Forget Econ Stats, Do Americans Feel Economic Exhuberance or Malaise?

[EconChick]

econchick cannot state a case, but that became obvious very quickly

I'm not here to state a case, darlin. Didn't you read the title?

But I'm having fun pointing out the lack of critical thinking in certain posts.

"But I'm having fun pointing out the lack of critical thinking in certain posts."



You mean your lack of honesty and critical thinking?

I keep watching you show an intense ignorance about how the three branches of government work....how an economy works....and how your Kenysian assumptions are just plain wrong. But you never address the Keynsian assumptions.

Me thinks you don't know that you don't know.

 

[EconChick]

You can SAY THAT ALL YOU WANT. Doesn't make it true

One president controlled the regulators that not only let banks stop checking income but cheered them on. And as president Bush could enact the very policies that caused the Bush Mortgage Bubble and he did. And his party controlled congress.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

Yeah, the financial meltdown was all Bush's doing. That defies common sense. AGAIN.

Weird you are blaming Obama for spending that starts in the GOP House but don't understand Dubya had day to day regulator oversight of FBI, SEC, F/F, HUD, etc...


Bush drive for home ownership fueled housing bubble

FBI saw threat of loan crisis

"It has the potential to be an epidemic"


A top official warned of widening mortgage fraud in 2004, but the agency focused its resources elsewhere

"We think we can prevent a problem that could have as much impact as the S&L crisis,"


FBI saw threat of loan crisis - Los Angeles Times
They ended up with fewer resources, rather than more.

Where did you learn this Tabloid Trash writing style? I'm sorry but you can't expect normal people to read it, can you? Try writing like a normal person.

 

[Dad2three]

I'm not here to state a case, darlin. Didn't you read the title?

But I'm having fun pointing out the lack of critical thinking in certain posts.

"But I'm having fun pointing out the lack of critical thinking in certain posts."



You mean your lack of honesty and critical thinking?

I keep watching you show an intense ignorance about how the three branches of government work....how an economy works....and how your Kenysian assumptions are just plain wrong. But you never address the Keynsian assumptions.

Me thinks you don't know that you don't know.

In other words you don't accept the most important part of the failure in Dubya's subprime crisis was the Dubya's regulators BUT that the spending originating in the GOP House is SOMEHOW Obama's fault? Is that the gist you're shooting for?

George W. Bush

From the start, Bush embraced a governing philosophy of deregulation. That trickled down to federal oversight agencies, which in turn eased off on banks and mortgage brokers

SEC head William Donaldson tried to boost regulation of mutual and hedge funds, he was blocked by Bush's advisers at the White House as well as other powerful Republicans and quit.

Regulators and policymakers enabled this process at virtually every turn. Part of the reason they failed to understand the housing bubble was willful ignorance: they bought into the argument that the market would equilibrate itself. In particular, financial actors and regulatory officials both believed that secondary and tertiary markets could effectively control risk through pricing.


http://www.tobinproject.org/sites/tobinproject.org/files/assets/Fligstein_Catalyst of Disaster_0.pdf

 

[Dad2three]

Yeah, the financial meltdown was all Bush's doing. That defies common sense. AGAIN.

Weird you are blaming Obama for spending that starts in the GOP House but don't understand Dubya had day to day regulator oversight of FBI, SEC, F/F, HUD, etc...


Bush drive for home ownership fueled housing bubble

FBI saw threat of loan crisis

"It has the potential to be an epidemic"


A top official warned of widening mortgage fraud in 2004, but the agency focused its resources elsewhere

"We think we can prevent a problem that could have as much impact as the S&L crisis,"


FBI saw threat of loan crisis - Los Angeles Times
They ended up with fewer resources, rather than more.

Where did you learn this Tabloid Trash writing style? I'm sorry but you can't expect normal people to read it, can you? Try writing like a normal person.

Can't refute FACTUAL DATA. Got it


The economists’ conclusion: “In the context of our model and according to this evidence, regulatory rather than monetary-policy failures are largely to blame for the occurrence and the severity of the Great Recession.”


Was it easy money or easy regulation that caused the housing bubble? | AEIdeas


WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST. ONE DUBYA CHEERED ON IN THE US

 

[EconChick]

Which policies? State your case.

Oh Jesus, the ones that are repeated over and over and over on this board....on dozens of threads. Mostly big spending is a good summary of them. If you don't know it now, you never will.

