PDA

View Full Version : The Economy & Recovery



road kill
08-27-2010, 09:20 AM
Let's talk about it.

Here is a good (or bad) start;

http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCATRE67N3B320100827

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Economic growth slowed more sharply than initially thought in the second quarter, held back by the largest increase in imports in 26 years, a government report showed on Friday.

Gross domestic product expanded at a 1.6 percent annual rate, the Commerce Department said, instead of the 2.4 percent pace it had estimated last month."

There is some spin in the article as well, but my quote which will be attacked as out of context speaks solely to the hard numbers.

BTW--Ben Bernanke will speak on the topic today, watch the market hit 8,500 before the day is over.

Then, when Obama HALTS the "Bush" tax cuts, look out folks.
Like it or not, that will be a hard hit again on the economy and any growth.


Batten down the hatches, the summer of recovery is not going well and it is about to get worse.

But hey, as long as your idealogue is in office, and you got yours, who really cares about this stuff, "EH??";-)



RK

road kill
08-27-2010, 01:21 PM
More........

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100827/D9HRP2DG1.html


Hey, as long as you got yours!!


RK

Buzz
08-27-2010, 02:33 PM
BTW--Ben Bernanke will speak on the topic today, watch the market hit 8,500 before the day is over.


RK


The day is not over yet, but this is where we stand...

Dow Jones 10,113.71 +127.90 (1.28%)
S&P 500 1,060.59 +13.37 (1.28%)
Nasdaq 2,145.61 +26.92 (1.27%)

I'm not saying things are good. Obama and congress did not do nearly enough when they came up with their stimulus plan...


http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9HRTVI82.htm



Stocks rise after 2nd quarter GDP news; Bonds slip

By SETH SUTEL and J.W. ELPHINSTONE

NEW YORK

Stocks are rising after the government reported that U.S. economic growth didn't slow as much as feared.

Stocks stumbled briefly Friday but then recovered after Intel issued a revenue warning. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said in a speech that the Fed was open to considering more purchases of securities if the economy were to deteriorate.

In midday trading, the Dow Jones industrial average is up 106, or 1.1 percent, to 10,091. The Standard & Poor's 500 Index rose 10, or 1 percent, to 1,058 and the Nasdaq composite index rose 19, or 0.9 percent, to 2,138.

Rising stocks outnumbered falling ones five to one on the New York Stock Exchange, where volume came to 380 million shares.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

NEW YORK (AP) -- Stocks rose Friday and bond prices fell after the government reported that U.S. economic growth didn't slow down as much as feared.

Stocks stumbled briefly but then recovered after Intel Corp. issued a revenue warning and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke didn't offer any concrete new steps for stimulating the economy.

The downward revision in second-quarter economic growth was steep, but not quite as bad as economists expected. That helped encourage investors to take money out of safe investments like Treasurys and put it to work in the stock market.

The Commerce Department reported that gross domestic product grew at a 1.6 percent rate in the April-to-June period. That's still way down from its earlier estimate of 2.4 percent but not as bad as the 1.4 percent expected by economists.

road kill
08-27-2010, 03:35 PM
The day is not over yet, but this is where we stand...

Dow Jones 10,113.71 +127.90 (1.28%)
S&P 500 1,060.59 +13.37 (1.28%)
Nasdaq 2,145.61 +26.92 (1.27%)

I'm not saying things are good. Obama and congress did not do nearly enough when they came up with their stimulus plan...


http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9HRTVI82.htm

OK, here is another chance to BURN road kill........

The truth is..............maybe this "correction" was inevitable.

I see people driving all day long on their cell phones or texting.
Every restaraunt is full up.
Cable TV service is in 90% + of households in Milw WI.
Hi-speed internet is in 60%+.

I don't know, seems to be conflicting data.

I know some friends who have lost employment, and others, such as myself, who are on 100% commision or small businesses.

It's not what it was, but I am going out to eat tonight.

My investments are not performing to my satisfaction, but they are making some profit.
But real estate and new home building is not robust.

So what really is going on here??

My Mom (RIP) told me up to a couple weeks before she left that "people are living to high on the hog!!"

Did she have something??
Her and my Dad lived thru the "Great Depression" as they called it.

Look at the "Roaring Twenties."
Then the thirties and forties came along.

I dunno, but I bet someone here does.........



RK

Buzz
08-27-2010, 03:50 PM
RK,

Just don't try to predict the stock market. Every time I try, I get burned. What seems like bad news they take as good, and visa versa... But I can't help but think every day that today I should pull out of my investments and wait to see what happens. I'm just thankful to be working when so many are not...


Maybe Mike "Sambo" can stop by and help.

road kill
08-27-2010, 03:52 PM
RK,

Just don't try to predict the stock market. Every time I try, I get burned. What seems like bad news they take as good, and visa versa... But I can't help but think every day that today I should pull out of my investments and wait to see what happens. I'm just thankful to be working when so many are not...

Yup, I decided yesterday to sell off 2 stocks, today they are both up.

So is Gold.

Go figure........


RK

dnf777
08-27-2010, 05:10 PM
watch the market hit 8,500 before the day is over.


The day is over now, and we're up 164.84.

RK, I'm glad you were wrong.

Got any November election predictions for us? ;-)

road kill
08-27-2010, 05:30 PM
watch the market hit 8,500 before the day is over.


The day is over now, and we're up 164.84.

RK, I'm glad you were wrong.

Got any November election predictions for us? ;-)


Don't get cocky in either regard.
10,150 is not awesome.

You think the market is fine now?
(I don't)

You think the Dems will hold the house??
(I don't)



RK

Marvin S
08-27-2010, 10:48 PM
I'm not saying things are good. Obama and congress did not do nearly enough when they came up with their stimulus plan...


As is usual with this bunch of clowns - they saw a problem, didn't know how to fix it & did the wrong thing. Spending money on non-value added stimuli just don't work.


My Mom (RIP) told me up to a couple weeks before she left that "people are living to high on the hog!!"

Did she have something??
Her and my Dad lived thru the "Great Depression" as they called it.

