Obama's plan to improve the economy - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-23-2008, 10:01 PM   #16
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Saving is great, that part you have down, but everything else, I don't think any economist in their right mind would agree with you...but that's probably because I only read economists of the Keynesian school
Fixed that for you.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:14 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Remember that not everyone is going to lose their jobs. The middle class that has decent jobs probably will still do so but they are often the ones in huge debt so they need to unload. The recession is simply a whole bunch of fake jobs that were created by cheap debt over the last 15 years being eliminated so people can shuffle over to other areas that can grow and are based on real needs and wants. The problem is that the people who can still buy are loaded with house and car debt and they can't buy anymore. That has to naturally resolve itself which means unemployment benefits will have to be used and food banks when necessary. If Obama doesn't do too many projects it won't matter one way or another but if taxes have to be raised enormously to do Japan style projects it will mean those same people loaded with debt will have less money to reinvest in the economy and/or pay down their debt which is the capital we need for new real jobs. I'd rather have a sharp short recession than a big long one. Obama better look to his "scalpel" on the budget and start find ways to narrow the deficit so people who save can have confidence in American bonds. It's pretty scary right now.
you say that the middle class has decent jobs, but it is well documented that the middle class is shrinking. when manufacturing and production jobs leave this country workers generally do not move into sectors with equivalent wages. they end up taking a pay cut, likely in the service sector. and yet, the people who have been pressured by stagnant or falling wages and consistent inflation are the ones upon whom a large portion of the economy rests. you want them to save, but capitalism demands they spend. i'm not convinced that the capital generated by debt payments will be used to create good jobs with decent wages and benefits. and if recent attacks on unionized auto workers is any indication, the outlook for middle class jobs is dim. if the service sector continues to expand, and wages continue to fall, who will have the purchasing power to support capital accumulation? even financeguy has recognized the proverbial "race to the bottom." will the debt spending start anew?
__________________

__________________
Se7en is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:17 PM   #18
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
I really find it hard to take anything you say regarding the economy seriously the more you post. Saving is great, that part you have down, but everything else, I don't think any economist in their right mind would agree with you...
Keynesian economists wouldn't agree with me. They are annoyed that Americans are starting to save.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
How can you compare a bridge to nowhere to actually moving this country forward? How is alternative energy going nowhere? How are better schools and infastructure going nowhere?
I'm comparing the bridge to nowhere with Obama's infrastructure expenses at a time when people aren't sure if the U.S. can pay back it's current debt. Palin was against it after she was for it so you can blame her for that but if Obama supporters didn't like her for spending I don't see how the new government is in the right direction. I'm sure they make excuses that it's needed infrastructure but if it was needed it would already be in the budget. It sounds like a make work project to me. I don't think you got my point so I've just spelled it out. I'm not for bailouts or make work projects. Europe and Japan have got lots and they don't have a great standard of living and are in the same debt problem except with higher unemployment rates. The U.S. rate of unemployment looks good compared to many European countries during a boom. Why imitate them?

Alternative energy like nuclear power is okay but wind and solar is VERY limited in providing enough to be energy independent. Drilling off shore and in Alaska would be a more achievable energy independence or more independence. Of course this would be counter to an attitude of going into cap and trade which ultimately passes the bill onto the consumer raising their electric bills. I don't think Obama would be smart in doing that aggressively when low oil and low electricity is what people need. This is something that McCain and Palin would have to explain.

"I want people to go back to work but I don't want more energy to be expended." Only politicians would over look that. This gives me the sense that they will pay lip service to it and C02 emissions will continue since carbon based life forms can't do otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
But I'm seeing much more clearly the reason you defend Palin so much, you are both out of touch...
More Alinsky tactics. Nice try Mr. Community Organizer. I see what you like in this thread:

Change.gov

I think the new U2 single should be "Get on your jack boots" and they should have a song "Community Organizer social worker rampage" with some death by audio guitar riffs.