Repeat After Me: Obama Cut the Deficit and Slowed Spending to Lowest Level in 50 Years

CBO reported in January, 2009 that the federal budget deficit for that fiscal year, which began on October 1, 2008, was already $1.2 trillion. President Obama's additional '09 spending added another $200 billion to the deficit, bringing the total to $1.412 trillion. Unprecedented and huge, but given the enormity of the financial crisis and the depth of the recession, there weren't many other options on the table. Add two wars into the mix and there you go.

Bob Cesca: Repeat After Me: Obama Cut the Deficit and Slowed Spending to Lowest Level in 50 Years

You keep throwing those Keynsian sources out there like I'm going to all of a sudden think they're credible.

This is like watching the Soviets during the Cold War plant pieces in various media around the world, then sit back and watch how many dumbasses would slurp it right up. How many would not question the source.

Oh wait, Obama did a lot of that in the 80s. Dear Lord he was a gullible idiot when it came to foreign affairs.

 

[EconChick]

Weird you are blaming Obama for spending that starts in the GOP House but don't understand Dubya had day to day regulator oversight of FBI, SEC, F/F, HUD, etc...


Bush drive for home ownership fueled housing bubble

FBI saw threat of loan crisis

"It has the potential to be an epidemic"


A top official warned of widening mortgage fraud in 2004, but the agency focused its resources elsewhere

"We think we can prevent a problem that could have as much impact as the S&L crisis,"


FBI saw threat of loan crisis - Los Angeles Times
They ended up with fewer resources, rather than more.

Where did you learn this Tabloid Trash writing style? I'm sorry but you can't expect normal people to read it, can you? Try writing like a normal person.

Can't refute FACTUAL DATA. Got it


The economists’ conclusion: “In the context of our model and according to this evidence, regulatory rather than monetary-policy failures are largely to blame for the occurrence and the severity of the Great Recession.”


Was it easy money or easy regulation that caused the housing bubble? | AEIdeas


WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST. ONE DUBYA CHEERED ON IN THE US

Facts?? You have a lot of tabloid headlines.

That's akin to if I started posting like this and expecting you to know what I meant:

lksajeri000 kasnfskjadisi kkkksaiwiKKE
KSKIITII
KSKDKKDKD

A
KDKFODFOAS
G

 

[Dad2three]

Oh Jesus, the ones that are repeated over and over and over on this board....on dozens of threads. Mostly big spending is a good summary of them. If you don't know it now, you never will.

Repeat After Me: Obama Cut the Deficit and Slowed Spending to Lowest Level in 50 Years

CBO reported in January, 2009 that the federal budget deficit for that fiscal year, which began on October 1, 2008, was already $1.2 trillion. President Obama's additional '09 spending added another $200 billion to the deficit, bringing the total to $1.412 trillion. Unprecedented and huge, but given the enormity of the financial crisis and the depth of the recession, there weren't many other options on the table. Add two wars into the mix and there you go.

Bob Cesca: Repeat After Me: Obama Cut the Deficit and Slowed Spending to Lowest Level in 50 Years

You keep throwing those Keynsian sources out there like I'm going to all of a sudden think they're credible.

This is like watching the Soviets during the Cold War plant pieces in various media around the world, then sit back and watch how many dumbasses would slurp it right up. How many would not question the source.

Oh wait, Obama did a lot of that in the 80s. Dear Lord he was a gullible idiot when it came to foreign affairs.

Yes, Mises and AEI are KNOWN hot beds for Keynes *shaking head*

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person", short for argumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.

 

[Dad2three]

Where did you learn this Tabloid Trash writing style? I'm sorry but you can't expect normal people to read it, can you? Try writing like a normal person.

Can't refute FACTUAL DATA. Got it


The economists’ conclusion: “In the context of our model and according to this evidence, regulatory rather than monetary-policy failures are largely to blame for the occurrence and the severity of the Great Recession.”


Was it easy money or easy regulation that caused the housing bubble? | AEIdeas


WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST. ONE DUBYA CHEERED ON IN THE US

Facts?? You have a lot of tabloid headlines.

That's akin to if I started posting like this and expecting you to know what I meant:

lksajeri000 kasnfskjadisi kkkksaiwiKKE
KSKIITII
KSKDKKDKD

A
KDKFODFOAS
G

Bubbette, I get it without your last post, you're a moron. Nothing strange there, you're a conservative, conservatives are NEVER on the correct side of history

 

[EconChick]

Weird you are blaming Obama for spending that starts in the GOP House but don't understand Dubya had day to day regulator oversight of FBI, SEC, F/F, HUD, etc...