Look at the "Roaring Twenties."
Then the thirties and forties came along.

I dunno, but I bet someone here does.........RK

I was born during Hoover's presidency so saw a lot of this. My maternal grandparents, legal immigrants from Belgium, raised me until I was 12.

Grandpa used to say when a beginning farmer didn't have milk cows & chickens that they were not going to make it as a farmer. As I got older I recognized what he was saying & have generally lived by that creed. He also passed along a lot of life's lessons that stuck.

The other night we took one of my sons, a granddaughter & the rest of their family to birthday dinner. The restaurant (upper mid scale)was full & we enjoyed a nice meal. When the bill came I paid in cash with a good tip for the waitress who had done a good job. She came back & asked me if I had made a mistake, My comment was "No, I believe you shouldn't be eating out if you can't afford something for good service". She said "You need to tell that to the rest of the people here". I found that exchange to be interesting, it's OK to eat at a better restaurant & I guess some believe it OK to stiff the help.

But, I'll give you one - the 3 of my son's who went to college paid THEIR OWN WAY, they are now all successful business owners. Does that send anyone a message? They were taught to be self reliant by the people who should be doing it, their parents. Could we have afforded to do it? More than likely, but then it would have been our education not theirs, as it was they were not happy, but they see the value today. Hope they do as well with their children ;-).

As for the economy, there is a lot of money on the sidelines, while people don't mind taking risk they try not to be stupid about it. But you still on occasion see the deal go through that will add value :o.

road kill
08-27-2010, 11:16 PM
As is usual with this bunch of clowns - they saw a problem, didn't know how to fix it & did the wrong thing. Spending money on non-value added stimuli just don't work.



I was born during Hoover's presidency so saw a lot of this. My maternal grandparents, legal immigrants from Belgium, raised me until I was 12.

Grandpa used to say when a beginning farmer didn't have milk cows & chickens that they were not going to make it as a farmer. As I got older I recognized what he was saying & have generally lived by that creed. He also passed along a lot of life's lessons that stuck.

The other night we took one of my sons, a granddaughter & the rest of their family to birthday dinner. The restaurant (upper mid scale)was full & we enjoyed a nice meal. When the bill came I paid in cash with a good tip for the waitress who had done a good job. She came back & asked me if I had made a mistake, My comment was "No, I believe you shouldn't be eating out if you can't afford something for good service". She said "You need to tell that to the rest of the people here". I found that exchange to be interesting, it's OK to eat at a better restaurant & I guess some believe it OK to stiff the help.

But, I'll give you one - the 3 of my son's who went to college paid THEIR OWN WAY, they are now all successful business owners. Does that send anyone a message? They were taught to be self reliant by the people who should be doing it, their parents. Could we have afforded to do it? More than likely, but then it would have been our education not theirs, as it was they were not happy, but they see the value today. Hope they do as well with their children ;-).

As for the economy, there is a lot of money on the sidelines, while people don't mind taking risk they try not to be stupid about it. But you still on occasion see the deal go through that will add value :o.

A tip of the cap to Marvin.

One of the best posts I've ever read here.

And to think, no link to support it, just some good old fashioned "horse sense!!"

BRAVO!!

RK

depittydawg
08-27-2010, 11:30 PM
Let's talk about it.

Here is a good (or bad) start;

http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCATRE67N3B320100827

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Economic growth slowed more sharply than initially thought in the second quarter, held back by the largest increase in imports in 26 years, a government report showed on Friday.

Gross domestic product expanded at a 1.6 percent annual rate, the Commerce Department said, instead of the 2.4 percent pace it had estimated last month."

There is some spin in the article as well, but my quote which will be attacked as out of context speaks solely to the hard numbers.

BTW--Ben Bernanke will speak on the topic today, watch the market hit 8,500 before the day is over.

Then, when Obama HALTS the "Bush" tax cuts, look out folks.
Like it or not, that will be a hard hit again on the economy and any growth.


Batten down the hatches, the summer of recovery is not going well and it is about to get worse.

But hey, as long as your idealogue is in office, and you got yours, who really cares about this stuff, "EH??";-)



RK

Well so much for your market predictions for the day. UP 165 I believe. As far as the Bush tax cuts, if they expire, as they were intended to do, it won't hurt the economy one bit. In fact, historical evidence reveals that higher tax rates on the top half percent usually result in a very healthy economy overall. One question begs an answer from those who still preach the "Taxes are evil" dogma. If these tax cuts are so important, why is it that 6 years after they were enacted the economy crashed its worst in 75 years? Not to mention that the tax cuts have remained in effect now for what, 8 or 9 years with continued economic down spin. It doesn't take rocket science to do that math. It's time to let the tax breaks for billionaires join the rest of the failed economic agenda of the last administration expire for good.

depittydawg
08-27-2010, 11:33 PM
Yup, I decided yesterday to sell off 2 stocks, today they are both up.

So is Gold.

Go figure........


RK

I almost sold some yesterday. Luckily I got busy and didn't get it done. Both are up nicely today... Sometimes you just get lucky.

M&K's Retrievers
08-27-2010, 11:52 PM
Well so much for your market predictions for the day. UP 165 I believe. As far as the Bush tax cuts, if they expire, as they were intended to do, it won't hurt the economy one bit. In fact, historical evidence reveals that higher tax rates on the top half percent usually result in a very healthy economy overall. One question begs an answer from those who still preach the "Taxes are evil" dogma. If these tax cuts are so important, why is it that 6 years after they were enacted the economy crashed its worst in 75 years? Not to mention that the tax cuts have remained in effect now for what, 8 or 9 years with continued economic down spin. It doesn't take rocket science to do that math. It's time to let the tax breaks for billionaires join the rest of the failed economic agenda of the last administration expire for good.

Once again you start spouting your BS stats with no links or proof. Everyone is well aware it's your opinion would appreciate it if you would just say so instead of calling it fact. Perhaps you should consider taking another self imposed exile. The ignore status works well but like a traffic wreck you just gotta look in only to find the same results. Total uneducated BS from someone who doesn't have a clue. You are one of the few I've found who cannot be insulted. Wonder why that is? Oh, I can't help be wonder why you blame conservatives for removing the silver spoon from your mouth.

