Paul Krugman- Republicans Hate America

[balli]

Just get out the way GOP, we real Americans have a country to put back together.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/opinion/26krugman.html?_r=1

As the debate over President Obama’s economic stimulus plan gets under way, one thing is certain: many of the plan’s opponents aren’t arguing in good faith. Conservatives really, really don’t want to see a second New Deal, and they certainly don’t want to see government activism vindicated. So they are reaching for any stick they can find with which to beat proposals for increased government spending.
Some of these arguments are obvious cheap shots. John Boehner, the House minority leader, has already made headlines with one such shot: looking at an $825 billion plan to rebuild infrastructure, sustain essential services and more, he derided a minor provision that would expand Medicaid family-planning services — and called it a plan to “spend hundreds of millions of dollars on contraceptives.”

But the obvious cheap shots don’t pose as much danger to the Obama administration’s efforts to get a plan through as arguments and assertions that are equally fraudulent but can seem superficially plausible to those who don’t know their way around economic concepts and numbers. So as a public service, let me try to debunk some of the major antistimulus arguments that have already surfaced. Any time you hear someone reciting one of these arguments, write him or her off as a dishonest flack.

First, there’s the bogus talking point that the Obama plan will cost $275,000 per job created. Why is it bogus? Because it involves taking the cost of a plan that will extend over several years, creating millions of jobs each year, and dividing it by the jobs created in just one of those years.

It’s as if an opponent of the school lunch program were to take an estimate of the cost of that program over the next five years, then divide it by the number of lunches provided in just one of those years, and assert that the program was hugely wasteful, because it cost $13 per lunch. (The actual cost of a free school lunch, by the way, is $2.57.)

The true cost per job of the Obama plan will probably be closer to $100,000 than $275,000 — and the net cost will be as little as $60,000 once you take into account the fact that a stronger economy means higher tax receipts.

Next, write off anyone who asserts that it’s always better to cut taxes than to increase government spending because taxpayers, not bureaucrats, are the best judges of how to spend their money.

Here’s how to think about this argument: it implies that we should shut down the air traffic control system. After all, that system is paid for with fees on air tickets — and surely it would be better to let the flying public keep its money rather than hand it over to government bureaucrats. If that would mean lots of midair collisions, hey, stuff happens.

The point is that nobody really believes that a dollar of tax cuts is always better than a dollar of public spending. Meanwhile, it’s clear that when it comes to economic stimulus, public spending provides much more bang for the buck than tax cuts — and therefore costs less per job created (see the previous fraudulent argument) — because a large fraction of any tax cut will simply be saved.

This suggests that public spending rather than tax cuts should be the core of any stimulus plan. But rather than accept that implication, conservatives take refuge in a nonsensical argument against public spending in general.

Finally, ignore anyone who tries to make something of the fact that the new administration’s chief economic adviser has in the past favored monetary policy over fiscal policy as a response to recessions.

It’s true that the normal response to recessions is interest-rate cuts from the Fed, not government spending. And that might be the best option right now, if it were available. But it isn’t, because we’re in a situation not seen since the 1930s: the interest rates the Fed controls are already effectively at zero.

That’s why we’re talking about large-scale fiscal stimulus: it’s what’s left in the policy arsenal now that the Fed has shot its bolt. Anyone who cites old arguments against fiscal stimulus without mentioning that either doesn’t know much about the subject — and therefore has no business weighing in on the debate — or is being deliberately obtuse.

These are only some of the fundamentally fraudulent antistimulus arguments out there. Basically, conservatives are throwing any objection they can think of against the Obama plan, hoping that something will stick.

But here’s the thing: Most Americans aren’t listening. The most encouraging thing I’ve heard lately is Mr. Obama’s reported response to Republican objections to a spending-oriented economic plan: “I won.” Indeed he did — and he should disregard the huffing and puffing of those who lost.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Yeah, Austin needs $875,000 for a disc golf course, WTF are Republicans doing trying to block quality pork like that?

