The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12

Thread: An Economic Approach that Worked

  1. #11
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by depittydawg View Post
    Yea, I remember Obama's "tax relief". It amounted to about 13 dollars a week. Dumbest thing I ever heard of. Like giving workers and extra couple of bucks a week is going to stimulate anything. At least Bush was smart enough to pass out the HUGE tax relief to the middle class (600 dollars) in one check!
    Here's the deal. Obama, and Bush prior to him, passed economic stimulus packages that failed. Why? Instead of getting the money into projects that would stimulate jobs and create demand from workers (consumers with money to spend), most of the "relief" went to wall street and state governments. The result is pretty simple. Most of it is still sitting there. Waiting to be invested. I agree with Buzz. The Germans Plan resembled an FDR or even Clinton stimulus. It actually created some demand by keeping consumers consuming, spent government money on much needed investments in energy and new industry development.

    All that said, i still think the root of America's job losses is not economic cycles. It is a result of failing trade and tax policies. The middle class is taxed to much. The corporations don't pay squat for exporting their jobs and importing their products. And the Top half a percent don't pay enough.
    Very few politicians are talking about remedies that might actually fix these problems. Certainly no one in leadership positions of either part.
    Interestingly, the cut was stupid politically but very smart economics. Because the cut was only a small amount in each pay check, almost every dollar went to immediate consumption rather than to savings. Lump sum cuts, by contrast, have tended to be used to pay down debt (savings) rather than for consumption and have not produced any significant economic benefits.

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Houston
    Posts
    3,928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YardleyLabs View Post
    Interestingly, the cut was stupid politically but very smart economics. Because the cut was only a small amount in each pay check, almost every dollar went to immediate consumption rather than to savings. Lump sum cuts, by contrast, have tended to be used to pay down debt (savings) rather than for consumption and have not produced any significant economic benefits.
    so marlboro and keystone light stock went bonkers, right???? for middle class folks the money just buffered the budget a tad, the only ones who went nuts and spent the $13 on the open market were, well, i think you get it.....

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •