Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

isnt the SS taxes capped at 109000 per year? that could be one change to increase the total revenue

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=dmek25;807531]isnt the SS taxes capped at 109000 per year? that could be one change to increase the total revenue[/quote]

Yes. Or thereabouts. That's another one that's on the table.

This of course would only affect individuals making more than $100K per year.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=Schneed10;807523]There is no solution. [B] The housing market is a symptom of a weak economy, not a cause of a weak economy.[/B]

We had a bubble on home prices for a number of reasons, which all started because creditors were too aggressive in providing funding to people who couldn't afford to make the payments. More people had access to more money, flooding the market with buyers and driving the prices up. Consequently builders saw the prices going up and realized they could make money, so they built tons of homes, driving up inventory. Further, speculators saw the prices going up and placed bets in the market, further driving up home prices.

All of that was possible because people who didn't have the means to pay off the loans were given the loans. Also, most of them had jobs.

Now we have high unemployment taking plenty of people out of the market, so until the job market turns around, you won't have that demand impetus to drive up home prices. And on top of that, we've now instituted sanity into the home loan process, you actually have to be in good credit standing to get a loan at a reasonable rate (imagine that). So all those people who were given the opportunity to shop for homes in the 2000s are no longer able to. As it should be. And consequently home prices are today at the same place they were in 2003-2004. As they should be.

It's such a fallacy to think government can do anything about it at all. You can maybe set tax policy in such a way to encourage hiring and job growth. But you can't do anything to prop up home prices permanently; the first time home buyer credit kicked prices up for a year or so, but you saw what happened when it expired, prices came right back down again.

It costs a lot of money to buy a house. The government can't force people to realize the importance of saving their money and living within their means. If people want to be in the housing market, they need to have jobs and they need to be smart with their money. Judging by the nation's credit card debt and savings rates, it's easy to see that right now too many Americans fall short in those categories.

As unemployment drops, home prices will come up. It will be a very, very gradual process. Just the way it is.[/quote]

Economic downturn is usually caused by loss of confidence and the housing bubble was a huge confidence buster. I mean, we were talking trillions not billions.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=saden1;807562]Economic downturn is usually caused by loss of confidence and the housing bubble was a huge confidence buster. I mean, we were talking trillions not billions.[/quote]

Yeah well, duh. But WHY was consumer confidence eroded so badly?

Don't forget, people are reactionary beings. Consumer confidence got crushed because suddenly layoffs were popping up and housing prices were on the decline. When loans can't be had as readily and jobs are hard to find, of course consumer confidence erodes.

Consumer confidence is the ultimate SYMPTOM of a flagging economy. It's never the cause. But it can be the cause of LAG in recovery. A recovery won't happen until people are willing to open their wallets. But they won't open the wallets until they're convinced things are improving, which requires substantial improvements in the job market first and foremost.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=12thMan;807513]- The first order of business would be to let the Bush tax cuts expire. Personal tax rates in the U.S. are at their lowest level in nearly 60 years, yet the economy has been as sluggish as it's been in recent history. Based on one study I was reading, the Bush tax cuts cost $2.5 trillion from 2001-2010, add on to that interest payments for another $379 billion because the cuts were deficit financed and not paid for. A drop in the bucket maybe, but still. I'm interested to see if anyone has another number that's different for the same time period.

- The Obama administration has failed miserably at addressing the foreclosure crisis. No discernable policy to keep people in their homes, and more importantly, pressuring the cash rich banks to work with homeowners to stay out of foreclosure. I'm not sure what the exact solution is, but as long as the crisis extends we can forget about any kind of long-term economic recovery.

- We have something like 600 military bases abroad (the exact number may be as high as 700); mostly in Europe and Asia. The cost of operating these bases aren't exactly driving our deficit woes, but bringing home all of that personnel would certainly boost the economy over time and cut costs on the margins. Like others have mentioned, we need to scale back military spending significantly.[B] I think the president has done a good job pushing the START treaty through and reducing the costs we spend on nukes[/B]. If he gets re-elected, he should continue to work with Russia to reduce our nuclear arsenal. It goes without saying, it's high time to leave Iraq and Afghanistan.

