Where is the US economy headed?

Yeah, according to ci, arresting and incarcerating criminals only makes them mad and creates more criminals, thus the solution to the problem is to leave them alone.

YOu don't seriously think I'm going to read all the links provided on his website do you? I want "you" to explain his policies and initiatives; in your own words as "you" understand them.

You can start with "The Economy" under McCain.

Okay, I will agree to do that, and I will do it without checking his website, I will do it from memory, my impressions based upon what I have heard him say, which won't be perfect, but perhaps a good test, but only if you agree to do the same for Obama. Actually, I will also add a bit of what I think Obama will do, if you do the same for McCain. How about it?

You're on!

Not a dodge, ci, I will be tied up for a while, have to go, will be back later this evening to do it.

No need boys. Both of them will put on their roller skates and take a few turns around the slippery and uneven rink.

Back here now. Rather than details, this is a general rundown of McCain's likely policies, as I understand them without any notes to look at. I throw in my comparisons with where I think Obama stands.

McCain clearly favors tax policies to stimulate business and commerce, which includes retaining taxcuts that have been implemented by Bush, certainly no more burdensome rates to dampen economic activity. Obama is grudgingly going along with similar suggestions for now, but that is not his political instinct, as he wanted to roll back tax cuts, but now says he won't, at least for a while. (He proposes tax incentives for businesses that hire, hey, I thought he and the Dems didn't believe in "trickle down," thats my observation, ci.)

McCain says he believes in cutting government spending, by looking at every budget item in detail and cutting where feasible. No more earmarks, as he has promised to veto them. I think I remember him mentioning a potential freeze of some government spending, except for the bare essentials. (This is a big laugh right now with hundreds of billions going out the door for bailouts, just a personal comment in regard to both Obama and McCain, what they will have to deal with). Obama does not commit to cutting spending, and instead has a whole laundry list of new pet projects in store.

McCain favors aggressive pursuit of all energy sources, both conventional and alternative, with incentives to do so. Drilling offshore has been advocated by McCain, and I look for Palin to work on him in regard to Alaska. I would add my personal comment that energy is crucial in this entire issue, in regard to our economy, it is a central cog in our economic machine. He advocates nuclear, to build a significant number of new plants, in contrast to Obama who claims to favor nuclear but will drag his feet in regard to the things necessary to move the process forward, such as disposal of spent fuel, etc. Nuclear is the one important energy source that could eventually make a very serious impact in electrical generation. Obama will instead block further drilling, drag his feet on nuclear, and spend a ton of government money on alternative research, the results being highly debatable. Obama is highly indebted to the green or environmental movement, so this faction will continue to place roadblocks against all reasonable commercial energy activities. In regard to emissions, both candidates seem to favor actions in that regard, but I am sure Obama would probably cowtow to the international community more, while McCain may weigh the actual economic impacts more importantly, thus dampening the worst policies here.

Education greatly impacts the economy down the road, plus it is a drain on taxes now, given the inefficiencies of the current system. McCain has suggested some basic changes such as school choice, while Obama is against big change here, but simply wants to throw more money into the current system and tweak it.

Health care, which is a huge impact on the economy, McCain favors free market solutions, increasing access, and leveling the playing field between all people, regardless whether you have a company provided benefits or not. Tort reform would be important, and I have not heard anyone mention this, but Obama would of course oppose any limits on people suing doctors. Liability insurance can be a half million for a doctor, and surely addressing that problem would obviously help some, I would hope McCain would be open to that, but not a snowballs chance in you know where given the tons of Democrat constituencies in Washington protecting their golden goose. It is pathetic. Obama plans to provide government mandated or supplied health care, thus increasing government spending, which of course is part of the economic plan.

Thats it for starters, ci. Other issues I haven't heard much talked about are our basic taxing system and unions which have driven alot of businesses into the ground or overseas. Laws regarding how corporations run is another issue that I have not heard addressed. If they were, I would have to believe Obama is beholden to a tax system with the greatest government sway over business, and power of unions would also reign supreme.

Summary, regardless of what McCain favors, I can see little of it ever getting done if he is elected, but at least he could possibly veto terrible legislation coming out of Congress, and he could nominate good supreme court judges, maybe. Obama and a big Dem majority in Congress, Katie bar the door, and hold onto your pocketbook, ci. Natural cycles of the economy and the emotional high of rich liberals could make the ship look good for a while, based upon another bubble like the 90's, but in the long term, an Obama presidency would incur an even bigger noose around the economic future of this country. Many of the big causes and effects in the economy are long term. That is my assessment.

