Where is the US economy headed?

JPB, I believe the reasons we are in the shape we are in are due to policies over decades, policies that have driven manufacturing and businesses out of business and offshore. There are long standing reasons, not short term ones, that explain why everything you buy anymore, virtually everything, are made in China, Mexico, or somewhere else. I believe the reasons include income tax rates on corporations or business, and over intrusive regulations on business, and too high labor rates due to all kinds of factors. Also a much too active legal industry in this country has dampened the economic health here. I have not seen anything significant proposed by this administration to fix any of those things long term. I admit to the fact that Republicans have also been AWOL on some of these issues, but I believe the Democrats have been largely responsible for pulling us in the wrong direction over the last few decades, and they have stonewalled and demonized any feable efforts that conservative Republicans can muster in regard to sensible reform in these areas. Unfortunately the voters have bought into the demagoguery directed at sensible policies, after all we are now being constantly told by the liberal Democrats it is the evil insurance companies and doctors that are ripping us off. If people buy this hogwash instead of recognizing the real source of our problems, we will continue down this road to self destruction of our economy.

There is no free lunch, and we need to realize this. The government cannot socialize every industry and we be successful, no way. The road to economic health is not through bigger and bigger governemnt, it will only bring more financial ruin. It is us out here that needs the power, and it will be up to us if there are enough of us to simply tell the government to cease and desist their grand plans for more power.

The only place we differ, okie, is in the finger pointing. I think history is valuable in going forward but I think it's a complete waste of time trying to assess blame. What's done is done, the past is in the past and Americans are finally beginning to wake up to the concept that our elected officials don't have the citizenry's best interest at the top of their priority list. I had a similar conversation on another site recently. I wrote,



And, I include entitlement programs in non-essential services.

Call it finger pointing, fine, but honestly we must identify the political philosophies that work and the ones that don't work. If we fail to do that, we are doomed to continue down the same failed road. If the drivers of our vehicle going down the road don't know how to drive, then I am going to point fingers at the drivers and suggest we need some new ones that approach the task in a different way. One thing is clear, if we fail to identify the basic cause of the problems, we will fail to solve them, and one of the over arching reasons for where we are is the political philosophies that got us here. If we fail to do that, we continue to treat the symptoms, not the causes of the problems.

I think the biggest problem is the two party system and career politicians. Not much we're going to do about that without term limits which is why I'm a big proponent of congressional term limits.

I've never been a member of any political party. As a lifelong independent I've seen both parties become self-serving behemoths who control those we elect as puppeteers with their puppets and consider the voter their audience. We no longer control what happens in government. All we do is change the players in the game so the puppeteers can take turns having the largest set of arrows in their quiver. We aren't governed by the people and we certainly aren't governed for the people. We are governed by the parties for their own self interests, namely, power.

Interesting, and although I respect your opinion because I used to think similarly, I think political parties are necessary and advisable to help define basic philosophies and platforms. I realize individual politicians vary somewhat from party platforms, as they should, but I do not think they should stray completely off the reservation, because after all that is why we have parties.

I have to shake my head a little when I hear people say I vote for the person, not the party, because although it sounds good, when a Democrat gets to Washington, the party will browbeat them into walking the party line, and I think what is going on right now is highly illustrative of that. Having a politician belong to a party also helps identify where his or her true beliefs actually reside, and it also helps voters better identify what that person may support or oppose when they get to Washington.

I identify myself as a conservative, and although registered as Republican I am not at all always happy with the Republican Party. I do lean toward that party simply because the Democrats seldom if every support the policies that I support, so I figure the Republicans are my best hope of seeing things happen that I agree with, and I figure that any tiny influence I might have is better attained through the party than as an independent.

By the way, my parents were lifelong Democrats, but seldom voted for the Democrats on the national scene in the past 20 years or more. I think the party left them, they did not leave the party. The Democratic Party in my opinion has gotten so extremely leftist and far out, that many of its beliefs are really far fetched.

You could also add that Obama's concerns about Israel building settlements in east Jerusalem could be viewed as revisionist history, since history shows that Jerusalem has been the capital of Israel in the past and present. Or, perhaps, Obama does not care? It appears to me that Obama cherry picks where he chooses to meddle.

The Social Security Administration will make it official tomorrow: no cost of living increase for retirees next year.
President Obama today asked Congress to approve a one-time $250 payment to every retiree, at a total cost of $15B.

Which is about £160 I think and enough to buy a candle lit dinner for two at a middle range restaurant or pay for a lawyer's typist addressing an envelope.

Any increase in Social Security benefits is tied to inflation, which is officially listed as being -0- this year. No inflation = no increase. That has been the rule since 1975.
The $250 Mr Obama proposes is designed, a cynic might argue, to mollify the certain criticism blaming the lack of an increase on him rather than on the 40 year old rule.
Last year, we retirees got a 5.2% increase due to the spike in the price of oil during the part of the year that is used to calculate inflation.

dare I say if Obama ever gives Jerusalem to the Arab`s all hell will break loose.

In what context could Obama give Jerusalem to the Arabs? As the Israeli President, or Israeli Prime Minister? Let us not forget that Israel may listen to the U.S., but still has its sovereignty. Or, has Israel become the 51st State, while no one was watching?

How does your post relate to "Where is the US economy headed?"

I actually tried to track down the old joke about The Elephant and the Polish Question - just to illustrate the mind set. Best I could come up with was a copy protected PDF.

If Israel gave Jerusalem to the Arabs war would break out regardless if there was a "peace" treaty. And as we all know war is soooooooo good for the economy.

foofie
But yes, Israel is sovereign and they would have to be very pressured to give up Jerusalem.

But I don't see why that reply is addressed to CI. None of it has anything to do with where the US economy is headed, which is what he asked.

da' ....
war in the ME affects the US economy
anyone who says they dont "get it" well........

As does rice blight in Indonesia, but I would say how it does, if I were going to drag it in by the heels.

Yes, lets not

Consumer sentiment falls. Not only did it fall, but it fell "more than expected". No kidding.

Don't need polls to tell us that consumer sentiment is falling.