- In terms of energy. Drilling really doesn't affect gas prices in my opinion. It takes years, nearly ten years, for the produced oil to come online and even then, OPEC plays a major role in inventory and the price of oil. That said, it's a good step but probably scaring off oil speculators more than anything else.[/quote]

Are we still building Nukes? I don't think they are so that treaty will probably cost money for us before it saves any money.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=dmek25;807531]isnt the [B]SS taxes capped at 109000 per year[/B]? that could be one change to increase the total revenue[/quote]

They are capped around that number and there is talk about removing the cap to help fix the SS problem. Its just another way to not fix the real problem. Its what they do in congress. God forbid we fix SS with real solutions. Its a spending problem not a money problem.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=Schneed10;807576]Yeah well, duh. [B]But WHY was consumer confidence eroded so badly?[/B]

Don't forget, people are reactionary beings. Consumer confidence got crushed because suddenly layoffs were popping up and housing prices were on the decline. When loans can't be had as readily and jobs are hard to find, of course consumer confidence erodes.

[B]Consumer confidence is the ultimate SYMPTOM of a flagging economy[/B]. It's never the cause. But it can be the cause of LAG in recovery. A recovery won't happen until people are willing to open their wallets. But they won't open the wallets until they're convinced things are improving, which requires substantial improvements in the job market first and foremost.[/quote]

The loss of confidence in the housing marked is primarily responsible for the current economic downturn. It's that simple.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=saden1;807638]The loss of confidence in the housing marked is primarily responsible for the current economic downturn. It's that simple.[/quote]

I disrespectfully disagree. That's an incredibly incorrect statement. And to think anything in economics is simple is laughable.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=Schneed10;807653]I disrespectfully disagree. That's an incredibly incorrect statement. And to think anything in economics is simple is laughable.[/quote]

I'm glad you feel that way...now let's show work:

The year is 2002ish and the economy is doing reasonably.[LIST=1][*]Schneed has a job and makes decent money.[*]Banks are lending at favorable terms and LIAR loans are ready to be consumed by Schneed. [*]Schneed buys a house he can only afford with a 5 year ARM loan.[*]It's 2007ish; Everything is peachy and economy is still doing reasonably well. [*]Poor ol' Schneed's mortgage changes to less favorable terms and he can't pay.[*]Investors get wind of Schneed and his ilk's LIAR loans, lose confidence in the banks and the credit market freezes.[*]Banks stop getting paid and consequently stop lending.[*]Companies can't get money to fund growth and start preparing for the worst.[*]Mass lawyoffs ensue and corporate spending freezes.[*]Poor ol' Schneed gets laid off and his house goes under.[*]His neighbors house's value drops. No more equity to borrow against.[*]Consumers brace themselves for the worse and stop spending.[*]More layoffs ensue and Schneed's neighbor gets laid-off.[*]Schneed loses his mind and starts making retarded arguments about stuff he's not well informed on.[/LIST]
I know you're averse to linking but this whole mess is well [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_recession"]documented and sourced.[/URL]

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=saden1;807658]I'm glad you feel that way...now let's show work:


The year is 2002ish and the economy is doing reasonably.[LIST=1][*]Schneed has a job and makes decent money.[*]Banks are lending at favorable terms and LIAR loans are ready to be consumed by Schneed.[*]Schneed buys a house he can only afford with a 5 year ARM loan.[*]It's 2007ish; Everything is peachy and economy is still doing reasonably well.[*]Poor ol' Schneed's mortgage changes to less favorable terms and he can't pay.[*]Investors get wind of Schneed and his ilk's LIAR loans, lose confidence in the banks and the credit market freezes.[*]Banks stop getting paid and consequently stop lending.[*]Companies can't get money to fund growth and start preparing for the worst.[*]Mass lawyoffs ensue and corporate spending freezes.[*]Poor ol' Schneed gets laid off and his house goes under.[*]His neighbors house's value drops. No more equity to borrow against.[*]Consumers brace themselves for the worse and stop spending.[*]More layoffs ensue and Schneed's neighbor gets laid-off.[*]Schneed loses his mind and starts making retarded arguments about stuff he's not well informed on.[/LIST]I know you're averse to linking but this whole mess is well [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late-2000s_recession"]documented and sourced.[/URL][/quote]

Yeah dude you totally misread me. The fact that consumer confidence shows up in item 12 above only proves my point.

Consumer Confidence was not the cause of this economic downturn. There were 11 causes you listed before it. Consumer Confidence is just another domino, it was not nearly the first.

