Disgusted With Obama Administration.

• QuakerOats

  And as for what Mr. Laffer currently thinks, well:
  
  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703791904576076353486266330.html
  
  My, my, my .....
• jhay78

  

  QuakerOats;792263 wrote:And as for what Mr. Laffer currently thinks, well:
  
  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703791904576076353486266330.html
  
  My, my, my .....

  
  A few gems from that article:
  

  You can't raise taxes on people who work, increase what you pay people not to work, and then expect more people to work.

  That simple sentence shatters one of the foundational pillars of modern American liberalism.
  

  The mistake Mr. Goolsbee makes when he says that a massive reduction in government spending will reduce output is to confuse accounting with economics. In the simplest accounting terms, GDP is equal to consumption plus investment plus government spending—that's true. But reducing government spending doesn't reduce GDP dollar-for-dollar, as this accounting equation would seem to be saying.
  
  Reducing government spending is not only a reduction in one of the components of GDP, but it is also a reduction in effective taxation and a reduction in payments for non-work and less output. In due course, cutting government spending will increase private output (in this case consumption plus investment) by more than the reduction in government spending.
  
  After World War II, the U.S. cut federal government spending dramatically. In 1945, federal government spending as a share of GDP peaked at 31.6%, and by 1948 it was down to 14.4%. Private real GDP (e.g., GDP less government purchases) for the three years 1946, 1947 and 1948 grew at a 7.5% annual rate. So much for the idea that cutting government spending hurts the economy.

  I've heard so many people, and read so many posts on here, that pretty much take for granted as indisputable fact, that if the government stops spending so much, it will hurt the economy. Can we please finally put that to rest?
• jmog

  jhay78;792343 wrote:A few gems from that article:
  
  
  
  That simple sentence shatters one of the foundational pillars of modern American liberalism.
  
  
  
  I've heard so many people, and read so many posts on here, that pretty much take for granted as indisputable fact, that if the government stops spending so much, it will hurt the economy. Can we please finally put that to rest?

  
  I can't agree more with both of these statements...
• BGFalcons82

  

  If 30% of Americans lose their employer-provided health care, whom will come in to save the day and give them health care? Oh, y'all know the answer, don't ya? Bet ya didn't think so when the Marxists rammed it up our arses, did ya? They did.
  
  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/07/1-in-3-employers-will-drop-health-benefits-after-obamacare-fully-kicks-in/
• jhay78

  

  BGFalcons82;793168 wrote:If 30% of Americans lose their employer-provided health care, whom will come in to save the day and give them health care? Oh, y'all know the answer, don't ya? Bet ya didn't think so when the Marxists rammed it up our arses, did ya? They did.
  
  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/07/1-in-3-employers-will-drop-health-benefits-after-obamacare-fully-kicks-in/

  
  You forgot: "Change . . . we can believe in"
• BGFalcons82

  

  jhay78;793318 wrote:You forgot: "Change . . . we can believe in"

  
  Nah...that's Quaker's tagline But very appropo.
• QuakerOats

  BGFalcons82;793378 wrote:Nah...that's Quaker's tagline But very appropo.

  
  
  Wingman here ---- 'change we can believe in' ..............
• QuakerOats

  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2001010/SWAT-team-launch-dawn-raid-family-home-collect-womans-unpaid-student-loans.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
  
  Imagine what they will do to YOU if you don't subscribe to obamaKare.
  
  Change we can believe in............
• QuakerOats

  http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/06/08/coal-regs-would-kill-jobs-boost-energy-bills
  
  It is time to defund the EPA and eliminate the radical marxists therein who are hell bent on overthrowing capitalism.
  
  2012 cannot arrive soon enough.
• majorspark

  

  QuakerOats;795130 wrote:http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2011/06/08/coal-regs-would-kill-jobs-boost-energy-bills
  
  It is time to defund the EPA and eliminate the radical marxists therein who are hell bent on overthrowing capitalism.
  
  2012 cannot arrive soon enough.

  Just Obama making good on a campaign promise.
• QuakerOats

  http://www.fox19.com/Global/story.asp?S=14872850
  
  "Ohio restaurant referenced by Obama is closing"
  
  
  obama would be better off going into hiding.
• QuakerOats

  http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/06/08/the_economy_is_worse_than_you_think_256889.html
  
  Another excellent piece from Mr. Feldstein
• believer

  

  QuakerOats;795968 wrote:http://www.fox19.com/Global/story.asp?S=14872850
  
  "Ohio restaurant referenced by Obama is closing"
  
  
  obama would be better off going into hiding.