Bush drive for home ownership fueled housing bubble

FBI saw threat of loan crisis

"It has the potential to be an epidemic"


A top official warned of widening mortgage fraud in 2004, but the agency focused its resources elsewhere

"We think we can prevent a problem that could have as much impact as the S&L crisis,"


FBI saw threat of loan crisis - Los Angeles Times
They ended up with fewer resources, rather than more.

Where did you learn this Tabloid Trash writing style? I'm sorry but you can't expect normal people to read it, can you? Try writing like a normal person.

Can't refute FACTUAL DATA. Got it


The economists’ conclusion: “In the context of our model and according to this evidence, regulatory rather than monetary-policy failures are largely to blame for the occurrence and the severity of the Great Recession.”


Was it easy money or easy regulation that caused the housing bubble? | AEIdeas


WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST. ONE DUBYA CHEERED ON IN THE US

And once again you fail to address my point that Keynsians dominate academia and the media.

So wow, you found yet another Keynsian idiot's theory.

Do you even know what I'm implying when I dis your Keynsian sources?

 

[EconChick]

Can't refute FACTUAL DATA. Got it


The economists’ conclusion: “In the context of our model and according to this evidence, regulatory rather than monetary-policy failures are largely to blame for the occurrence and the severity of the Great Recession.”


Was it easy money or easy regulation that caused the housing bubble? | AEIdeas


WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST. ONE DUBYA CHEERED ON IN THE US

Facts?? You have a lot of tabloid headlines.

That's akin to if I started posting like this and expecting you to know what I meant:

lksajeri000 kasnfskjadisi kkkksaiwiKKE
KSKIITII
KSKDKKDKD

A
KDKFODFOAS
G

Bubbette, I get it without your last post, you're a moron. Nothing strange there, you're a conservative, conservatives are NEVER on the correct side of history

You're fun. Was I a moron when I was a liberal in my youth? LMAO.

 

[Londoner]

In the last century 65 years there have been two sustained economic booms.

ECONOMIC BOOM 1
The Postwar Years. This was defined by a compromise between capital and labor. Put simply, the American workers were the highest paid in history, and their cost of living was kept affordable. The historically singular wealth of the "99%" translated into unprecedented consumer demand. This is why the period from 1945 to 1973 was our greatest economic growth.

But then came the oil shocks of the 70s, followed by inflation and then stagflation (high prices and high unemployment). This gave the Right an opening.

ECONOMIC BOOM 2
Reaganomics. The second boom of the past 65 years happened from 1980 to 2000. (FYI: yes, within each boom there were short lived recessions). The Reagan Boom was based on the unwinding postwar Keynesianism, specifically: massive tax cuts, deregulation and cheaper labor costs (by breaking unions, cutting benefits and shipping jobs to China so our capitalists could cut their cost of production). Reagan said that by lowering the cost of capital investment (i.e., lowering taxes, labor costs and costly regulations) we would see more investment, hence economic growth. And yes, we did see economic growth, but Reaganomics played a terrible trick on the American People. As high paying jobs were shipped to cheaper labor markets in places like China, Reaganomics, to make up for lost wages/jobs, expanded the credit system. That is to say, the impressive economic growth of the 80s and 90s was largely fueled by the expansion of DEBT. (And now we are paying the price: the American consumer - after the greatest borrowing orgy in world history - is finally tapped out; he can no longer consume significantly in the aggregate to drive economic growth. Worse: he is too indebted, after 30 years of borrowing, to borrow at sufficient levels to drive economic growth through consumption.)

You get this right? You understand why Reaganomics and Clintonomics expanded credit to American families as jobs were shipped to China? Remember the 80's when, all of the sudden, Americans started receiving several credit card offers a week? Historians now recognize this period as a transition from wage-based consumption to debt-based consumption.

The malaise we feel is only logical because several generations of Americans are now living the consequences of 3 decades of chronic borrowing.

Reaganomics/Clintonomics - by supporting the flight of capital (jobs) to the 3rd world - dug our grave. We don't make anything save financial gimmicks so that Americans can pull out their credit cards and go to shopping malls in order to buy "made in China" products.

One day Americans are going to realize that "Morning in America" was brought to you by American Express, MasterCard and Visa.

