Let's all thank President Obama for lower gas prices

[3rdnlng]

Well, even with the tortured Administtration accounting the Unemployment rate has gone back up to 8.2%

 

 

.

 

 

Yes, but that doesn't count the yeomans job he did on "saving" jobs. Or is that "corpse mans" job?

[erynthered]

Yes, but that doesn't count the yeomans job he did on "saving" jobs. Or is that "corpse mans" Death Camps?

 

 

fixed

[\GoBillsInDallas/]

Let's all thank President Obama for lower gas prices

 

Lets all thank the NYS Thruway Authority for making up for the lower gas prices:

 

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/city/capital-connection/albany/article880089.ece

[B-Large]

Dig in, it will not get better anytime soon. Europe is still a mess, and that situation could bring everybody else a big step backwards. Housing still drags on the middle class primarily, that ties up spending money and tamps confidence.... and there is no easy money asset bubble on the horizon.... what is what out economy thrives on now, boom and bust...

 

Don't expect compaines to hire anytime soon to make up for lost jobs on 2008. I have maintined since the end of GWB tenure when the recession started that it will take more than a decade to recover our losses, and we may never get the boom jobs back.

 

Government Stimulus is great for short term slumps.... Tax cuts are great for Small Business, but seriously, are small business really going to hire people they don't need because demand is weak, just because of a tax break?

 

Heck, 30 year Mortgage Rates were at 2.97 yesterday...... 2. freaking 97.....

[3rdnlng]

Dig in, it will not get better anytime soon. Europe is still a mess, and that situation could bring everybody else a big step backwards. Housing still drags on the middle class primarily, that ties up spending money and tamps confidence.... and there is no easy money asset bubble on the horizon.... what is what out economy thrives on now, boom and bust...

 

Don't expect compaines to hire anytime soon to make up for lost jobs on 2008. I have maintined since the end of GWB tenure when the recession started that it will take more than a decade to recover our losses, and we may never get the boom jobs back.

 

Government Stimulus is great for short term slumps.... Tax cuts are great for Small Business, but seriously, are small business really going to hire people they don't need because demand is weak, just because of a tax break?

 

Heck, 30 year Mortgage Rates were at 2.97 yesterday...... 2. freaking 97.....

 

We could help get this economy going by opening up ANWR and other fields.

[Magox]

Dig in, it will not get better anytime soon. Europe is still a mess, and that situation could bring everybody else a big step backwards. Housing still drags on the middle class primarily, that ties up spending money and tamps confidence.... and there is no easy money asset bubble on the horizon.... what is what out economy thrives on now, boom and bust...

 

Don't expect compaines to hire anytime soon to make up for lost jobs on 2008. I have maintined since the end of GWB tenure when the recession started that it will take more than a decade to recover our losses, and we may never get the boom jobs back.

 

Government Stimulus is great for short term slumps.... Tax cuts are great for Small Business, but seriously, are small business really going to hire people they don't need because demand is weak, just because of a tax break?

 

Heck, 30 year Mortgage Rates were at 2.97 yesterday...... 2. freaking 97.....

Although I do agree with some of what you are saying, your view is too simplistic, a defeatist perspective, that basically implies a black or white scenario, tilting heavily towards black. The reality is that there are many shades of grey in between and that there are policy prespriptions that can lead us to a long-term solution by incrementally leading us to lighter shades of grey.

 

The president and his staff is a team comprised of a bunch of leftist ideologues, early on my criticism was that his administration had virtually no one that had private sector experience, and that I knew from the beginning that the Obama Whitehouse would be incapable of leading us to a solid sustained recovery, and guess what? Some of us were right.

 

There is over two trillion dollars sitting on the sidelines from corporations, and if the president had any sort of business sense, he would work tirelessly in how to have them unleash and spend that money. But rather than do that, he is more concerned with the politics of "fairness" which contradicts in what makes a business want to grow. Even if you look past the corporations and them hoarding money through fear of uncertainty and higher taxes, small business polls show that regulations is what is inhibiting job hiring, not lack of demand.

 

The president has failed and it's time for someone who actually understands business to finish the job he couldn't handle.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Magox

[B-Large]

Although I do agree with some of what you are saying, your view is too simplistic, a defeatist perspective, that basically implies a black or white scenario, tilting heavily towards black. The reality is that there are many shades of grey in between and that there are policy prespriptions that can lead us to a long-term solution by incrementally leading us to lighter shades of grey.