[balli]

Spend the money on fucking carrot sticks and potato peels. I don't give a fuck. Just spend it. And don't call it pork you dishonest motherfucker. We HAVE to spend this money. He HAVE to. But what we're damn sure not going to do is just throw huge tax breaks into wealthy peoples' bank accounts so they can just sit on the money.

[micca]

You real Americans have a country to put back together again? nearly half the people able to vote in America in the presidental elections didn't bother. Of the half that did vote only 52% of the popular vote went to obama, that means obama was elected by less than 30% of the people of the nation, hardly a mandate.But it is the lie that was stuffed down our throats during the election and the lie that is constanly stuffed down our throats now.That America loves Obama. But like the nazi's minister of propaganda said"if you tell a big enough lie often enough it becomes true"
The political, and bussiness class in America put out the lie that American voters are apathetic, they are not apethetic they are enraged that there is no real voice for them in either party.If the democrats are so worried about disenfranchized voters they might start with the 47% of the nation who have given up on the political process.
But I think your right why don't you 30% give your energy to supporting obama, and the rest of us ignore this shit, get off our asses and start to build the nation we want.

[ChumpDumper]

Obama won.

Sorry you lost.

[FreeMason]

Have it! Just give us Texas and everyone will be happy.

I wish you all and Barney Frank lots of luck and happiness on your journey to rebuilding America. :lol:toast

[balli]

Have it! Just give us Texas and everyone will be happy.

Gladly. Too bad I'm not Obama. Unfortunately for you, I'm going to assume TX, like most red states, spends more federal dollars than it generates. Actually maybe not, but if so, you guys would have a bitch of a time without the blue states buying your shit for you.

[FreeMason]

Gladly. Too bad I'm not Obama. Unfortunately for you, I'm going to assume TX, like most red states, spends more federal dollars than it generates. Actually maybe not, but if so, you guys would have a bitch of a time without the blue states buying your shit for you.


Shit homie, why talk shit about one of the states that isn't bankrupting itself?

Texas would and is doing great without most of the liberal economic filth that is crippling some states.

And you probably have your mind backwards on what you just said. Texas is one of the biggest fucking players in America. This should be common sense, but you live in Utah so I will give you a free pass. What a joke to think that NY, Cali, and other states are actually keeping us UP. haha

[balli]

Shit homie, why talk shit about one of the states that isn't bankrupting itself?I'm not talking shit. Like I said, "actually, maybe not".


without most of the liberal economic filth that is crippling some states.
Motherfucker please. 8 of the 10 states who spend the most federal tax dollars while paying the least are red states. Liberal economic filth? Bullshit. Blue states and their charity are the lifeblood of the south.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

You real Americans have a country to put back together again? nearly half the people able to vote in America in the presidental elections didn't bother. Of the half that did vote only 52% of the popular vote went to obama, that means obama was elected by less than 30% of the people of the nation, hardly a mandate.But it is the lie that was stuffed down our throats during the election and the lie that is constanly stuffed down our throats now.That America loves Obama. But like the nazi's minister of propaganda said"if you tell a big enough lie often enough it becomes true"
The political, and bussiness class in America put out the lie that American voters are apathetic, they are not apethetic they are enraged that there is no real voice for them in either party.If the democrats are so worried about disenfranchized voters they might start with the 47% of the nation who have given up on the political process.
But I think your right why don't you 30% give your energy to supporting obama, and the rest of us ignore this shit, get off our asses and start to build the nation we want.

60 percent of the voting population voted, largest turnout since 1960.

Obama's margin of victory has been the largest since 1988, and the total domination of the democratic party in congress also suggests that he has a mandate.

Obama has an approval rating in the mid 70s right now.

[FreeMason]

I'm not talking shit. Like I said, "actually, maybe not".


Motherfucker please. 8 of the 10 states who spend the most federal tax dollars while paying the least are red states. Liberal economic filth? Bullshit. Blue states and their charity are the lifeblood of the south.


hahhaha. What do I give a shit about any other red states? I'm not some party hack who only sees red and blue and throws my blind loyalty towards one or the other. I do know Cali, NY, Rhode Island, and others are complete clusterfucks right now and Texas is handling business.

You make me embarrassed to be labeled an "American".