In order to give our capitalists cheaper labor and higher profits, we cannibalized middle class jobs. And we tried to fix the loss of jobs with credit (debt). And it worked really well for a couple decades. Debt based economic growth is awesome . . . until it's not.

 

[EconChick]

Repeat After Me: Obama Cut the Deficit and Slowed Spending to Lowest Level in 50 Years

CBO reported in January, 2009 that the federal budget deficit for that fiscal year, which began on October 1, 2008, was already $1.2 trillion. President Obama's additional '09 spending added another $200 billion to the deficit, bringing the total to $1.412 trillion. Unprecedented and huge, but given the enormity of the financial crisis and the depth of the recession, there weren't many other options on the table. Add two wars into the mix and there you go.

Bob Cesca: Repeat After Me: Obama Cut the Deficit and Slowed Spending to Lowest Level in 50 Years

You keep throwing those Keynsian sources out there like I'm going to all of a sudden think they're credible.

This is like watching the Soviets during the Cold War plant pieces in various media around the world, then sit back and watch how many dumbasses would slurp it right up. How many would not question the source.

Oh wait, Obama did a lot of that in the 80s. Dear Lord he was a gullible idiot when it came to foreign affairs.

Yes, Mises and AEI are KNOWN hot beds for Keynes *shaking head*

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person", short for argumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.

You're so full of shit, D2. This is out of that liberal rag, the Huff and Puff Post. Couldn't be more dif than the American Enterprise Institute.

You were looking in the mirror when you typed ad hom.

 

[EconChick]

In the last century 65 years there have been two sustained economic booms.

ECONOMIC BOOM 1
The Postwar Years. This was defined by a compromise between capital and labor. Put simply, the American workers were the highest paid in history, and their cost of living was kept affordable. The historically singular wealth of the "99%" translated into unprecedented consumer demand. This is why the period from 1945 to 1973 was our greatest economic growth.

But then came the oil shocks of the 70s, followed by inflation and then stagflation (high prices and high unemployment). This gave the Right an opening.

ECONOMIC BOOM 2
Reaganomics. The second boom of the past 65 years happened from 1980 to 2000. (FYI: yes, within each boom there were short lived recessions). The Reagan Boom was based on the unwinding of the postwar Keynesianism that worked so effectively from 1945-73. It was based on massive tax cuts, deregulation of business and cheaper labor costs (by breaking unions, cutting benefits and shipping jobs to China so our capitalists could cut their cost of production). Reagan said that by lowering the cost of capital investment (i.e., lowering taxes, labor costs and costly regulations) we would see more investment, hence economic growth. And yes, we did see economic growth, but Reaganomics played a terrible trick on the American People. As high paying jobs were shipped to cheaper labor markets in places like China, Reaganomics replaced high wages/benefits with an aggressive expansion of credit. That is to say, the impressive economic growth of the 80s and 90s was largely fueled by the expansion of DEBT. (And now we are paying the price)

You get this right? You understand why Reaganomics and Clintonomics expanded credit to American families as jobs were shipped to China? Remember the 80's when all of the sudden Americans started receiving several credit card offers a week?

The malaise we feel is only logical after several generations of American families are now living the consequences of 3 decades of debt-based spending.

Reaganomics/Clintonomics - by supporting the flight of capital (jobs) to the 3rd world - dug our grave.

One day Americans are going to realize that "Morning in America" was brought to you by American Express, MasterCard and Visa.

In order to give our capitalists cheaper labor and higher profits, we cannibalized middle class jobs. And we tried to fix the loss of jobs with credit (debt). And it worked really well for a couple decades. Debt based economic growth is awesome . . . until it's not.

Londoner, you make some good points (esp about credit) but you also make some statements that undermine you somewhat. When you say "postwar Keynesianism that worked so effectively from 1945-73," it didn't work so effectively at all. The 70s were the most stagnant in decades....because of Keynsian policies.

 

[Dad2three]

Where did you learn this Tabloid Trash writing style? I'm sorry but you can't expect normal people to read it, can you? Try writing like a normal person.

Can't refute FACTUAL DATA. Got it


The economists’ conclusion: “In the context of our model and according to this evidence, regulatory rather than monetary-policy failures are largely to blame for the occurrence and the severity of the Great Recession.”


