Democrat, Republican, Other?

Ilmarë wrote:agree somewhat, but we do need government to stop companies from getting too free, like the credit card motherfuckers..
unfortunately, these are just the companies the govt supports and bails out all the time, I actually agree with Dray's first statement

btw, *slaps Dray*

you have a death wish too?

and yay, he agrees with me.

i believe tat in some way, be it in free market or whatever, the current governments would find a way to control. thats all they want, control control control. and taxes.

You want government control and more taxes?

Aragorn wrote:You want government control and more taxes?

read carefully....before you speak.

I know you said they but hopefully you see how ridiculous such an idea is...

Aragorn wrote:I know you said they but hopefully you see how ridiculous such an idea is...

yes cause governments are SO pure and just and goodhearted.....-.-

oh of course they are

lol ara..wait a minute, Dray, you're not american aer you?

Ilmarë wrote:lol ara..wait a minute, Dray, you're not american aer you?

should i?

government's hand in something bad?? hmmm... stock crashed because PRIVATE SECTOR overpriced their own stocks so they could get money new deal gave them a federal oversight... regan got rid of that and then the east asian financial crisis and all of that happened, the stocks that crashed in 1929. in that era we realized that capitalism wasn't self correcting. I think government should have input as a guiding hand, be it giving tax credits to companies who make greener stuff, or something like that.

how u respond to THAT?

That was due to the stupidity of the stockholders getting greedy, all government intervention would do is force a cap that may or may not be right. Let me reemphasize something, I think the government has the right to prosecute anyone found breaking a law if charges are leveled against them, I do not feel they should put their hand into free economy though.

Since the end of the Clinton administration, when he gave a false stimulus to our fail social security, our country went through a slight boom followed by a severe downfall that has lasted longer then the boom. So let me ask you this: Is that, by any measure, something good for our economy.

Just a quick further note on my growth and jobs post. To get a sense of what 3.5% growth does and doesn’t mean, we can look at the Clinton years, viewed as a whole. (I’m using end-1992 to end-2000, but it doesn’t really matter if you vary the start and end dates a bit).

Over that 8-year stretch, real GDP grew at an average annual rate of 3.7%. (Did you know that? My sense is that very few people realize just how good the Clinton-era growth record was). Over the same period, the unemployment rate fell from 7.4% to 3.9%, a 3.5 percentage point decline.

So if we take 3rd quarter growth to be more or less equivalent to average Clinton-era growth, even after 8 years of growth at that rate we’d only expect unemployment to have fallen from the current 9.8% to a still uncomfortably high 6.3%. It would take us around a decade to reach more or less full employment. As I said in my previous post, that’s well into President Palin’s second term.

The implications for Fed policy are also striking. If we use a Taylor rule that suggests zero rates until the unemployment rate reaches the vicinity of 7%, the Fed should stay on hold for around 6 more years.

We need much faster growth.

Nobel Prize winning economist paul krugman wrote that article.

oh and may or may not be right... thats what we have economists and professionals for XD

We had that boon because Clinton made a false stimulus, he transfered money between two areas of government that made it look like we had a increase in overall wealth, but that's all it was, an illusion. In fact our current economic problems are due to that very Bill that gave us a "stimulus"

No.... those are called statistics, and what you wrote disagrees with those statistics, people got jobs, that means people didn't have the illusion of not having a job...

It was a false stimulus. It gave the illusion of having more money on paper, but not in reality, much like a pyramid scheme.

then how does that make jobs? How does a false stimulus raise GDP?

seems to me this stimulus did this

It created 36 percent and 39.6 income tax rates for individuals.
It created a 35 percent income tax rate for corporations.
The cap on Medicare taxes was repealed.
Transportation fuels taxes were raised by 4.3 cents per gallon.
The taxable portion of Social Security benefits was raised.
The phase-out of the personal exemption and limit on itemized deductions were permanently extended.
Part IV Section 14131: Expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit and added inflation adjustments

from wikipedia

agree with nihil there, according to the statistics he cites, unemployment rates fell and that certainly isn't any illusion, though there are ways to falsify that data or make it inaccurate

you mean unregulated corporations which like i said before, rose their own stock prices so that they could do w/e and then it all fell apart because of NO REGULATION, in 1929

It was a short-term solution to a long-term problem. Bush did very little concerning economic issues, and yet it still fell during his years as President. Therefore it leads, at least to me, to a very simple conclusion, a false stimulus, a short-term solution to temporarily raise wealth, when what we really needed was a long-term solution to decrease the national debt.

debt, we haven't been paying that off for years, and we aren't even spending 10% of our GDP this year, and you talk about debt? we have more than enough money

politics are useless.

No we don't, we haven't had the money to pay off national debt for decades, and the amount accumulate during and right after the Clinton administration sky-rocketed it.

Aardvark wrote:No we don't, we haven't had the money to pay off national debt for decades, and the amount accumulate during and right after the Clinton administration sky-rocketed it.

seriously thou, when are you guys gonna pay up? or are u just gonna rely on fear of invasion to keep the debt from beeing paid?

All countries individual GDP<U.S GDP<EU GDP

We make enough money that our debt only racks up to 95% gdp, if we stop borrowing after the recession we should be able to do that over, i bet, a 15 year span,



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt

http://www.fedstats.gov/cgi-bin/imf/imf.cgi

also, before WWII, we had it above 100% of gdp and brought it down

however bush and reagan did much to bring it back up by ending regulations



federal debt started to go up around the 1980s... before clinton was in office

where do u live lez here ur %gdp debt?

And I chart I studied in school showed that thing fly up as soon as you hit 1999.