That was my whole point.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=12thMan;807514]What do you guys think about repealing ethanol subsidies? That could be another $6 bil?

A study from CATO, a conservative think tank done in 1995. I'm curious what our free market conservatives think about ethonal subsidies.

[URL="http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-241.html"][COLOR=#800080]http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-241.html[/COLOR][/URL][/quote]

Thanks for bringing this up. I'm going to read this at work tomorrow while it's slow and I'll get back to you on this. ;)

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

Schneed, there are many symptoms and causes to this fragile economy. It's like a sickly patient who comes into your office sneezing like crazy. The first thing the doctor wants to know if they're allergic to anything. If the answer is yes, he/she will keep diagnosing beyond the obvious before they prescribe medication. My basic premise is that the weakness of the housing market is the most glaring undermining confidence and recovery, not the only thing.

I wholeheartedly agree that the the rate of unemployment is linked to housing prices. I've mentioned this in at least one other thread around here. However, my point of contention with the Obama administration, as it relates to the foreclosure crisis, is that they've nursed the banks back to health, the auto industry is back on it's feet, yet they've left the middle class to endure the most brutal housing recession to hit this nation, perhaps ever.

You seem to lay much of the blame at the feet of the American consumer. Government can't solve all the problems, people need to save more, homes are expensive, etc. While all of your statements are true, it's also true that real wages have stagnated over the past 20 years while the cost of living continues to go up. The average American is working longer, retiring later, and the exorbitant cost of health care have driven many into bankruptcy, all while being barraged with ads selling the American dream and easy credit.

It's not that government can -- or should be expected to solve everything, but they should at least uphold their end of the bargain.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=12thMan;807674]
You seem to lay much of the blame at the feet of the American consumer. Government can't solve all the problems, people need to save more, homes are expensive, etc. While all of your statements are true, it's also true that real wages have stagnated over the past 20 years while the cost of living continues to go up. The average American is working longer, retiring later, and the exorbitant cost of health care have driven many into bankruptcy, all while being barraged with ads selling the American dream and easy credit.
[/quote]

But WHY have real wages stagnated? It's not enough to just say they have, you have to understand why they've stagnated if you expect anyone to do anything about it. You can't prescribe medicine for the disease if you don't understand how it's attacking the body.

Globalization. That's the cause.

Real wages have stagnated because the American dream as we used to know it has evaporated. It used to be enough to graduate from high school and get a job at a factory. That could support the American family just fine. But companies have found ways to make many products for cheaper overseas largely because of lower wage rates in foreign countries. Companies shut down factories here and moved them to China. And now as India has become stronger from an education perspective, companies are finding they can eliminate American call centers and do it cheaper in India.

So when you have so many jobs headed overseas, and a growing population here in the states, you get a greater supply of workers. Natural market forces will of course prevent wages from growing.

Understanding that, what praytell do you ask of Obama or congress or anybody? What the hell can you do about it? China and India have cheaper labor, are you going to tell your American companies they can't ship jobs overseas to those countries? If you do, those American companies won't last long against competition that is allowed to tap into the cheaper labor pool.

Obama hasn't done anything about it because there is no answer. It's up to the people. You want to live the American dream, be better than your Chinese or Indian counterpart, because if you don't then they'll live the American dream. Work and deserve it, earn it to own it.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=12thMan;807514]What do you guys think about repealing ethanol subsidies? That could be another $6 bil?

A study from CATO, a conservative think tank done in 1995. I'm curious what our free market conservatives think about ethonal subsidies.

[URL="http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-241.html"][COLOR=#800080]http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-241.html[/COLOR][/URL][/quote]


Hell yes get rid of this shit..lol

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=NC_Skins;807680]Hell yes get rid of this shit..lol[/quote]

But isn't there a return on investment case to be made on this?

You can mix ethanol at up to 10% levels into gasoline and cars will still run fine. I haven't done the math, but the financial analyst in me says:

- You have a cash outlay of $6 Billion
- You have savings on gasoline of 10% x Gallons of Gas Sold at Pump x (Price of Gasoline per Gallon - Price of Ethanol per Gallon)

So the question becomes, without the Ethanol subsidy could we still realize the savings on the 10% of gasoline that's displaced by Ethanol?