I apologize for injecting alot of my opinions besides explaining what I think the policies are in general, and comparisons between McCain and Obama. This has been an interesting exercise, and after reading it, I think McCain actually advocates more actual change than Obama.

By the way, ci, no fair to use my summary to compile yours. Yours must be totally from scratch from your head, no references allowed, as I did, got that?

Back here now. Rather than details, this is a general rundown of McCain's likely policies, as I understand them without any notes to look at. I throw in my comparisons with where I think Obama stands.

okie, You're missing the whole point of this "discussion." Any policy recommended by any candidate must have "details" for it to make any sense. Generalities are usually "promises" without substance.

McCain clearly favors tax policies to stimulate business and commerce,
The question becomes "how?" "Tax policies to stimulate business and commerce" says absolutely nothing.

which includes retaining tax cuts that have been implemented by Bush,
The Bush tax cuts have not produced the jobs he promised. As a matter of fact, job creation under Bush has been abysmal; the worst since Hoover (you do know when Hoover was president, right?

certainly no more burdensome rates to dampen economic activity.
Huh?

Obama is grudgingly going along with similar suggestions for now,
No, he isn't. Show us where Obama's suggestions are similar to McCain's?

but that is not his political instinct,
How do you determine anybody's instincts? Do you have a special gift?

as he wanted to roll back tax cuts, but now says he won't, at least for a while.
What Obama said was he will cut taxes for 90% of workers.

(He proposes tax incentives for businesses that hire, hey, I thought he and the Dems didn't believe in "trickle down," that's my observation, ci.)
Different animal, okie. What Obama proposes is to provide businesses a benefit if they keep jobs in the US rather than off-shoring them. That's not even close to what you call a "trickle down."


McCain says he believes in cutting government spending,
What he says and what he'll be able to accomplish in a democratic congress belongs on the laugher curve.

by looking at every budget item in detail and cutting where feasible.
No. What McCain said was that he would put a freeze on spending. As to "cutting every budget item where feasible" is not even a good red herring.


No more earmarks, as he has promised to veto them. I think I remember him mentioning a potential freeze of some government spending, except for the bare essentials. (This is a big laugh right now with hundreds of billions going out the door for bailouts, just a personal comment in regard to both Obama and McCain, what they will have to deal with). Obama does not commit to cutting spending, and instead has a whole laundry list of new pet projects in store.

McCain favors aggressive pursuit of all energy sources, both conventional and alternative, with incentives to do so. Drilling offshore has been advocated by McCain, and I look for Palin to work on him in regard to Alaska. I would add my personal comment that energy is crucial in this entire issue, in regard to our economy, it is a central cog in our economic machine. He advocates nuclear, to build a significant number of new plants, in contrast to Obama who claims to favor nuclear but will drag his feet in regard to the things necessary to move the process forward, such as disposal of spent fuel, etc. Nuclear is the one important energy source that could eventually make a very serious impact in electrical generation. Obama will instead block further drilling, drag his feet on nuclear, and spend a ton of government money on alternative research, the results being highly debatable. Obama is highly indebted to the green or environmental movement, so this faction will continue to place roadblocks against all reasonable commercial energy activities. In regard to emissions, both candidates seem to favor actions in that regard, but I am sure Obama would probably kowtow to the international community more, while McCain may weigh the actual economic impacts more importantly, thus dampening the worst policies here.

Education greatly impacts the economy down the road, plus it is a drain on taxes now, given the inefficiencies of the current system. McCain has suggested some basic changes such as school choice, while Obama is against big change here, but simply wants to throw more money into the current system and tweak it.

Health care, which is a huge impact on the economy, McCain favors free market solutions, increasing access, and leveling the playing field between all people, regardless whether you have a company provided benefits or not. Tort reform would be important, and I have not heard anyone mention this, but Obama would of course oppose any limits on people suing doctors. Liability insurance can be a half million for a doctor, and surely addressing that problem would obviously help some, I would hope McCain would be open to that, but not a snowballs chance in you know where given the tons of Democrat constituencies in Washington protecting their golden goose. It is pathetic. Obama plans to provide government mandated or supplied health care, thus increasing government spending, which of course is part of the economic plan.

That's it for starters, ci. Other issues I haven't heard much talked about are our basic taxing system and unions which have driven a lot of businesses into the ground or overseas. Laws regarding how corporations run is another issue that I have not heard addressed. If they were, I would have to believe Obama is beholden to a tax system with the greatest government sway over business, and power of unions would also reign supreme.

