Obama's Record-Breaking TWO-Years!!!!

[Mr. Shaman]

Especially with the same demand! I'm selling widgets. My costs went up 2%. My expected demand stays stable. I cut production? On what ******* planet?

Wingnuts don't know how to run a business.

....Which explains their skill at running economies.....



(....Big AND small......

)​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

They were there before increased government involvement happened. See 2007.

....And, magically-disappeared, before Obama got anywhere-near the situation.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y04g6OPLnQ[/ame]

*

Now.....exactly WHICH increased government involvement did BUSHCO implement....to sabotage the jobs they created?????????

​

Disappeared before Obama got near it? Unemployment was at 7.7% when Obama was inaugurated. What is it now?

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

None of Obama's policies went into-effect, 'til months after he was inaugurated.

What's your point????​

 

[asterism]

Correct. I will (and am) look for other places to make money, other products, other lines of business. Increased costs discourage that.

::sigh::

Try to dissaciate yourself from your own MICRO situation for a second.

The actual one or the one where you and your little friend tell me I'm lying?

We're talking about the MACRO economy. If AGGREGATE demand does not increase, AGGREGATE employment will not increase.

That is a basic concept, but only as a building block for other economic ideas. Forcing aggregate demand has never worked and the economy is not static. Innovation and greater efficiency is what's needed, not just convincing people to buy more stuff from companies the government picks. Aggregate demand is in fact increasing overall simply because there are more people alive today than there ever have before, but not all sectors are on the rise. Aggregate demand for Pontiac Firebirds is not increasing. Aggregate demand for $40,000 electric cars is not increasing. Aggregate demand for housing is not increasing.

We are in a period of change where it's hard to tell what sectors can sustain long term growth which is why any measures to stimulate demand will fail.

Even if you find a niche to make more money because you can make a better mousetrap than somebody else, the OVERALL economy will go nowhere.

True, but if a few hundred of us can do it that will deliver overall economic growth. The key is to foster innovation, not try to manage who gets to try stuff with someone else's money, and not to try use the government to pick the winners and losers.

The core problem is not your inability to invest. If there's ******* profit to be made, investment will be made. if not by you personally, then by someone else, like me.

There is a profit to be made replacing small suburban area bus routes with taxicabs and vouchers. Wanna invest?

There's no lack of capital out there friend. The problem is that the masses can't afford to buy the output capacity of industry. Demand is stuck at a less than full employment equilibrium. The market WILL NOT self-correct.

Demand for existing output capacity of existing industry is stuck and innovators have fewer and fewer incentives to take risks. Notice I said innovators, not investors. The market will self-correct that and if the government would figure out a way to stop meddling while still providing proper oversight things would improve quickly. The current model just isn't working and the professional economist contingent has meandered too far away from the basics.

A side note here, which economists predicted the huge economic growth of the 1990s in 1995? The reason I ask is because I remember Bob Dole getting laughed at in the campaign for suggesting that the economy could grow 15-20% over the next 4 years.

I think we're on the cusp of another breakthrough like that, but it won't happen with the 1950-1990 model of industrial production. Let China have it, they need it. The current demand for iPhones doesn't support $60K for a production worker.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

You seem to have lost track of the points being made here

See post 108 dude. Try to comprehend. Please.

The title of the thread is (paraphrased) "Obama's two ground breaking years"

You guys are yakking about macro vs. micro economics. Go take an Adderall and focus.

 

[asterism]

....And, magically-disappeared, before Obama got anywhere-near the situation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1y04g6OPLnQ

*

Now.....exactly WHICH increased government involvement did BUSHCO implement....to sabotage the jobs they created?????????

​

Disappeared before Obama got near it? Unemployment was at 7.7% when Obama was inaugurated. What is it now?

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

None of Obama's policies went into-effect, 'til months after he was inaugurated.

What's your point????​

The point in my last post was to prove you wrong. So can we dispense with the silly notion that the jobs "magically-disappeared, before Obama got anywhere-near the situation?"

Bush deserves a whole lot of blame for our current situation, and I'll never vote for him or other faux fiscal conservatives. However, Obama campaigned (both before he won and after he won) on his ability to make things better. His plans have been mostly implemented even according to him. They failed.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Artificially stimulating demand failed.

I can't stand it. You're a moron! I posted the facts in 108. That post smashes this ignorant talking point. You countered nothing. Yet you will just infinitely repeat the lie.

That's fairly-common, around here.

​

 

[LiberalNut]

Aggregate demand for Pontiac Firebirds is not increasing.

I can't talk economics with you anymore. Aggregate demand for one product? Could you possibly illuminate how clueless you are any better than that?

The market will self-correct

A statement of faith. What use are facts in the face of religion? I might as well argue evolution with a fundie.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Disappeared before Obama got near it? Unemployment was at 7.7% when Obama was inaugurated. What is it now?

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

None of Obama's policies went into-effect, 'til months after he was inaugurated.

What's your point????​

The point in my last post was to prove you wrong. So can we dispense with the silly notion that the jobs "magically-disappeared, before Obama got anywhere-near the situation?"

Bush deserves a whole lot of blame for our current situation, and I'll never vote for him or other faux fiscal conservatives.

...So, we're done, here.