Go train a dog instead of kicking one regards,

Mike Whitworth

depittydawg
08-28-2010, 12:15 AM
Once again you start spouting your BS stats with no links or proof. Everyone is well aware it's your opinion would appreciate it if you would just say so instead of calling it fact. Perhaps you should consider taking another self imposed exile. The ignore status works well but like a traffic wreck you just gotta look in only to find the same results. Total uneducated BS from someone who doesn't have a clue. You are one of the few I've found who cannot be insulted. Wonder why that is? Oh, I can't help be wonder why you blame conservatives for removing the silver spoon from your mouth.

Go train a dog instead of kicking one regards,

Mike Whitworth

Nice try Mikey. If I recall that last time you tried to play this stupid game I provided you with more data than you could comprehend. You on the other hand have NEVER responded with evidence when asked. So once again I'll say it. And perhaps this time you can try to come up with an answer. Or perhaps one of the conservatives who still maintains a thread of logical synapse can respond for you.

If the Bush tax cuts are so vital to a healthy economy, why did the economy crash and burn 6 years after they were enacted. And more important, why have they not worked while remaining intact for 2 years since the crash and burn?

Now, if you can give me a plausible explanation for this, I will be glad to find you some links showing how the economy boomed from 1950 or so; well into the 1980's with the top tax bracket set between 75% and 90%. But this time, YOU need to add some light on the question I posed FIRST.

M&K's Retrievers
08-28-2010, 12:41 AM
Nice try Mikey. If I recall that last time you tried to play this stupid game I provided you with more data than you could comprehend.Which was inconclusive and several years old which I pointed out with no response from you You on the other hand have NEVER responded with evidence when asked. If you check, I've shut your arse down every time. I even offered to help you via PM on a health insurance issue. Never heard a word. In fact, if your smart enough to check, I believe you'll find that you have been blown away by everyone - hence my comment that you can't be insulted. So once again I'll say it. Say what? And perhaps this time you can try to come up with an answer. Or perhaps one of the conservatives who still maintains a thread of logical synapse can respond for you. No one needs help blowing you away

If the Bush tax cuts are so vital to a healthy economy, why did the economy crash and burn 6 years after they were enacted. And more important, why have they not worked while remaining intact for 2 years since the crash and burn? The tax cuts were not the only thing effecting the economy IE two wars, bailouts, overspending, mortgages, government intervention in to every aspect of our lives, illegal immigrants, union bailouts, earmarks, etc.

Now, if you can give me a plausible explanation for this, just did I will be glad to find you some links showing how the economy boomed from 1950 or so; well into the 1980's with the top tax bracket set between 75% and 90%. But this time, YOU need to add some light on the question I posed FIRST. Oh, read your posts. You didn't pose a question, you offered one of your ill advised opinions

I'm getting bored with you again regards. Do you even have a dog and if so what kind? Who trains who?

Mike Whitworth

caryalsobrook
08-28-2010, 01:43 AM
Ok dippidy, I won't be presumptous to respond for MK but in your response to some of your statements. Your statements that the economy boomed from 1950 to well into the 1980's. I guess you don't remember the 7%-9% inflation and the 22% interest rates that ensued during the Carter administration. Were not income tax rates high then? You are right to say that that was generally a period of growth, a good portion during the Eisenhower administration(the best President in my opinion of my lidetime). This country had great ecoonomic growth long before the period of 75 to 90% income tax for the rich. In fact this country has existed far longer with wonderful growth with NO INCOME TAX than it has with an income tax.

you say that the Bush tax cuts were intended to expire in 2011? Do you also say that an estate tax exemption was intended to expire also. I hope you realize that as of now that if you die January 2011, there is no estate tax exemption and the rate goes to 55%. So if you are married and have a joint net worth of $100,000 and you die then the tax on your share of your estate will be $27,500. The good part is that the tax will be the same for all, NO exemptions! The bad part is that it will be exorbitant. Then again it is always easy to levy a tax if you are exempt, even if it is on one's savings.

You seem to say that the tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration were the cause of this recession but you offer no justification for such a statement. It might be amusing to hear your logic as how the tac cuts caused the recession.

The fact of the matter is that the tax cuts had nothing to do with the recession. I wol think it to be common knowledge that artificial housing demand created by gover,ment policy and implemented by Fanny Mae(you do know that Fanny Mae at that time made 80% of all home loans) was the root cause but not the only cause of the finantial mess. Credit Default Swaps were created as a kind of insurance(actually a beton the soundness of these loans), to the tune of about 55 Trillion Dollars world wide. While being hard to understand, they are really not that complicated. They are similar to commodity futures trading. Farmers can use commodity futures as a hedge on their crops if they so choose but others can buy as sell futures contracts also. You can do your own homework on credit default swaps.

There are still subdivisions being built here advertising zero down payment financed by FHA and now 90% of all hame bortgages are government financed. Do you remember that the healthcare bill was supposed to lower costs and health insurance rates?? How did that work out for you. Didn't health insurance rates jump somewhere between 25 and 50% after it passed?? Wasn't finantial reform supposed to lower credit card costs as well as other banking charges? Didn't credit card interest go up 12% since the bill passed. How did that work out for you. That is just the start of what this government has done. If you think this year is bad then wait until next year then I believe you will reall find out what bad is. I hope I am wrong but I think not.

Both Herbert Hoover and Franklin Roosevelt raised income taxes,instituted import tariffs, and incured deficit spending and the depression lasted almost 15 years. I fear we may be in for something similar again.

kBy the way this country started and grew begininning in the 1700, not 1950.

Gerry Clinchy
08-28-2010, 07:42 AM
you say that the Bush tax cuts were intended to expire in 2011? Do you also say that an estate tax exemption was intended to expire also. I hope you realize that as of now that if you die January 2011, there is no estate tax exemption and the rate goes to 55%. So if you are married and have a joint net worth of $100,000 and you die then the tax on your share of your estate will be $27,500. The good part is that the tax will be the same for all, NO exemptions! The bad part is that it will be exorbitant. Then again it is always easy to levy a tax if you are exempt, even if it is on one's savings.