Was it easy money or easy regulation that caused the housing bubble? | AEIdeas


WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST. ONE DUBYA CHEERED ON IN THE US

And once again you fail to address my point that Keynsians dominate academia and the media.

So wow, you found yet another Keynsian idiot's theory.

Do you even know what I'm implying when I dis your Keynsian sources?

Yeah, it was Keynes who cheered on the Banksters WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST. Oh wait, no that was Dubya

 

[Moonglow]

I don't know about the area you live in, but in my area people are working and living....They are hiring and need skilled workers along with general laborers, professional positions are in need of people to fill positions. It's good where I live and people are filling restaurants, shopping malls, bars, the streets are packed with spenders and visitors, vacationers, campers, canoeist, and the lakes are loaded with boats....It's great to be here and vibrant with activity.. It's a hell of a lot better than 2008 when the day was darkened by gloom and doom.....
carry on pragmatics, cynics and naysayers...It's your Constitutional right and you get to enjoy what many in the world do without....the glass is half full, not half empty...

See The Glass Half Full Or Empty? Why Optimists Are Happier, Healthier & Wealthier!

See The Glass Half Full Or Empty? Why Optimists Are Happier, Healthier & Wealthier! - Forbes

By the vie, the veggie garden is doing great this year and the harvest is most bountiful....

 

[Dad2three]

In the last century 65 years there have been two sustained economic booms.

ECONOMIC BOOM 1
The Postwar Years. This was defined by a compromise between capital and labor. Put simply, the American workers were the highest paid in history, and their cost of living was kept affordable. The historically singular wealth of the "99%" translated into unprecedented consumer demand. This is why the period from 1945 to 1973 was our greatest economic growth.

But then came the oil shocks of the 70s, followed by inflation and then stagflation (high prices and high unemployment). This gave the Right an opening.

ECONOMIC BOOM 2
Reaganomics. The second boom of the past 65 years happened from 1980 to 2000. (FYI: yes, within each boom there were short lived recessions). The Reagan Boom was based on the unwinding of the postwar Keynesianism that worked so effectively from 1945-73. It was based on massive tax cuts, deregulation of business and cheaper labor costs (by breaking unions, cutting benefits and shipping jobs to China so our capitalists could cut their cost of production). Reagan said that by lowering the cost of capital investment (i.e., lowering taxes, labor costs and costly regulations) we would see more investment, hence economic growth. And yes, we did see economic growth, but Reaganomics played a terrible trick on the American People. As high paying jobs were shipped to cheaper labor markets in places like China, Reaganomics replaced high wages/benefits with an aggressive expansion of credit. That is to say, the impressive economic growth of the 80s and 90s was largely fueled by the expansion of DEBT. (And now we are paying the price: consumer demand is dead)

You get this right? You understand why Reaganomics and Clintonomics expanded credit to American families as jobs were shipped to China? Remember the 80's when, all of the sudden, Americans started receiving several credit card offers a week? Historians now recognize this period as a transition from wage-based consumption to debt-based consumption.

The malaise we feel is only logical because several generations of Americans are now living the consequences of 3 decades of chronic borrowing.

Reaganomics/Clintonomics - by supporting the flight of capital (jobs) to the 3rd world - dug our grave. We don't make anything save financial gimmicks so that Americans can pull out their credit cards and go to shopping malls in order to buy "made in China" products.

One day Americans are going to realize that "Morning in America" was brought to you by American Express, MasterCard and Visa.

In order to give our capitalists cheaper labor and higher profits, we cannibalized middle class jobs. And we tried to fix the loss of jobs with credit (debt). And it worked really well for a couple decades. Debt based economic growth is awesome . . . until it's not.

Yeah, Reagan had a top rate of 50% for 6 years, 10% lower than Obama weird right?

LOVE it when conservatives claim Clinton stopping Reagan's runaway debt (US debt quadrupled under Reagan/Poppy Bush) somehow was a continuation of Ronnie's cut taxes and spend, spend, spend



NO SERIOUS ECONOMISTS CREDITS REAGAN WITH CLINTON'S GREAT ECONOMY. None

David Stockman bombshell: How my Republican Party destroyed the American economy.

The “debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party’s embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don’t matter if they result from tax cuts.”

Cue the FoxNews denunciations.

