114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
ican711nm
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 30 Jun, 2010 09:53 am
Quote:
STOP Federal Spending and Support Real Economic Growth

Efforts to spark private-sector job creation through government ‘stimulus’ spending have been unsuccessful. Small businesses face an array of new challenges imposed on them by the federal government, including the threat of tax hikes and the newly-enacted health law, which will discourage hiring, increase the deficit and raise health care costs.

The jobs report released last month by the U.S. Department of Labor was a cause for alarm. Of the 431,000 new jobs in May, 95% were temporary government jobs created by the Census Bureau. Only 41,000 private-sector jobs were generated. In addition, 46% of those out of work have been jobless for six months or more.

Congress is Destroying the Job Market
Demand Washington to Stop “Stimulating” the Economy with our Tax Dollars
...

To support real economic growth and provide the spark needed to support creation of private-sector jobs, immediate action is needed to rein in federal spending, prevent job-killing tax hikes through the expiration of current tax rates, and reverse the harmful effects of the health care law on small businesses, the engine of job creation in our economy.

For the first time in modern history, the U.S. House of Representatives has failed to even pass a budget. Such a failure will mark a massive missed opportunity to help our economy grow and create private-sector jobs. Failing to restrict spending growth will further balloon the national debt and impede economic growth.

Action is needed now to begin to slow government spending and support the creation of new private-sector jobs. For the sake of millions of Americans who remain out of work – and future generations of Americans, who will carry the debt burden we are accumulating today - the leaders of both parties need to take action immediately to eliminate unnecessary federal spending, prevent tax hikes, stop regulatory threats to job creation and enact reforms to put our nation back on a true path to prosperity.

Congress is Destroying the Job Market
Demand Washington to Stop “Stimulating” the Economy with our Tax Dollars
...

Republican candidates across the state are advocating smart solutions to bring spending under control and provide meaningful tax relief to individuals and small businesses. Putting money back into the economy in the form of tax relief will do far more to spur job growth than another injection of government stimulus spending – spending that in the end will be financed by taxes paid by the middle class of American households.

All through out West Virginia, families are struggling to keep their heads above water. The only answers the Democrats seem to have for them are more spending and higher taxes. Republicans offer better solutions that will get our economy moving again and treat the taxpayers with the respect they deserve.

Sincerely,

Douglas McKinney, M.D.
Chairman
West Virginia Republican Party
...
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Reply Wed 30 Jun, 2010 02:06 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:
Ah, those economic know-nothings! They're everywhere---even among the Nobel-Prize-winning economists.

Yes, my mother never finished high school, but she could balance her check book. Part of being able to balance her check book was knowing not to write checks for an amount that did not exist in the bank. Can one say the same for so-called economists, including Nobel Prize winners? I doubt it, Thomas. We know for sure the same can't be said for our so-called president.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Wed 30 Jun, 2010 02:08 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:
We know for sure the same can't be said for our so-called president.


So okie is now saying that the election was a fraud?
okie
 
  0  
Reply Thu 1 Jul, 2010 12:24 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

okie wrote:
We know for sure the same can't be said for our so-called president.


So okie is now saying that the election was a fraud?

No, I was not saying that. I was simply using a common expression that is used often in regard to somebody being something, such as John Doe is the manager so-called, or John Doe is the so-called financial advisor, or as I've already expressed, Obama is the so-called president. He has been elected and does occupy that office, but I have very grave doubts as do tens of millions of other Americans that he is actually doing the job of president in a credible manner, and perhaps half the stuff he does is told him by people like Rahm "dead fish" Emmanuel?

And we still have people bringing up evidence that the guy was not even qualified to run for president, as a citizen for example. I am sure some of that is bogus, but I am not one to conclude that there is nothing at all to all of the smoke around this issue, I wonder if there could still be some fire connected to a part of the smoke. I am going to continue to monitor the information that comes forth with time. As screwed up as Obama's childhood and growing up years were, and considering the amount of money he has spent on lawyers to hide his past, I am not at all convinced that all is hunky dory with it. George Soros was convinced everything was fine, and thats all that mattered to the radical Democratic Party to get Obama elected, but there may still be more to learn.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Reply Thu 1 Jul, 2010 01:06 pm
Okay.Thanks. I'd thought more of "so-called friend" and such.

Thanks for replying, okie, which seems to opposite to the commercial you're running in my favour:
http://i47.tinypic.com/2vkgc5w.jpg

ican711nm
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 1 Jul, 2010 02:52 pm
I shall support only those candidates who advocate the impeachment of Barack Obama, because Barack Obama is a lying, thieving gangster, who is stealing our property, stealing our liberty under the law, stealing our Constitutional government, and stealing our capitalist economy.


