Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Economic Stimulus
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 472704" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>I just read this piece at CNN concerning proposals by gov't to help people buys cars. <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/23/autos/government_car_incentives/index.htm" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/23/autos/government_car_incentives/index.htm</span></a></p><p> </p><p>On the surface it might be tempting on many fronts to accept the ideas but then I think about the real estate boom and then bust and it doesn't take much thinking to realize that at first it would seem to work for the auto industry but at some point down the road as the auto industry expanded to meet buyer capacity needs, a market saturation would be met and passed and then the bubble would bust and then where would we be?</p><p> </p><p>Baba, you are correct in that even though it's painful, allowing this problem to wash itself out of the market and the market price itself accordingly is the better approach longterm. And none of this is without pain but IMO it's quicker and longterm better. The current answer of both republicans (one "NO" vote this past week doesn't IMO make a trend) and democrats is to in effect give asprin for a severe case of cancer and try and convince the patient because he feels a little better, he's cured and can return to a normal life.</p><p> </p><p>Starting with the Bush adminstration and republican led Congress and continuing with the current monarchy and democrat domination, we are using debt on the backs of our children and grandchildren as a means out of this and the coming problem will be massive inflation pressures that will come to pass. I believe even now inflation concerns are showing in the commodities markets as prices have stablized and even showing signs of upwards pressures in the near future. Even well known establishment economists like say a Paul Krugman have publically stated our answer is inflation. Go back and look through various threads here and you'll find where I posted such articles, even some written by Krugman himself.</p><p> </p><p>In 2006' the total of all taxes Fed, State, local are as follows:</p><p> </p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Us_gov_spending_2006_billions.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7f/Us_gov_spending_2006_billions.png" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></a></p><p> </p><p>We're talking nearly $5 trillions dollars out of the private economy for public use in various ways. In 2006' the GDP value of the US economy was $13 trillion plus per the Bureau of Economic Analysis for said year.</p><p>Moreover, according to a letter dated May 2007' from the Congressional Budget Office to Senator Kent Conrad <a href="http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/81xx/doc8116/05-18-TaxRevenues.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/81xx/doc8116/05-18-TaxRevenues.pdf</span></a> from 2003' to 2006' under republican control, our gov't realized a growth in tax revenue increase up 35% or growth of $625 billion increase in additional tax revenues. Had tax revenues only matched the actual growth of the economy as measured by GDP, tax revenues would have only grown by $373 billion. </p><p> </p><p>Now some here would extoll this as great news and parade the economic policies of the republicans as working but let's look at it another way. Look at the below comparing Deficit to Debt Increases from 2001' to 2008':</p><p> </p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Deficits_vs._Debt_Increases_-_2008.png" target="_blank"><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/67/Deficits_vs._Debt_Increases_-_2008.png/400px-Deficits_vs._Debt_Increases_-_2008.png" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></a></p><p> </p><p>To place real dollar numbers on the 2003' to 2006' period:</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>2003 $589.0 billion 5.5% of GDP</p><p>2004 $605.0 billion 5.3% of GDP</p><p>2005 $523.0 billion 4.3% of GDP</p><p>2006 $536.5 billion 4.1% of GDP</p><p> </p><p>These numbers are actual increases in the debt itself and then the % of GDP this represents. This is in addition on top of already existing Federal debt. So in a 4 years period, gov't revenues when up $625 billion but under republican leadership the gov't borrowed an additional $2 plus trillion dollars. Now some here will be quick to say that the cost was to protect us because of terrorism and such war efforts but "Houston, we have a problem!" According to the Congressional Research Office report dated October 2008', <a href="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="color: red">http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf</span></a> from FY 2001' to FY 2009' all appropiations in supplementals, regular appropiations and continuing resolutions as it realtes to Afghanistan, Iraq and all other efforts to the Global war on terror equal up to a grand total of $864 billion. Now just in the 4 years of 2003' to 2006' the $625 billion in revenue growth should have been enough to pay for 3/4ths of this total cost and we haven't factored in revenues fro 01' and 02' along with 07' and 08'. You can't tell me $200 plus billion couldn't be found to make the total cost of this war a paid out of petty cash proposition? Instead we find ourselves saddled by the party of fiscal conservatism with an extra $2 trillion in debt so to say the debt paid for the war cost is just plain factual </p><p> </p><p><span style="font-size: 26px">BULL*!</span></p><p>Democrats are for gov't medical care! Really? And what do you call Bush's Federal Drug prescription program, laissez fiare medicine! Democrats want to take over Education! What do you call "No Child Left Behind", chopped liver? Wanna know where this money for adventures in socialism came from? Our children and grand children and they'll have you to thanks for both the tax increases and excessive inflation that is to come to pay for all this Red State conservatism. God if that's conservative, hell I guess I am a liberal! 18th century classical type to be exact.</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/FeltTip/wink.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":wink2:" title="Wink :wink2:" data-shortname=":wink2:" /></p><p> </p><p>The truth is republicans had their own brand of welfare both corp. and public and the saddled debt was their means of wrecking the economy in order to buy votes to keep them in power. Problem was, their have no economic skills and knowledge, especially inthe business cycle and as Rev. Wright was so fond of saying, an in this case "the economic chickens have come home to roost!" Election 06' and then election 08' and "GAME OVER!"</p><p> </p><p>Now I know democrats will now take their turn at the trough known as "<img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/group1/censored2.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":censored2:" title="Censored2 :censored2:" data-shortname=":censored2:" />ING THE PUBLIC" but this latest "We've come to Jesus" or "Deathbed Conversion" by the republicans is completely and totally bogus. What is happening in Washington with the democrats is no surprise at all and I see no reason for them to stop what Bush and the republicans started. Face the facts, this is the legacy of Bush and the republican congress and the worse part is they greenlighted the democrats to be who they are to begin with. Thanks again for nothing!