David Stockman, director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan


David Stockman bombshell: How my Republican Party destroyed the American economy. | ThinkProgress




SURE, REAGANOMICS (AKA FINALIZATION OF US) played a HUGE part in Dubya's crash


The American mortgage market In 2000, stood at $1 trillion a year. The real surge in the mortgage market began in 2001 (the year of the stock market crash). From 2000 -2004, residential originations the U.S. climbed from about $1trillion to almost $4 trillion.

About 70% of this rise was accounted for by people refinancing their conventional mortgages at lower interest rates

http://www.tobinproject.org/sites/tobinproject.org/files/assets/Fligstein_Catalyst of Disaster_0.pdf


IN DUBYA'S FIRST 7 YEARS US HOUSEHOLD DEBT DOUBLED!!!


Neo-Liberalism/Conservatives is/has destroyed the American Economy in favor of the so called "Job Creator"... In reality are "Job Exporters"...


Too bad conservatives get their economic education from Rush and Fox who parrot Heritage Foundation talking points.

 

[Dad2three]

You keep throwing those Keynsian sources out there like I'm going to all of a sudden think they're credible.

This is like watching the Soviets during the Cold War plant pieces in various media around the world, then sit back and watch how many dumbasses would slurp it right up. How many would not question the source.

Oh wait, Obama did a lot of that in the 80s. Dear Lord he was a gullible idiot when it came to foreign affairs.

Yes, Mises and AEI are KNOWN hot beds for Keynes *shaking head*

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person", short for argumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.

You're so full of shit, D2. This is out of that liberal rag, the Huff and Puff Post. Couldn't be more dif than the American Enterprise Institute.

You were looking in the mirror when you typed ad hom.

LOL, You already attacked the MISES AND AEI links Bubbett. Go look.

 

[EconChick]

Oh look the brainless one that can't stop posting in the failed thread. LMAO. Darlin, go paint your fingernails. Maybe it will help you think better.

I am posting in this failed thread in order to remind you that it is a failed thread. It's fun.

And.....you are not paying attention. Nutters tend to be a bit self absorbed like that.

No one pays attention to your dumbass, illogical, incongruent, small-minded, petty posts. But you ARE like the class clown that makes people laugh. You sure make me laugh. You remind me of an idiot savant, except your savant is in online shopping, not critical thinking.

 

[Dad2three]

In the last century 65 years there have been two sustained economic booms.

ECONOMIC BOOM 1
The Postwar Years. This was defined by a compromise between capital and labor. Put simply, the American workers were the highest paid in history, and their cost of living was kept affordable. The historically singular wealth of the "99%" translated into unprecedented consumer demand. This is why the period from 1945 to 1973 was our greatest economic growth.

But then came the oil shocks of the 70s, followed by inflation and then stagflation (high prices and high unemployment). This gave the Right an opening.

ECONOMIC BOOM 2
Reaganomics. The second boom of the past 65 years happened from 1980 to 2000. (FYI: yes, within each boom there were short lived recessions). The Reagan Boom was based on the unwinding of the postwar Keynesianism that worked so effectively from 1945-73. It was based on massive tax cuts, deregulation of business and cheaper labor costs (by breaking unions, cutting benefits and shipping jobs to China so our capitalists could cut their cost of production). Reagan said that by lowering the cost of capital investment (i.e., lowering taxes, labor costs and costly regulations) we would see more investment, hence economic growth. And yes, we did see economic growth, but Reaganomics played a terrible trick on the American People. As high paying jobs were shipped to cheaper labor markets in places like China, Reaganomics replaced high wages/benefits with an aggressive expansion of credit. That is to say, the impressive economic growth of the 80s and 90s was largely fueled by the expansion of DEBT. (And now we are paying the price)

You get this right? You understand why Reaganomics and Clintonomics expanded credit to American families as jobs were shipped to China? Remember the 80's when all of the sudden Americans started receiving several credit card offers a week?

The malaise we feel is only logical after several generations of American families are now living the consequences of 3 decades of debt-based spending.

Reaganomics/Clintonomics - by supporting the flight of capital (jobs) to the 3rd world - dug our grave.

One day Americans are going to realize that "Morning in America" was brought to you by American Express, MasterCard and Visa.

In order to give our capitalists cheaper labor and higher profits, we cannibalized middle class jobs. And we tried to fix the loss of jobs with credit (debt). And it worked really well for a couple decades. Debt based economic growth is awesome . . . until it's not.

Londoner, you make some good points (esp about credit) but you also make some statements that undermine you somewhat. When you say "postwar Keynesianism that worked so effectively from 1945-73," it didn't work so effectively at all. The 70s were the most stagnant in decades....because of Keynsian policies.