  Apparently Obama believes in trickle down economics.
• BoatShoes

  QuakerOats;796303 wrote:http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2011/06/08/the_economy_is_worse_than_you_think_256889.html
  
  Another excellent piece from Mr. Feldstein

  
  LOL. From the article.
  
  "...As for the "stimulus" package, both its size and structure were inadequate to offset the enormous decline in aggregate demand...."
  
  If you'll recall, Mr. Feldstein, a Neo-classical Deficit Hawk, called for the Obama Administration to use a Keynesian style fiscal stimulus to save the economy. In fact he called for it even before the election and suggested that John McCain or Obama introduce such legislation while they were still Senators.
  
  See Martin Feldstein doing his best Keynes impression here:
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/29/AR2008102903198.html
  
  See Martin Feldstein calling the stimulus a mistake because it didn't have enough direct spending and had too much ineffective tax relief (among other problems)
  http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/2009/01/29/20090129WP-feldstein0129.html
  
  Yet, in the article you cite and in others, he pointed out how the stimulus bill was too small (i.e. the government didn't do enough spending) and was composed of too much tax relief (not enough direct federal spending because everyone in the economics profession knows by now; as well as practical epistemology will allow, that tax relief is a poor stimulus). Even Mr. Feldstein, the deficit hawk who disagreed with the deficits ran by his boss Ronald Reagan advocated the U.S. to borrow even more money than we did for the porkulus package. Even Martin Feldstein.
  
  The stimulus was too small because that 800 billion piece of crap was declared a disaster by the Republicans who don't know what they are talking about Mr. Feldstein!
  
  Notice also he begrudges Obama for wanting to increase tax rates (which is the same mistake FDR made because of his conservative deficit hawk Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau). Again, austerity is the problem and that is all Republicans want!
  
  (now I've advocated for hire taxes on the rich but NOT during a weak economic period).
  
  He then goes on to complain about the uncertainty coming from BHO's policies but I can't help but notice one glaring omission...the uncertainty being caused by the GOP threatening to allow the United States to default! For all this talk Republicans give about how Obama makes businesses uncertain, what do you think the threat of making the Full Faith and Credit of the United States drop down a peg is doing???
  
  So yes, Professor Feldstein is right. The economy is even worse than it is being portrayed to be. And the reason is because President Obama is caving to Republicans. The irony is so strong because Obama is failing us by not being liberal enough (in the short term) and even Mr. Feldstein agrees. Surely the stimulus might have been larger but Ron Paul was on the floor of the House declaring the dawn of hyper-inflation! And Obama caved.
  
  And this is pure madness because we're stuck between choosing between Obama who has caved to the Republicans doing everything they've asked and allowing their zombie lies to permeate the airwaves unchallenged and voting in Republicans who would be even worse believing it morally virtuous for the nation's unemployed to suffer at the alter of the free market and to bankrupt the federal coffers! Utter Sanctimony! I'm so lucky to have a job because nobody in power will do anything to help people find work. But who knows how long that will last?
  
  What does Believer always say "The market will work if the government stays outta da way herm durp." And you know what, Keynes said the same thing...in the long run that's true but it's been 3 long years and we have done nothing meaningfully from a fiscal standpoint while monetary policy was at its wits end and the market has not picked up and we're full steam ahead towards a Japan-style lost decade while conservatives whine about mythological inflation and pretend to care about deficits and Obama listens to them! (when if we had some real inflation like Greg Mankiw suggests, Bush 43's former economic adviser, this debt problem we have would look a lot less bad for one). But wouldn't you know? QuakerOats and believer blast BHO about the economy when he has done exactly what they would have them do. Nothing.
  
  But after all it is a waste of time to tell a Republican how the government might kick-start the economy or improve society even if all reason points in that direction when their plan is to bankrupt the government at any cost.
  
  
• QuakerOats

  ^^ "QuakerOats and believer blast BHO about the economy when he has done exactly what they would have them do. Nothing."
  
