Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
8 hours ago.
by jaxspp
rshill7
#1

Letters To Ed :-)

"We've been duped by the Republicans. Kentucky Sen. and minority leader Mitch McConnell in a news conference one day after the election, stated that the single and sole goal of the GOP over the next two years is: to make Barack Obama a single term president. What an arrogant and obnoxious goal and statement. There agenda before the election was to get votes by promising that there first goals were jobs, the economy and health care reform. It seems their goal is to grab power, not to do things for the people that are in need of jobs and or unemployment pay, health care for those that don't have it, and the people losing their homes. This is the same party that wanted the auto plants and their suppliers to go out of business. We are just coming back from what they did to this country, and now we have them back to do the same things to our country again. What a mess the next two years is going to bring to this country. Talk about partisanship." Carl D. Leow Rogers Cit

 
 

Member Comments

Yes, 9 years of lucky. Lucky, lucky, lucky. No thought put into it, just luck, luck, luck. And just an amazing coincidence that the map Reich laid down played out.

While you're at it, explain a time in the last 80 years where America's economy thrived without massive government spending. One of the pillars of your ECON 101 diatribe.

What are you taking a vacation from?

Posted 446 days ago.

rshill7

"Stock and commodities markets went into a two-day slide after Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke hinted that the United States would end so-called “quantitative easing” sometime during 2014." (TheNewAmerican)

"Why We Won't See the End of QE for a Very Long Time" (DAVID ZEILER in MoneyMorning))

"The Fed has articulated it wants a 2% inflation target to be sustained for a long enough period (at least a few quarters, but they haven't said for how long) to insure against deflation. We're nowhere near 2% inflation."

"In fact, the Fed's preferred measure of inflation, the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index, has been falling, not rising, since last September, when it was 1.8%. As of April, the PCE had slipped to 1.1% -- its lowest level since 1963."

Posted 446 days ago.

rshill7

He announced that he is considering easing up as the economy recovers.

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

Starting VACATION!!

Have a great 4th!

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

I thought Fed Chair announced the end of QE, am I wrong?

Posted 446 days ago.

rshill7

"The fed finally wised up and stopped printing money." (Freeman)

No, they did not.

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

Long story short - You can do a lot of things when the economy is growing ORGANICALLY that you can't do when the economy is plodding along at 1.5% to 2% growth.

Proportionality.

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

The seeds of the 2007/8 crash were planted and "government intervention" created the housing bubble.

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

To address your direct point "ECON 101", proportionality has to be considered.

Government as a percentage of GDP fell due to the robustness of the boom. Not because it did not try to grow. Revenues increased due to economic activity, not due to tax increases.

That period is remarkable in that the tech and financial booms were so large and so profound that their momentum was almost impossible to stop.

Much like the U.S. economy post WW2, kind of the last player in the game. Nobody could compete with U.S. tech and financials.

Don't forget that this is when the GSE's were empowered, and encouraged, to start creating sub-prime mortgages,, but that's a whole different story.

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

So, yes, Clinton was lucky. Recovery had started at the end of Bush Sr. last term and momentum built as the tech industry and the financial sector exploded. That started before Clinton had a chance to warm the seat in the Oval Office.

Get your facts straight jaxspp before you start yelling at me.

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

The numbers don't add up. His tax increases were spent on many things, not all infrastructure.

Certainly not fast enough to create the tech boom.

You can't ignore the private sector's role in creating that surplus, to do so belies a fundamental misunderstanding of economics.

ECON 101

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

Wow, really?

Look at the revenue generated by the tech boom.

Compare it to the revenue generated by the tax increases.

In short, Clinton managed to spend $3 + trillion more than Reagan and still generate a budget surplus. Clinton spent far more than the savings from cutting Reagan’s defense spending. How was that possible?

Posted 446 days ago.

So we're calling it luck now. The economic boom was just a coincidence, had nothing to do with the government having the revenue to invest back into America. Reich said the tax increases were specific and the revenue generated by them were invested in a specific way. Of course now the money is sent to Switzerland by the likes of Mitt Romney, not invested into America. How we are better off with that as a country, I have no idea.

Your Econ 101 lesson: "When government grows the private sector shrinks. Econ 101.

You getting my drift?"

Really. Seems like in the Clinton and Reagan scenarios the economy grew for both presidents and government grew. That's impossible under Econ 101.

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

You're right, Libby was a bad comparison but Snowden still needs to be tried, (IN MY OPINION).

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

The point is simple. Tax increases did not create surpluses, economic growth did. Clinton and, YES, Gingrich get far too much credit where credit is NOT DUE.

KUDOS to the U.S. economy during that period.

Today we are asking for more money from the private sector in an economy whose growth has been pitiful for years. Not smart and not going to work.

The fed finally wised up and stopped printing money. Interest rates will start to rise and investment by the private sector will grow. It took them awhile but some lessons, I guess, have to be learned over and over.

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

That was rhetorical and supposed to be funny.

Sorry if I offended you but to be fair you are not very specific in your claims.

I've posted an article that might shed some light on the Clinton years that many people do not know about because they have not studied it.

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

Clinton spent far more than the savings from cutting Reagan’s defense spending. How was that possible? Clinton was lucky. It is true that he raised tax rates on the two highest categories of income earners. But his luck was more important. His presidency fell between two recessions – 1991 and 2001. His years in office were marked by both an economic boom and a stock market boom. Government tax receipts flooded in.

Posted 446 days ago.

Freeman

Federal outlays in Reagan’s first FY budget year of 1982 were $1.794,05 trillion (real), some 22.9 percent of the real GDP. By his last budget year, FY 1989, real outlays had risen to $2.141,36 trillion but as a percentage of GDP had fallen to 20.9. In total, Reagan spent $16.003,7 trillion 2013 dollars. Real outlays in Clinton’s first FY budget year of 1994 were $2.290,0 trillion or 20.6 percent of GDP. By his last FY 2001 budget, real outlays had risen to $2.398,8 trillion but as a percentage of GDP had fallen to 17.8. In total, Clinton spent $19.054,4 trillion 2013 dollars. In short, Clinton managed to spend $3 + trillion more than Reagan and still generate a budget surplus.

Posted 446 days ago.

You don't put words in my mouth:

"To sum up this morning, according to jaxspp, the U.S. House of Representatives is not required to pass revenue legislation. "

Find my post where I said that.

Posted 446 days ago.

I never said it was a balanced budget. Once again Free puts words into my mouth. Is that the 4th or 5th time you've done that now in 2 weeks?

The revenues generated by the bill led to a balanced budget. Obviously a difficult concept.

Posted 446 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or