'We're on the verge of a great, great depression'

[jackoroe]

Very interesting reading:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...-1930s-pace-as-Obama-eyes-fresh-stimulus.html

Probably the best thing about the last couple of years is that the Keynesian insanity is being relegated to the trash heap of failed economic policies!

 

[Jack Springer]

Get a new job skill set or are you too lazy to reeducate yourself? 3 years is an awful long time to sit around doing nothing.

Learn to diversify your investments. A home is an investment, not a right. If you put all your eggs in one basket, that is the risk you take. Note that 'property' was not taken from Locke and put in the Declaration of Independence.


I'll agree to some extent here. Raises are hard to come by. They basically lay off many employees and hire new ones at lower salaries. The problem also is that many raises are tied into COLAs and when dealing with stagflation, it is a lose-lose situation.

The republicans are playing chicken with the economy and they need to have an "adult moment" or else they will doom this nation. Raise taxes and cut spending, not that hard.

Comforting response from a caring liberal.

When you have your "adult moment" and wake up to the state of our nation, let me know.

As long as you and others play blame games nothing will change.

 

[CowboyBob]

Comforting response from a caring liberal.

When you have your "adult moment" and wake up to the state of our nation, let me know.

As long as you and others play blame games nothing will change.

Oh Christ.... will you stop it already Springer? In every thread you post in you're complaining about blame games and whining about the lack of open mindedness from liberals, but in fact you never show it yourself. God, this is boring.

All your thread starts is a slam against Obama or the Democrats. Just how open minded are you anyway? Take a look in the mirror if you want to see someone who is intolerant and blames groups (democrats, liberals) you don't agree with for every ill in the world.

 

[jackoroe]

Along with trickle-down economics?

Why, trickledown was the worst snake-oil bullshit I can remember.

Let's refresh your memory, OK? This on Reaganomics.

These economic policies amounted to the most successful economic experiment in world history. The Reagan recovery started in official records in November 1982, and lasted 92 months without a recession until July 1990, when the tax increases of the 1990 budget deal killed it. This set a new record for the longest peacetime expansion ever, the previous high in peacetime being 58 months.
During this seven-year recovery, the economy grew by almost one-third, the equivalent of adding the entire economy of West Germany, the third-largest in the world at the time, to the U.S. economy. In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years. Nearly 20 million new jobs were created during the recovery, increasing U.S. civilian employment by almost 20%. Unemployment fell to 5.3% by 1989.

http://blogs.forbes.com/peterferrara/2011/05/05/reaganomics-vs-obamanomics-facts-and-figures/

 

[Kulindahr]

Nine, that's a good article. Maybe I'm tired, though; I'm blanking on "full Friedmanite monetary stimulus".

Jack, that Reagan boom was pumped to a high degree by deficit spending. That can work, but the trick is to know when to raise taxes again and pay off the debt. Republicans learned the wrong lesson, and once they finally realized the problem they'd created, their response comes out of "wisdom" from a frontier society and economy.

We're now at a point where we can't deficit spend into a powerful economy, because the debt's so high it's having its own negative implications.

So it's nice that Republicans finally got some sense on having a debt (proving that till this point they haven't been conservatives), but it would be nice if they could catch up to the twenty-first century with their response to it instead of insisting on hanging out in the nineteenth.

 

[Kulindahr]

Funny how it isn't Keynesist policy that didn't cause this mess to begin with. What needs to be trashed is libertarianism and that lesser government myth. You know what? We need more government intervention to fix this mess, not less. Anything else is a myth. We don't need piss down economics. The 1980s were a horrible time for everyone except the upper 10%... and yes Reagan was such a hero wasn't he? Yeah, what a crock.

By the way, in 1989 there was an economic recession because those policies were fundamentally unsound.

Libertarianism needs to disappear for good. As if 2008 wasn't a lesson... Libertarianism = Failure.

What libertarianism? We haven't seen anything resembling it in this country since before WWII, anything seriously resembling it since before the Robber Barons.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Let's refresh your memory, OK? This on Reaganomics.



http://blogs.forbes.com/peterferrara/2011/05/05/reaganomics-vs-obamanomics-facts-and-figures/

What utter hogwash! The tax increase of 1990 didn't kill it, the Iraq War I and resulting oil price skyrocket, along with the Savings and Loan collapse, and the Tax Reform Act of 1986 caused it. Good grief!

 

[M4P]

As an outsider I'll throw in my 2 (Canadian) cents

Individuals and Governments cannot continue to spend more than they make. This was going on well before the recession struck America. When times were good both sides continued to spend with reckless abandon and didn't put any aside for rainy days. Banks leant money to individuals who had no business borrowing it. People demanded cheap goods and the only way to produce said goods was to send the jobs offshore

The rainy day came and they always do. Suddenly the homeowner couldn't afford to make the payments on a home he had no business purchasing. And the ripple effect began

America needs a government with the balls to do what is right rather than what is popular

Let the economy shake out

If you lose your home move on and don't be looking to your government to bail you out

As for the governnment - lead by example and stop spending more than you can possibly take in. Deficits are okay for short term but they can't be lived on forever

America can be great again - but it will take effort, commitment and accountability from the top down and bottom up

Thank you for your time

 

[chance1]

^

Hello . How r u?