[balli]

hahhaha. You make me embarrassed to be labeled an "American".

Then get the fuck out.

I know numbers and reality can be a bitch but like I said. red states spend far more federal dollars than blue states. Blue states pay far more in federal taxes than red states. It's all right here: http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html

Once you republicans get away from the federal trough, you can say something about federal spending. Until then... Shut the fuck up GOP.

[SnakeBoy]

You mean the opposition party is opposing. That's outrageous! Who the hell do they think they are, democrats.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I'm sorry you're so clueless balli. The stimulus package won't do shit for this country in the long run except make the tab bigger. But hey, what do we care if our kids and their kids have to pay like 90% income taxes to cover the tab we're running up right now? Everyone deserves to have an ipod, a 60" plasma, and a mcmansion.

A government powerful enough to provide everything to the people is powerful enough to take it all away - Thomas Jefferson

Nationalization worked well for the USSR, Cuba, North Korea, etc., so we definitely have history on our side....

[balli]

I'm sorry you're so clueless balli. The stimulus package won't do shit for this country in the long run except make the tab bigger.
You don't know that. Just like I don't know if it will work.

But you're right. We should just sit back and do nothing. I mean, fuck it, everybody will lose their money, retirement and jobs and we'll basically be living in the third world, but worse. But yeah, you're right, let's just give up now.

[Winehole23]

The bill: http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/HR1.pdf

The criticism that the stimulus bill looks more like an appropriations bill than a plan to stimulate he economy does have some merit IMO. But suggesting it is all pork is an overstatement.

I bet some stuff could be trimmed without measurable harm to the economy. I also bet there are a few solid ideas in there. You have to play both ends against the middle.

The majority drafts the bill they want, the minority bitches about being left out in the cold. Politics as usual. Both sides want what they think is good for the country. Saying that the minority hates America is just as dimwitted AND UNHELPFUL now as it was when the GOP had majorities in Congress.

But, hey, suit yourself, ballijuana. I'm sure you will anyway. I know it feels good to throw it back in the face of erstwhile super-patriots, but that doesn't make it any less childish.

As for the disc golf in Austin, it sounds frivolous, but strikes me as a good idea. (I live in Austin.) It improves a public accommodation that will soon be overrun by even greater numbers of underemployed stoners. Thumbs up!

It seems like there's very little incentive for the GOP to get on board, and very much to obstruct. Why vote for activist government you don't believe in? If you help it succeed, you kill your own ideology. If you resist and and Keynesian pump-priming fails -- and it may -- then your party ends up "not on the wrong side" of history.

The danger for the GOP is that they will be perceived by voters as blocking necessary and desirable government action without proposing anything better. In this case, the path of obstruction leads to obsolescence and even smaller minorities.

[balli]

I know it feels good to throw it back in the face of erstwhile super-patriots, but that doesn't make it any less childish.
I know, but we all know that that is the extent of what I'm doing.


As for the disc golf in Austin, it sounds frivolous, but strikes me as a good idea. (I live in Austin.) It improves a public accommodation that will soon be overrun by even greater numbers of underemployed stoners. Thumbs up!

The danger for the GOP is that they will be perceived by voters as blocking necessary and desirable government action without proposing anything better. In this case, the path of obstruction leads to obsolescence and even smaller minorities.
And I guess that's what's driving my anger... and said childishness. Whether it's a state road, a frolf course, a federal highway, a new job, a tax cut, a bunch of contraceptives, a tax rebate, a museum, etc. That money's going to be spent.

And it just seems ridiculous to me that the Republicans are trying to frame this in the context of unnecessary, or frivolous spending. It doesn't really matter where the money goes, it just needs to enter the American system. And if they want to bitch and moan about how it's spent, fine, like you suggested, come up with something else. But don't just blather on about pork and the need for assured, permanent tax cuts. Right now is not the time for political posturing. It's the time to get something done. We're bleeding 50,000 fucking jobs a day in this country. The GOP needs to quit putting party first.

[ClingingMars]

:sleep

-Mars

[ratm1221]

A government powerful enough to provide everything to the people is powerful enough to take it all away - Thomas Jefferson

Gerald Ford said that. Not Thomas Jefferson. You didn't even quote it right. It's "A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.."