I'm sure this is overly simplified, but somebody somewhere needs to do an ROI on this before recommending cutting the subsidy.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=Schneed10;807682]But isn't there a return on investment case to be made on this?

You can mix ethanol at up to 10% levels into gasoline and cars will still run fine. I haven't done the math, but the financial analyst in me says:

- You have a cash outlay of $6 Billion
- You have savings on gasoline of 10% x Gallons of Gas Sold at Pump x (Price of Gasoline per Gallon - Price of Ethanol per Gallon)

So the question becomes, without the Ethanol subsidy could we still realize the savings on the 10% of gasoline that's displaced by Ethanol?

I'm sure this is overly simplified, but somebody somewhere needs to do an ROI on this before recommending cutting the subsidy.[/quote]



Not sure how.


[quote]In 1986 the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimated the average cost of producing ethanol at $l.60 a gallon, more than double the then wholesale gasoline price of 60 cents a gallon (the current wholesale price is roughly 55 cents).


Ethanol has done poorly on its own largely because it is a relatively lousy fuel. An Agriculture Department report observed,

[U][B] Each gallon of ethanol contains about two-thirds as much energy as does gasoline, resulting in reduced fuel economy.[/B][/U] One would expect vehicles using gasohol to show about a 3.3 percent reduction in miles per gallon since ethanol constitutes 10 percent of the ethanol-gasoline blend. In a recent report on the performance of alcohol-gasoine blends, the DOE concluded that gasohol-fueled vehicles averaged 4.7 percent fewer miles per gallon than gasoline-fueled vehicles in automobile fleets.(35)

The comparatively feeble fuel value of ethanol is a large part of the reason why the fuel is so discounted from its cost of production. The USDA report further noted,

Fuel ethanol sold for about $0.90 per gallon in July 1986. This price does not reflect its free market value because gasoline blenders qualify for Federal and State ethanol subsidies. After deducting the value of the subsidies ($0.60 per gallon for the Federal subsidy and some $0.30- $0.40 average for State subsidies) the net cost of ethanol to blenders is about zero. This indicates that ethanol producers could not survive without the subsidies, and suggests that most will need even larger subsidies to stay in business unless petroleum prices increase sharply. Net of applicable subsidies, ethanol is selling for about $0.30 per gallon less than the wholesale price of gasoline.(36)

Yet, [U][B]while ethanol was selling (net of subsidies) for half the price of gasoline, it cost more than twice as much to produce as gasoline[/B][/U]. Obviously, government intervention is necessary.[/quote]

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=NC_Skins;807683]Not sure how.[/quote]

Compelling case. As you can tell, I did not read it!

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

I saw this and thought about this thread. We really don't unstand the cost to run our gov. and the cost to just fight rust was amazing.

[url=http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/05/the-pentagon-declares-war-on-rust/]The Pentagon Confronts New Enemy: Rust | Danger Room | Wired.com[/url]

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

I don't know the details of the latest due to lots of work/family stuff going on but.......one thing I know I wouldn't do to try to fix the economy/budget is walk out of negotiations to work on the budget/defecit/debt ceiling. Maybe I'm just naive, but no one said this was going to be easy, and you can't get anything done if you're not talking.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=Schneed10;807682]But isn't there a return on investment case to be made on this?

You can mix ethanol at up to 10% levels into gasoline and cars will still run fine. I haven't done the math, but the financial analyst in me says:

- You have a cash outlay of $6 Billion
- You have savings on gasoline of 10% x Gallons of Gas Sold at Pump x (Price of Gasoline per Gallon - Price of Ethanol per Gallon)

So the question becomes, without the Ethanol subsidy could we still realize the savings on the 10% of gasoline that's displaced by Ethanol?

I'm sure this is overly simplified, but somebody somewhere needs to do an ROI on this before recommending cutting the subsidy.[/quote]

First off the 10% enthanol level in gas does cause cars not run as effecient as they should. On the marine side its been a nightmare and caused millions of damage to boats. Enthanol is also more expensive to produce then gas so it does not save money it cost money. Those weed wackers and gas blowers you have that seem to not run as good its probably because of E10.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

Here's a study on the effect ethanol production has on food prices, particularly the price of corn.

Opponents argue that it's disrupting to the food supply, which is true, and there's a direct link to the higher food prices. Proponents argue the opposite.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=12thMan;808276]Here's a study on the effect ethanol production has on food prices, particularly the price of corn.

