Comments on: Produce a reliable income stream, not a short-term stimulus

By: budorob

budorob — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 14:13:18 +0000

Obama plans on extending and tweaking tax credits. He calls his plan a series of tax cuts, but that’s the politician talking. Most of the tax credits in the code become phased out for married couples making over $150,000. Broad based tax reform is needed. I am alarmed at the politics of economics; as Rs and Ds fight over income taxes, our elected officials continue to levy higher taxes on our basic needs. More and more, I’m feeling like Thomas Sowell, who said, “Does anyone else feel like you’re at a restaurant and can’t get anyone’s attention?”

By: There's My Two Cents

There's My Two Cents — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 04:52:20 +0000

Tax Cuts Versus Redistribution…

Hot Air has a great post today about what really helps to improve an economy: a one-time injection (aka ’stimulus’) or a long-term plan for growth….

By: Dasher

Dasher — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:19:06 +0000

You know that first stimulus check….

It’s still in the bank. I never spent it.

Does that make me a bad person?

Kini on November 25, 2008 at 11:28 AM

That’s where mine went.

By: Count to 10

Count to 10 — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:07:45 +0000

There is a big problem with equating consumption to economic health. If we are borrowing money to buy consumer goods, then we are reducing the resources that go into increasing our production.
Marginal tax rate cuts can help a lot, especially if you are high up the Laugher curve. But that is only part of what really needs to be done, which is to motivate people to produce more. Get rid of the minimum wage, let union dominated businesses die, and stop paying people not to work.
It can’t be all bliss. If there is no pain, there will be no improvement.

By: kelley in virginia

kelley in virginia — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:56:17 +0000

I didn’t get a stimulus check last time & bambi for sure will never give me one because my husband & i work, save & invest. we’re the ones he wants to screw.

By: Obama Future Press Conference 25 December 2011 | BigMouthFrog

Obama Future Press Conference 25 December 2011 | BigMouthFrog — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:40:58 +0000

[...] Transcript from press conference of Pres. Barack Obama, Dec. 25th, 2011: CNSNEWS.COM: Mr. President, during a press conference in November of 2008, when you were President Elect, you promised to create 2.5 million jobs by January, 2011. But the Labor Department report issued yesterday indicates that in fact 1.7 million jobs were lost during that period. Why did your plan fail? [...]

By: aelhues

aelhues — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:38:53 +0000

Hah!!Thanks DarkCurrent, but I doubt I’d vote for myself….I’m not qualified.

On another note, anyone wonder why we don’t have some of the really cool cars that are fun to drive, and get great gas mileage like the Ford Mondeo? Stupid regulation, that’s why. And no, I’m not saying that all regulation is bad, but we should err on the side of less, not more.

By: hillbillyjim

hillbillyjim — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:38:44 +0000

In the natural order of things, down-sizing is a predictable occurrence that corrects an imbalanced situation.

Peer into the Looking Glass and you see our bloated government doing the exact opposite.

By: DarkCurrent

DarkCurrent — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:26:25 +0000

aelhues on November 25, 2008 at 1:09 PM

Aelhues 2012!

By: aelhues

aelhues — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:09:49 +0000

I still think this is pretty simple. In order to compete for jobs on the world stage, while maintaining our relatively higher income, we have to have a lower tax and regulation burden for corporations. There is no snazzy magical way to fix our economy. There is only reducing costs to business.
Part of this is, of course, reducing the financial burden of government through cutting inefficient, unnecessary, and unconstitutional government programs. Unfortunately, regardless of reason, or law, we are moving in the other direction, and I see no signs that there is a turn about on the horizon.

By: DarkCurrent

DarkCurrent — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 18:01:38 +0000

sheebe on November 25, 2008 at 12:53 PM

I think my sarcastic comment was misunderstood, or I’m not following your logic.

By: sheebe

sheebe — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:53:00 +0000

Why not go a step further and simply ban foreign trade?

DarkCurrent on November 25, 2008 at 11:37 AM

Such logic. That would be real good for our Country. The Libs know this though. They won’t go for that. How would they get their payoffs? Great idea and I have said that too! Wonder how much pork they will start taking when the Dictator takes office? I would like to know so I can keep on their greedy asses! I have been flooding them lately with a bunch of complaints. I won’t stop now.

