Where is the US economy headed?

it agrees with simple common sense.

The following is interesting. I tried to find if government employees have gotten or will get a raise, and I was not able to find anything. If anyone knows, that would be interesting.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/10/government-expected-nix-cost-living-increase-social-security/?test=latestnews
"Government Expected to Nix Cost-of-Living Increase for Social Security Again"

"Government Expected to Nix Cost-of-Living Increase for Social Security Again"

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/11/soros-i-cant-stop-a-republican-avalanche/?partner=rss&emc=rss
New York Times
Monday, October 11, 2010
8:38 am
Soros: I Can’t Stop a Republican ‘Avalanche’
By SEWELL CHAN
George Soros, the billionaire financier who was an energetic Democratic donor in the last several election cycles but is sitting this one out, is not feeling optimistic about Democratic prospects.

“I made an exception getting involved in 2004,” Mr. Soros, 80, said in a brief interview Friday at a forum sponsored by the Bretton Woods Committee, which promotes understanding of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

“And since I didn’t succeed in 2004, I remained engaged in 2006 and 2008. But I’m basically not a party man. I’d just been forced into that situation by what I considered the excesses of the Bush administration.”

Mr. Soros, a champion of liberal causes, has been directing his money to groups that work on health care and the environment, rather than electoral politics. Asked if the prospect of Republican control of one or both houses of Congress concerned him, he said: “It does, because I think they are pushing the wrong policies, but I’m not in a position to stop it. I don’t believe in standing in the way of an avalanche.”

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=19908&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD
Three Reasons Obama's Education Vision Fails

President Barack Obama is making his bid to be "the education president," yet Obama's education vision deserves an F, says Nick Gillespie, editor in chief of Reason.tv and Reason.com.

In a new video, Gillespie gives three reasons for Obama's failing grade:

Money talks.

Obama says that the educational system needs new ideas and more money.
Despite a doubling in inflation-adjusted per-pupil spending since the early 1970s, student achievement is flat at best.

While he brags constantly about his Race to the Top initiative, in which states competed for $4 billion to fund innovative programs, he's spent more than $80 billion in no-strings-attached stimulus funds to maintain the educational status quo.

Choice cuts.

Candidate Obama said that he'd try any reform idea regardless of ideology.
Yet one of his first education-related moves after taking office was to aid his Senate mentor, Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), in killing a successful and popular D.C. voucher program that let low-income residents exercise the same choice Obama did in sending his daughters to private school.

The unions forever.

The two largest teachers unions, the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association (NEA), overwhelmingly supported Obama with their votes and their contributions.

Some 95 percent of the groups' campaign contributions go to Democratic candidates and the NEA spends more money on elections than Microsoft, ExxonMobil, Walmart and the AFL-CIO combined.

No wonder Obama's big talking point is that he wants to add 10,000 more teachers to public payrolls despite the fact that there are already more teachers per student than ever.

Source: Lisa Snell, "Three Reasons Obama's Education Vision Fails," Reason Foundation, October 7, 2010.

I am surprised that you say you couldn't find data on pay raises for federal civilian and military employees.

I would however give the military a raise because I think they deserve it, but civilian employees, no

Meanwhile, social security recipients apparently will again get nothing.

Quote:

I would however give the military a raise because I think they deserve it, but civilian employees, no

Why do they deserve it, but hardworking people in other areas don't? Be specific.

Quote:

Meanwhile, social security recipients apparently will again get nothing.

But, you're happy about this. You think this is appropriate, right? I mean, you surely wouldn't be arguing for any sort of expansion of this Entitlement program - would you?
Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:

I would however give the military a raise because I think they deserve it, but civilian employees, no

Why do they deserve it, but hardworking people in other areas don't? Be specific.

Because national security is a crucial job to be done, while many bureaucracies are more wasteful and unnecessary.

Quote:

Quote:

Meanwhile, social security recipients apparently will again get nothing.

But, you're happy about this. You think this is appropriate, right? I mean, you surely wouldn't be arguing for any sort of expansion of this Entitlement program - would you?
Cycloptichorn

No, I never said I was happy about it, nor have I ever said I was for expansion of the program. I think however that federal employees do not automatically deserve raises as a matter of course every year. In fact as long as we are running huge deficits, I believe we should consider freezes, even more layoffs and perhaps cuts in pay, especially for the higher ups that undoubtedly receive big pay packages, even when they do not do a good job.

To clarify one important point, I do not collect Social Security. I probably will kick it in next year or the year after, I have not yet decided. And when I do, it is not the pay raises I will care about for myself, it is for those close relatives that I know about, that receive very low amounts. In fact, I would gladly take the money that I have contributed and they could forget sending me any checks, but of course they do not give me that option.