Guess it gives your quote more relevance by shitting on Jefferson's name?

[balli]

:lol

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Gerald Ford said that. Not Thomas Jefferson. You didn't even quote it right. It's "A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.."

Guess it gives your quote more relevance by shitting on Jefferson's name?

Cute reply, gun hater. Where I grabbed the quote from they had quoted it as being Thomas Jefferson's. Excuse the fuck out of me.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to figuring out who to shoot next with my guns - that's all they're good for according to you.

[ratm1221]

Cute reply, gun hater. Where I grabbed the quote from they had quoted it as being Thomas Jefferson's. Excuse the fuck out of me.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to figuring out who to shoot next with my guns - that's all they're good for according to you.

Why do you hate America?

[jack sommerset]

"Republicans hate America" Politics are getting worse!

[johnsmith]

One year ago democrats fucking hated it when a republican would ask "why do you hate America"?

They also hated, "if you don't like it then leave".


Now it's their standard reply..................politics are hilarious.

[balli]

One year ago democrats fucking hated it when a republican would ask "why do you hate America"?

They also hated, "if you don't like it then leave".


Now it's their standard reply..................politics are hilarious.

:bang It's our standard reply because we are mocking you. Every time someone says, "why do you hate America," the right is being made fun of for all the years they spent saying, "why do you hate America?"

The difference, we're joking- you seriously fucking meant it. Do you not understand that, dumbass?

[Winehole23]

Have it! Just give us Texas and everyone will be happy.

I wish you all and Barney Frank lots of luck and happiness on your journey to rebuilding America. :lol:toastHowever much you may consider the secession of Texas a spiritual fait accompli, it flies in the face of the facts. We're still estadounidense.

Whose side were you on again?

[Winehole23]

:bang It's our standard reply because we are mocking you. Every time someone says, "why do you hate America," the right is being made fun of for all the years they spent saying, "why do you hate America?"

The difference, we're joking- you seriously fucking meant it. Do you not understand that dumbass?I think he does.

It's getting to be a broken record, ballijuana. For me, it's bad enough that it already was one. The sardonic echoes proceeding in the other direction are even more tired and pompous than the phony jingo umbrage was in the first place.

Let's talk baseball, and cut down on the stupid chatter.

[johnsmith]

:bang It's our standard reply because we are mocking you. Every time someone says, "why do you hate America," the right is being made fun of for all the years they spent saying, "why do you hate America?"

The difference, we're joking- you seriously fucking meant it. Do you not understand that, dumbass?

First of all, link to where I ever said one of those things please.


Second, I'm pretty sure it was a joke then too, you were just to angry to recognize it as such.................weird thing about it though is that you are still just as angry.

[balli]

It's getting to be a broken record
I know... I'm tepidly sorry for doing it initially, I shouldn't have distorted Krugman into a tired joke- at least not in the title. And it's only been a week so this "hating America" ship will sail soon enough.

[balli]

First of all, link to where I ever said one of those things please.
Look into majestic pluralization.

And yes, the right did mean it, all those YEARS they spent saying it.

[johnsmith]

Look into majestic pluralization.

Ok, but only if you look into broad generalization.

[johnsmith]

Look into majestic pluralization.

And yes, the right did mean it, all those YEARS they spent saying it.

I have to quote you twice now since you can't muster up a complete thought at once and go back and edit your shit after the fact.

Anyway, I don't think the right did mean it, I think they meant it the same way you do.

[balli]

Ok, but only if you look into broad generalization.
Are you seriously going to try to deny the right's use of accusations about patriotism during the Bush years? That's not a generalization, it's a stone cold fact. Give me a fucking break.

[johnsmith]

Are you seriously going to try to deny the right's use of accusations about patriotism during the Bush years? That's not a generalization, it's a stone cold fact. Give me a fucking break.

I'm going to deny it when you speak specifically about a group that I associate myself with yet have never uttered the words you brought up and therefore have painted me in a light that I don't truly belong in.