See I can be inflammatory and insult Alinsky style too. If it works maybe Conservatives should lower themselves. I mean decapitated Turkeys weren't beyond PMSNBC.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:19 PM   #19
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Fixed that for you.
Thanks Mr. Libertarian conscience sir!
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:19 PM   #20
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Remember that not everyone is going to lose their jobs. The middle class that has decent jobs probably will still do so but they are often the ones in huge debt so they need to unload. The recession is simply a whole bunch of fake jobs that were created by cheap debt over the last 15 years being eliminated so people can shuffle over to other areas that can grow and are based on real needs and wants. The problem is that the people who can still buy are loaded with house and car debt and they can't buy anymore. That has to naturally resolve itself which means unemployment benefits will have to be used and food banks when necessary. If Obama doesn't do too many projects it won't matter one way or another but if taxes have to be raised enormously to do Japan style projects it will mean those same people loaded with debt will have less money to reinvest in the economy and/or pay down their debt which is the capital we need for new real jobs. I'd rather have a sharp short recession than a big long one. Obama better look to his "scalpel" on the budget and start find ways to narrow the deficit so people who save can have confidence in American bonds. It's pretty scary right now.
You simplify the issue, and admit so in this post. It's anything but simple.

I don't understand why programs to fix schools and infrastructure is a bad thing. You dismiss jobs from the equation entirely just because it's not the only problem, which does not make sense. It is not the only problem, but it is part of the problem.

This is a multi-faceted issue that requires a multi-faceted approach. Job creation through government work programs that improve our public facilities is not an inherently bad idea, if executed properly. It can help, if done right.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:21 PM   #21
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 09:02 PM
"Saving" is much too simple. That's simply not going to get the job done.

This is a complex problem that you continually try to simplify.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:31 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Europe and Japan have got lots and they don't have a great standard of living and are in the same debt problem except with higher unemployment rates.
Is it? Which European countries are you referring to? And the second sentence is a generalization as well, with lots of important facts for the reasons of many countries neglected.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:34 PM   #23
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Se7en View Post
you say that the middle class has decent jobs, but it is well documented that the middle class is shrinking. when manufacturing and production jobs leave this country workers generally do not move into sectors with equivalent wages. they end up taking a pay cut, likely in the service sector. and yet, the people who have been pressured by stagnant or falling wages and consistent inflation are the ones upon whom a large portion of the economy rests. you want them to save, but capitalism demands they spend. i'm not convinced that the capital generated by debt payments will be used to create good jobs with decent wages and benefits. and if recent attacks on unionized auto workers is any indication, the outlook for middle class jobs is dim. if the service sector continues to expand, and wages continue to fall, who will have the purchasing power to support capital accumulation? even financeguy has recognized the proverbial "race to the bottom." will the debt spending start anew?
I'm glad you brought this up. I've posted some libertarian Austrian school responses to the onslaught of Keyensian thinking the western world is pushing on us that will help your natural assumption that capitalism is about spending. It's partially true that it involves spending but a portion should always be saved and debt is just a tool that can be abused if it's used too much. Check these out. There is a difference between Capital goods and Consumer goods and savings and investment are needed in those areas to create more supply in the economy to lower prices and increase our standard of living. Hence supply side economics. Demand is unlimited by supply is limited and we need Capital Assets to produce goods and to provide jobs to use those assets.

Markets Need Time, Not More Poison - Robert P. Murphy - Mises Institute

The Importance of Capital Theory - Robert P. Murphy - Mises Institute

http://www.mises.org/books/critics.pdf

When it comes to unions it's known that they need a deal that is competitive with Toyota, Nissan, and Honda. If the wage costs continue to be much larger than these companies then it will be hard to compete. One area I would like the unions to address is Japan and their trade barriers. That would be a good discussion. I also think the corporate tax rates need to be competitive so people want to bring companies to the U.S. If Obama raises corporate taxes then why would companies want to come to the U.S.?
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:37 PM   #24
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 08:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Fixed that for you.
Well you've actually agreed with me a couple of times when commenting on his economic views.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:42 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 12:02 PM
I really like having purpleoscar on here
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:44 PM   #26
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillyfan26 View Post
"Saving" is much too simple. That's simply not going to get the job done.