 

The president and his staff is a team comprised of a bunch of leftist ideologues, early on my criticism was that his administration had virtually no one that had private sector experience, and that I knew from the beginning that the Obama Whitehouse would be incapable of leading us to a solid sustained recovery, and guess what? Some of us were right.

 

There is over two trillion dollars sitting on the sidelines from corporations, and if the president had any sort of business sense, he would work tirelessly in how to have them unleash and spend that money. But rather than do that, he is more concerned with the politics of "fairness" which contradicts in what makes a business want to grow. Even if you look past the corporations and them hoarding money through fear of uncertainty and higher taxes, small business polls show that regulations is what is inhibiting job hiring, not lack of demand.

 

The president has failed and it's time for someone who actually understands business to finish the job he couldn't handle.

 

I didn't think it was pessimistic, I thought it was realistic. I have to question the premise of your post... let me propose this question to you- if there was very strong, aggregate demand for products and services... much like there was in 2003-2007 when Americans had access to bags of cash (albeit phantom cash, or better know as credit), do you really believe that companies would be worried about tax rates (I am not saying tax rates are not important factors, both on the income and capital investment side, they are), or be more worried about finding hands to pack boxes and fill orders? That is the whole point to this mess we are in, everybody below the 5% of Americans feels like they shoudld be holding onto their money, paying down debt and refinancing their mortgage instead of spending on consumables and other such things like cars and home upgrades. I think for the first time, in a long time, Americans are starting to step back and really think about their fiscal behavior... and realize that overextending is less desirable than saving.

 

Here has been my belief all along. Housing, and its iliquid drag is the single biggest issue on the US economy, at least domestically. Instead of a 800B Stimulus packages and subsequent easing attempts, the government should have back and very large, expansive refinannce backing package for howeowners that really could keep their homes, and provide much needed monthly payment relief. Let the people are are too far gone, provide a streamlined bankruptcy process espcially for handling underwater homes... get people out of their home based prisons, and let the investory get absorbed by qualified buyers or investors. the US Governments housing and monetarty policies over the last few decades created this glut, this would be a gteat opportunity to mend the fence, change those bad polcies, and get people our feeling financially healthy again.

 

But here we are, piecemealing away. Banks and compaines are doing well because of Free Fed money..... but IMHO, again, this will get worse again before it gets better.

 

BTW- I am doing just fine, personally. I have always been a saver/ investor, and these downtimes are garage sales for value assets- plus I work in an injustry that continue to add jobs and will for 20 years.... Healthcare. I do however have great empathy for people in a tough siuation.

Edited June 1, 2012 by B-Large

[TheMadCap]

Although I do agree with some of what you are saying, your view is too simplistic, a defeatist perspective, that basically implies a black or white scenario, tilting heavily towards black. The reality is that there are many shades of grey in between and that there are policy prespriptions that can lead us to a long-term solution by incrementally leading us to lighter shades of grey.

 

The president and his staff is a team comprised of a bunch of leftist ideologues, early on my criticism was that his administration had virtually no one that had private sector experience, and that I knew from the beginning that the Obama Whitehouse would be incapable of leading us to a solid sustained recovery, and guess what? Some of us were right.

 

There is over two trillion dollars sitting on the sidelines from corporations, and if the president had any sort of business sense, he would work tirelessly in how to have them unleash and spend that money. But rather than do that, he is more concerned with the politics of "fairness" which contradicts in what makes a business want to grow. Even if you look past the corporations and them hoarding money through fear of uncertainty and higher taxes, small business polls show that regulations is what is inhibiting job hiring, not lack of demand. The president has failed and it's time for someone who actually understands business to finish the job he couldn't handle.

 

no, no NO! I heard my card carrying Democrat father-in-law say that it was because they "don't like the black guy" as why business are not spending...

[Magox]

I didn't think it was pessimistic, I thought it was realistic. I have to question the premise of your post... let me propose this question to you- if there was very strong, aggregate demand for products and services... much like there was in 2003-2007 when Americans had access to bags of cash (albeit phantom cash, or better know as credit), do you really believe that companies would be worried about tax rates (I am not saying tax rates are not important factors, both on the income and capital investment side, they are), or be more worried about finding hands to pack boxes and fill orders? That is the whole point to this mess we are in, everybody below the 5% of Americans feels like they shoudld be holding onto their money, paying down debt and refinancing their mortgage instead of spending on consumables and other such things like cars and home upgrades. I think for the first time, in a long time, Americans are starting to step back and really think about their fiscal behavior... and realize that overextending is less desirable than saving.