Summary, regardless of what McCain favors, I can see little of it ever getting done if he is elected, but at least he could possibly veto terrible legislation coming out of Congress, and he could nominate good supreme court judges, maybe. Obama and a big Dem majority in Congress, Katie bar the door, and hold onto your pocketbook, ci. Natural cycles of the economy and the emotional high of rich liberals could make the ship look good for a while, based upon another bubble like the 90's, but in the long term, an Obama presidency would incur an even bigger noose around the economic future of this country. Many of the big causes and effects in the economy are long term. That is my assessment.

I apologize for injecting a lot of my opinions besides explaining what I think the policies are in general, and comparisons between McCain and Obama. This has been an interesting exercise, and after reading it, I think McCain actually advocates more actual change than Obama.

You didn't play by the rules. I want to see your summary, not a rebuttal of mine. Details, there are none until actual legislation is on the table. All we have right now are general policy outlines from the candidates right now, and that is what I gave you. You do the same, ci, with no notes, from memory.

If you don't want to do what you agreed to do, then forget it.

au1929 asked way back in 2005, "Do you believe that the US may be approaching economic disaster? If so what can or should the administration and congress do to avert it?"

I forgot to include regulatory reform, which is huge. I think McCain would want to fix Fannie and Freddie, as he tried before. Quit making loans based upon cultural engineering, and get back to economic justification for loans, I think that would be McCains position. Since Obama is a supporter of cultural engineering, fairness without merit, and all of that, I really can't tell you how he would reform it. It may not matter now that we, the taxpayers, own a stake in all of this mess, we will end up subsidizing the losers and the people that cheated the system. To the tune of trillions. I would be mad if it would help, but it won't, and the media is worthless to accurately investigate this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/14/AR2008101402841_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2008101402966&s_pos=

Here are some of Obama's economic recommendations:
1. Provide an emergency $1,000 to each family paid for by excess oil company profits.
2. $25 billion to states to prevent cuts in education, health, and housing.
3. Eliminate taxes for seniors making less than $50,000.
4. Fight for Fair Trade.
5. End tax breaks for companies sending jobs overseas.
6. Reward companies that support American workers.
7. Invest in clean energy.
8. Make R&D tax credit permanent.
9. Provide tax relief for small business and start-ups by eliminating capital gains tax.
10. Provide workers the choice to join unions.
11. Raise minimum wage indexed to inflation.
12. Address credit card predatory practices.

BTW, I do not agree with all of Obama's initiatives.
There are many more.

That would require a line item veto, which the president doesn't have. McCain will become aware of this if elected, if he isn't already aware.

Thanks, ci, and I won't double check the accuracy. I think I have heard most of these points being said by Obama. Now for the evaluation. I think most of the points address symptoms, not the underlying problem with our economy. #1 thru 3 accomplish little, and are probably counterproductive and even creates double standards or more favoratism in the tax code. #4, fight for fair trade, tells me nothing, everybody is in favor of that, but how? #5 and #6, again addressing a symptom, not the problem. We need to do things that make it more economically feasible to do spur manufacturing, etc. here, aside from tweaking a broken tax system that needs overhauling, not tweaking. #7, invest in clean energy, how, with the government? McCain favors that too, but the difference is the approach, actually encourage building clean energy, such as nuclear, which Obama has not voted to advance, so the devil is in the details. #8 is a loser, too open to abuse. #9 sounds Republicanish, but be careful about creating more eneven playing fields, which I am deadset against. #10 already exists, but the devil may be in the details, for example is he suggesting eliminating all right to work laws, forcing corrupt unions on people, which by the way are responsible for bankrupting alot of business, retirement plans, etc. #10 sounds very bad, reading between the lines. #11 minimum wage, useless, and counterproductive with unintended consequences. #12 credit card practices, this is probably the best one he has, I would be in favor of this.

roger, I wasn't talking about signing bills, I was talking about a McCain administration looking at the budget items and tailoring them for his budget to be proposed to Congress. Earmarks another issue, he has said he will veto bills with earmarks. Practically, this will lead to a standoff with a Democrat congress, which in cahoots with the press casting the administration as the culprit, as they always do, McCain will end up signing bills regardless of the pork. Thats the way I see it.