Not an expert in tax law, but as I recall life insurance proceeds are not considered part of an estate that is taxable. Imagine if a young father of two died leaving an estate of $100,000, of which $27,500 goes to the govt as tax. Just owning a home could put an estate at that amount. The whole purpose of building an estate would be to provide for the real needs of those left behind. If they leave life insurance alone (do not include proceeds in the estate), then M&K could end up making up for his lost health insurance commissions by selling more life insurance :-)

Unfortunately, what this law might not take into account is that some of those estate proceeds often go to private charities ... everything from the Salvation Army to the decedant's alma mater, or something like St. Jude's Hospital. So, the govt will also be siphoning money away from social services provided by the private sector.

When we talk about the estate tax, we seem to always focus on the very high-end estates, but there is good reason for middle-Americans to build an estate for the real needs of a family left behind ... like college educations or basic living expenses for small children when one (or the only) income-earner dies.

None of our legislators has to worry about these concerns with their generous benefits as our civil "servants".


There are still subdivisions being built here advertising zero down payment financed by FHA and now 90% of all hame bortgages are government financed.

Like consumers taking intelligent steps of paying down debt and saving more, the private sector of banking realized the error of their ways in the low-down-payment loans. In our area, the number of FHA loans skyrocketed as a result. The minimum down payment for an FHA loan is 3.5% (up from 2.25%), but still the best "bargain" around when it comes to low down payment. FHA has also always been more lenient when it comes to credit history.

I'd also imagine more seniors using reverse mortgages to take equity out of their homes ... thus reducing the value of the net proceeds of their home that will go into their estates. That should make some $ for the banking industry as the baby boomers enter eligibility for that (for those who did act wisely and pay down their mortgages so there is equity to be tapped).

depittydawg
08-28-2010, 12:24 PM
Ok dippidy,
I guess you don't remember the 7%-9% inflation and the 22% interest rates that ensued during the Carter administration. Were not income tax rates high then? You are right to say that that was generally a period of growth, a good portion during the Eisenhower administration(the best President in my opinion of my lidetime). This country had great ecoonomic growth long before the period of 75 to 90% income tax for the rich. In fact this country has existed far longer with wonderful growth with NO INCOME TAX than it has with an income tax.

you say that the Bush tax cuts were intended to expire in 2011? Do you also say that an estate tax exemption was intended to expire also. I hope you realize that as of now that if you die January 2011, there is no estate tax exemption and the rate goes to 55%. So if you are married and have a joint net worth of $100,000 and you die then the tax on your share of your estate will be $27,500. The good part is that the tax will be the same for all, NO exemptions! The bad part is that it will be exorbitant. Then again it is always easy to levy a tax if you are exempt, even if it is on one's savings.

You seem to say that the tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration were the cause of this recession but you offer no justification for such a statement. It might be amusing to hear your logic as how the tac cuts caused the recession.

The fact of the matter is that the tax cuts had nothing to do with the recession. I wol think it to be common knowledge that artificial housing demand created by gover,ment policy and implemented by Fanny Mae(you do know that Fanny Mae at that time made 80% of all home loans) was the root cause but not the only cause of the finantial mess. Credit Default Swaps were created as a kind of insurance(actually a beton the soundness of these loans), to the tune of about 55 Trillion Dollars world wide. While being hard to understand, they are really not that complicated. They are similar to commodity futures trading. Farmers can use commodity futures as a hedge on their crops if they so choose but others can buy as sell futures contracts also. You can do your own homework on credit default swaps.

There are still subdivisions being built here advertising zero down payment financed by FHA and now 90% of all hame bortgages are government financed. Do you remember that the healthcare bill was supposed to lower costs and health insurance rates?? How did that work out for you. Didn't health insurance rates jump somewhere between 25 and 50% after it passed?? Wasn't finantial reform supposed to lower credit card costs as well as other banking charges? Didn't credit card interest go up 12% since the bill passed. How did that work out for you. That is just the start of what this government has done. If you think this year is bad then wait until next year then I believe you will reall find out what bad is. I hope I am wrong but I think not.

Both Herbert Hoover and Franklin Roosevelt raised income taxes,instituted import tariffs, and incured deficit spending and the depression lasted almost 15 years. I fear we may be in for something similar again.

kBy the way this country started and grew begininning in the 1700, not 1950.

First off I'll ignore the intended insult to my handle as I most often do around here.
Interest rates in the 70s- The interest rates peaked under Ronald Reagan's newly appointed Fed Chairman, Paul Volker, not during the Carter administration
Chairman of the Federal Reserve
Paul Volcker, a Democrat,[5] was appointed Chairman of the Federal Reserve in August 1979 by President Jimmy Carter and reappointed in 1983 by President Ronald Reagan.[6]
Volcker's Fed is widely credited with ending the United States' stagflation crisis of the 1970s. Inflation, which peaked at 13.5% in 1981, was successfully lowered to 3.2% by 1983.[7]
The federal funds rate, which had averaged 11.2% in 1979, was raised by Volcker to a peak of 20% in June 1981. The prime rate rose to 21.5% in 1981 as well.
Volcker's Fed elicited the strongest political attacks and most widespread protests in the history of the Federal Reserve (unlike any protests experienced since 1922), due to the effects of the high interest rates on the construction and farming sectors, culminating in indebted farmers driving their tractors onto C Street NW and blockading the Eccles Building.[8]
Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz said about him in an interview:
Paul Volcker, the previous Fed Chairman known for keeping inflation under control, was fired because the Reagan administration didn't believe he was an adequate de-regulator. - In hindsight, most credit Volker as doing the right thing even though it was unpopular. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Volcker
Income Tax Rates - Here is the history. I don't see any correlation between tax rates and economic boom - bust cycles http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php
Ike's Presidency- although I was a child, I also think Ike was a decent president. A man of principle and high morality. His policy's by today's standards would be considered progressive.
Pre- 20th century economics- I certainly can't comment much on this. Couple of things come to my mind. 1st the federal government was financed by land sales for a long time I believe. Tariffs were also used extensively. I really don't know. Most important also is that during this time America was investing in America. We also did not maintain a military budget like we do now. Another change is that corporations were very highly monitored and restricted. I believe The idea of Corporate citizenship is a 20th, even 21st century phenom.
Estate Tax Exemptions - I think I heard a while back that congress had addressed this. Perhaps someone else can look it up. Obviously if it hasn't been addressed, it need to be.
Bush Tax Cuts are responsible for the crash- I never said that. Perhaps you mis-interpreted. What I asked for was some explanation as to why, since these tax cuts have not worked for the intended purpose for the 10 years since enactment, why we should believe the hype that these tax cuts will work in the next few years if extended. To me, the overwhelming evidence says they did nothing but drive up debt. I have become somewhat of the debt hawk over the years. I saw what it did to the Soviet Union and I don't want that to happen in the United States. Especially for the sole purpose of allowing billionaires to keep more of the pie.