  Surely you jest. What BHO has done is spend an extra few TRILLION THAT WE DON"T HAVE, on top of a mountain of debt that we already had. He has increased the debt to such an extent that we can barely afford to service it, and that is with monetary policy holding rates at damn near zero. How brilliant was that? But worse, the spending was essentially a handout to unions, largely public sector unions, the most-unproductive sector of society, and thus there was no return on the "investment". How brilliant was that? And simultaneously he and his marxist pals in congress rammed obamaKare down the throats of all the rest of us in complete defiance of the will of the people, creating incalculable damage and uncertainty within nearly 20% of the entire economy. How brilliant was that? And then he unleashes his marxist pals at EPA to begin the complete dismantling of the entire coal industry and indicated he would bankrupt that industry, and oh by the way, they just happen to generate half of the nation's power. How brilliant was that? And now he has unleashed the marxists at NLRB to take out Boeing unless Boeing manages their company and their employees the way the marxists say the company should be run. How brilliant was that? Then we can add in all the other radical overregulation being 'legislated' by administrative fiat, and all the other assaults on private enterprise that continue to spew out this radical administration and you're damn right that no one with half a brain is going to put at risk one dime more than they have to until these lunatics are run out of D.C., thereby stalling growth, and it is only growth and federal spending cuts that can solve this problem.
  
  So actually BHO has done quite a lot, and it has been for the worse, and is potentially damaging us beyond repair ...... perhaps just as he envisioned.
  
  Change we can believe in ........
• BGFalcons82

  

  Boat - nice rant. Especially the part where you claim Feldstein is a proponent of John Maynard Keynes. I've been listening and reading Mr. Feldstein's work for a long time and never drew that conclusion. Weird, eh?
  
  I'm also stunned and amazed...no, I'm SHOCKED...to learn that those wascally wepublicans, whom held a mere 40 seats in the Senate, we're able to control Obama, Reid and Pelosi to the point that all of their political actions from 2009 to 2011 were the result of wepublican whims and initiatives. I never knew that a 40% minority could control the smartest President of all time with such ease. You realize the political dream team only needed to flip 1 person out of 40 to make it all moot...right? That's right, their bills, amendments, and reconciliations were so perfect that they only needed to convince 3% of the wepublicans to go along with them and yet....no dice. It's all the wascals fawlt. Thanks for pointing this out.
  
  Regarding inflation: Since the elitist leaders believe Americans are too chicken-shit to handle the truth, they decided years ago to remove energy and food prices from the gubmint inflation statistics. This way, when gasoline has risen over 100% in 2 years, bread/milk/sugar have soared over 30% in the past year, and the costs to deliver same are excluded from the truth, you can claim that inflation isn't really a problem. No one buys gasoline to travel to their jobs or eats on a regular basis, so why not exclude them? It only serves to make people mad to see 10% inflation, so why piss them off, eh? Gotta keep the populace sedated so they don't get any wild ideas and start idiotic, redneck, inbred, moronic groups like the Tea Party.
  
  Edit Note: Regarding the Feldstein article you posted, very little of what he wanted in 2008 was done by Obama. He didn't state the next POTUS should spend hundreds of billions on unions, car companies, investment bankers, targeted bailouts, ACORN, and anyone else that propped up his campaign. Matter of fact, most of his article is about how to get out from under the home devaluation cycyle, which appears quite salient nearly 3 years later. Maybe if Barry had performed as Martin suggested, things would be different today. Unfortunately, we'll never know now will we?
• QuakerOats

  BG, 'there you go again' ..........
• BoatShoes

  BGFalcons82;797353 wrote:Boat - nice rant. Especially the part where you claim Feldstein is a proponent of John Maynard Keynes. I've been listening and reading Mr. Feldstein's work for a long time and never drew that conclusion. Weird, eh?
  
  I'm also stunned and amazed...no, I'm SHOCKED...to learn that those wascally wepublicans, whom held a mere 40 seats in the Senate, we're able to control Obama, Reid and Pelosi to the point that all of their political actions from 2009 to 2011 were the result of wepublican whims and initiatives. I never knew that a 40% minority could control the smartest President of all time with such ease. You realize the political dream team only needed to flip 1 person out of 40 to make it all moot...right? That's right, their bills, amendments, and reconciliations were so perfect that they only needed to convince 3% of the wepublicans to go along with them and yet....no dice. It's all the wascals fawlt. Thanks for pointing this out.
  