 

Here has been my belief all along. Housing, and its iliquid drag is the single biggest issue on the US economy, at least domestically. Instead of a 800B Stimulus packages and subsequent easing attempts, the government should have back and very large, expansive refinannce backing package for howeowners that really could keep their homes, and provide much needed monthly payment relief. Let the people are are too far gone, provide a streamlined bankruptcy process espcially for handling underwater homes... get people out of their home based prisons, and let the investory get absorbed by qualified buyers or investors. the US Governments housing and monetarty policies over the last few decades created this glut, this would be a gteat opportunity to mend the fence, change those bad polcies, and get people our feeling financially healthy again.

 

But here we are, piecemealing away. Banks and compaines are doing well because of Free Fed money..... but IMHO, again, this will get worse again before it gets better.

 

BTW- I am doing just fine, personally. I have always been a saver/ investor, and these downtimes are garage sales for value assets- plus I work in an injustry that continue to add jobs and will for 20 years.... Healthcare. I do however have great empathy for people in a tough siuation.

 

let me propose this question to you- if there was very strong, aggregate demand for products and services... much like there was in 2003-2007 when Americans had access to bags of cash (albeit phantom cash, or better know as credit), do you really believe that companies would be worried about tax rates

 

First you can't make that comparison, at least not from a rational basis. The economy we had in 2003-2007 is vastly different than what it is now. We need to reinvigorate the private sector, unleash the animal spirits, and demand is obviously a part of the equation, but in order to produce more demand you have to get people working again. The WhiteHouse believes that we should borrow money and produce a job with that money. THe problem is that Gov. is usually very inefficient when given that responsibility, as evidenced in the Stimulus Bill. Considering that our labor issues are mainly structural, we need to try to resolve these issues not with quick keynesian quick fixes but with structural solutions.

 

Considering that the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world, addressing this issue is extremely important. The president has decided to push for the Buffet Tax, that is a political gimmick in order to rile up his looney leftist base, than actually solve our problems of addressing our tax code.

 

Secondly, leftists which you aren't a full blown leftist, but you definitely reside on the left side of the aisle, refuse to acknowledge the impact of regulations and how that affects business behavior. Businesses first and fore most crave certainty. Without a doubt, regulatory impacts of Dodd-Frank (Im a casualty of this regulation), Obamacare and the EPA have dampened certainty. ALso, we know that under a second Obama term, Obama will push for punitive taxes on the job creators in the name of "fairness".

 

This is what I see as the number one issue standing in the way from our anemic growth to having average growth.

 

Other areas that need to be addressed is ramping up oil/energy drilling, there are literally millions of jobs that can be created over the next 5-10 years if we decided to have full blown energy policy. Of course, having better relations with our trading partners an area that can lead to more exports would be fruitful.

 

There are many areas that we can go, but this president has failed to address these areas, simply because its not in his DNA, he is incapable of doing what needs to be done to get ths economy going again.

 

In regards to your housing solution. I disagree. The gov. should do nothing, and just allow the market to find its natural bottom, the quicker it finds its bottom, the quicker the healing can begin. The more you inject "stimulus" the more it distorts its natural price, which means the healing gets postponed.

 

ANd in regards to your personal situation, well, you are one of the below 40% of the population that can say the same. I'm in the 60%, I lost my business because of the DOdd Frank Regulation, I am a direct casualty of Obamas awful economic policies, so again, good for you, I'm happy that you are doing well, but most AMericans don't feel your enthusiasm.

[B-Large]

First you can't make that comparison, at least not from a rational basis. The economy we had in 2003-2007 is vastly different than what it is now. We need to reinvigorate the private sector, unleash the animal spirits, and demand is obviously a part of the equation, but in order to produce more demand you have to get people working again. The WhiteHouse believes that we should borrow money and produce a job with that money. THe problem is that Gov. is usually very inefficient when given that responsibility, as evidenced in the Stimulus Bill. Considering that our labor issues are mainly structural, we need to try to resolve these issues not with quick keynesian quick fixes but with structural solutions.

 

Considering that the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world, addressing this issue is extremely important. The president has decided to push for the Buffet Tax, that is a political gimmick in order to rile up his looney leftist base, than actually solve our problems of addressing our tax code.

