or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › How Can One Possibly Support Obama's Economic Policies?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How Can One Possibly Support Obama's Economic Policies? - Page 15

post #561 of 753
post #562 of 753
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Because you always lose. Yeah. I can see that!


Case in point.

Waste of time.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #563 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Yeah really. That's what I was thinking. Arguing with jimmac about questions not answered is futile. In fact, most debate with jimmac is futile.

That's why I stopped almost a year ago. Really bettered the experience here at AI noticeably.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #564 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

That's why I stopped almost a year ago. Really bettered the experience here at AI noticeably.

Same, here.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #565 of 753
Addressing his ever-shrinking base in NH, "big f____ing deal" Joe let another one fly:

Quote:
"Stop whining and get out there and look at the alternatives. This President has done an incredible job. He’s kept his promises."

One wonders if Obama's done "an incredible job", what would "a sort of OK job" look like?

Quote:
One Democratic operative gasped when told of Biden’s remarks and wondered “why they would pick a fight with the base” five weeks before a midterm election that will hinge on turnout.

"If Democrats, with the White House and Congressional super-majorities, had delivered on what they had promised, and if people had jobs, no one would be whining. They have reaped what they sowed. They haven’t delivered on what they’ve promised — and instead of making the case as to why they would do if they are reelected, they are insulting people."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories...#ixzz10t2tecOj

Sounds eerily familiar. Hmm. Where have I heard those words spoken on the campaign trail before? Oh yes:

Quote:
"We have sort of become a nation of whiners," said (McCain economic adviser Phil) Gramm. "You just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline" despite a major export boom that is the primary reason that growth continues in the economy, he said.

"We've never been more dominant; we've never had more natural advantages than we have today," he said. "We may have a recession; we haven't had one yet."

After sharing that erudition, things commenced to go as badly for Mr. Gramm as they did for McCain.

Hmm.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...tal-recession/
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #566 of 753
I can't wait to see Wormhole's response on this one:

Will 'Clean Energy' Lead to Economic Recovery?

Quote:
Keynesians and semi-socialists claim that "clean energy" will create jobs and net economic growth. From Al Gore to the New York Times, "green energy" is almost religious in scope, as advocates claim that not only will it give us better air and weather, but it also will be a fundamental building block of economic recovery.

To speak out against this is tantamount to treason in some quarters, and people who dissent are vilified in the media; organizers wanting California's recent "clean energy" law repealed recently were attacked by the New York Times. Indeed, it almost seems to be self-evident that a "key" to economic recovery is government "investment" in "green technologies," so anyone who might look differently at this new government-led venture not only opposes progress but new jobs as well.

The technologies leading the way in this effort include biofuels, such as corn-based ethanol and biodiesel; wind power; and solar photovoltics. Not surprisingly, Gore partners with a venture capital fund that helps to finance many of these things.

Of course, these are ventures are not profitable on their own. In other undertakings, entrepreneurs find new ways to apply existing resources in hopes of making a profit. They rarely have the luxury of being targeted for success by governing bodies; rather, they have to deal with all the roadblocks and difficulties that any business venture might find in its way.

With green technologies we have a situation in which entrepreneurs purchase various factors of production, put together a product, sell it, and then chronically fall short of making a profit. Then they lobby for subsidies or mandates. This is not the same kind of situation that faced a capital-intensive operation like Federal Express, which went five years without making a profit. The goal was to be profitable in the future, knowing the company would not receive special government benefits.

As Robert Bryce notes in his eye-opening book, Gusher of Lies, much of what proponents claim about these "new technologies" not only is untrue but will remain untrue because of the first and second laws of thermodynamics: The laws of science stand in the way of these projects ever becoming profitable on their own, and Congress cannot repeal either economic or scientific laws.

Some green energy proponents understand this, but counter that if governments limit consumer choices, people will be forced to purchase these products at prices that will make them appear profitable. That means government coercion is enlisted to create the illusion that "green technologies" are viable when in reality people must use them under threat of state-sponsored violence. One cannot build a prosperous economy on that footing.

Why can't a good that must be subsidized be the basis of an economic recovery? The answer would seem obvious on its face, but people often don't see it. The answer is based on this fact: The very presence of subsidies and targeted favors for a particular good means that the real value of the resources being used to create that good is greater than the value of the good itself. No economy can grow under such circumstances. The reality is that "green energy" actually causes the economy to contract.

Part of the misunderstanding comes because people see only one side -- new jobs being created in the subsidized industry -- but fail to see the entire picture. This hardly is limited to alternative energy -- the "broken window fallacy" permeates our body politic and even more so when we suffer economic downturns, as governments seek "solutions" that only make things worse.

If there ever were an example of the "broken window fallacy" in energy, it is the notion that "green energy" in its present circumstances will help the economy grow. That is a logical impossibility, but governments (and, sadly, many economists) don't do economic logic.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #567 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I can't wait to see Wormhole's response on this one:

Will 'Clean Energy' Lead to Economic Recovery?

Too long to read. It's very much working for me, thanks.
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #568 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

Too long to read. It's very much working for me, thanks.

