Where is the US economy headed?

@JPB,

I remember when members of congress and most of the financial pundits looked upon Greenspan as some kind of god while I disagreed with them all! There is no way I will ever defend Greenspan on anything!

0 Replies

And then, there's this:

Code:Obama tells workers U.S. economy is on the mend

Mend from what? When thousands continue to lose their jobs, what's on the mend? Mend is when people begin to find jobs, and pay taxes.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

When the pro's talk about the economy, they are talking about GDP. It is not about the welfare of people, where have you been hiding these last 20 years. It is all about the numbers now.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

The GDP? And exactly what does the GDP tell you?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

hawk, I hope all is okay.

0 Replies

Signs to nowhere. We are apparently spending an estimated 6 to 20 million on signs advertising stimulus work. I have noticed these signs and before I read this story already figured this was one huge boondoggle of wasted funds, using our money to manufacture signs to tell us how wonderful they are.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/16/democrats-reject-gop-proposal-stop-stimulus-advertising/

"The cost of the signs vary from state to state. For example, a "Good Morning America" report calculated the cost at $500 in Maryland and New Hampshire to $3,000 in New Jersey. Gregg estimated the total cost at anywhere from $6 million to $20 million.

....

"I just find it absurd that we're putting up all these signs all over the country with taxpayer money telling taxpayers we're spending their money," he told FOX News. "Most taxpayers can figure that out. We don't have to put up a sign and tell them we're spending their money."

1 Reply

@okie,

And compared to two billion every week on our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, how does the cost of these signs compare in spending taxpayer money? YOu get one guess.

0 Replies

Only in America can you go from domestic terrorist / weather underground / FBI most wanted list, to helping write a hundreds of billions stimulus bill for the president. What president would do that? One guess.

By the way, this guy is not William Ayers, but another guy named Jeff Jones. Sheesh, what next?

This administration has moved beyond bizarre, to the surreal.

1 Reply

@okie,

The only thing bizarre is your existence.

0 Replies

I like this video, with opinions about the economy and ideas for solutions for the economy and health care, from CEOs of 3 very large corporations that have good insight into the pulse of the economy, FedEx, Office Depot, and Cisco. I think Fred Smith of FedEx and Steve Odland of Office Depot have the best measure and comments on the economy. Odland seems the most pessimestic and says unless small business gets stimulation by economic policy, which has had very little by current Obama policy, the recession will not improve alot very soon.

One of Fred Smiths best points is the overburdensome corporate tax rates in the United States.

http://www.foxnews.com/search-results/m/26497242/ceo-panel-on-fns.htm#q=hannity+obama+appointees

1 Reply

@okie,

You lie! The corporate tax rates doesn't mean much when over 60% pay no taxes.

That's not the only problem; as you conservatives cry for more tax cuts for the wealthy, our federal deficit continues to go up! NO brains.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

I actually don't have a problem with reducing taxes on businesses, reduce them to $0; but if we do that they shouldn't be allowed to lobby congress. They can write/call their congressman, but no donations.

2 Replies

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

I actually don't have a problem with reducing taxes on businesses, reduce them to $0; but if we do that they shouldn't be allowed to lobby congress. They can write/call their congressman, but no donations.

maporsche, I believe as many people do or should, that people pay taxes anyway, not businesses. Since taxes upon businesses are passed onto the cost of products and services, just as any other cost of doing business has to be factored in, the people end up paying the tax through higher prices. Anyone that claims the businesses do not do that, they will instead take it as increased profit or give it to their inflated CEO pay, that is ignoring or simply lacking confidence in the age old laws of economics, that of competition, supply, demand, price, etc. It is totally proven that capitalism works through competition, and competition lowers prices and improves service. We see this proven over and over, that is why people buy Chinese stuff, it is cheaper and quality is competitive or competitive enough, given the price.

And this is important to point out also that not only will people here in this country benefit by businesses paying lower taxes or no taxes, those same businesses should be able to compete better in the global market place, possibly being able to move some of their operations back here to produce more jobs, or by being able to sell more products worldwide, thus being able to expand or even build more plants here. It also might mean foreign companies coming here to build plants and to do business here. I believe it could be a tremendous boost to the economy, and thus a tremendous job generator as part of that economy boost.