It's sort of like the temper tantrum you threw when Angel Luv called you the devil or whatever the fuck she said to merit a finger lashing from the hands of an angry Ute.

[balli]

I'm going to deny it when you speak specifically about a group that I associate myself with yet have never uttered the words you brought up and therefore have painted me in a light that I don't truly belong in.
I didn't say shit about you personally. Anytime I used the word you, I was clearly, clearly, speaking in the context of right v left. Again, look into majestic pluralization.

[johnsmith]

I didn't say shit about you personally. Anytime I used the word you, I was clearly, clearly, speaking in the context of right v left. Again, look into majestic pluralization.


It's our standard reply because we are mocking you.
See, a period symbolizes the end of a complete thought. Therefore, you are talking about me.

Then you called me a "dumbass" at the end. To me, that isn't clearly, clearly speaking of context of right v left. Again, look into broad generalization.

I'll be accepting apologies between 5:00 and 6:00 PM Pacific Standard time via instant messaging. Until then, carry on with your Boutons like anger all over the political forum. I wonder if you are this miserable in real life?

[DarrinS]

Q: What did Reagan do back in 1981, during one of the worst recessions?

Hint: He didn't drastically increase the size of govt. and raise taxes.

People forget what a mess Reagan inherited from Jimmy Carter.



If I'm against giant govt and I'm for low taxes, does that automatically make me an anti-American, anti-Obama, political hack?

[ChumpDumper]

Hint: He didn't drastically increase the size of govt. and raise taxes.Right, he drastically increased the size of government and cut taxes of the rich.

And '81 was nothing compared to this -- all one had to do back then was jack up interest rates to kill inflation. Not as simple today.

[DarrinS]

Right, he drastically increased the size of government and cut taxes of the rich.

And '81 was nothing compared to this -- all one had to do back then was jack up interest rates to kill inflation. Not as simple today.


Uh, do you even know what you're talking about?

[ChumpDumper]

Absolutely. Thinking Reagan didn't drastically increase the size of government is cute, but wrong. That's like saying W didn't do it either.

[Winehole23]

http://www.buyandhold.com/bh/en/education/history/2000/paul_volker2.html

[balli]

Hint: He didn't drastically increase the size of govt. and raise taxes.

If I'm against giant govt and I'm for low taxes, does that automatically make me an anti-American, anti-Obama, political hack?
First, you're going to get huge tax cuts and stimulus checks under Obama.

Second, I'm sorry you don't want to face the reality that the Govt. has to inject money into the system, propose something better or build a time machine.

[ElNono]

Listen, it's not that complicated. As Winehole pointed out earlier, the Keynesian recipe for dealing with recession is to increase government spending. You can increase spending in two ways: Cutting taxes and/or increasing spending on programs. Normally both are done. There's no defined set ratio between the two. So most conservatives push for tax cuts, while the liberals normally push for the programs. Why follow Keynes? Well, his recipe is pretty much the only available, and was used both on the great depression and in the economic crisis in Japan in the 90's. While there are no guarantees it will work, it's pretty much all we have. So those looking to balance the budget right now, it's just not going to happen. It makes no economic sense. Once prosperity returns, we can go back to trimming spending.

[DarrinS]

http://www.buyandhold.com/bh/en/education/history/2000/paul_volker2.html

That was actually a good read.

[BradLohaus]

The real problems are:

1.) the wealth continues to become concentrated at the very, very top

2.) (partly because of #1) the masses of consumers don't have the purchasing power to continue to live the way they way the do for much longer

3.) the government owes more in debt and entitlements than it can ever hope to pay without a serious devaluation of the dollar, and that amount will only grow in the future

Fiscal stimulus will help numbers 1 and 2 in the short term while hurting number 3 in the long term... which is why the government loves it - they are here in the short term, and gone in the long term.

Krugman is hot right now after winning the Nobel Prize and all, but people seem to forget that he was writing articles like this in Japanese periodicals in the 90s... and his advise didn't work. Not that anyone else's really did either, which is really the point. This is the beginning of another huge test for Keynes's theories. We'll probably just get into another huge war again and claim that they passed the test again.