Fine.​

 

[asterism]

Artificially stimulating demand failed.

I can't stand it. You're a moron! I posted the facts in 108. That post smashes this ignorant talking point. You countered nothing. Yet you will just infinitely repeat the lie.

Countered what lie? That artificially stimulating demand failed? It did. There was even a fancy chart the Obama Administration put out making predictions about employment with and without the stimulus. Do I need to post it again?

You're a brainwashed drone. There's nothing I can do about it. maybe some lurker learned something.

::sigh::

And people like you wonder why people like me won't run our businesses according to your ideas of redistribution of wealth, tax increases, and more government involvement in the economy. You can continue to demand and rely on econometric models that have failed.

C+I+G+-X=GDP is not enough to create Microsoft, FedEx, Google, or JetBlue. But that's the problem with trying to use Macroeconomics as a central planning and management tool instead of a learning tool. The economy cannot be successfully planned and managed.

By your posts you seem to be doing pretty well. Go hire some people and stimulate demand then. I'm doing my best as well.

 

[LiberalNut]

I got the rightie message. The government should get out of the way, whatever the **** that means, and let the almighty entreprenuers shift the supply curve through a technological innovation.

Good plan.

What if no earth shattering innovation comes? What then? What if you can't really plan on these, they just happen from time to time? How the **** could government interfer with innovation anyway? Seems to me they ******* spend more on R&D than anyone!

Not tethered to reality. That's why wingnuts are so frustrating. They simply have no repsect or regard for the real world.

 

[asterism]

Aggregate demand for Pontiac Firebirds is not increasing.

I can't talk economics with you anymore. Aggregate demand for one product? Could you possibly illuminate how clueless you are any better than that?

What makes up the aggregate in your opinion?

The market will self-correct

A statement of faith. What use are facts in the face of religion? I might as well argue evolution with a fundie.

Not faith, confidence in economics. We simply have different interpretations of it. I think the market actions are like gravity. I'm not sure what you think, other than that the last 4 years of fiscal liberalism are all Bush's fault and that Obama's crack economic team deserves another shot since they were incompetent the first time around but not so incompetent as to try something else.

 

[shintao]

Oooops!

 

[LiberalNut]

Do I need to post it again?

If you don't mind embarrasing yourself again, go for it.

You have effectively made the notions..."didn't meet projections" and "failure", synonymous. Congratu ******* lations.

 

[daveman]

Where is the progressive plan?

Unlike you, I have an actual plan! In the short run, stimulate the economy. Build wind farms from northern Texas to the Dakotas. Solar arrays all across the desert Southwest. Nuclear power plants by the hundreds. Unify the grid and make it smarter. Lay thousands of miles of high speed rail. Do all of this on the public dime. the investment will pay off for generations. Pay for some of it with a tax on fossil fuels.

Cut the Department of Defense by at least 30%. Our nation has STILL not demobilized from WWII and the armed forces we have are STILL structured to fight a major land war in Europe that simply isn't going to happen.

In the long term...redistribute wealth. The core problem with the economy is that wealth has been redistributed from the middle and the bottom to the top. As a result, the masses can't consume to a level equal to the output capacity of industry. End the Bush income tax cuts for the rich. Increase capital gains taxes. Bring back the estate tax, in spades. Expand the earned income tax credit. Expand Pell Grants. Expand subsidies for RENT. Institute single payer healthcare.

There's an outline. I can expand it on request.

 

[Misty]

Classic ad hoc ergo propter hoc argument.

Tell me wingnuts, what did Congress do that caused the employment downturn?

Tic tock, tic tock.

Passed a healthcare reform bill. This has and will cost people their jobs.

 

[LiberalNut]

What makes up the aggregate in your opinion?

It has nothing to do with my opinion dumbass. Aggregate demand has a definition. Read a ******* book.

I think the market actions are like gravity.

That's ******* hillarious. care to grace us with the equations for these physical laws? I think the "market" or the economy if you will is a collection of personal decisions. It isn't governed by physics or by the market God with invisible hands. It's governed by people.

 

[Misty]

You seem to have lost track of the points being made here

See post 108 dude. Try to comprehend. Please.

The title of the thread is (paraphrased) "Obama's two ground breaking years"

You guys are yakking about macro vs. micro economics. Go take an Adderall and focus.

They think they are impressing us with their knowledge but it makes me laugh tea out my nose because none of them get it.

You have to run a business not read a book or take a class to understand what it takes to create jobs.

 

[daveman]

If the Democrats haven't done anything, why are so many on the right throwing fits over what they claim are all the terrible things the Democrats have done?

You misunderstand: The Democrats haven't done anything beneficial...unless you're a Democrat special interest group.

So the new G.I. Bill was for that Democratic special interest group known as veterans?

Hey, thanks! I forgot about that one. Good stuff.

Any more, or is that the only one?

 

[shintao]

Classic ad hoc ergo propter hoc argument.

Tell me wingnuts, what did Congress do that caused the employment downturn?

Tic tock, tic tock.

Passed a healthcare reform bill. This has and will cost people their jobs.

Actually it has created jobs, if you are referring to National Halth Care.

 

[daveman]

Rolling back would reduce the deficit from 1.3 trillion to 300 billion, why is that so wrong?

Because Democrat deficits are good.