You didn't disappoint.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #569 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

You didn't disappoint.

All my girlfriends tell me that too but you? I know we had gay sex yesterday but it wasn't that good.
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #570 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

All my girlfriends tell me that too but you? I know we had gay sex yesterday but it wasn't that good.

Another example of "moral superiority" from a "progressive".

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #571 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Another example of "moral superiority" from a "progressive".

I have never claimed moral superiority. Pleeeeeze, if it was for me people can marry cockroaches ... your wife .... oh shit they already do...
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #572 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

I have never claimed moral superiority. Pleeeeeze, if it was for me people can marry cockroaches ... oh shit they already do...

My mistake.

I guess vulgarity, crassness, etc. are perfectly fine if you make no claim to any moral standards?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #573 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormhole View Post

... your wife ....

Expanding the personal attacks to my family members, now? Really, that's a new low even for you.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #574 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Expanding the personal attacks to my family members, now? Really, that's a new low even for you.

So you didn't even get the joke, that's some funny shit!
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
yes I want oil genocide.
Reply
post #575 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Case in point.

Waste of time.

Yup. Pretty much.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #576 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Same, here.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #577 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

That's why I stopped almost a year ago. Really bettered the experience here at AI noticeably.

You were really never a contender.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #578 of 753
Why stimulus doesn't stimulate:

Quote:
President Obama has asked Congress for an additional $50 billion in "stimulus" money to finance infrastructure projects. The theory is that the additional spending will cause businesses to boost production to meet this demand. Producers will add jobs, triggering increases in consumer spending that will ripple through the economy and fuel a stronger overall recovery.

Unfortunately, however, such government pump-priming hasn't worked in the past, and there's no reason to believe it will work now.

Sure, consumer spending accounts for approximately 70 percent of America's gross domestic product, and increases in consumer spending would provide the economy with an immediate boost. But a drop in consumer spending is not what ails the economy. In fact, as a percentage of GDP, consumer spending actually increased during the downturn, the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis reports - from approximately 69.2 percent of GDP in the fourth quarter (October-December) of 2007 to approximately 71 percent of GDP in the April-June quarter of 2009.

So the conventional wisdom - that a sharp decline in consumer spending caused the economy's downturn - is wrong.

What did cause the downturn? The answer is: a sharp decline in private investment.

In fact, the ups and downs of the business cycle are always driven by investment spending, not by consumption spending.

When private domestic investment last peaked, in the first quarter (January-March) of 2006, it was nearly $2.3 trillion (in dollars of 2005 purchasing power), or 17.5 percent of GDP. When it hit bottom in the second quarter of 2009, it had fallen by 36 percent to $1.45 trillion, or 11.3 percent of GDP. It is still far below the 2006 peak.

By contrast, in the second quarter of this year, personal consumption was actually at an all-time high, at nearly $9.3 trillion (in 2005 inflation-adjusted dollars). If stimulating consumption were the key to an economic recovery, we would have achieved one already.

The media's focus on consumption unfortunately tempts politicians to approve "stimulus" measures aimed at pumping up this part of total spending - measures such as long extensions of unemployment insurance, aid to state and local governments to help them avoid personnel reductions, and increases in federal employee salaries.

Some economists in fact single out such measures for special praise on the grounds that such payments, because they are most likely to stimulate near-term consumption spending, have the greatest "multiplier effect."

Such arguments fail to grasp the true nature of boom-bust cycles, however, especially the central role of investment spending in driving them - and, more important, in driving long-term economic growth.

If politicians truly wish to promote genuine, sustainable recovery and long-term economic growth, they should focus on actions that will contribute to a revival of private investment, not on pumping up consumption. In the most recent quarter, gross private domestic investment was still running at an annual rate more than 20 percent below its previous peak. Net private investment was fully two-thirds below the previous peak.

To bring about this essential revival of investment, the government needs to put an end to actions that threaten investors' returns or create uncertainty that paralyzes the undertaking of new long-term projects.

Gigantic government measures such as the recently enacted health-care legislation and the financial-reform law, which entail hundreds of new regulations whose specific content, enforcement and costs are impossible to forecast with confidence, contribute to such uncertainty and encourage investors to sit on the sidelines with large cash balances, or to park their funds in safe, short-term, low-yield securities. Such tepid investments cannot support genuine recovery and sustained long-run growth.

What entrepreneurs, investors and executives await is policy stability and predictability, not more government spending, borrowing, sweeping new regulations, and heightened uncertainty.

Our crying need at present is for a robust revival of private long-term investment. Consumption-oriented government "stimulus" programs, threats of tax increases for entrepreneurs and business owners, and costly regulatory onslaughts breed fear and uncertainty and thus ensure a protracted period of economic stagnation.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #579 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Why stimulus doesn't stimulate:

There were a couple of good WSJ stories about the same thing, last month It Isn't Just Lost Jobs—It's the Lost Jobs Machine, and more recently The Only Policy Left: Growth.