REASONS REQUIRED BY THE CONSTITUTION FOR IMPEACHMENT AND REMOVAL

Constitution Article II. Section 4.
The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 1 Jul, 2010 02:54 pm
EVIDENCE JUSTIFYING IMPEACHMENT OF BARACK OBAMA

http://www.altavista.com/web/results?fr=altavista&itag=ody&q=REASONS+FOR+IMPEACHING+BARACK+OBAMA+&kgs=0&kls=0
1. Barack Obama has unlawfully taken private property from those persons and from those organizations who have lawfully earned it, and given it to those persons and organizations who have not lawfully earned it.

a. Barack Obama has unlawfully exercised the authority of his office to take private property for public use in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which guarantees to the People that “private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation,” and without “due process of law.”

b. Barack Obama has unlawfully interfered with the management of private companies for the purpose of achieving government control of them, in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.

c. Barack Obama has unlawfully interfered with the economic rights of the people by imposing unreasonable impairments in the fulfillment of their intended contractual obligations, and their ability to enter into such contracts.

d. Barack Obama has unlawfully attempted to change our fundamental economic system from one governed by the rule of law to one governed by presidential dictate.
0 Replies
 
electronicmail
 
  0  
Reply Thu 1 Jul, 2010 02:58 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Another reason lots of us think of Obama as "so-called" leader is growing doubt about his policies. He's a voice in the desert, and his desert is populated by special minority interests not representative of the voters as a whole, imho. Are you in Germany? Didn't your president just resign about Afghanistan?

Well lots of us wish our own president would follow the honorable example set by yours. Not only for Afghanistan, either. http://www.newsweek.com/2010/06/25/obama-s-approval-ratings-slump-in-latest-newsweek-poll.html But we got to wait until 2012 to replace him. The House of Representatives will be replaced in its entirety as will a third of the Senate next November, maybe some incumbents will return and maybe not.
http://www.newsweek.com/content/newsweek/2010/06/25/obama-s-approval-ratings-slump-in-latest-newsweek-poll/_jcr_content/body/inlineimage_0.img.png/1277512265095.png
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Jul, 2010 03:26 pm
@ican711nm,
ican711nm wrote:

I shall support only those candidates who advocate the impeachment of Barack Obama...

The 2 U.S. Senate seats in Texas are not in play this year. May I ask what U.S. House district you live in?
okie
 
  0  
Reply Fri 2 Jul, 2010 10:28 am
The summer recovery touted by Obama is a joke, unfortunately a cruel joke played upon the country by Obama and his policies. Here is the pertinent statement from the following article.
"The unemployment rate fell as 652,000 people out of work gave up on their job searches and left the labor force. People who are no longer looking for work aren't counted as unemployed."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/02/unemployment-drops-percent-jobs-shed-june/
http://www.foxnews.com/static/managed/img/Politics/jobless_philly_397x224.jpg
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 07:34 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:

okie wrote:
We know for sure the same can't be said for our so-called president.


So okie is now saying that the election was a fraud?

No, I was not saying that. I was simply using a common expression that is used often in regard to somebody being something, such as John Doe is the manager so-called, or John Doe is the so-called financial advisor, or as I've already expressed, Obama is the so-called president. He has been elected and does occupy that office, but I have very grave doubts as do tens of millions of other Americans that he is actually doing the job of president in a credible manner, and perhaps half the stuff he does is told him by people like Rahm "dead fish" Emmanuel?

And we still have people bringing up evidence that the guy was not even qualified to run for president, as a citizen for example. I am sure some of that is bogus, but I am not one to conclude that there is nothing at all to all of the smoke around this issue, I wonder if there could still be some fire connected to a part of the smoke. I am going to continue to monitor the information that comes forth with time. As screwed up as Obama's childhood and growing up years were, and considering the amount of money he has spent on lawyers to hide his past, I am not at all convinced that all is hunky dory with it. George Soros was convinced everything was fine, and thats all that mattered to the radical Democratic Party to get Obama elected, but there may still be more to learn.


In my opinion, the thought has occurred that this country would like to put in its history books that there has been a Black President. However, odd as it may sound, time might have been running out to ever elect a Black President. I say that since with the liklihood of many more people becoming citizens in the not too distant, through some sort of immigration reform (aka, some perfunctory cost/effort = amnesty?), the constituency that would vote for a Black President might then become smaller and smaller with time. Remember, many people come to our shores with emotional baggage from some other country where Blacks are not voted into the highest office of the land. So, the "window of opportunity" of electing a Black President might have been closing?

And, by having a Black President effect this or that "reform," guess who gets the credit for any problems with said reforms, in the history books.