[ElNono]

The real problems are:

1.) the wealth continues to become concentrated at the very, very top

2.) (partly because of #1) the masses of consumers don't have the purchasing power to continue to live the way they way the do for much longer

3.) the government owes more in debt and entitlements than it can ever hope to pay without a serious devaluation of the dollar, and that amount will only grow in the future

Fiscal stimulus will help numbers 1 and 2 in the short term while hurting number 3 in the long term... which is why the government loves it - they are here in the short term, and gone in the long term.

Krugman is hot right now after winning the Nobel Prize and all, but people seem to forget that he was writing articles like this in Japanese periodicals in the 90s... and his advise didn't work. Not that anyone else's really did either, which is really the point. This is the beginning of another huge test for Keynes's theories. We'll probably just get into another huge war again and claim that they passed the test again.

I actually adventure that we'll go in circles. When the recession moves over somebody is going to refloat monetarism, then let free-market take over again... then we'll drive right back into recession...

[Winehole23]

That was actually a good read.The way many people see it, the Volcker Fed chairmanship vindicated monetarism. He whipped inflation with a 20.5% prime rate. Then he refused to loosen as quickly and as much as the politicians wanted him to. Volcker took inflation seriously.

We're at the opposite pole, trying to stave off deflation. All the monetaristic rope is played out with rates effectively already at zero. So the solution has to be fiscal if there is one at all. If demand craters more than the 2-3% of GDP we're going to spend, we'll only be softening the blow, but if a deflation spiral is thereby averted, it'll have been worth doing. Is the way the village wisdom goes.

Averts deflation? Maybe. Who knows?

If it fails we'll know for sure Keynesian priming doesn't work at the chosen magnitude. If it succeeds, people will say the economy didn't need saving anyway. That it was about to get better all on its own.

Softens the blow? This takes me back to the old joke about pissing in dark slacks: it gives you a nice warm feeling, but nobody else can tell.

[Rogue]

as the vicious cycle would have it the democrats are going to take this blame in 4 or 8 years.

this thread sucks even more than tmac does.

we are facing a financial desaster which is generated by decades of ignorance and abusement, so it can not be resolved overnight. the cluprits are the housellers I think. these motherf***ers sold their houses at sky high prizes and most americans don't have cash to afford them, so they had to buy them on credit. Our banks had always been generous to loan money to help our business starters and family builders, but the dollars they had lent all went to the pockets of those f***ing house-sellers who used the money to avoid being charged after fucking their moms.

[Winehole23]

as the vicious cycle would have it the democrats are going to take this blame in 4 or 8 years.

this thread sucks even more than tmac does.

we are facing a financial desaster which is generated by decades of ignorance and abusement, so it can not be resolved overnight. the cluprits are the housellers I think. these motherf***ers sold their houses at sky high prizes and most americans don't have cash to afford them, so they had to buy them on credit. Our banks had always been generous to loan money to help our business starters and family builders, but the dollars they had lent all went to the pockets of those f***ing house-sellers who used the money to avoid being charged after fucking their moms.:lol

[angrydude]

The real problem is our standard of living is too high compared to how much money we make. That's why we buy everything on credit and then default on the debt. The Fed's response for the past 30 years has been to cut interest rates effectively putting more money into the economy to cover up this fact and ensure there was plenty of credit to go around. Now that we've run out of interest rates to cut we're just going to make money the old fashion way--by printing it.

The country needs a recession to get back to some sort of balance. Too bad we've put it off for so long that now its going to be much worse than it would have been in the past. Even if this measure does what its intended to do its only going to prolong the inevitable.

[Winehole23]

The real problem is our standard of living is too high compared to how much money we make. That's why we buy everything on credit and then default on the debt. The Fed's response for the past 30 years has been to cut interest rates effectively putting more money into the economy to cover up this fact and ensure there was plenty of credit to go around. Now that we've run out of interest rates to cut we're just going to make money the old fashion way--by printing it.