Opponents argue that it's disrupting to the food supply, which is true, and there's a direct link to the higher food prices. Proponents argue the opposite.[/quote]

I've looked and it seems to be one study saying it does not affect food prices then there is one that says it does drive up food prices. I don't have a problem with using E10 in my car but it really sucks for boats. It does three things. If its an older boat the hoses cannot handle E10 and the hoses break down causing even bigger motor problems. The other problem is that E10 holds and attracts moistuer and cause issues there. It does not store very well and seperates causing issues for people who store their boats for the winter.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

Funny now the Dems are trying to say the Rep are sabotaging the economy for political gain. Thats funny because it was the right that said that 1 trillion Obama spent would not help and it looks like we were right. So I guess the only thing the Dems can try to do is blame the Rep.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=firstdown;809225]Funny now the Dems are trying to say the Rep are sabotaging the economy for political gain. Thats funny because[B] it was the right that said that 1 trillion Obama spent would not help and it looks like we were right.[/B] So I guess the only thing the Dems can try to do is blame the Rep.[/quote]

Greenspan concurs.

[url=http://www.cnbc.com/id/43598606]News Headlines[/url]

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=GMScud;809229]Greenspan concurs.

[URL="http://www.cnbc.com/id/43598606"]News Headlines[/URL][/quote]

The stimulas was around 870 billion and we have around 300 million us citizens if I'm correct. That works out to be around 2500 per person. Seems like given families the money directly would have really been a true stimulas. That would mean a family of 3 like myself would have received around 7,500. Wow imagine how much spending would have occured.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=firstdown;809246]The stimulas was around 870 billion and we have around 300 million us citizens if I'm correct. That works out to be around 2500 per person. Seems like given families the money directly would have really been a true stimulas. That would mean a family of 3 like myself would have received around 7,500. Wow imagine how much spending would have occured.[/quote]

The numbers in the 7th Quarterly Report (7 quarters since the "stimulus" was passed) released on Friday certainly don't help Big O. His own handpicked trio of economists put the report together, and it paints a pretty grim picture of just how ineffective this stimulus has been thus far. $278K spent for each job gained? Eeeesh.

[url=http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-s-economists-stimulus-has-cost-278000-job_576014.html]Obama’s Economists: ‘Stimulus’ Has Cost $278,000 per Job | The Weekly Standard[/url]

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

You guys are totally confusing the facts here. This article is referring to the stimulus passed by the Fed Reserve under Ben Bernanke, not President Obama. Under the direction of Ben Bernanke the [B]Fed[/B] purchased $600 Billion in Treasury Bonds, also known as QE2. This has absolutely nothing to do with the "stimulus" Congress passed shortly after President Obama took office. In fact, the president of the United States doesn't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve is the monetary authority. Alan Greenspan's critique was directed at Ben Bernanke's actions, not President Obama.

But since we're now talking about Obama's stimulus, anyone know what portion represented tax cuts? Firstdown, how come I don't hear you crowing about that?

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

No one --not a single economist-- thought the recovery would take this long. The Administration's biggest mistake was floating that 8% unemployment number from the jump, not trying to stimulate the economy.

Historically speaking it takes time for an economy this large to recovery from a recession, such as the one we're coming out of, and even longer to replace all the lost jobs. They caved to the intense political environment and the urgency to grease the wheels and get things going so they threw out 8%. It was stupid and they know it, but they saved and created a lot of damn jobs in the process.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=12thMan;809343]No one --not a single economist-- thought the recovery would take this long. The Administration's biggest mistake was floating that 8% unemployment number from the jump, not trying to stimulate the economy.

Historically speaking it takes time for an economy this large to recovery from a recession, such as the one we're coming out of, and even longer to replace all the lost jobs. They caved to the intense political environment and the urgency to grease the wheels and get things going so they threw out 8%. It was stupid and they know it, but they saved and created a lot of damn jobs in the process.[/quote]

A good portion of the stimulus spending amounted to spitting into the wind. You're right in saying they caved to the political environment, and consequently they lost sight of the long term good.

First time homebuyer credit was one of the stupidest things I've ever seen. We had a bunch of people who were underwater on bad mortgages, which this administration blamed on predatory lending practices, yet they turn around and give first time homebuyer credits to people who had never bought a house before. Wha?? So we're going to help the people who got screwed buying a house by helping the people who've never bought one?

