What,

Post #332,230 by beepster 9/3/10 2:44:08 PM Reply	What, that they lump asset and IP together in an expansion category? You are clearly not getting it. Recovery. Thats the word. Recovery means jobs. Recovery will be FASTER if you focus on all aspects of demand. Just throwing money at joe consumer WILL NOT DO IT. Its not a supply side argument. Its pure straight down the middle econ, regardless of your thinly veiled attempts at baiting by introducing communist planning and voodoo economics. You have had 3 huge failed attempts at demand spurred growth in the past 12 months and you still don't seem to understand. Cash for clunks, housing credit and the tax withholding credit. Additionally, the "stimulus" that was focussed on all the wrong parts of the economy (and they wonder why it didn't work, gee, go figure). And you are still here saying that we should continue down that path because it will create more jobs. Guess what? We're nearly 1.4T down that path and unemployment is still rising. Hmmm. Feel free to talk about it amongst yourself. It appears that you have little desire to pay attention, instead you keep trying to paint this as a supply side communist agenda. I'm done with that. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.
Post #332,232 by drook 9/3/10 4:59:02 PM Reply	"Recovery means jobs" Remember when I said there are two economies? That wasn't a tangential point. A recovery for the owners' economy is almost completely unrelated to a recovery for the workers' economy. So no, recovery does not mean jobs. Jobs means jobs. The housing credit was a payment to the banks. You can blame whoever you want for passing what they did, but I don't consider that stimulus targeted at helping workers. Cash for Clunkers might have helped, if they had required that the new cars were American. Or at least built in America. Both those credits were targeted at specific industries, which is what I keep calling central planning. They were designed to help preserve the status quo. The tax withholding change, which at least didn't favor a specific industry, was good for an estimated $65/mo for a family -- http://taxes.about.c...ew-tax-credit.htm That's enough to make a big number for the (owners') economy, but won't make a huge difference in most people's lives. I also notice you didn't include the huge amounts of money sent directly to the banks via TARP and other off-the-books instruments. Even if that money were fully paid back, the round trip from the discount window to the bond market and back meant that huge (and mostly undocumented) amounts of money were shoveled to banks in the form of interest on the money we were loaning them. But let's suppose every dollar that has been categorized as "stimulus" spending went directly to workers. The "big" number you keep quoting is $1.4 trillion. Considering the crash of the housing bubble represents a $6 trillion hole in the economy, how is that 1.4 supposed to do anything other than slow down the rate of decline? -- Drew
Post #332,234 by boxley 9/3/10 5:14:43 PM Reply	Re: "Recovery means jobs" according to whom? recovery is gdp gains as opposed to losses it doesnt have squat to do with the unemployment rate. Now our economy is sorta ok at 7% unemployment, pretty decent at 5% but over 9 means we are fucked for a while. The wife and I were talking about our early years in marriage when the Alaskan economy had 9% unemployment and we lived week to week in shit trailers. Its bad, but jobs are not going to come back in the same places. Companies have found ways to get along with less and as you love to point out workers are a commodity. So demographics will change, those that can will move to the jobs, those who cant get left behind in grinding multigeneration poverty If I lost my gig within 90 days I will be in deep kimchee and if I have to walk away from the 40k cash I have in this house I will do it, no choice it isnt easy pickins any more and hasnt been since 2001. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #332,235 by drook 9/3/10 8:44:02 PM Reply	That was Bill's line recovery is gdp gains as opposed to losses it doesnt have squat to do with the unemployment rate. That sounds a lot more like what I'm saying. When the financial press -- and the financial reporters for the mainstream press -- talk about "the economy", they mean the owners' economy. And when they talk about recovery, you're exactly right that they're talking about GDP. That's what I meant when I said, "A recovery for the owners' economy is almost completely unrelated to a recovery for the workers' economy." -- Drew
Post #332,239 by boxley 9/3/10 9:17:04 PM Reply	bill is right a decently paid fully employed work force is a byproduct of an overheated economy on the verge of popping another bubble. There is no such thing as a workers economy. Now workers have a standard of living scale but it doesnt have anything to do with an economy. We could stage nationwide work to rule strikes and fight for living wages, cheap education, decent healthcare but november will show us the country would not be in the mood at all. but that really hasnt worked very well in the past, doubt it would work this time. The grocery unions are about to go on a major strike in the northwest, that may show us how things stand nationwide. Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 55 years. meep
Post #332,240 by beepster 9/3/10 9:24:30 PM Reply	With a line like that... it is quite clear that you will never grasp my point. There are NOT 2 economies. Sure, understanding today's complex world of the future is a little like having bees live in your head. But...there they are.

Welcome to IWETHEY!