This is a complex problem that you continually try to simplify.
It's the one area that economists don't want people to do but if you are hanging by a thread to pay off your debts it's not wise to take on more because Keynesians think you should. Krugman has made it explicit that he doesn't like the current trend for Americans to retrench. He's the Nobel Prize economist and all the rank and file economists are copying him and telling politicians to do it. I don't think it's good advice for people teetering on bankruptcy and people uncertain about their future employment status.

If the central banks raised interest rates during the MASSIVE boom people wouldn't have got into so much debt. The business cycle yo yo's too much when they let the printing presses go. Then you get socialist teachers like my Marxist teacher who looks at this period of time as the best time so that they can grow larger during a recession. He really meant it when he said it.

Protect your ass. The savings rate in the West has been too low for too long. It's hard to save for retirement. I'm narrowing the discussion to savings to highlight an area that desperately needs highlighting. Don't save to the point of starving but as we saw in the last 15 years people were making the opposite error. For those who don't have a lot of debt it doesn't apply as much to them. Savings in the economy is often not understood well because of the counter-intuitive nature of it. Certainly I'm for low interest rates during a recession but not all the time and even through a normal economy. It leads to speculation and consumer debt. Banks even send poor people credit lines of $100,000. It's like normal bankers have turned into loan sharks.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:48 PM   #27
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Vega View Post
Is it? Which European countries are you referring to? And the second sentence is a generalization as well, with lots of important facts for the reasons of many countries neglected.
France, Germany, Spain. I'm sure there are more, but those are the ones I know. In Canada when we get 6% unemployment during a boom that's considered good. In the U.S. it's an alarm bell.

There's a saying in Germany. "If you have a job you are in a union and when you're not in a union you don't have a job." It's an exageration of course but it shows how long it takes to get a job in countries like that. They also have more trade barriers though hopefully that will loosen up after the G20 meeting. Hopefully.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:51 PM   #28
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 08:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Keynesian economists wouldn't agree with me. They are annoyed that Americans are starting to save.
Yeah, that's not what I'm talking about...


Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I'm comparing the bridge to nowhere with Obama's infrastructure expenses at a time when people aren't sure if the U.S. can pay back it's current debt. Palin was against it after she was for it so you can blame her for that but if Obama supporters didn't like her for spending I don't see how the new government is in the right direction. I'm sure they make excuses that it's needed infrastructure but if it was needed it would already be in the budget. It sounds like a make work project to me. I don't think you got my point so I've just spelled it out. I'm not for bailouts or make work projects. Europe and Japan have got lots and they don't have a great standard of living and are in the same debt problem except with higher unemployment rates. The U.S. rate of unemployment looks good compared to many European countries during a boom. Why imitate them?
What do you mean "if it was needed it would already be in the budget"? Have you been to the US? There's a lot needed here as far as infastructure... We need to move forward, what part of that do you not get?


Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
Alternative energy like nuclear power is okay but wind and solar is VERY limited in providing enough to be energy independent. Drilling off shore and in Alaska would be a more achievable energy independence or more independence. Of course this would be counter to an attitude of going into cap and trade which ultimately passes the bill onto the consumer raising their electric bills. I don't think Obama would be smart in doing that aggressively when low oil and low electricity is what people need. This is something that McCain and Palin would have to explain.
Oil is just a temp fix, why would anyone want to ignore other souces? Yes, as we know them now, every alternative source has it's drawbacks, but putting more focus and recources in these energies creates more jobs and promotes research in the fields, how can anyone in their right mind find that to be wrong?

The rest of the post wasn't even worth commenting on...
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:53 PM   #29
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
purpleoscar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In right wing paranoia
Posts: 7,597
Local Time: 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Well you've actually agreed with me a couple of times when commenting on his economic views.
I'm just teasing you BVS. You've tweaked my nose often enough.
__________________
purpleoscar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2008, 10:58 PM   #30
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 08:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by purpleoscar View Post
I'm just teasing you BVS. You've tweaked my nose often enough.
So you're financeguy?
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com