The country needs a recession to get back to some sort of balance. Too bad we've put it off for so long that now its going to be much worse than it would have been in the past. Even if this measure does what its intended to do its only going to prolong the inevitable.I feel your anger, angrydude, and I largely agree with your take. Too little real wealth supports too much debt. Restoring the status quo ante in credit or consumption means restoring the imbalance that made us vulnerable to financial meltdown in the first place.

For some reason, it's considered beyond the pale to suggest that deflation might be our friend. And why it's taken as an article of faith that only fiscal medicine will save us is beyond me.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

The real problem is our standard of living is too high compared to how much money we make. That's why we buy everything on credit and then default on the debt. The Fed's response for the past 30 years has been to cut interest rates effectively putting more money into the economy to cover up this fact and ensure there was plenty of credit to go around. Now that we've run out of interest rates to cut we're just going to make money the old fashion way--by printing it.

The country needs a recession to get back to some sort of balance. Too bad we've put it off for so long that now its going to be much worse than it would have been in the past. Even if this measure does what its intended to do its only going to prolong the inevitable.

Good take, rookie.

Everything going on in D.C. just pisses me off more with each passing day. We need a recession, hell, we probably need a depression, to get out of this financial funk.

But the POS politicians won't let it happen because they're more worried about staying in office than doing the right thing, so they come up with bailouts and have the Treasury print more dollars to try and spend the country's way out of the recession.

Sadly, we're at the point this is just going to make it more painful in the long run. People need to live within their means. Just because you're an American doesn't mean you're entitled to a new iPod every six months, plasmas or LCDs in every room in the house, high speed internet, and a 200K mcmansion (oh, and new cars every 2-3 years).

Damn.

[Warlord23]

Good take, rookie.

Everything going on in D.C. just pisses me off more with each passing day. We need a recession, hell, we probably need a depression, to get out of this financial funk.

But the POS politicians won't let it happen because they're more worried about staying in office than doing the right thing, so they come up with bailouts and have the Treasury print more dollars to try and spend the country's way out of the recession.

Sadly, we're at the point this is just going to make it more painful in the long run. People need to live within their means. Just because you're an American doesn't mean you're entitled to a new iPod every six months, plasmas or LCDs in every room in the house, high speed internet, and a 200K mcmansion (oh, and new cars every 2-3 years).

Damn.

For once, I completely agree with your take. This country needs a good recession to eliminate all the bad fiscal habits that both individuals and corporations have been accustomed to.

On the topic of Republicans hating America, it's not that they hate the country, they are just stupid. Stupid enough to think that just because the GOP claims it is conservative, it actually has been fiscally conservative. Republican administrations have outspent Democratic ones consistently in recent history. Reagan racked up a huge deficit, Bush Sr. did nothing to help, Clinton actually turned it around by reducing public debt and putting up a surplus, and Bush screwed the pooch again by spending like a drunken sailor.

Republican presidents have always taken the short-sighted route by spending big, pussing out on regulation, cutting taxes without a clear plan and finally letting somebody else pick up the tab. Reaganomics resulted in massive deficits, the Savings & Loan crisis and the 87 stock market crash. Bush Jr. leaves us with a banking system on life support, a housing crash, a stock market crash, and oh yeah, massive deficits.

History repeats itself, but Republicans won't learn.

[mogrovejo]

First, you're going to get huge tax cuts and stimulus checks under Obama.

Second, I'm sorry you don't want to face the reality that the Govt. has to inject money into the system, propose something better or build a time machine.

Tax cuts like those are fake, those taxes are just being postponed. It's merely taxing the unborns. If the spending is not cut, someone will have to pay the bill.

[mogrovejo]

Good take, rookie.

Everything going on in D.C. just pisses me off more with each passing day. We need a recession, hell, we probably need a depression, to get out of this financial funk.

But the POS politicians won't let it happen because they're more worried about staying in office than doing the right thing, so they come up with bailouts and have the Treasury print more dollars to try and spend the country's way out of the recession.

Sadly, we're at the point this is just going to make it more painful in the long run. People need to live within their means. Just because you're an American doesn't mean you're entitled to a new iPod every six months, plasmas or LCDs in every room in the house, high speed internet, and a 200K mcmansion (oh, and new cars every 2-3 years).

Damn.


Great post.