Once first time homebuyer credits dried up the market went where the market should have gone, back to Earth. Houses are for people who can afford them without government help and without sketchy loans. The market was headed south whether Obama liked it or not, he just drove us into further debt by spitting into the wind.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=12thMan;809342]You guys are totally confusing the facts here. This article is referring to the stimulus passed by the Fed Reserve under Ben Bernanke, not President Obama. Under the direction of Ben Bernanke the [B]Fed[/B] purchased $600 Billion in Treasury Bonds, also known as QE2. This has absolutely nothing to do with the "stimulus" Congress passed shortly after President Obama took office. In fact, the president of the United States doesn't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve is the monetary authority. Alan Greenspan's critique was directed at Ben Bernanke's actions, not President Obama.

But since we're now talking about Obama's stimulus, anyone know what portion represented tax cuts? Firstdown, how come I don't hear you crowing about that?[/quote]

I'm not confusing anything. All I said was these numbers don't help Obama. He may not have been directly responsible for the QE2 pump, but it happened on his watch. Wrong or right, he'll ultimately be held largely responsible.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

You know, I'm going to apologize. I shouldn't have posted anything political today. The 4th is all about celebrating what's great about this country. So that's my bad.

Happy 4th of July, Warpath. Ive got a BBQ to attend... Softshell crab sandwiches here I come! Cheers y'all.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=12thMan;809343]No one --not a single economist-- thought the recovery would take this long. The Administration's biggest mistake was floating that 8% unemployment number from the jump, not trying to stimulate the economy.

Historically speaking it takes time for an economy this large to recovery from a recession, such as the one we're coming out of, and even longer to replace all the lost jobs. They caved to the intense political environment and the urgency to grease the wheels and get things going so they threw out 8%. It was stupid and they know it, but they saved and created a lot of damn jobs in the process.[/quote]

Ok these numbers come from the White House. It cost us around 280,000 for each job they claimed to create but they quit using that term because they know it failed.

WASHINGTON - White House economists say the $821 billion economic stimulus passed early in 2009 is responsible for at least 2.4 million jobs that otherwise would not have existed because of the recession.
A new report by the White House Council of Economic Advisers says the spending and tax breaks in the package are phasing out and their effect on economic growth and hiring is declining.
When passed, the Obama administration said the stimulus would halt rising unemployment at about 8 percent.
Unemployment, however, peaked at 10.1 percent in October of 2009. The White House has said it underestimated the force of the recession.
The administration no longer uses the much maligned phrase "saved or created" jobs. Instead, it says the stimulus "raised employment relative to what it otherwise would have been."
(Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=GMScud;809346]I'm not confusing anything. All I said was these numbers don't help Obama. He may not have been directly responsible for the QE2 pump, but it happened on his watch. Wrong or right, he'll ultimately be held largely responsible.[/quote]

Your link attached to Firstdown's statement certainly implied you did. It's all good.

Hope you had good Fourth.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

And I gotta say the idea that there's some magic unemployment number that will sink President Obama's chances of getting re-elected is nonsense. It's going to be hard no matter what. But it's going to much more difficult, in my opinion, for the GOP nominee to convince the American people that things would have been appreciably better under his/her stewardship. Obama sucks. Obama failed, Obama's a socialist ain't gonna fly gonna fly in a general election.

So I wouldn't hang my hat on every little economic indicator, poll, statistic, or whatever in an attempt to gauge the president's re-election prospects. No doubt the economy will be the main issue, but it's going to be a tough slog either way.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=firstdown;809374]Ok these numbers come from the White House. It cost us around 280,000 for each job they claimed to create but they quit using that term because they know it failed.

WASHINGTON - White House economists say the $821 billion economic stimulus passed early in 2009 is responsible for at least 2.4 million jobs that otherwise would not have existed because of the recession.
A new report by the White House Council of Economic Advisers says the spending and tax breaks in the package are phasing out and their effect on economic growth and hiring is declining.
When passed, the Obama administration said the stimulus would halt rising unemployment at about 8 percent.
Unemployment, however, peaked at 10.1 percent in October of 2009. The White House has said it underestimated the force of the recession.
The administration no longer uses the much maligned phrase "saved or created" jobs. Instead, it says the stimulus "raised employment relative to what it otherwise would have been."
(Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)[/quote]


The numbers indeed came from the White House, but the Weekly Standard did the number crunching. Google Bill Kristol if you want to know how much the Weekly Standard loves Obama.