So I'll ask again. Anybody care to explain what positive impacts the Bush Tax cuts have had on economic stimulation in the United States? And what specific actions can we expect if we extend them?

I say let them expire. In fact increase taxes on the top brackets, cut government spending starting with the ridiculous military budget, and start buying back our debt.

road kill
08-28-2010, 12:47 PM
First off I'll ignore the intended insult to my handle as I most often do around here.
Interest rates in the 70s- The interest rates peaked under Ronald Reagan's newly appointed Fed Chairman, Paul Volker, not during the Carter administration
Chairman of the Federal Reserve
Paul Volcker, a Democrat,[5] was appointed Chairman of the Federal Reserve in August 1979 by President Jimmy Carter and reappointed in 1983 by President Ronald Reagan.[6]
Volcker's Fed is widely credited with ending the United States' stagflation crisis of the 1970s. Inflation, which peaked at 13.5% in 1981, was successfully lowered to 3.2% by 1983.[7]
The federal funds rate, which had averaged 11.2% in 1979, was raised by Volcker to a peak of 20% in June 1981. The prime rate rose to 21.5% in 1981 as well.
Volcker's Fed elicited the strongest political attacks and most widespread protests in the history of the Federal Reserve (unlike any protests experienced since 1922), due to the effects of the high interest rates on the construction and farming sectors, culminating in indebted farmers driving their tractors onto C Street NW and blockading the Eccles Building.[8]
Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz said about him in an interview:
Paul Volcker, the previous Fed Chairman known for keeping inflation under control, was fired because the Reagan administration didn't believe he was an adequate de-regulator. - In hindsight, most credit Volker as doing the right thing even though it was unpopular. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Volcker
Income Tax Rates - Here is the history. I don't see any correlation between tax rates and economic boom - bust cycles http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php
Ike's Presidency- although I was a child, I also think Ike was a decent president. A man of principle and high morality. His policy's by today's standards would be considered progressive.
Pre- 20th century economics- I certainly can't comment much on this. Couple of things come to my mind. 1st the federal government was financed by land sales for a long time I believe. Tariffs were also used extensively. I really don't know. Most important also is that during this time America was investing in America. We also did not maintain a military budget like we do now. Another change is that corporations were very highly monitored and restricted. I believe The idea of Corporate citizenship is a 20th, even 21st century phenom.
Estate Tax Exemptions - I think I heard a while back that congress had addressed this. Perhaps someone else can look it up. Obviously if it hasn't been addressed, it need to be.
Bush Tax Cuts are responsible for the crash- I never said that. Perhaps you mis-interpreted. What I asked for was some explanation as to why, since these tax cuts have not worked for the intended purpose for the 10 years since enactment, why we should believe the hype that these tax cuts will work in the next few years if extended. To me, the overwhelming evidence says they did nothing but drive up debt. I have become somewhat of the debt hawk over the years. I saw what it did to the Soviet Union and I don't want that to happen in the United States. Especially for the sole purpose of allowing billionaires to keep more of the pie.

So I'll ask again. Anybody care to explain what positive impacts the Bush Tax cuts have had on economic stimulation in the United States? And what specific actions can we expect if we extend them?

I say let them expire. In fact increase taxes on the top brackets, cut government spending starting with the ridiculous military budget, and start buying back our debt.

Allowed Medium to small businesses to make capital investments and increased the deductions.


Terrible idea, that would create jobs!!
People with jobs pay taxes, people without jobs don't.
I honestly don't think you get that.


I addressed this in some detail on another thread, but I am brain dead today, and about to go kill some more brain cells at a Blues band, BBQ, Biker party!!


Later Dudes and Dudettes!!;-)