 

Secondly, leftists which you aren't a full blown leftist, but you definitely reside on the left side of the aisle, refuse to acknowledge the impact of regulations and how that affects business behavior. Businesses first and fore most crave certainty. Without a doubt, regulatory impacts of Dodd-Frank (Im a casualty of this regulation), Obamacare and the EPA have dampened certainty. ALso, we know that under a second Obama term, Obama will push for punitive taxes on the job creators in the name of "fairness".

 

This is what I see as the number one issue standing in the way from our anemic growth to having average growth.

 

Other areas that need to be addressed is ramping up oil/energy drilling, there are literally millions of jobs that can be created over the next 5-10 years if we decided to have full blown energy policy. Of course, having better relations with our trading partners an area that can lead to more exports would be fruitful.

 

There are many areas that we can go, but this president has failed to address these areas, simply because its not in his DNA, he is incapable of doing what needs to be done to get ths economy going again.

 

In regards to your housing solution. I disagree. The gov. should do nothing, and just allow the market to find its natural bottom, the quicker it finds its bottom, the quicker the healing can begin. The more you inject "stimulus" the more it distorts its natural price, which means the healing gets postponed.

 

ANd in regards to your personal situation, well, you are one of the below 40% of the population that can say the same. I'm in the 60%, I lost my business because of the DOdd Frank Regulation, I am a direct casualty of Obamas awful economic policies, so again, good for you, I'm happy that you are doing well, but most AMericans don't feel your enthusiasm.

 

Sales and Orders create Demand, not other way around though. I can have all the certaintly in the world, and a 0% tax rate and am I still not going to hire another body if I don't have the Sales or Antipcated Sales to do so.... you can give me a big tax credit to hire somebody, but if my current staff can do the job and I can work a Saturday to fill the orders, I will do before I hire another person, train them, offer the bennies, etc. If I can't serve my customers wants and needs is when I hire another person, and I need to know there are enough customers with money to buy my stuff....

 

So to me, Mag, that means money in the hands of those who desire to aquire (so if you are going to give a all out aggressive, ball buster tax cut to, it should be anybody but the people who have the money to do what they want anyway- I don't need a tax cut to spend money, but I know people who would spend every dollar)... the more I think about your post, yes you need people with Jobs to have the money to spend, but businesses don't hire until the masses spend.... Its kind of like a catch-22.... but back to main premise, housing still drags on the economny, and puts a dent in spenders pockets and they outlook. Am I going to save a few extra bucks of disposable income to pay the mortagage shoudl I love my paycheck, or do I spend on new stuff.... it is an easy question, and that is putting the hurt on consumer acitivity. While I don't like the idea of the USG backing my massive refi/ bankruptcy idea and more than you, it is an easy option to get a very lareg amount og Americans with more money in theie hands to spend... in the mind of Joe Consumer, underwater house is suffocating, refinanced house with manageable payments if progress.... while I prefer the "let it find it's bottom" solution above all, we are 4 years later dragging in the same malaise.... banks are not motivated to book losses, and they are not super eager to refi owners who are a steady stream of interest and make their payments above all else.

 

I am sorry to hear about your siuation, I certainly do not envy your place right now. My siuation is not perfect by any means, I mean I FINALLY refinancing my wife's condo she bought back in 2003 that WAS 40K under water.... but we saved diligently to be able to pay most of the pricipal down and can now refi- and yes, our money has gone to buying more more property at discount and to that problem child, and we do not spend on anything that is not a need (except vacations).

 

What I find more defalting that anything else is I don't see much difference with the vote for Romney versus Obama at this point. I don't see much hope between a vote for Republicans versus Democrats. The only candidate that was really speaking the business was Ron Paul, but there is no way a Libertarian is gonna get close to that House for a long. long time. IMHO, R and D's have a vested interest in keeping Government big, and expanding into everybodies lives more than ever intended. People will argu me up and doen about how huge the differences are, but when you really drill down, the have both been big net exapnders for 50 years.... all of the sudden in the 2012 that will all change? I doubt it.

Edited June 1, 2012 by B-Large

[Jim in Anchorage]

Sales and Orders create Demand, not other way around though. I can have all the certaintly in the world, and a 0% tax rate and am I still not going to hire another body if I don't have the Sales or Antipcated Sales to do so.... you can give me a big tax credit to hire somebody, but if my current staff can do the job and I can work a Saturday to fill the orders, I will do before I hire another person, train them, offer the bennies, etc. If I can't serve my customers wants and needs is when I hire another person, and I need to know there are enough customers with money to buy my stuff....

