Quote from Buchanan's new book

[ElNono]

You brought up the "income inequality" angle, then painted it with some canard...

Are you still talking to yourself?

[Wild Cobra]

NBER: "Personal income less transfers peaked in December 2007" and has "generally declined since June" 2008. In December 2008, the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) announced that the recession began in December 2007. At that time, NBER stated, "Our measure of real personal income less transfers peaked in December 2007, displayed a zig-zag pattern from then until June 2008 at levels slightly below the December 2007 peak, and has generally declined since June." NBER noted that "[t]o adjust personal income less transfer payments from nominal to real terms (that is, to remove the effects of price changes), the committee uses the deflator for gross domestic product."



Spin that , yoni

I will say what I have all along.

The democrats took both houses in 2006. Their rhetoric about taxing the wealthy and regulating industry is all it took to bring us down. Measures need not be passed, but just the threat of passing.

Words and congressional threats have a huge effect on the economy.

[ElNono]

I will say what I have all along.

Maybe there's a non-partisan, and quite simple explanation: We got into a recession. A pretty big recession.

Not everything has to be red vs blue, tbh. Especially when the causes are fairly simple to spot.

[Yonivore]

I will say what I have all along.

The democrats took both houses in 2006. Their rhetoric about taxing the wealthy and regulating industry is all it took to bring us down. Measures need not be passed, but just the threat of passing.

Words and congressional threats have a huge effect on the economy.

Well, raiding guitar factories and running the rigs out of the Gulf of Mexico didn't help either.

[Wild Cobra]

Well, raiding guitar factories and running the rigs out of the Gulf of Mexico didn't help either.

True, but didn't that all happen during the Obama administration's enforcing pet policies, rather than the 110th congress in Bush's last term scaring the bejesus out of the wealthy?

[Wild Cobra]

Maybe there's a non-partisan, and quite simple explanation: We got into a recession. A pretty big recession.

Not everything has to be red vs blue, tbh. Especially when the causes are fairly simple to spot.

I wish things were non partisan. The facts remain, they are partisan. The facts remain that democrats are always catering to the poor and promising the poor they will hurt the rich.

Class warfare is clearly the MO of the democrats.

[ElNono]

wealthy scared?

[ElNono]

I wish things were non partisan. The facts remain, they aren't.

I gather you mean "they are" (partisan). Otherwise, we agree

[Wild Cobra]

I gather you mean "they are" (partisan). Otherwise, we agree

I stand corrected, and will edit that post.

[ElNono]

Unless you're suggesting that parties create recessions just to with the other party, what you say makes no sense. And if your claim is indeed that, then I'd like you to back that up.

[Wild Cobra]

Unless you're suggesting that parties create recessions just to with the other party, what you say makes no sense. And if your claim is indeed that, then I'd like you to back that up.

Wow...

Think about how the rhetoric has psychological effects. Some things should be readily apparent. Sure, it doesn't affect 100% or 0%. Still, there will be some number between 0% and 100% that it does. Quantifying that uncertainty would be difficult, but I will maintain that it is one key factor as to why we are in such a crisis today.

[ElNono]

Wow...

Think about how the rhetoric has psychological effects. Some things should be readily apparent. Sure, it doesn't affect 100% or 0%. Still, there will be some number between 0% and 100% that it does. Quantifying that uncertainty would be difficult, but I will maintain that it is one key factor as to why we are in such a crisis today.

IOW, you can't back it up. Noted.

[Wild Cobra]

IOW, you can't back it up. Noted.

I know I could find examples, but I'm not going to take the time. Rather, let me as a simple yes or no question.

Do you think that somewhere above 0%, but less than 100%, of corporate decisions, will be affected by such talk of future legislation ideas, and talk alone?

[ElNono]

I know I could find examples, but I'm not going to take the time.

Of course you won't.

Rather, let me as a simple yes or no question.
Do you think that somewhere above 0%, but less than 100%, of corporate decisions, will be affected by such talk of future legislation ideas, and talk alone?

"personal income" isn't a legislation idea, is a real, measurable economic figure. But thanks for the strawman.

[Yonivore]

Partisan politics affect the economy when parties pursue ideologies that are economically unsound.

[ElNono]

Partisan politics affect the economy when parties pursue ideologies that are economically unsound.

That's exactly the opposite of what was presented here. Here, we were presented with an economic indicator, one that was unfavorable both when Bush Jr was president and now, and then chalked it up to partisan politics of Barry.

Thanks again for showing what a shill you are, yoni.

[Wild Cobra]

"personal income" isn't a legislation idea, is a real, measurable economic figure. But thanks for the strawman.

I wasn't talking about personal income, but the job providers that has an effect of personal income.

Why are you liberals so short sighted? You want immediate bandage solutions, instead of fixing the root problems.

It took us decades to get where we are. There is no overnight, or single solution to restore America.

[Wild Cobra]

Again...

Do you think that somewhere above 0%, but less than 100%, of corporate decisions, will be affected by such talk of future legislation ideas, and talk alone?

[ElNono]

I wasn't talking about personal income

That's what we were talking about. Not sure why or where you went off a tangent.

[ElNono]

Again...

Do you think that somewhere above 0%, but less than 100%, of corporate decisions, will be affected by such talk of future legislation ideas, and talk alone?

I think some percentage let themselves get affected. I think it's the vast minority, seeing there's much better indicators that are not based on fable.

Again, a strawman to what we're discussing. But there, you have your answer.

[Wild Cobra]

I think some percentage let themselves get affected. I think it's the vast minority, seeing there's much better indicators that are not based on fable.

Again, a strawman to what we're discussing. But there, you have your answer.

So you agree it will have some effect.

[ElNono]

So you agree it will have some effect.

Some, sure. Especially on those that follow partisan politics, instead of sound economic decisions.

[Wild Cobra]

Some, sure. Especially on those that follow partisan politics, instead of sound economic decisions.

Well, we disagree on that finer point.

Once democrats were the majority after the 2006 election, their ideas of policy were bound to start taking shape. Now think of what some of these top 1% people would be thinking. Corporations and businessmen plan for the future. They would look and see the more likely climate being unfriendly to them, and put off new growth and hiring more employees. With higher taxes and regulations being talked about in congress, especially the likes of Cap and Trade... Would you invest in future corporate ventures in such uncertainty?

[ElNono]

Well, we disagree on that finer point.

Reality disagrees with you. Nothing passes without Bush signing off on it. Furthermore, Bush had a lot of things he proposed passed by that Congress, including the TARP.

If the country would be so disillusioned with the Democrats, as you propose, Barry wouldn't have been President, nor the Democrats would've held the Senate.

Again, when talking about economics, there's simply much better indicators. We clearly got into a recession somewhere in 2007, and the economy is still screwed. Obviously, a deadlocked Congress isn't going to help.

[Wild Cobra]

Reality disagrees with you. Nothing passes without Bush signing off on it. Furthermore, Bush had a lot of things he proposed passed by that Congress, including the TARP.

i suggest you open up a dictionary and look up the word "future."

If the country would be so disillusioned with the Democrats, as you propose, Barry wouldn't have been President, nor the Democrats would've held the Senate.

I didn't know the voting population in general reacted the way as corporate stock holders.

link please.

Again, when talking about economics, there's simply much better indicators. We clearly got into a recession somewhere in 2007, and the economy is still screwed. Obviously, a deadlocked Congress isn't going to help.

Yep, it all started about 8 months after the 2006 elections.