The US Economy NEEDS A LIBERAL!!!

Comments

• Reply 1 of 103

  formerlurker Posts: 2,686member

  March 7, 2003 12:39AM

  Did someone get into the communal wine this evening??
• Reply 2 of 103

  trick fall Posts: 1,271member

  March 7, 2003 1:27AM

  Nah, these Republicans will do just fine, lower taxes to get the trickle up really cooking, borrow and spend, reduce regulations so that we can become even more efficient, we could probably whittle it down to just one corporation owning everything if we really let em have at and what a wonderful McWorld it will be.
• Reply 3 of 103

  fellowship Posts: 5,038member

  March 7, 2003 1:46AM

  [quote]Originally posted by trick fall:
  
  <strong>Nah, these Republicans will do just fine, lower taxes to get the trickle up really cooking, borrow and spend, reduce regulations so that we can become even more efficient, we could probably whittle it down to just one corporation owning everything if we really let em have at and what a wonderful McWorld it will be.</strong><hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  Bah Bah Bah... I have my own small business.. Far from McDonalds.
  
  
  
  "borrow and spend" you say... I have no trouble with deficits during weak economic times as to provide tax cuts etc. to stimulate the economy. Democrats when they were more honest in decades past realized the concept of "prime the pump" In economics class you learn of this spending to jumpstart the economy. Remember the New Deal? It was before my time but I studied it in school. I laugh at modern day liberals who cry over the deficits we have today during this weak economy. The reason Clinton saw surpluses on his watch was because the stock market was roaring out of control (fueled by a gold rush mentality of the "new economy" stocks and the internet and people took (realized) gains thus capital gains taxes were realized and the IRS collected tax receipts far above what we see now after the collapse of the bubble stock market. The timing of the collapse of the stock market and the time Bush took office does not place the blame of this weak economy with deficits unto President Bush.
  
  
  
  We could do nothing and watch the economy and unemployment worsen such as Germany is seeing under their "leadership"
  
  
  
  I have no problem with the actions such as tax cuts President Bush has advanced. Remember deficits for the purpose of stimulating the economy was something democrats in days gone by understood and employed. However today with the current democrats we find petty politics that serve to deceive and divide Americans.
  
  
  
  In the mean time President Bush is doing a great Job to manage this country. Not for some but for all.
  
  
  
  Fellowship
  
  
  
  [ 03-07-2003: Message edited by: FellowshipChurch iBook ]</p>
• Reply 4 of 103

  ghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member

  March 7, 2003 2:01AM

  [quote]Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook:
  
  <strong>Remember the New Deal?</strong><hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  What Bush is doing now is not comparable to ND. If you want to get the economy going its better to give to those who have less than those who have more. If you give money to those who have (esp. in times like now with economical uncertainty) they tend NOT to spend it but to save it. That may be good but on the longer run and only if invested domesticly. If you give it to the poorer then it is much more likely to be spend on (domestic) goods here and now (which is a good thing in an economy as the current).
  
  
  
  In 92 we kickstarted our economy with a semi-keynesian policy. It worked! And we still have surplus on the national and state budget that is widely recognised to be a result of what we did back in 92-95.
  
  
  
  And ALWAYS remember that when comparing US to germany that if to be fair you had to had carpet bombed the Mexican industrial areas and then accept it as the 51th. ten years ago.
• Reply 5 of 103

  trick fall Posts: 1,271member

  March 7, 2003 2:03AM

  I'm the controller for a post production company , it's not like I'm unaware of the plight of business. I'm just not unaware of the plight of average folks either. I probably also have a much higher cost of living and get taxed at a higher rate than you do.
  
  
  
  [quote] Bah Bah Bah... I have my own small business.. Far from McDonalds. <hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  Yeah, well we have a seemingly diverse amount of clients, but when you take a closer look there's actually very few corporate parents to these behemoths which gives them extra leverage over small business.
  
  
  
  [quote]Bah Bah Bah... I have my own small business.. Far from McDonalds. <hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  Yes I know of the New Deal and I would support deficits to pay for large scale public works, the kind of large scale public works undertaken during the New Deal, the kind of public works that we're still receiving benefit from today.
  
  
  
  [quote] The timing of the collapse of the stock market and the time Bush took office does not place the blame of this weak economy with deficits unto President Bush. <hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  Doesn't mean he's done a good job of handling the downturn.
  
  
  
  [quote] In the mean time President Bush is doing a great Job to manage this country. Not for some but for all. <hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  Easy to say when you're living in a fat house that's already paid for.
  