RK

caryalsobrook
08-29-2010, 01:11 PM
First off I'll ignore the intended insult to my handle as I most often do around here.
Interest rates in the 70s- The interest rates peaked under Ronald Reagan's newly appointed Fed Chairman, Paul Volker, not during the Carter administration
Chairman of the Federal Reserve
Paul Volcker, a Democrat,[5] was appointed Chairman of the Federal Reserve in August 1979 by President Jimmy Carter and reappointed in 1983 by President Ronald Reagan.[6]
Volcker's Fed is widely credited with ending the United States' stagflation crisis of the 1970s. Inflation, which peaked at 13.5% in 1981, was successfully lowered to 3.2% by 1983.[7]
The federal funds rate, which had averaged 11.2% in 1979, was raised by Volcker to a peak of 20% in June 1981. The prime rate rose to 21.5% in 1981 as well.
Volcker's Fed elicited the strongest political attacks and most widespread protests in the history of the Federal Reserve (unlike any protests experienced since 1922), due to the effects of the high interest rates on the construction and farming sectors, culminating in indebted farmers driving their tractors onto C Street NW and blockading the Eccles Building.[8]
Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz said about him in an interview:
Paul Volcker, the previous Fed Chairman known for keeping inflation under control, was fired because the Reagan administration didn't believe he was an adequate de-regulator. - In hindsight, most credit Volker as doing the right thing even though it was unpopular. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Volcker
Income Tax Rates - Here is the history. I don't see any correlation between tax rates and economic boom - bust cycles http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php
Ike's Presidency- although I was a child, I also think Ike was a decent president. A man of principle and high morality. His policy's by today's standards would be considered progressive.
Pre- 20th century economics- I certainly can't comment much on this. Couple of things come to my mind. 1st the federal government was financed by land sales for a long time I believe. Tariffs were also used extensively. I really don't know. Most important also is that during this time America was investing in America. We also did not maintain a military budget like we do now. Another change is that corporations were very highly monitored and restricted. I believe The idea of Corporate citizenship is a 20th, even 21st century phenom.
Estate Tax Exemptions - I think I heard a while back that congress had addressed this. Perhaps someone else can look it up. Obviously if it hasn't been addressed, it need to be.
Bush Tax Cuts are responsible for the crash- I never said that. Perhaps you mis-interpreted. What I asked for was some explanation as to why, since these tax cuts have not worked for the intended purpose for the 10 years since enactment, why we should believe the hype that these tax cuts will work in the next few years if extended. To me, the overwhelming evidence says they did nothing but drive up debt. I have become somewhat of the debt hawk over the years. I saw what it did to the Soviet Union and I don't want that to happen in the United States. Especially for the sole purpose of allowing billionaires to keep more of the pie.

So I'll ask again. Anybody care to explain what positive impacts the Bush Tax cuts have had on economic stimulation in the United States? And what specific actions can we expect if we extend them?

I say let them expire. In fact increase taxes on the top brackets, cut government spending starting with the ridiculous military budget, and start buying back our debt.

I had decided previously that the wise thing for me to do was not to post on this site again. Unfortunately, I must have had a brain fa?t and did it anyway. As a friend of mine has said many times "if you are gonna be stupid you gotta be tough" and I don't think I am togh enough.

I post here to let you know that I meant no insult to you or your handle. I did mispell and shorten it. Other people's handle has been shortened and I mispelled other words in the post. If I meant to insult you, the last thing I would use would be your handle. It is beyong my comprehension why you would have been insulted by either of these things. On second thought maybe I caan think of a reason as to why you might be.

road kill
08-30-2010, 07:20 PM
Closing 8-30-10

10,009.73 -140.92 -1.39%


RK

dnf777
08-30-2010, 07:33 PM
Closing 8-30-10

10,009.73 -140.92 -1.39%


RK

to answer your earlier post....NO, I don't think 10k is great, but its better than 8k. As for the dems holding the house, I hope so, but not for the reasons you'd guess.

I would predict that if the reps gain house control, the business of the gov't will grind to a complete halt as we are assailed with investigation after investigation, in a pure political attack. Even less will get done, so as to make the current white house look as bad as possible headed into 2012. (as if they need any help with that)

The small business bill is being constantly blocked by the minority as it is? What are they--afraid it may help the economy recovery by aiding small-businesses?

road kill
08-30-2010, 08:12 PM
to answer your earlier post....NO, I don't think 10k is great, but its better than 8k. As for the dems holding the house, I hope so, but not for the reasons you'd guess.

I would predict that if the reps gain house control, the business of the gov't will grind to a complete halt as we are assailed with investigation after investigation, in a pure political attack. Even less will get done, so as to make the current white house look as bad as possible headed into 2012. (as if they need any help with that)

The small business bill is being constantly blocked by the minority as it is? What are they--afraid it may help the economy recovery by aiding small-businesses?
Did it ever occur to you that maybe what got done (shoved up our a**) over the last 1-1/2 years may be why we are were we are??


RK

dnf777
08-30-2010, 10:24 PM
Did it ever occur to you that maybe what got done (shoved up our a**) over the last 1-1/2 years may be why we are were we are??


RK

No, because we were in a pickle jar when Obama took office. This didn't all come about suddenly on Jan 20th at 1pm.

As I've said many times before, Obama may screw the pooch, but as of now, this is all Bushonomics falling into place.

You didn't address the small-business relief bill that has been continually blocked by the minority party? What--afraid something that helps the small businesses and therefore the economy may actually make Obama look good for a brief moment? Can't have that with elections coming up. Drive the economy down as low as possible. After all, its all about regaining power, not helping America recover!

Hew
08-31-2010, 02:33 AM
You didn't address the small-business relief bill that has been continually blocked by the minority party? What--afraid something that helps the small businesses and therefore the economy may actually make Obama look good for a brief moment? Can't have that with elections coming up. Drive the economy down as low as possible. After all, its all about regaining power, not helping America recover!
One of the items that the Senate GOP is fighting is the $30 billion TARP-like government slush fund that has been carved to dole out to banks to back business loans. The Senate GOP has been stymied from ammending the bill by Reid. Reid and the Senate Dem's recalcitrance has been such that even might-as-well-be-a-Democrat Olympia Snowe blasted them:



“It’s all political theater. It’s not about legislating anymore,” she added. “You know, it’s scoring political points. It’s all for the next election that’s coming very shortly.”
.....

"We’re not going to be allowed to offer any amendments because the majority is going to dictate the will of the minority on a few amendments. Madam President, this is unacceptable ... enough is enough,” Snowe said.
......

Snowe noted that she has made the extra effort to work with Democrats.
“I supported the unemployment benefit extension, you know, much to the consternation of the minority leader and others on this [Republican] side, because they wanted to pay for it. But I did too, but I knew that wouldn’t be acceptable” to Democrats, she said.

When Olympia Snowe goes out of her way to blast her Democrat collegues for being bullying a-holes who are playing politics, well, you can be pretty sure that they are indeed bullying a-holes who are playing politics. I know whose side most thoughtful independents would take in a political duel between Harry Reid and Olympia Snowe. And we know whose side you're taking, Dnf.

dnf777
08-31-2010, 05:45 AM
"We’re not going to be allowed to offer any amendments because the majority is going to dictate the will of the minority on a few amendments. Madam President, this is unacceptable ... enough is enough,” Snowe said.


