk that will see the economy stagnate or worse for perhaps decades to come.


Related Articles
Britain at War: I was awoken by yells of "the war is over!"
Sainsbury's has performed well but questions remain
FA Cup final 2009: David Moyes good enough to manage Chelsea, says Harry Redknapp
Hold on until Pinewood's star shines once again
Wonder drug that stole my memory
We need shock and awe policies to halt depressionI'm an optimist, so I tend towards the former view, but even I would concede that the situation looks ominous; a double-dip recession in either the US or Europe continues to seem unlikely, yet the odds are shortening fast. If the economy starts to contract again, there are plainly highly negative implications for corporate earnings.

But before exploring these two scenarios in more detail, first some historical context. Rewind in time to 1947 and something equally momentous occurred. That was the year in which the Imperial Tobacco pension fund was advised to switch all its assets out of gilts and into equities. Thus was born, for the UK at least, "the cult of equity".

It took a while for the new religion to take hold, but by the late 1950s, it had become the prevailing investment orthodoxy. Over time, it was figured, equities would always outperform bonds because unlike bonds, both dividends and capital would appreciate with inflation and economic growth. As a consequence, the yield on shares has been lower than on bonds pretty much ever since. Investors have become very comfortable with that relationship and tend to regard anything else as abnormal.

On any longer term perspective, however, it's not abnormal at all. Up until 1959, the reverse had been true. For most of the last century and much of the previous one too, equities had consistently yielded more than gilts to compensate for their supposedly higher risk profile. It was only after 1945 that modern portfolio management turned this idea on its head by postulating that higher risk investments would also deliver higher rates of return over time.


Mind the gap: why the bond markets are signalling a depression - Telegraph





Hey..........Im 50 years old this year............first time in my life I am seeing any news of the possibility of a "depression". But what, me worry? After all, the k00ks say everything is so rosy!!!!!

 

[daveman]

I have never understood why people insist that low wages bring economic golden ages.

Workers who cannot BUY do NOT sustain a consumer driven economy.

As is so obviously evident right now.

Corporate taxes have been going down.

Where's our golden age?

You corporate tools are freakin' idiots.

So taking more money away from people and businesses laying off employees creates prosperity -- how, exactly?

"Not only was the entire national deficit eliminated after raising taxes on the wealthy in 1993, but the economy grew so fast for the remainder of the decadehttp://www.kellysite.net/taxes.html that many conservative economists thought that the Fed should raise the prime interest rate in order to slow it down."

So...you're claiming the government taxing the rich spurred the internet boom?

 

[skookerasbil]

Trickle Down Poverty Economics doesnt work s0ns!!!!


Perhaps somebody can go search the netherregions of the internet and post up an example of Trickledown Poverty Economic policy has been successful???

 

[boedicca]

Many of us predicted this last year when the Stimulus bill was passed and Obama made noises about letting the Bush tax cuts expire. When the government sucks the oxygen out of the private sector and then raises taxes, it doesn't result in a healthy economy.

 

[The Rabbi]

Many of us predicted this last year when the Stimulus bill was passed and Obama made noises about letting the Bush tax cuts expire. When the government sucks the oxygen out of the private sector and then raises taxes, it doesn't result in a healthy economy.

That "many of us" includes 200 economists who took out an ad in the WSJ decrying the stimulus bill as doomed to failure. They were right. Japan has had a decade of stimulus bills and near zero interest rates. They have had a decade of stagnating economy to go with that as government does everything it can to stifle innovation.
In fact Hazlett predicted this as a fallacy back in 1946 or so, writing that government cannot create wealth, only redistribute it. And it will redistribute it to the least efficient parties from the most efficient. We see this even today.

 

[skookerasbil]

Bush was a spendthrift idiot as was his Dad. This guy Obama though..........asshat has no peer in the history of the world.
And the gigantic tax hikes are comin' in 2011 and start up business, those businesses responsible for producing the majority of jobs ( approx 3 million/year in good times) in America will be provided even more disincentive to start up...........thus, 2011 is going to be a fcukking disaster. But we'll just have to wait and see right!!! We'll come back and compare the k00ks predictions for 2011 same time next year!!!

 

[The Rabbi]

Bush was a spendthrift idiot as was his Dad. This guy Obama though..........asshat has no peer in the history of the world.
And the gigantic tax hikes are comin' in 2011 and start up business, those businesses responsible for producing the majority of jobs ( approx 3 million/year in good times) in America will be provided even more disincentive to start up...........thus, 2011 is going to be a fcukking disaster. But we'll just have to wait and see right!!! We'll come back and compare the k00ks predictions for 2011 same time next year!!!

The kooks will claim 1) it was Bush's fault; 2) It's the republicans' fault for not supporting Obama's agenda.
I know that doesn't make sense. But that's why they're K00ks, s0n.

 

[JimH52]

Obama inherited an economy on the brink. It was at the edge of completely imploding. He could have sat on his hands and done nothing and we could have ended up with a recession worse than the Great Depression. His stimulous program has kept this nation afloat, IMHO. The road back is slow and it is rocky. It is going to take a lot of time.

The economy, particularly the housing market, was expanding at a unsustainable rate. There had to be a correction. No one foresaw the magtitude of the crash. I really do not think housing values have bottomed out. But technically, we have been out of the recession for months. The jobs will be the last to come back. Palin and her "mama grizzlies" are praying that it doesn't come back before 2012.

The Dems.....well, the Dems are praying that Palin is the 2012 GOP nominee. She has some much baggage that a wink will do her no good.