  
  
  Oh, and btw it's called Keynesian economics.
• Reply 6 of 103

  fellowship Posts: 5,038member

  March 7, 2003 2:17AM

  trick fall:
  
  
  
  I respect your views while I may differ on the details. What more than anything that gets under my skin with the politics of today is the cheap low IQ tactics that the democrtatic party as a whole employs to win over political support. They have to have a platform that is different to be an alternative. The democrats always seem to re-invent what they believe. What ever will divide away a group of people that they can get to support their party. With economics one rarely views any detail in respect to realities of economic cycles. In light of what our country has gone through such as the collapse of the bubble stock market as well as 9/11 I think in light of the weak economy be it weak we have been fortunate on balance. I attribute this to our consuming nature as Americans combined with actions taken to stimulate the economy. All in all for bad times the valley could be far worse. If in America we saw 12% unemployment then we would have something of weight to discuss with fearful weight. I am optimistic about the pork of our economy or weeds if you will being rooted out. I have seen some retail sectors show some players pull out of my market here but in light of that I saw those players as poor competitors. It goes back to supply and demand in a reality of competition. If you do not supply what is in demand get out of the way because someone else will.
  
  
  
  What can harm such a free market is an overbearing tax yoke.
  
  
  
  Fellowship
  
  
  
  [ 03-07-2003: Message edited by: FellowshipChurch iBook ]</p>
• Reply 7 of 103

  splinemodel Posts: 7,311member

  March 7, 2003 3:03AM

  Ummm. . . I really don't want to post a judgemental comment. . .
  
  
  
  Anyway, many economists attest the economic strength of the nineties to be an affect of the merits of Reaganomics. Regardless, I don't know how much affect the pres has on the economy directly. Any policies made will take some time to work themselves out. Blame the economic normalcy we see currently on the textbook rise and fall of a free market.
• Reply 8 of 103

  harald Posts: 2,152member

  March 7, 2003 4:44AM

  Funny, I kind of agree with you you, do need a liberal over there. The current US administration is underpinned with an orthodoxy, a well-thought out comprehensive world view. It's one I abhor, and one that is incredibly frightening, but it's a very strong one. I believe Bush doesn't really get it, but it fits with his instincts so the people running the country are happy with the President.
  
  
  
  But a democracy really needs a counterbalance, a counter-orthodoxy, an opposition that is able to question the government, to test it, to confront it, to ask difficult questions. To bravely make a case for the future of a country.
  
  
  
  And the democrats don't have that. They don't have a Wolfowitz coming out with a compelling world view. All they have is an inability to say something like "This war is a bad idea. Our current policies will make everyone hate us" because they'll be pilloried for being anti-American. They have no agenda beyond a watered down version of the Republican worldview.
  
  
  
  You NEED a strong opposition fellows, it's a healthy device for (for example) preventing a slow slide to totalitariansim, for maintaining democracy.
• Reply 9 of 103

  stagger Posts: 35member

  March 7, 2003 6:49AM

  The employment change is mostly seasonal. Don't expect our condition to improve a whole lot, and sarcasm is the lowest form of humor.
• Reply 10 of 103

  ghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member

  March 7, 2003 6:51AM

  No its not.
• Reply 11 of 103

  fran441 Posts: 3,715member

  March 7, 2003 7:23AM

  Hey Fellowship, if you want to look month to month, that's fine. But look at the unemployment rates compared to a year ago and they are still really high.
  
  
  
  My former employer cut 20% of it's work force yesterday and there is hardly a day that goes by that you don't hear another huge company making big layoffs.
  
  
  
  Also, the unemployment rate is kind of misleading. What kind of jobs are these people getting? Are software engineers now working at Wal-Mart or McDonald's? If so, then the economy is still much weaker than those numbers would reflect.
  
  
  
  If software engineers are getting jobs in the computer field at 1/3 of their original pay, the economy is still much weaker than unemployment numbers would reflect.
  
  
  
  You have to look at the big picture which you aren't doing. Very few Americans that are losing their jobs are walking into a job with equal or greater pay.
  
  
  
  As a result of that, the consumer index rate falls because people aren't spending their money (except on bills and food). Things are bad out there, and while people walking into low pay jobs is better than not getting a job at all, it doesn't mean the economy is recovering.
  
  
  
  If anything, the economy is still in a spiral downward as people who even think they might lose their jobs stockpile cash instead of spending it. That also hurts the economy.
• Reply 12 of 103

  drewprops Posts: 2,321member

  March 7, 2003 8:50AM

  What kind of "big picture" is the question though Fran. Are you backing it out by five years? By ten? By twenty?
  
  
  
  The earlier claim in this thread that something done in 1992 was solely responsible for "kick starting" the American economy ignores the physics of the global economic market; a living, breathing system in place since time immemorial. Hobos don't jump onto a moving train and then turn around and claim that they helped make it speed up.
  
  
  
  Well, unless they're DRUNK hobos...and that's <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=002920"; target="_blank">another thread</a>.
  