 

So to me, Mag, that means money in the hands of those who desire to aquire (so if you are going to give a all out aggressive, ball buster tax cut to, it should be anybody but the people who have the money to do what they want anyway- I don't need a tax cut to spend money, but I know people who would spend every dollar)... the more I think about your post, yes you need people with Jobs to have the money to spend, but businesses don't hire until the masses spend.... Its kind of like a catch-22.... but back to main premise, housing still drags on the economny, and puts a dent in spenders pockets and they outlook. Am I going to save a few extra bucks of disposable income to pay the mortagage shoudl I love my paycheck, or do I spend on new stuff.... it is an easy question, and that is putting the hurt on consumer acitivity. While I don't like the idea of the USG backing my massive refi/ bankruptcy idea and more than you, it is an easy option to get a very lareg amount og Americans with more money in theie hands to spend... in the mind of Joe Consumer, underwater house is suffocating, refinanced house with manageable payments if progress.... while I prefer the "let it find it's bottom" solution above all, we are 4 years later dragging in the same malaise.... banks are not motivated to book losses, and they are not super eager to refi owners who are a steady stream of interest and make their payments above all else.

 

I am sorry to hear about your siuation, I certainly do not envy your place right now. My siuation is not perfect by any means, I mean I FINALLY refinancing my wife's condo she bought back in 2003 that WAS 40K under water.... but we saved diligently to be able to pay most of the pricipal down and can now refi- and yes, our money has gone to buying more more property at discount and to that problem child, and we do not spend on anything that is not a need (except vacations).

 

What I find more defalting that anything else is I don't see much difference with the vote for Romney versus Obama at this point. I don't see much hope between a vote for Republicans versus Democrats. The only candidate that was really speaking the business was Ron Paul, but there is no way a Libertarian is gonna get close to that House for a long. long time. IMHO, R and D's have a vested interest in keeping Government big, and expanding into everybodies lives more than ever intended. People will argu me up and doen about how huge the differences are, but when you really drill down, the have both been big net exapnders for 50 years.... all of the sudden in the 2012 that will all change? I doubt it.

Do you babble like this to your "staff"? What a nightmare job.

[IDBillzFan]

Sales and Orders create Demand, not other way around though

What in the hell???

 

If sales and orders create demand, then I'm curious: what creates sales and orders?

 

Wait. Let me guess. A government mandate.

[B-Man]

Let's all thank President Obama for lower gas prices

 

 

Don't worry, he's focusing on the economy, its his Number One priority

 

President Obama Hosts 6 Fundraisers Friday on Minneapolis, Chicago Visit

 

ABC News

 

 

 

 

Well, maybe the day after......................

 

 

 

.

[DC Tom]

What in the hell???

 

If sales and orders create demand, then I'm curious: what creates sales and orders?

 

Wait. Let me guess. A government mandate.

 

Or indefinite interest.

 

Lets all thank the NYS Thruway Authority for making up for the lower gas prices:

 

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/city/capital-connection/albany/article880089.ece

 

They still haven't paid off that bond issue?

[Jim in Anchorage]

Or indefinite interest.

 

 

 

They still haven't paid off that bond issue?

You need to point that up to Tom Dewey. It is his Truway after all.

[B-Large]

What in the hell???

 

If sales and orders create demand, then I'm curious: what creates sales and orders?

 

Wait. Let me guess. A government mandate.

 

Missed the Point, LA. I didn't say Government was the answer to anything. The wealth in this country has flown upward for decades, incomes have remained flat for middle class, and recently the middle to lower class of this country has main'y prospered on Credit. Borrowing against 401K's, Credit Cards, Home Refi's with Cash-Out Options or Helocs.... subsequently the easy money well is about dry, and Americans have finally got it through their heads that Income and Credit are mutually exclusive terms. Now, you have a generation of yonng Americnans who have School Debt, CC Debt.... that will stick with them longer as income stay stagnant and the economy struggles. We are seeing a maxed out spending class, and this economy is dead in the water without consumption...

 

I think you have me pegged wrong, I am not a liberal. I can simple state what I see in the country right now. I don't care about talking points and being right or wrong, all I can say is the strong foundtion, the base of this country is shifting, buckling and breaking all over the place... Middle Classers don't have much more to give, and we can't prosper until that is fixed.