Hmmmm...wonder what amendments we're talking about here? More perks and giveaways to Wall Street? Please, let's see them. Imagine that, in the congress, the majority party (the ones the PEOPLE elected) get to formulate legislation.

road kill
08-31-2010, 07:10 AM
No, because we were in a pickle jar when Obama took office. This didn't all come about suddenly on Jan 20th at 1pm.

As I've said many times before, Obama may screw the pooch, but as of now, this is all Bushonomics falling into place.

You didn't address the small-business relief bill that has been continually blocked by the minority party? What--afraid something that helps the small businesses and therefore the economy may actually make Obama look good for a brief moment? Can't have that with elections coming up. Drive the economy down as low as possible. After all, its all about regaining power, not helping America recover!
As of this post I have not read enough about it to feel I know what exactly is happening.

I know that doesn't stop most here (not knowing anything about the topic) but I will wait on this one till I know more.

Yes, sometimes I read.

I have been busier than a 1 legged man in an azz kicking contest this week and last week.


RK

Hew
08-31-2010, 07:16 AM
Hmmmm...wonder what amendments we're talking about here? More perks and giveaways to Wall Street? Please, let's see them. Imagine that, in the congress, the majority party (the ones the PEOPLE elected) get to formulate legislation.
Hmmmm...imagine that you actually look into what ammendments they proposed before you guess as to what they were.

But since we're playing the imagination game, I'm going to imagine how upset you were that the Senate Democrats blocked legislation and judicial appointments when the Republicans (you know, the ones the PEOPLE elected) ran the joint. Yeah, I'm just not able to imagine you being too worked up about it. In fact, I imagine that you were quite happy about it.

dnf777
08-31-2010, 07:44 AM
Hmmmm...imagine that you actually look into what ammendments they proposed before you guess as to what they were.

But since we're playing the imagination game, I'm going to imagine how upset you were that the Senate Democrats blocked legislation and judicial appointments when the Republicans (you know, the ones the PEOPLE elected) ran the joint. Yeah, I'm just not able to imagine you being too worked up about it. In fact, I imagine that you were quite happy about it.


I will do just that.....I don't run my own small business, so I haven't followed it closely, except to hear it is continually stone-walled by republicans. If Sen Snow has a problem, I will certainly pay her respect...she is one of the more reasonable republicans on the hill.

As for bringing up Bush again, you guys are really getting old! BUSH isn't president anymore!! (or so I've been told by many here) But just to entertain you, are you referring to judicial appointees such as Harriet Miers? I believe she lacked sufficient GOP support, and was withdrawn by the president. Sam Alito and John Roberts......oh, yeah, they got appointed.

dixidawg
08-31-2010, 08:02 AM
I'm not saying things are good. Obama and congress did not do nearly enough when they came up with their stimulus plan...


http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9HRTVI82.htm


So.....Congress and Obama didn't do enough, but Bush spent way too much in Iraq?


As President Obama prepares to tie a bow on U.S. combat operations in Iraq, Congressional Budget Office numbers show that the total cost of the eight-year war was less than the stimulus bill passed by the Democratic-led Congress in 2009

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/30/cbo-years-iraq-war-cost-stimulus-act/

road kill
08-31-2010, 08:06 AM
So.....Congress and Obama didn't do enough, but Bush spent way too much in Iraq?


As President Obama prepares to tie a bow on U.S. combat operations in Iraq, Congressional Budget Office numbers show that the total cost of the eight-year war was less than the stimulus bill passed by the Democratic-led Congress in 2009

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/30/cbo-years-iraq-war-cost-stimulus-act/

And if I may;


CONGRATS to President Bush!!


The huge push that Obama OPPOSED is the reason we are able to remove combat troops now.


Let's see who gives credit to the former President for that..........



RK

dnf777
08-31-2010, 10:19 AM
And if I may;


CONGRATS to President Bush!!


The huge push that Obama OPPOSED is the reason we are able to remove combat troops now.


Let's see who gives credit to the former President for that..........



RK


I'll be the first to give him FULL CREDIT for the current state of affairs in the US.

Happy?

Hew
08-31-2010, 10:25 AM
As for bringing up Bush again, you guys are really getting old! BUSH isn't president anymore!! (or so I've been told by many here) But just to entertain you, are you referring to judicial appointees such as Harriet Miers? I believe she lacked sufficient GOP support, and was withdrawn by the president. Sam Alito and John Roberts......oh, yeah, they got appointed.
I'm guessing you were absent from your Constitutional Law class when they discussed all the other types of presidentially-nominated Federal judges besides the Supreme Court?

dnf777
08-31-2010, 11:14 AM
I'm guessing you were absent from your Constitutional Law class when they discussed all the other types of presidentially-nominated Federal judges besides the Supreme Court?

Yeah, I was. That's when they also talked about all the other executive apointees, such as the hundreds that are being stonewalled by the current minority party. Some things are business as usual.

I gave you three examples of SCOTUS appointees, including the CJ, that were given fair, expedient hearings by the dems, and you shift the focus.

Hew
08-31-2010, 11:27 AM
I gave you three examples of SCOTUS appointees, including the CJ, that were given fair, expedient hearings by the dems, and you shift the focus.
You point to two Supreme Court nominations that made it by the Dem Senators as proof that they didn't block legislation or judicial nominees but don't apply the same standards to the GOP minority currently in the Senate who have similarly allowed two of Obama's nominees to be confirmed. Stay hypocritical, my friend.

dnf777
08-31-2010, 11:40 AM
You point to two Supreme Court nominations that made it by the Dem Senators as proof that they didn't block legislation or judicial nominees but don't apply the same standards to the GOP minority currently in the Senate who have similarly allowed two of Obama's nominees to be confirmed. Stay hypocritical, my friend.

Not at all. Its their right to oppose legislation they don't agree with. If they don't think that helping secure credit for small businesses to grow and expand, providing 80% of job growth, then let them obstruct it. They're showing their colors, and that's their right. I just hope voters take note.