  Regarding inflation: Since the elitist leaders believe Americans are too chicken-shit to handle the truth, they decided years ago to remove energy and food prices from the gubmint inflation statistics. This way, when gasoline has risen over 100% in 2 years, bread/milk/sugar have soared over 30% in the past year, and the costs to deliver same are excluded from the truth, you can claim that inflation isn't really a problem. No one buys gasoline to travel to their jobs or eats on a regular basis, so why not exclude them? It only serves to make people mad to see 10% inflation, so why piss them off, eh? Gotta keep the populace sedated so they don't get any wild ideas and start idiotic, redneck, inbred, moronic groups like the Tea Party.
  
  Edit Note: Regarding the Feldstein article you posted, very little of what he wanted in 2008 was done by Obama. He didn't state the next POTUS should spend hundreds of billions on unions, car companies, investment bankers, targeted bailouts, ACORN, and anyone else that propped up his campaign. Matter of fact, most of his article is about how to get out from under the home devaluation cycyle, which appears quite salient nearly 3 years later. Maybe if Barry had performed as Martin suggested, things would be different today. Unfortunately, we'll never know now will we?

  
  
  I never said Martin Feldstein was keynesian. My point is that even martin feldstein a classical economist wanted a robust fiscal stimulus and believed Obama-Reid-Pelosi's was both too small and inadequate in structure. The points you're making are proving mine. I'm agreeing, if Obama would have listened to an elite economist and done a real fiscal stimulus (which you would have disagreed with as socialist) we would be much better off. Also, in regards to the commodity inflation, first it is a response to increased worldwide demand and not because of an increase in the money supply and this has tapered off for one and also commodity prices are volatile and tying monetary policy to the fluctuations in commodity prices as opposed to core inflation would be a disaster...imagine what the constant fluctuation in interest rates would do!!! Furthermore, your claims of hyperinflation for the last several years have been wrong, even if you take into account the rise in commodity prices. You were wrong, accept it, it's ok, I'm wrong a lot.
  
  Also, you're acting like I'm not bashing Obama here. I am bashing Obama because you're right, he let Republicans in the minority control the national debate with lies and falsehoods. He got through a terrible, Conservative cocktail of a stimulus when even Martin Feldstein desired a Keynesian style Direct Government spending stimulus. That's why this is such a disaster because we're stuck choosing between the insanity of the right and Obama and folks caving into the insanity. If Martin Feldstein were king and would have had direct control of the fiscal response, it would have been impressively more socialist than any response that Obama/reid/pelosi did! That's why this whole economic debate is mind boggling. We're talking Martin Feldstein here, a Conservative economist.
  
  I'm agreeing with you. Obama and the democrats failed. But we disagree as to why he failed. He failed because he was too conservative and not liberal enough.
  
  I mean damn learn to read. The first thing I said was "Martin Feldstein, a neo-classical deficit hawk."
• BoatShoes

  QuakerOats;797239 wrote:^^ "QuakerOats and believer blast BHO about the economy when he has done exactly what they would have them do. Nothing."
  
  Surely you jest. What BHO has done is spend an extra few TRILLION THAT WE DON"T HAVE, on top of a mountain of debt that we already had. He has increased the debt to such an extent that we can barely afford to service it, and that is with monetary policy holding rates at damn near zero. How brilliant was that? But worse, the spending was essentially a handout to unions, largely public sector unions, the most-unproductive sector of society, and thus there was no return on the "investment". How brilliant was that? And simultaneously he and his marxist pals in congress rammed obamaKare down the throats of all the rest of us in complete defiance of the will of the people, creating incalculable damage and uncertainty within nearly 20% of the entire economy. How brilliant was that? And then he unleashes his marxist pals at EPA to begin the complete dismantling of the entire coal industry and indicated he would bankrupt that industry, and oh by the way, they just happen to generate half of the nation's power. How brilliant was that? And now he has unleashed the marxists at NLRB to take out Boeing unless Boeing manages their company and their employees the way the marxists say the company should be run. How brilliant was that? Then we can add in all the other radical overregulation being 'legislated' by administrative fiat, and all the other assaults on private enterprise that continue to spew out this radical administration and you're damn right that no one with half a brain is going to put at risk one dime more than they have to until these lunatics are run out of D.C., thereby stalling growth, and it is only growth and federal spending cuts that can solve this problem.
  
