I decided to look at the Dow Jones Industrial Average from 1920 up to the present, in order to see how many serious market downturns we have weathered, and to perhaps see whether or not we are in a bear market/recession cycle so unusual and so catastro…

Former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill was told “deficits don’t matter” when he warned of a looming fiscal crisis.

O’Neill, fired in a shakeup of Bush’s economic team in December 2002, raised objections to a new round of tax cuts and said the president balked at his more aggressive plan to combat corporate crime after a string of accounting scandals because of opposition from “the corporate crowd,” a key constituency.

O’Neill said he tried to warn Vice President Dick Cheney that growing budget deficits-expected to top $500 billion this fiscal year alone-posed a threat to the economy. Cheney cut him off. “You know, Paul, Reagan proved deficits don’t matter,” he said, according to excerpts.

Do something! Do something! If you can’t do something smart, do something stupid, but do something! New Gallup polling shows that 53% of Americans favor and 36% oppose Congress’ passing a new $775 billion stimulus package of the type President-elect….

Hi Ron!

That is unless YOU grow some and say NO! to any more taxes, spending or ‘bailouts’.

Not that it will make any difference in Sodom-on-the-Potomac.

You can’t make this stuff up!

benny shakar

But apparently you can, Benny. Keep clinging to your love for the big-eared freak and let us know how that’s working out for you in a couple of years.

A) Cut supply-side tax rates: free up capital for investment, business expansion, hiring employees, etc. People also get to keep more of their earnings, which they can spend on consumer products. Best long-term solution.

B) Give out a “tax rebate” check in one lump sum. Not a great long term solution, but may give a one time bump to the economy since people might decide to go out and buy something big and shiny.

C) Give a “tax rebate” spread out over 52 weeks so that each person will see about $42 extra per month in their pay. As far as shaping behavior, I don’t see it. I doubt I’ll decide each month, “Hey, I’ve got an extra $42″ and go on a $42 shopping spree. It will just get lumped in with my pay and I probably won’t even notice it or consciously decide to go out and spend it.

Given these alternatives, why is Obama opting for what will probably be the least effective at boosting consumer spending? Even some Democrats in congress are balking and saying that a small “rebate” amount each month won’t affect spending behavior.

One last thing, John Kerry said he would rather the money not be given out as tax rebates, but spent on infrastructure. Interesting statement. This should be exhibit A that this rebate idea isn’t a tax cut, but rather a government spending program. It’s just a matter of where the spending goes: individuals or public works projects. A true tax cut involves people keeping more of the money that they earn. In other words, government never gets it to begin with. In this new definition, any government spending program can be justified as a “tax cut”. Increasing welfare benefits is really just a tax cut to those receiving welfare checks. Increasing education spending is just a tax cut to those with children in the public school system. Increasing corn subsidies is really a tax cut for farmers. It’s truly Orwellian language.
Sorry for the long post. This is my first time posting here . I will keep future posts much shorter.

Are you people really clueless enough to criticize President Obama’s efforts to clean up W’s epic mess?

You can’t make this stuff up!

benny shakar on January 8, 2009 at 9:00 PM

Spend our way to prosperity? No, you certainly can’t make this stuff up. A New New Deal without a Depression. And it’s not like the Old New Deal did a lot of good, either. Idiotic. But, good Obamaton fodder. Keeps them rapt and giddy.

Now can someone get this in front of the news readers and talking heads?

You can’t make this stuff up!

Read it all, and quit weeping.

Are you kidding? Using government numbers to gauge how well the economy is foolish. Government numbers are meant to quell fear and keep elected official in office. Our debt to GDP ratio is ridiculous. The government uses hedonics to push out high GDP numbers. Our real GDP is lower than advertised and our debt is soon to be thrust back in our faces. The bond market is being driven by the Feds buying it back and speculators. Once the Fed starts trying to issue more bonds and finds out foreign central banks aren’t buying, speculators dump and the bond market pops. What then, who bails out the Fed? Then you throw on top of all that the “stimulus.” We are hosed.

The Democratic senators, including Dick Durbin of Illinois and Tom Carper of Delaware, were given data showing that about half the poll’s respondents favored making huge investments that would expand government during a recession even if such measures result in a $1 trillion deficit.

About half? Yup, sounds like a consensus to me.

And from Axelrod himself:

“There’s an enormous appetite in this country for action,” he said. He declined to provide specifics about his polling and focus-group data.

Please, can the Republicans quit reitring and fight back!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqaWiI_sM0c&feature=related

1. Recession and inflation in the 1970s.
2. Loosening of capital in the 1980s and boom times.
3. Recession in the late 1990s and then 9/11.
4. Loosening of capital in 2000s and boom times.
5. Recession in the late 2000s.
6. ???????

C’mon, libtards. You can figure out the answer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnX8OfVLsK8