If my hunch has any veracity, then the WASP power elite might have just learned to operate in the background, similar to what some people claim my own ethnic group does. I believe the term in psychology is called "reaction formation."

realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 12:19 pm
I was wandering around on the BBC, reading articles on the UK.
The coalition government (the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats) is instructing departments to look at cutting their budgets by 40%. This comes ahead of a public spending review coming out in October.
Some departments, such as health, will be "ring fenced." Interesting phrase which I think means not subject to cuts. Others, like defense and education, should look for 10-20%. Most agree that the 40% was a slap across the face to get attention. The October review will probably suggest something more like 25%.
It could be that no one is going to take any of this all that seriously. I would need someone more familiar with the U.K. to comment about whether this is all hypothetical committee speak that will result in no actual action.
Suffice it to say that the Labor party and the public sector unions are opposed and promise "coordinated industrial action" if the cuts implemented are anywhere close to 40% or even 25%.
This comes, as an aside, as the U.K. actually has some inflation (3.5% I think I read) which may result in the Bank of England raising interest rates. That is also happening in India but not in the U.S.
We have done an exercise periodically on this thread to suggest ways to cut the U.S. deficit. I think the ideas proposed got us up to about 1 or 2%.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 12:58 pm
@okie,
Quote:
The summer recovery touted by Obama is a joke, unfortunately a cruel joke played upon the country by Obama and his policies. Here is the pertinent statement from the following article.
"The unemployment rate fell as 652,000 people out of work gave up on their job searches and left the labor force. People who are no longer looking for work aren't counted as unemployed."
eventually people will catch on that the unemployment number is now nearly useless. The number to watch is the jobs number. We need something on the order of 200,000+ new jobs a month just to keep up with population growth, so that is the treading water mark. TO put people back to work in any meaningful way we double or triple that. Last month we added 63, 000 (dumping out the effect of the census temp jobs, which dont mean anything long term) as I recall.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 02:21 pm
Quote:


Robert J. McCartney
Assistant Managing Editor, Continuous News Desk
Washington Post

One field where we've definitely lost ground is the global economy. That's partly because the rest of the world, especially in Asia, is catching up.

Shortly after World War II, the United States accounted for nearly half of total world output. For several decades now, our share has been about a fifth.

In 1950, China made up less than 5 percent of the world economy. Now its share is more than 10 percent and rising.

That's not necessarily bad. China's growth has exploded because it adopted free-market policies that we've been recommending for decades.

America's problem is that the global economy is seriously unbalanced, and we're on the red ink side of the ledger. Globalization, which we championed, led to the export of millions of good-paying U.S. manufacturing jobs. That means we're now running large trade deficits. In our foreign accounts, as in the gaping shortfall in the federal budget, we are living beyond our means.

This can't continue indefinitely, and the fix is eventually going to hurt our standard of living somehow.

Right now, America is sharply divided over painful choices. Should we spend more to fight joblessness? Or should we move now to contain the government deficit?

That uncertainty points to the other half of the broader question: Are we in decline in some absolute way? In particular, is our political culture so gridlocked that we're unable to address long-standing problems that we know need solving?

I'm sad to say the evidence right now suggests that the answer is yes.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/03/AR2010070302707_2.html?hpid=sec-metro

Never heard of him before, but he is a smart guy.....is right on....
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 03:43 pm
@ican711nm,
Quote:

I shall support only those candidates who advocate the impeachment of Barack Obama, because Barack Obama is a lying, thieving gangster, who is stealing our property, stealing our liberty under the law, stealing our Constitutional government, and stealing our capitalist economy.


Gee, Obama sounds more like bush every day. Thanks for pointing out the resemblance!
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  0  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 03:46 pm
@Foofie,
Interesting theory. I felt that the Obama as a black man had to be elected over Hilary as a woman because history does tend to repeat itself and black men were allowed to vote before women were. Some one else will be the first female president.
plainoldme
 
  0  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 03:48 pm
@hawkeye10,
When I was in grad school in Detroit and Vietnam was the current war, left-wing students knew the government statistics on unemployment were a lie.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 05:55 pm
@plainoldme,
I heard some pundit on tv say, in the not too far past, that the key to a woman president is to find a woman that can have the role as Commander In Chief and it would be believable. Plus, there are many patriarchal countries that may not be able to deal with the incongruousness (from their perspective) of a woman head of state.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 06:04 pm
@Foofie,
Quote:
that the key to a woman president is to find a woman that can have the role as Commander In Chief and it would be believable
Makes sense..it is fine for the Germans for instance to take a chance on a woman, as they don't have much of a military and have no intention of using the military.
hamburgboy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 06:06 pm
@hawkeye10,
are you ( conveniently ) forgetting mrs. thatcher ?
 

Related Topics

The States Need Help - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fiscal Cliff - Question by JPB
Let GM go Bankrupt - Discussion by Woiyo9
Sovereign debt - Question by JohnJD
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 10/07/2024 at 03:35:18