By: DarkCurrent

DarkCurrent — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:47:25 +0000

hillbillyjim on November 25, 2008 at 12:41 PM

Indeed. As an example, my spelling in the above post reflects the quality of a government education. We don’t need more of that.

By: hillbillyjim

hillbillyjim — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:41:24 +0000

I think we agree on both the tax and trade points.

DarkCurrent on November 25, 2008 at 12:37 PM

Yes. I would venture to speculate that we also agree on the need to restrain, then reverse, the growth of ~~Big Brother~~ the federal government. Therein lies real progress.

By: DarkCurrent

DarkCurrent — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:37:34 +0000

Of course not. But you must also ask, should the government be in the business of redistributing wealth with the likely outcome a boon for Chinese manufacturing and a tenuous IV infusion for low-skill American jobs?

What happens to these positions when the stimulus money runs its course?

hillbillyjim on November 25, 2008 at 12:28 PM

No, the government should NOT be involved in redistribtion of wealth. Tax cuts, particularly capital gains and for the highest earners are the way to promote real, sustainted stimulus. I think we agree on both the tax and trade points.

By: Dr Evil

Dr Evil — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:36:57 +0000

Lou Dobbs was the guest this morning Imus and Lou were discussing Larry Summers…CHANGE? Who is the smartest guys in the room now?

http://imustimes.wordpress.com/2008/11/25/imus-fat-larry-summers/

By: hillbillyjim

hillbillyjim — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:32:41 +0000

Hillbilly, having seen the gravy I can tell you the goo’s better eating.

DarkCurrent on November 25, 2008 at 12:28 PM

I’d much rather have my own gravy.

By: lodge

lodge — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:31:53 +0000

We need to change the mark to market rules.

That’s just rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic. You can’t fix an economy with a rule change

By: TedInATL

TedInATL — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:29:52 +0000

I agree about doing away with Sarbanes/Oxley and mark-to-markets rules. I also wish there were more discussion of ideas like that of Dennis Prager: Allow tax-free withdrawals from retirement accounts IF the funds are used to buy up at-risk real estate.

By: hillbillyjim

hillbillyjim — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:28:47 +0000

Should US consumers pay much higher prices just so the money circulates only with the borders?

DarkCurrent on November 25, 2008 at 12:06 PM

Of course not. But you must also ask, should the government be in the business of redistributing wealth with the likely outcome a boon for Chinese manufacturing and a tenuous IV infusion for low-skill American jobs?

What happens to these positions when the stimulus money runs its course?

By: DarkCurrent

DarkCurrent — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:28:11 +0000

hillbillyjim on November 25, 2008 at 12:19 PM

Hillbilly, having seen the gravy I can tell you the goo’s better eating.

By: hawksruleva

hawksruleva — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:23:38 +0000

One of the 2 things I agree with Mort Kondracke on. We need to change the mark to market rules.

By: hillbillyjim

hillbillyjim — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:19:04 +0000

Of course, that’s somewhat of a generalization because even items bought from China in WalMart produce jobs for people here.

Of course. Mostly low-paying jobs, but jobs nonetheless. Clerks, stockers, truck-drivers, warehouse workers–all necessary and productive jobs, but….

There must be a better way to stimulate the economy besides skimming the goo off of China’s gravy.

By: DarkCurrent

DarkCurrent — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:16:25 +0000

Before the recent troubles, China was likely to get old before they can get rich. A lost decade hurts Chinas prospects for economic dominance. It is too late to undo their one-child policy.

Right_of_Attila on November 25, 2008 at 11:53 AM

Correct. China’s already a lot older than it is rich, and that will only accelerate in years and decades to come.

I remember when I lived in Japan 20 years ago the common view was that Japan was going to dominate the 21st century. Now it looks like they’ll be needing robots to change the old folk’s diapers by 2040. (I think this may be part of the Japanese facination with robots)

By: hawksruleva

hawksruleva — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:16:10 +0000

By my math, $700B, divided by the 304 Million people in the US, comes out to around $2,300 for every man woman and child in the US.

If they’re giving out checks, they should just give them straight to us, and not spend it on gov’t projects, half of which will never happen, and more than half the money for ends up in bureaucrats’ pockets.

But we don’t need another stimulus. We just need the government to get out of the way. Stop taking our money, and you don’t HAVE to give it back.