Here's the White House's rebuttal: [url=http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/07/-278k-per-stimulus-job-white-house-says-no.html]$278K per Stimulus Job? White House Says No. - Political Punch[/url]

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=12thMan;809383]And I gotta say the idea that there's some magic unemployment number that will sink President Obama's chances of getting re-elected is nonsense. It's going to be hard no matter what. But it's going to much more difficult, in my opinion, for the GOP nominee to convince the American people that things would have been appreciably better under his/her stewardship. Obama sucks. Obama failed, Obama's a socialist ain't gonna fly in a general election.

So I wouldn't hang my hat on every little economic indicator, poll, statistic, or whatever in an attempt to gauge the president's re-election prospects. INo doubt the economy will be the main issue, but t's going to be a tough slog either way.[/quote]

I agree with this.

The real interesting thing coming out of this debt ceiling debate is that spending cuts are coming as a result. A lot of spending cuts, reportedly $1.0 trillion being discussed so far, with the Republicans pushing for more.

When the specifics come out as to what programs are being axed, the Republicans are going to be challenged to defend their stance that the wealthy should not keep certain tax breaks and deductions. Americans don't have a good feel for what $1.0 trillion in cuts really means. When they hear the specifics and realize that programs they rely on are taking a hit, it will then be on the republicans to explain why the rich should keep their hedge fund tax deductions while education funding, for example, has to take a hit.

Obama will have plenty of ammo to fire back with.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=12thMan;809385]The numbers indeed came from the White House, but the Weekly Standard did the number crunching. Google Bill Kristol if you want to know how much the Weekly Standard loves Obama.

Here's the White House's rebuttal: [URL="http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/07/-278k-per-stimulus-job-white-house-says-no.html"]$278K per Stimulus Job? White House Says No. - Political Punch[/URL][/quote]

Ok, we will use the numbers they want so it only cost us 180,000 for each job created. Sorry, I forgot we are not using the term jobs save or created anymore.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=Schneed10;809386]I agree with this.

The real interesting thing coming out of this debt ceiling debate is that spending cuts are coming as a result. A lot of spending cuts, reportedly $1.0 trillion being discussed so far, with the Republicans pushing for more.

When the specifics come out as to what programs are being axed, the Republicans are going to be challenged to defend their stance that the wealthy should not keep certain tax breaks and deductions. Americans don't have a good feel for what $1.0 trillion in cuts really means. When they hear the specifics and realize that programs they rely on are taking a hit, it will then be on the republicans to explain why the rich should keep their hedge fund tax deductions while education funding, for example, has to take a hit.

Obama will have plenty of ammo to fire back with.[/quote]


I agree thye Rep. have to agree to raise the taxes on the rich even if they believe it will hurt the economy.

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/invoke-the-14th--and-end-the-debt-standoff/2011/07/01/gHQAUif8yH_story.html?wpisrc=emailtoafriend"]Pro 14th[/URL]

[URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/opinion/08tribe.html?ref=opinion"]No 14th[/URL]

Re: How would you fix the economy and budget issues?
 

[quote=12thMan;809383]And I gotta say the idea that there's some magic unemployment number that will sink President Obama's chances of getting re-elected is nonsense. It's going to be hard no matter what. But it's going to much more difficult, in my opinion, for the GOP nominee to convince the American people that things would have been appreciably better under his/her stewardship. Obama sucks. Obama failed, Obama's a socialist ain't gonna fly gonna fly in a general election.

So I wouldn't hang my hat on every little economic indicator, poll, statistic, or whatever in an attempt to gauge the president's re-election prospects. No doubt the economy will be the main issue, but it's going to be a tough slog either way.[/quote]

Well I'd say if the numbers keep going the wrong way all the rep. have to do is play Obama's words about how unemployment will not go over 8%. Then play him talking about creating jobs then show how he was totaly wrong. His 4 yrs has been all about the economy and creating jobs and so far what he has done has not worked. Two years back he could blame Bush but that has grown old on the American people and will be even older a year from now when he is still blaming Bush.