Thanks, ci, and I won't double check the accuracy. I think I have heard most of these points being said by Obama. Now for the evaluation. I think most of the points address symptoms, not the underlying problem with our economy. #1 thru 3 accomplish little, and are probably counterproductive and even creates double standards or more favoratism in the tax code.
1) What do you think the "stimulus" packages is all about - that both democrats and republicans support?
2) It helps maintain our educational system that states are cutting in these times when tax revenue continues to deteriorate. Supporting education looks forward necessary to remain competitive in the world marketplace. Health is also important; without a healthy population, it interferes with having health children and workforce that is necessary for a healthy economy. Many middle class families are losing their homes; if we can spend $10 billion every month in Iraq, we can surely help our own citizens with their housing needs.
3) Many seniors are suffering from the downturn in the stock market. This initiative relieves some of the pressures for those who have seen a good portion of their security destroyed. It's not a cure-all by any means, but it shows that Obama understands the average senior's sufferings.
4) This issue tells you nothing, because you lack the understanding of international trade, and how "Fair Trade" equalizes trade within this spector.
5) The symptom is quite evident to those of us who have seen many factories closing down in our country while companies expand in low-cost labor countries. Here again, you fail to understand macroeconomics; that keeping well-paying jobs at home helps our country's economy in the long-term 6) To reward companies who keep their jobs at home is a good idea, but I doubt $3,000 will do the job.
7) The government can provide greater tax benefits to those companies doing R&D for clean energy, and also fund more money to universities who doe this kind of research.
8) You do not seem to understand much about any economy; R&D is the foundation of any economy to grow. The US was the first to found computers, and grow that industry. Many developed countries today spend a good portion of their funding on R&D; there's a good reason for that. You get an "F" for failure to understand basic economic theories.
9) Your claim that it sounds "republicanish" has no basis in fact. That you happen to be "dead set against" something explains nothing.
10) "Reading between the lines?" LOL You have no understanding of Economics 101. What unions have done is to help non-union workers with higher wages and benefits.
11) You claim it has "unintended consequences" without explaining what they are. California has a higher minimum wage than the federal minimum wage, but California is the fifth largest economy in the world.
12) This is but one of many good ideas proffered by Obama.

Your analysis gets and "F" grade.


#4, fight for fair trade, tells me nothing, everybody is in favor of that, but how? #5 and #6, again addressing a symptom, not the problem. We need to do things that make it more economically feasible to do spur manufacturing, etc. here, aside from tweaking a broken tax system that needs overhauling, not tweaking. #7, invest in clean energy, how, with the government? McCain favors that too, but the difference is the approach, actually encourage building clean energy, such as nuclear, which Obama has not voted to advance, so the devil is in the details. #8 is a loser, too open to abuse. #9 sounds Republicanish, but be careful about creating more eneven playing fields, which I am deadset against. #10 already exists, but the devil may be in the details, for example is he suggesting eliminating all right to work laws, forcing corrupt unions on people, which by the way are responsible for bankrupting alot of business, retirement plans, etc. #10 sounds very bad, reading between the lines. #11 minimum wage, useless, and counterproductive with unintended consequences. #12 credit card practices, this is probably the best one he has, I would be in favor of this.

ci, are you okay today? Quoting me without quote boxes really makes it confusing. And now you aren't even using font color to show what I said, before you add your comment. At least you used to do that.

Without commenting on all of your opinions, just this on unions, ci. I have been around a long time now, and I have never belonged to a union, but I know plenty of people that have and I also have known of businesses that have simply been run into the ground by unions, put out of business, or chased out of the country in order to compete. I have also known people personally threatened and their families threatened with bodily harm by union thugs. I have no use for unions, they are arrogant, corrupt, and leaches upon society. Unions are basically past their usefullness, given all the laws protecting workers these days. Unions may be okay to a point, if right to work laws allow people choice to belong or not, after all this is supposed to be a free country. I prefer to be my own union, I am free to work for whomever I please if they will hire me, and if I don't like it I can quit, which I have done, and then gotten better jobs.

Jobs going foreign have been happening for a very long time, it is not a new thing, it goes back decades, and unions are one large reason why this has happened. Face it, if stuff can be made in China at lower wages, it does no good for a union to sit here and demand high wages and every benefit known to man, it falls on deaf ears, ears that are moving the entire operation to China or somewhere else. This is only one small part of the problem, but it is a part. Other parts include over-regulation, lawsuits, taxes, and everything else. These are the problems that we should be addressing, not the symptoms.

okie wrote:

Please provide evidence of this? (Not your personal opinion.)