If business tax was totally eliminated, I think I would also be able to endorse higher marginal tax rates on individuals, perhaps not tremendously higher, but some higher, perhaps alot higher for super high incomes. This could be used to combat obcenely high CEO pay, etc. And if increased profits do happen sometimes, it would go to millions of stockholders in retirement programs and so forth, which is totally good, and if higher incomes become greatly expanded because of that, the tax is still collected from individual tax returns.

Another point, I have seen arguments by ci and others in the past that many corporations don't pay tax anyway, but what is ignored is the fact that the tax on some affects the entire business world, and it affects business decisions in the entire business world.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

What I forgot to mention is that much lobbying by business is actually very good and beneficial, as lobbyists actually serve to inform and educate the congressmen in regard to the effects of their legislation. So even though businesses may not be taxed under that new policy, congress still has the ability to affect businesses and industries greatly by instituting new rules and regulations. Businesses should be able to contact and talk to congress. I agree donations should be prohibited because any company should not be able to spend stockholders money on supporting political candidates. This should also apply to unions and other groups. Donations should be by individual choice.

I think lobbying by environmental groups are probably more wasteful or non-productive, or counter-productive.

0 Replies

Car sales tank after cash for clunkers. This was predictable, and it was predicted.

This is what you get with idiots running the zoo.

http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=9873051&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/

0 Replies

I read Addison Wiggin daily. His financial advisory firm (Agora Financial) takes a contrarian position on the current recovery. This article in yesterday's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette sums up the international concerns on the future strength of the USD remaining the world trade currency nicely.

Quote:

The dollar's No. 1 status has been a symbol of the United State's position in the global community as the predominate driver of world commerce. But the venerable greenback is facing its most serious challenge yet because of our collapsed consumer economy.

"We've seen a complete reverse of the trend of borrowing to keep up consumer spending and financing purchases through mortgages and credit cards and student loans," said Addison Wiggin, executive publisher of Agora Financial, a financial research firm in Baltimore, Md.

"Most of our spending is financed through the credit market, which is heavily dependent on our ability to attract capital from the rest of the world," Mr. Wiggin said.

....

China, Russia and Brazil earlier this month took a major step in shifting away from dollar reserves when they sealed a deal with the International Monetary Fund to buy $70 billion worth of currency-diverse bonds that are a mixture of euros, pounds, yens and U.S. dollars that can be used in international trade.

China bought $50 billion of these bonds while Russia and Brazil bought $10 billion each.

...

"The fact that the dollar has been the reserve currency of the world has allowed us to live beyond our means for a long enough period of time to get into trouble and that's what the crisis is," Mr. Wiggin said. "The deficit spending in Washington is the biggest threat to the dollar's status as the reserve currency."

...

While the average person might not be too concerned about the constant rising and falling of the U.S. dollar against other world currencies, many consumers may be surprised to know the dramatic effect it has on their bottom lines.

From the cost of food and gasoline to the interest rates they pay on cars and home loans, consumers and companies will either pay more or save based on how the value of the falling dollar affects their businesses and daily lives.

If central banks around the world decided to stop buying U.S. debt and begin accumulating other currencies to store their wealth, it would plunge the value of the dollar and destroy the purchasing power of U.S. citizens.

more

1 Reply

@JPB,

I don't believe that's a contrarian view of the US dollar or economy; I've been saying for several years now that our deficit cannot be sustained. That's one of the biggest reasons I disagree with ObamaCare; they haven't shared what the true cost will be nor what the actual savings will be. Until they are able to spell out cost/savings ratios, the health care plan should not be implemented. Continually increasing the national debt will only impact us much sooner in many negative ways.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

It is a known principle of economic science ci. that the greater the demands made upon an economic system is inversely proportional to that system's viability. Such a principle is exacerbated when those making the demands are non-producers and even moreso when those demands are ravenous.

It is also well known that a temporary increase in the standard of living can be gained at the turning point from progressive to regressive population trends.

Progressive population trends would be increased birth rates and increased immigration of economically active people.

What is your birth rate doing?

And where are you going for your holidays? How many demands do you personally make on the economic system?

0 Replies

Or, to put it another way, what should the birth rate be and what the rate of immigration to keep you and your kind in the manner to which you have become accustomed and to which you encourage others to become accustomed?

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Well, then you can join me in the contrarian ranks, ci, because those espousing that we've turned the corner, that the recession is over, that economic happy days are ahead (if not already here again) are the mainstream.

0 Replies

Where is the US economy headed?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know