Buzz
08-31-2010, 11:42 AM
Not at all. Its their right to oppose legislation they don't agree with. If they don't think that helping secure credit for small businesses to grow and expand, providing 80% of job growth, then let them obstruct it. They're showing their colors, and that's their right. I just hope voters take note.


Don't hold your breath. They're busy worrying about Mosques near ground zero, gay marriage, socialism, gun rights, and restoring America's honor.

road kill
08-31-2010, 12:31 PM
Don't hold your breath. They're busy worrying about Mosques near ground zero, gay marriage, socialism, gun rights, and restoring America's honor.

Yeah, not of that stuff matters, right Buzz??:rolleyes:


RK

road kill
08-31-2010, 12:35 PM
I'll be the first to give him FULL CREDIT for the current state of affairs in the US.

Happy?

Well, you can do that, but my post was about Iraq and President Bush's PUSH that you all were against, but are now willing to take credit for.

What's the word I'm looking for here.........



RK

dnf777
08-31-2010, 12:47 PM
Well, you can do that, but my post was about Iraq and President Bush's PUSH that you all were against, but are now willing to take credit for.

What's the word I'm looking for here.........

RK


I have no idea what you're looking for, but let me remind you, if we hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place, we wouldn't have needed a push, and 4421 American kids would still be alive.

Again, I'm more than willing to give George W. Bush FULL CREDIT for the current state of affairs. Its about time he got his due.

road kill
08-31-2010, 12:49 PM
I have no idea what you're looking for, but let me remind you, if we hadn't invaded Iraq in the first place, we wouldn't have needed a push, and 4421 American kids would still be alive.

Again, I'm more than willing to give George W. Bush FULL CREDIT for the current state of affairs. Its about time he got his due.

Oh, I understand.

Everything that has gone wrong for the last 19 months is Bush's fault.

Everything that has gone right for the last 9 years is because of Obama!!



RK

dnf777
08-31-2010, 12:56 PM
Oh, I understand.

Everything that has gone wrong for the last 19 months is Bush's fault.

Everything that has gone right for the last 9 years is because of Obama!!



RK

Not quite. You've heard me criticize Obama plenty. Just because I don't use childish monikers doesn't mean I agree with all he does. I'll stick to the issues, and skip the silly Muslim, Kenyan, references that have no bearing on the debate.

road kill
08-31-2010, 12:59 PM
Not quite. You've heard me criticize Obama plenty. Just because I don't use childish monikers doesn't mean I agree with all he does. I'll stick to the issues, and skip the silly Muslim, Kenyan, references that have no bearing on the debate.

Well, there is 1 thing we agree on.




RK

dixidawg
08-31-2010, 04:26 PM
Useful idiots????

Why Wall Street Is Deserting Obama



http://www.cnbc.com/id/38933555

Buzz
08-31-2010, 05:16 PM
Useful idiots????

Why Wall Street Is Deserting Obama



http://www.cnbc.com/id/38933555

I think it's criminal that the government plans to tax earnings by hedge fund managers as income rather than capital gains, at 15%. Why shouldn't they be able to make millions and pay a lower effective rate than many middle class tax payers?

dnf777
08-31-2010, 07:43 PM
Well, there is 1 thing we agree on.




RK


I suspect we agree on more than one thing....just to bull-headed to admit it.

Steve Hester
09-01-2010, 08:44 AM
So.....Congress and Obama didn't do enough, but Bush spent way too much in Iraq?


As President Obama prepares to tie a bow on U.S. combat operations in Iraq, Congressional Budget Office numbers show that the total cost of the eight-year war was less than the stimulus bill passed by the Democratic-led Congress in 2009

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/30/cbo-years-iraq-war-cost-stimulus-act/


Ding, ding ding!!!! We have a winner!!!

Buzz
09-01-2010, 09:03 AM
A trillion here, a trillion there. What difference does it make? :rolleyes:

M&K's Retrievers
09-01-2010, 09:21 AM
A trillion here, a trillion there. What difference does it make? :rolleyes:

Apparently nothing to Obama, Reid and Pelosi.:-x

depittydawg
09-01-2010, 10:33 PM
Apparently nothing to Obama, Reid and Pelosi.:-x

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/01/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm

Market is up 250 today. The Stock Market IS the forward looking indicator. No matter how much doom and gloom you guys preach, things are getting better once again under the democrats. One can only imagine how much better the recovery would be now if the Dem's had the leadership capable of confronting the Republican obstructionists instead of placating to them.

depittydawg
09-02-2010, 01:06 AM
Oh, I understand.

Everything that has gone wrong for the last 19 months is Bush's fault.

Everything that has gone right for the last 9 years is because of Obama!!



RK

Not quite that simple. I'd give Clinton, and the Republican congress of the nineties credit for the mess the economy is in today. Bush did nothing to correct the situation, and of course spent money like a drunken sailor. And Obama is following close in his footsteps. Although, Obama and the democrats have managed to change some things. It will take a few years to evaluate the results.

M&K's Retrievers
09-02-2010, 01:29 AM
Not quite that simple. I'd give Clinton, and the Republican congress of the nineties credit for the mess the economy is in today. Bush did nothing to correct the situation, and of course spent money like a drunken sailor. And Obama is following close in his footsteps. Although, Obama and the democrats have managed to change some things. It will take a few years to evaluate the results.

A few years? If you would pull your head out of your arse, you would see the effects of his socialists programs now.

depittydawg
09-02-2010, 01:32 AM
A few years? If you would pull your head out of your arse, you would see the effects of his socialists programs now.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/01/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm

The Stock Market is the forward indicator of the US economy.

T. Mac
09-02-2010, 01:56 AM
http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/01/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm

The Stock Market is the forward indicator of the US economy.
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/charts/chartdl.aspx?showchartbt=Redraw+chart&D4=1&DD=1&D5=0&DCS=2&CF=0&symbol=%24DJI&nocookie=1&SZ=2&CP=0&PT=10

M&K's Retrievers
09-02-2010, 02:57 AM
http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/01/markets/markets_newyork/index.htm

The Stock Market is the forward indicator of the US economy.

Then you better invest in gold 'cause that sucker is going south.