  So actually BHO has done quite a lot, and it has been for the worse, and is potentially damaging us beyond repair ...... perhaps just as he envisioned.
  
  Change we can believe in ........

  
  See, how can we even have a debate if you just sensationalize everything by saying, "handout to unions" "marxists in the epa" blah blah..It's not even worthwhile responding.
• BGFalcons82

  

  Got any change left to believe in?
  
  http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-0612-rates-20110611,0,7432941.story
  
  I'll give Barry credit for one thing: He's made sure that none of his most important initiatives occur prior to November, 2012. They have crafted legislation, regulations, and executive orders to take place after he thinks he's getting re-elected. Kind of smarmy, but no one will actually feel the pain before they pull the lever for more skyrocketing energy costs, even MORE expensive gasoline, and a crippled economy that only government intervention and control can fix. For those of you that think he's not hell bent on destroying capitalism, I suggest you start paying attention to what he's doing instead of listening to his glorious readings of his teleprompter.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  BGFalcons82;799883 wrote:Got any change left to believe in?
  
  http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-0612-rates-20110611,0,7432941.story
  
  I'll give Barry credit for one thing: He's made sure that none of his most important initiatives occur prior to November, 2012. They have crafted legislation, regulations, and executive orders to take place after he thinks he's getting re-elected. Kind of smarmy, but no one will actually feel the pain before they pull the lever for more skyrocketing energy costs, even MORE expensive gasoline, and a crippled economy that only government intervention and control can fix. For those of you that think he's not hell bent on destroying capitalism, I suggest you start paying attention to what he's doing instead of listening to his glorious readings of his teleprompter.

  
  Well obvious the problem is he's too conservative, and if he stuck to his liberal roots instead of catering to the GOP MINORITY for two years, we'd all be enjoying "green" jobs, guaranteed pensions funded by evil rich people, and on the weekends spend our times riding our flying unicorns that farts (eco-friendly) gumdrops for flight power.
  
  The fact is he was always unqualified. He's never worked a real private sector job aside from his summer camp at Sidley - his economic dream team has either left (Romer, Summers) or is continuing in disgrace (Geithner). This is the worst economic administration imaginable.
• believer

  

  Manhattan Buckeye;800314 wrote:Well obvious the problem is he's too conservative, and if he stuck to his liberal roots instead of catering to the GOP MINORITY for two years, we'd all be enjoying "green" jobs, guaranteed pensions funded by evil rich people, and on the weekends spend our times riding our flying unicorns that farts (eco-friendly) gumdrops for flight power.
  
  The fact is he was always unqualified. He's never worked a real private sector job aside from his summer camp at Sidley - his economic dream team has either left (Romer, Summers) or is continuing in disgrace (Geithner). This is the worst economic administration imaginable.

  Initially I gave Jimmy Carter that honor but I think it's safe to say now that BHO does indeed deserve this moniker.
• jmog

  Imagine that, the coal power plant restrictions don't go into place until after the election...who would have thought it?
• QuakerOats

  BoatShoes;798724 wrote:See, how can we even have a debate if you just sensationalize everything by saying, "handout to unions" "marxists in the epa" blah blah..It's not even worthwhile responding.

  
  Unless we utilize real descriptors we cannot have a real debate. If people are not going to call the marxists in the administration and/or EPA, marxists, because it is politically incorrect, then our problems our probably greater than they already are.
• QuakerOats

  As support:
  
  NLRB Dispute With Boeing Becomes "All-Out Political Brawl."
  McClatchy (6/13, Rosen) reports that the National Labor Relations Board's case against Boeing, which "began as an administrative complaint over the opening of a factory in South Carolina, has became an all-out political brawl over unions and the future of US capitalism." A judge is set to take up the case this week. Lafe Solomon, acting general counsel for the NLRB, "played down the dispute in saying 'a thorough investigation' led him to file the April 20 complaint that will get its first official airing during the Seattle hearing." McClatchy notes that "virtually every major business group, including...the National Association of Manufacturers, backs Boeing in the dispute."
  
  
  Some can sugarcoat it all they want, but most of us (especially in manufacturing) realize who these radicals really are.