Good post here - agree with all or at least most

America IS great However

The current admin and dem majority refuse to recognize that social handouts are not the answer - and their unwillingness to address entitlements weakens the economic foundation that is based on private enterprise and hard work not hand outs

Bail outs for big business or homeowners is a one night stand not sustaining

IMO unemployment will continue to vex our leadership as job definitions and skill sets to match the new economy are not in sync with the workforce

Everyone out of work MUST learn a new skill - or risk being unemployable at worst underemployed at best

 

[JB3]

Perhaps you are right. It lead to the 1929 Great Depression. And people still advocate it... why can't libertarians learn from past mistakes?

It didn't lead to the depression. It had nothing to do with it. Being an avowed socialist, I'm not surprised you are choosing to attack libertarianism though.

 

[M4P]

Bail outs for big business or homeowners is a one night stand not sustaining

Unfortunately they buy votes

Economically, America needs another Reagan to come in, tell it like it is, do what's right and not blink

 

[Kulindahr]

Unfortunately they buy votes

Economically, America needs another Reagan to come in, tell it like it is, do what's right and not blink

What, so ten years from now we can have a national debt of seventy trillion?

No, thanks.

 

[JB3]

Nice try. It didn't lead to it (you won't explain why), and it had nothing to do with it (and you won't explain that one either). Got any other strawman arguments? And please don't speak for my political and economic viewpoints. I can speak for myself. I don't need you doing that.

When you make a statement about something, the responsibility lies with you to prove it, not with me. So why do you think libertarianism caused the great depression?

 

[maxpowr9]

What, so ten years from now we can have a national debt of seventy trillion?

No, thanks.

I don't think he meant Reagan per se but someone who has the balls to actually get shit done and not pussyfoot around. Congress is just one giant daycare center for adults (worse than public colleges).

 

[M4P]

I don't think he meant Reagan per se but someone who has the balls to actually get shit done and not pussyfoot around. Congress is just one giant daycare center for adults (worse than public colleges).

That's exactly what I meant. Thanks for clarifying for the masses

 

[Kulindahr]

I don't think he meant Reagan per se but someone who has the balls to actually get shit done and not pussyfoot around. Congress is just one giant daycare center for adults (worse than public colleges).

Ah -- you mean Lyndon Johnson.

Except he was the one who sloshed SS into the budget, to hide the cost of the war he swore we wouldn't get involved in.

Was it this thread where I said Obama needs a bit of Reagan, a bit of JFK, and a good dose of LBJ?

 

[MoltenRock III]

Unfortunately they buy votes

Economically, America needs another Reagan to come in, tell it like it is, do what's right and not blink

LMAO! What utter nonsense.

 

[Kulindahr]

LMAO. If you're going to make a declaration that it didn't cause it, you need to prove that too. You could have just said "can you prove this statement?"... but instead you made several blanket statements of your own without any evidence.

Libertarianism did cause it. Lesser government intervention (by everyone's favorite Libertarian President Herbert Hoover), the gold standard (libertarians just LOVEEEE this one, even though countries that abandoned the gold standard had less of an impact by the great depression), and unregulated banking sectors.

You can thank the Keynesian policies of FDR for saving this country from total disintegration and collapse.

Would you be referring to the Hoover who sought stronger oversight of banking and the stock market, tried to reign in the fed, who urged business to retain its workers, and sought public works funding as a means of employment for people -- the Hoover who was called a radical for these things? The Hoover who knew he couldn't get a real direct relief program past Congress, so he got a version that would let him hand money to the states to use? the Hoover who fought for drastic tax increases on the wealthy and luxury taxes on both domestic and imported items?

I don't know where you're getting your info, but Hoover's not much of a libertarian hero; he's chastised for lukewarm socialism and crony capitalism both. He's a better hero for the Tea Party, with his belief that small signs of compassion by the government would stir spiritual people to help each other. He expected the rich to be generous....

Propertarians love the gold standard; libertarians argue over it.


Libertarianism didn't cause the Great Depression. Hoover thought the Fed did, by handing out unlimited credit to speculators -- and I tend to agree. Since libertarians are not fond of the existence of a central bank, that alone sets the blame elsewhere.

 

[Kulindahr]

LMAO! What utter nonsense.

Not given the way he meant it. But Reagan isn't entirely the figure we need -- he was great at communicating vision and giving hope, but we need the charisma and boldness of a JFK and the cunning ruthlessness of an LBJ.

That would give us a president who could say, "Hope and change!" and people would believe they were real, who could point to a course of action and people would back him -- and who could sit down with the members of Congress and swear to ruin careers if they didn't line up and get the job done.


I find it interesting that I don't deeply like any of the presidents mentioned here -- but those combined aspects would do us good. I especially like the idea of a president who could get in John Boehner's face and leave him either cowed or with a heart attack -- same for John McCain.

 

[JB3]

Would you be referring to the Hoover who sought stronger oversight of banking and the stock market, tried to reign in the fed, who urged business to retain its workers, and sought public works funding as a means of employment for people -- the Hoover who was called a radical for these things? The Hoover who knew he couldn't get a real direct relief program past Congress, so he got a version that would let him hand money to the states to use? the Hoover who fought for drastic tax increases on the wealthy and luxury taxes on both domestic and imported items?

I don't know where you're getting your info, but Hoover's not much of a libertarian hero; he's chastised for lukewarm socialism and crony capitalism both. He's a better hero for the Tea Party, with his belief that small signs of compassion by the government would stir spiritual people to help each other. He expected the rich to be generous....

Propertarians love the gold standard; libertarians argue over it.


Libertarianism didn't cause the Great Depression. Hoover thought the Fed did, by handing out unlimited credit to speculators -- and I tend to agree. Since libertarians are not fond of the existence of a central bank, that alone sets the blame elsewhere.

Hey now, don't confuse us all with facts!