  
  
  Also: I thought that ALF was the lowest form of humor.
• Reply 13 of 103

  bunge Posts: 7,329member

  March 7, 2003 8:52AM

  [quote]Originally posted by Splinemodel:
  
  <strong>
  
  Blame the economic normalcy we see currently on the textbook rise and fall of a free market.</strong><hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  So that makes it OK? How about, we prepare for and adjust to this, um, 'normalcy' so we don't have to have such a normal economy?
• Reply 14 of 103

  thegelding Posts: 3,230member

  March 7, 2003 9:24AM

  [quote]U.S. jobless rate moves higher
  
  Unemployment rose to 5.8 percent in February, payrolls drop
  
  <hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  <a href="http://msnbc.com/news/882024.asp"; target="_blank">msnbc</a>
  
  
  
  Nearly 2 million jobs have been lost since hiring peaked in March 2001.
  
  
  
  maybe we do need a liberal.....g
  
  
  
  what we need to do is start paying back down the national debt...that would raise consumer confidence...i mean, we all have credit cards and it is great to buy something today and pay for it in a month or maybe two or three...but we all know a family member or friend or have heard a story of people who have to cut up their cards or go bankrupt due to these credit cards...it is the same with the debt...we don't mind some debt, but when the debt isn't being paid, but instead is growing and growing almost unchecked, it makes many people nervous and unsure of the future and the economy...i believe that if we could get the debt in check and starting paying it back down like in the 90's more people would be confident and would spend more and it would actually help create jobs...back in my grandparents days they really didn't understand debt, nobody had credit cards and such...today everybody had debt (and some even understand it), and many dread the debt they owe....i think many also dread the debt the government owes....paying it down helps with that dread...making it grow adds to that dread...g
  
  
  
  [ 03-07-2003: Message edited by: thegelding ]</p>
• Reply 15 of 103

  guartho Posts: 1,208member

  March 7, 2003 9:44AM

  [quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
  
  <strong>
  
  
  
  Also, the unemployment rate is kind of misleading. What kind of jobs are these people getting? Are software engineers now working at Wal-Mart or McDonald's? If so, then the economy is still much weaker than those numbers would reflect.
  
  
  
  If software engineers are getting jobs in the computer field at 1/3 of their original pay, the economy is still much weaker than unemployment numbers would reflect.
  
  
  
  </strong><hr></blockquote>
  
  
  
  But if those are Microsoft software "engineers than they should have been working at McDonald's or Wal-Mart to begin with.
  
  
• Reply 16 of 103

  ghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member

  March 7, 2003 10:05AM

  If the more bookish Liberals here really want to understand why the US economy FAILED!!! during the 90?s under their Liberal stewardship I suggest they read this book.
  
  
  
  <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1587991306/104-7277752-3923140?vi=glance"; target="_blank">The Force of Finance: Triumph of the Capital Markets
  
  by Reuven Brenner
  
  </a>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Edit:
  
  
  
  I should hurry and add that those serious mistakes of the past have yet to be corrected under the current administration. Thus they deserve a beating to the head just as much as their predecessors.
  
  
  
  [ 03-07-2003: Message edited by: zKillah ]</p>
• Reply 17 of 103

  jimmac Posts: 11,898member

  March 7, 2003 11:47AM

  I heard Bush's memoir is going to be a " How To " book.
  
  
  
  
  
  " How To Ruin A Country In Four Easy Steps "
  
  
  
  ( With big easy to understand illustrations )
  
  
  
  <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
  
  
  
  [ 03-07-2003: Message edited by: jimmac ]</p>
• Reply 18 of 103

  midwinter Posts: 10,060member

  March 7, 2003 11:56AM

  <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A55329-2003Mar7.html"; target="_blank">*cough*</a>
• Reply 19 of 103

  ghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member

  March 7, 2003 12:02PM

  Despite how much I wan to jump on Bush I want to say he can hardly be critisiced for the current situation. But he can be blamed for not doing the right thing for the future economy.
• Reply 20 of 103

  br Posts: 8,395member

  March 7, 2003 12:07PM

  [quote]Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook:
  
  <strong>*snip*
  
  NYAH NYAH NYAH
  
  Republicans are the greatest ever!!!!
  
  Democrats are lousy swine!!!!!
  
  NYAH NYAH NYAH
  
  *snip*</strong><hr></blockquote>
  
  Look, Fellowship. You are part of the problem--not because you are a Republican that takes every opportunity to bash your Democratic counterparts. No, you are part of the problem because you actually think there is a difference between the two parties.
  
  
  
  Enough of this crap already. I'm tired of hearing this childish bullshit from both sides of the aisle.
  
  
  
  [ 03-07-2003: Message edited by: BR ]</p>