From the first:

Quote:
(Republican economist) Mr. Holtz-Eakin suggests a three-pronged attack. First, he would stop using the tax system to achieve social goals and change it to focus, almost obsessively, on fostering economic growth.

I may have posted that excerpt here already, apologies if I did, but it precisely echoes the Robert Higgs analysis.

From the second:

Quote:
A more circumspect version of this view came recently from no less than Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, speaking at this summer's gathering of the world's financial elites in Jackson Hole: "Central bankers alone cannot solve the world's economic problems."

Really? They're quite adept at creating economic problems.

It's amazing that despite seventy years of empirically proving the inherent flaws of Keynesean economic theory, it still has its diehard adherents. Not enough money has been thrown at the problem yet, so let's try even more.
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #580 of 753

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #581 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Presidential seal falls off podium as Obama speaks

A shadow of things to come?

Stupid and off topic. This doesn't represent his policies in any form jazzy. Desperate or cheap shot.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #582 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Stupid and off topic. This doesn't represent his policies in any form jazzy. Desperate or cheap shot.

This post is a prime example of irony. And hypocrisy.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #583 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Stupid and off topic. This doesn't represent his policies in any form jazzy. Desperate or cheap shot.

Not off topic at all, when O's policies can be summarized by his consistent propensity to fix blame:

Quote:
Obama told the audience that somebody in the back was really nervous, referring to the staffer who hung the seal on the front of the lectern so precariously. ...
"Someone here is really nervous. They're sweating bullets," he joked about the staffer who had attached the seal.

Just another "ass to kick". Pathetic.
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #584 of 753

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #585 of 753
$162 million in stimulus funds not disclosed

Obama: "Let me be clear..."

Clear as mud?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #586 of 753
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #587 of 753
Biden Says He'll 'Strangle' Republicans

Quote:
According to a pool report from Tuesday's event in Dayton, Biden was telling the crowd that Democrats know how to balance the budget. He said, "If I hear one more Republican tell me about balancing the budget, I am going to strangle them."

He quickly added: "To the press, that's a figure of speech."

An example of the Democrats' desire to work in a spirit of mutual understanding and bi-partisanship, courtesy of the Walking Gaffe Machine.

Wasn't it the Democrats who closed up shop early in D.C. so they could campaign instead of passing a budget?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #588 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by john galt View Post

Not off topic at all, when O's policies can be summarized by his consistent propensity to fix blame:



Just another "ass to kick". Pathetic.

Well if this is what passes for conservative input on how to solve our issues in this country liberals have nothing to worry about.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #589 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Well if this is what passes for conservative input on how to solve our issues in this country liberals have nothing to worry about.

If what you offer is what passes for liberal input on how to solve our issues in this country, our country has a lot to worry about.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #590 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Biden Says He'll 'Strangle' Republicans



An example of the Democrats' desire to work in a spirit of mutual understanding and bi-partisanship, courtesy of the Walking Gaffe Machine.

Wasn't it the Democrats who closed up shop early in D.C. so they could campaign instead of passing a budget?

So say Republicans win big in November and take a lot of seats. Conservatives on this board have been arguing that things started getting bad when the Democrats took over the house and the senate in 06'. Well say Republicans have control in after the election in 2010. Then if things still go bad will they still blame Obama? I mean their whole arument has been based on the president doesn't matter as much as the rest of the government. That's how they can blame the Democrats for all of this. So I'm just wondering what brilliant logic they'll come up with then?


However I don't see their win as being that big.

[QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Biden Says He'll 'Strangle' Republicans

Why should you care Jazzy? I mean you're independent not a Republiocan and Republicans are just as bad ( or almost that's why you're not one ) right?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #591 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

If what you offer is what passes for liberal input on how to solve our issues in this country, our country has a lot to worry about.

One wonders if the Presidential Seal jumped... or was it pushed
A is A
Reply
A is A
Reply
post #592 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

If what you offer is what passes for liberal input on how to solve our issues in this country, our country has a lot to worry about.

I haven't heard anything new from you on these issues MJ.

New that is from what's offered by Republicans.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #593 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by john galt View Post

One wonders if the Presidential Seal jumped... or was it pushed

One wonders why you'd care? Is it really something that has any bearing on any issue?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #594 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I haven't heard anything new from you on these issues MJ.

Then you're not paying attention.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #595 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Then you're not paying attention.

Oh! But I have.

Sure MJ. Sure.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #596 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

One wonders why you'd care? Is it really something that has any bearing on any issue?

Nah...it's just fun to mock Obama since he's so mock-worthy. Not as much as you, but close.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #597 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Oh! But I have.

All evidence to the contrary.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #598 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Nah...it's juts fun to mock Obama since he's so mock-worthy. Not as much as you, but close.

Well since we know where your loyalties are now I guess that makes sense. So much for independent parties. More of the same.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #599 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Well since we know where your loyalties are now

Do you? Do you really? Do tell!

<waits for another famous jimmac non sequitur>

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #600 of 753
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

All evidence to the contrary.

Well you've been looking at thing through Republican colored glasses. I can't help that.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › How Can One Possibly Support Obama's Economic Policies?