Yeah, NOTHING to do with Nixon/Ford wage and price controls or that OPEC thing *shaking head*

 

[EconChick]

In the last century 65 years there have been two sustained economic booms.

ECONOMIC BOOM 1
The Postwar Years. This was defined by a compromise between capital and labor. Put simply, the American workers were the highest paid in history, and their cost of living was kept affordable. The historically singular wealth of the "99%" translated into unprecedented consumer demand. This is why the period from 1945 to 1973 was our greatest economic growth.

But then came the oil shocks of the 70s, followed by inflation and then stagflation (high prices and high unemployment). This gave the Right an opening.

ECONOMIC BOOM 2
Reaganomics. The second boom of the past 65 years happened from 1980 to 2000. (FYI: yes, within each boom there were short lived recessions). The Reagan Boom was based on the unwinding of the postwar Keynesianism that worked so effectively from 1945-73. It was based on massive tax cuts, deregulation of business and cheaper labor costs (by breaking unions, cutting benefits and shipping jobs to China so our capitalists could cut their cost of production). Reagan said that by lowering the cost of capital investment (i.e., lowering taxes, labor costs and costly regulations) we would see more investment, hence economic growth. And yes, we did see economic growth, but Reaganomics played a terrible trick on the American People. As high paying jobs were shipped to cheaper labor markets in places like China, Reaganomics replaced high wages/benefits with an aggressive expansion of credit. That is to say, the impressive economic growth of the 80s and 90s was largely fueled by the expansion of DEBT. (And now we are paying the price: consumer demand is dead)

You get this right? You understand why Reaganomics and Clintonomics expanded credit to American families as jobs were shipped to China? Remember the 80's when, all of the sudden, Americans started receiving several credit card offers a week? Historians now recognize this period as a transition from wage-based consumption to debt-based consumption.

The malaise we feel is only logical because several generations of Americans are now living the consequences of 3 decades of chronic borrowing.

Reaganomics/Clintonomics - by supporting the flight of capital (jobs) to the 3rd world - dug our grave. We don't make anything save financial gimmicks so that Americans can pull out their credit cards and go to shopping malls in order to buy "made in China" products.

One day Americans are going to realize that "Morning in America" was brought to you by American Express, MasterCard and Visa.

In order to give our capitalists cheaper labor and higher profits, we cannibalized middle class jobs. And we tried to fix the loss of jobs with credit (debt). And it worked really well for a couple decades. Debt based economic growth is awesome . . . until it's not.

Yeah, Reagan had a top rate of 50% for 6 years, 10% lower than Obama weird right?

LOVE it when conservatives claim Clinton stopping Reagan's runaway debt (US debt quadrupled under Reagan/Poppy Bush) somehow was a continuation of Ronnie's cut taxes and spend, spend, spend



NO SERIOUS ECONOMISTS CREDITS REAGAN WITH CLINTON'S GREAT ECONOMY. None

David Stockman bombshell: How my Republican Party destroyed the American economy.

The “debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party’s embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don’t matter if they result from tax cuts.”

Cue the FoxNews denunciations.

David Stockman, director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Ronald Reagan


David Stockman bombshell: How my Republican Party destroyed the American economy. | ThinkProgress




SURE, REAGANOMICS (AKA FINALIZATION OF US) played a HUGE part in Dubya's crash


The American mortgage market In 2000, stood at $1 trillion a year. The real surge in the mortgage market began in 2001 (the year of the stock market crash). From 2000 -2004, residential originations the U.S. climbed from about $1trillion to almost $4 trillion.

About 70% of this rise was accounted for by people refinancing their conventional mortgages at lower interest rates

http://www.tobinproject.org/sites/tobinproject.org/files/assets/Fligstein_Catalyst of Disaster_0.pdf


IN DUBYA'S FIRST 7 YEARS US HOUSEHOLD DEBT DOUBLED!!!


Neo-Liberalism/Conservatives is/has destroyed the American Economy in favor of the so called "Job Creator"... In reality are "Job Exporters"...


Too bad conservatives get their economic education from Rush and Fox who parrot Heritage Foundation talking points.

Your knowledge of the Reagan years comes from David Stockman????????? Stockman is a flippin idiot. Reagan gave him a real big boot in the ass from his Administration once he figured that out.

By all means keep showing your incredible ignorance.