</p><p> </p><p>Scream about Obama and the democrats all you want becuase it just points out the truth of the hypocrits that you are!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 472704, member: 2189"] I just read this piece at CNN concerning proposals by gov't to help people buys cars. [URL="http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/23/autos/government_car_incentives/index.htm"][COLOR=red]http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/23/autos/government_car_incentives/index.htm[/COLOR][/URL] On the surface it might be tempting on many fronts to accept the ideas but then I think about the real estate boom and then bust and it doesn't take much thinking to realize that at first it would seem to work for the auto industry but at some point down the road as the auto industry expanded to meet buyer capacity needs, a market saturation would be met and passed and then the bubble would bust and then where would we be? Baba, you are correct in that even though it's painful, allowing this problem to wash itself out of the market and the market price itself accordingly is the better approach longterm. And none of this is without pain but IMO it's quicker and longterm better. The current answer of both republicans (one "NO" vote this past week doesn't IMO make a trend) and democrats is to in effect give asprin for a severe case of cancer and try and convince the patient because he feels a little better, he's cured and can return to a normal life. Starting with the Bush adminstration and republican led Congress and continuing with the current monarchy and democrat domination, we are using debt on the backs of our children and grandchildren as a means out of this and the coming problem will be massive inflation pressures that will come to pass. I believe even now inflation concerns are showing in the commodities markets as prices have stablized and even showing signs of upwards pressures in the near future. Even well known establishment economists like say a Paul Krugman have publically stated our answer is inflation. Go back and look through various threads here and you'll find where I posted such articles, even some written by Krugman himself. In 2006' the total of all taxes Fed, State, local are as follows: [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Us_gov_spending_2006_billions.png"][IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7f/Us_gov_spending_2006_billions.png[/IMG][/URL] We're talking nearly $5 trillions dollars out of the private economy for public use in various ways. In 2006' the GDP value of the US economy was $13 trillion plus per the Bureau of Economic Analysis for said year. Moreover, according to a letter dated May 2007' from the Congressional Budget Office to Senator Kent Conrad [URL="http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/81xx/doc8116/05-18-TaxRevenues.pdf"][COLOR=red]http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/81xx/doc8116/05-18-TaxRevenues.pdf[/COLOR][/URL] from 2003' to 2006' under republican control, our gov't realized a growth in tax revenue increase up 35% or growth of $625 billion increase in additional tax revenues. Had tax revenues only matched the actual growth of the economy as measured by GDP, tax revenues would have only grown by $373 billion. Now some here would extoll this as great news and parade the economic policies of the republicans as working but let's look at it another way. Look at the below comparing Deficit to Debt Increases from 2001' to 2008': [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Deficits_vs._Debt_Increases_-_2008.png"][IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/67/Deficits_vs._Debt_Increases_-_2008.png/400px-Deficits_vs._Debt_Increases_-_2008.png[/IMG][/URL] To place real dollar numbers on the 2003' to 2006' period: 2003 $589.0 billion 5.5% of GDP 2004 $605.0 billion 5.3% of GDP 2005 $523.0 billion 4.3% of GDP 2006 $536.5 billion 4.1% of GDP These numbers are actual increases in the debt itself and then the % of GDP this represents. This is in addition on top of already existing Federal debt. So in a 4 years period, gov't revenues when up $625 billion but under republican leadership the gov't borrowed an additional $2 plus trillion dollars. Now some here will be quick to say that the cost was to protect us because of terrorism and such war efforts but "Houston, we have a problem!" According to the Congressional Research Office report dated October 2008', [URL="http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf"][COLOR=red]http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf[/COLOR][/URL] from FY 2001' to FY 2009' all appropiations in supplementals, regular appropiations and continuing resolutions as it realtes to Afghanistan, Iraq and all other efforts to the Global war on terror equal up to a grand total of $864 billion. Now just in the 4 years of 2003' to 2006' the $625 billion in revenue growth should have been enough to pay for 3/4ths of this total cost and we haven't factored in revenues fro 01' and 02' along with 07' and 08'. You can't tell me $200 plus billion couldn't be found to make the total cost of this war a paid out of petty cash proposition? Instead we find ourselves saddled by the party of fiscal conservatism with an extra $2 trillion in debt so to say the debt paid for the war cost is just plain factual [SIZE=7]BULL*![/SIZE] Democrats are for gov't medical care! Really? And what do you call Bush's Federal Drug prescription program, laissez fiare medicine! Democrats want to take over Education! What do you call "No Child Left Behind", chopped liver? Wanna know where this money for adventures in socialism came from? Our children and grand children and they'll have you to thanks for both the tax increases and excessive inflation that is to come to pay for all this Red State conservatism. God if that's conservative, hell I guess I am a liberal! 18th century classical type to be exact. :wink2: The truth is republicans had their own brand of welfare both corp. and public and the saddled debt was their means of wrecking the economy in order to buy votes to keep them in power. Problem was, their have no economic skills and knowledge, especially inthe business cycle and as Rev. Wright was so fond of saying, an in this case "the economic chickens have come home to roost!" Election 06' and then election 08' and "GAME OVER!" Now I know democrats will now take their turn at the trough known as ":censored:ING THE PUBLIC" but this latest "We've come to Jesus" or "Deathbed Conversion" by the republicans is completely and totally bogus. What is happening in Washington with the democrats is no surprise at all and I see no reason for them to stop what Bush and the republicans started. Face the facts, this is the legacy of Bush and the republican congress and the worse part is they greenlighted the democrats to be who they are to begin with. Thanks again for nothing! Scream about Obama and the democrats all you want becuase it just points out the truth of the hypocrits that you are! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Economic Stimulus
Top