 

What creates a Sales a Demand? A fiscally healthy group of Consumers. This has been my point about housing, the classic America core asset... In the past is has been about stablity, pride, progress, "making it".... now that very asset for TONS of Americans is the cross they bare (I am honestly shocked how many people are underwater, and Denver was not even that bad of a RE market)..... I don't know what the answers are, but low paying jobs and endless credit expansion and cheap money are not the answer. This is a viscious cycle of compaines not wanting to hire, consumer weary of spending, and until one gives, we will continue to struggle. To me, I think this has been a long time coming and we are being forced to pay the piper.

 

Side thought: Think about the last phases of growth- hyped assets, easy credit, each time the collateral damage worse than before. How do we get real, sustainable growth should be the question- do I think the community organizer/lawyer or Private Equity/ Short Term Profit expert have any expereince..... sadly, don't really know....

 

Do you babble like this to your "staff"? What a nightmare job.

 

Sent them all home early. I stayed late to answer any call until 5PM. Lotsa dead time today to post and converse.

[Magox]

Sales and Orders create Demand, not other way around though. I can have all the certaintly in the world, and a 0% tax rate and am I still not going to hire another body if I don't have the Sales or Antipcated Sales to do so.... you can give me a big tax credit to hire somebody, but if my current staff can do the job and I can work a Saturday to fill the orders, I will do before I hire another person, train them, offer the bennies, etc. If I can't serve my customers wants and needs is when I hire another person, and I need to know there are enough customers with money to buy my stuff....

 

So to me, Mag, that means money in the hands of those who desire to aquire (so if you are going to give a all out aggressive, ball buster tax cut to, it should be anybody but the people who have the money to do what they want anyway- I don't need a tax cut to spend money, but I know people who would spend every dollar)... the more I think about your post, yes you need people with Jobs to have the money to spend, but businesses don't hire until the masses spend.... Its kind of like a catch-22.... but back to main premise, housing still drags on the economny, and puts a dent in spenders pockets and they outlook. Am I going to save a few extra bucks of disposable income to pay the mortagage shoudl I love my paycheck, or do I spend on new stuff.... it is an easy question, and that is putting the hurt on consumer acitivity. While I don't like the idea of the USG backing my massive refi/ bankruptcy idea and more than you, it is an easy option to get a very lareg amount og Americans with more money in theie hands to spend... in the mind of Joe Consumer, underwater house is suffocating, refinanced house with manageable payments if progress.... while I prefer the "let it find it's bottom" solution above all, we are 4 years later dragging in the same malaise.... banks are not motivated to book losses, and they are not super eager to refi owners who are a steady stream of interest and make their payments above all else.

 

I am sorry to hear about your siuation, I certainly do not envy your place right now. My siuation is not perfect by any means, I mean I FINALLY refinancing my wife's condo she bought back in 2003 that WAS 40K under water.... but we saved diligently to be able to pay most of the pricipal down and can now refi- and yes, our money has gone to buying more more property at discount and to that problem child, and we do not spend on anything that is not a need (except vacations).

 

What I find more defalting that anything else is I don't see much difference with the vote for Romney versus Obama at this point. I don't see much hope between a vote for Republicans versus Democrats. The only candidate that was really speaking the business was Ron Paul, but there is no way a Libertarian is gonna get close to that House for a long. long time. IMHO, R and D's have a vested interest in keeping Government big, and expanding into everybodies lives more than ever intended. People will argu me up and doen about how huge the differences are, but when you really drill down, the have both been big net exapnders for 50 years.... all of the sudden in the 2012 that will all change? I doubt it.

 

Your view is too singularly myopic. In your first paragraph, you are making the case that without sales, nothing else matters. Well yeah, but that isn't the case, there are sales. Again, the argument you make is either black or white. White being red hot sales, black being none at all. The reality is that sales are below what we normally see in a normal economy, and the only way we will get back to a normal economy is through higher employment. We know that profits from corporations aren't the problem, the issues is getting corporations to spend that money. So the million dollar question is; Why aren't they spending and investing that money?

 

It's simple, you can either read WSJ, tune into CNBC and apply a little logic and hear what the CEO's are saying or you can read HUFFPO or the spin from the Whitehouse and congressional Democrats. I guarantee you, that if you listen to what the Dem's are saying or hear the spin from keynesian economists that promoted the stimulus (like a Mark Zandi) and have time in and time out been proven wrong on almost all their projections, then you are going to continue to never find the right solution. Guys like Mark Zandi feel as if their reputation is on the line, they heavily promoted the stimulus and have defended itwith incredible zeal, so they are stuck attempting to justify their error. (BTW I am not an anti keynesian, just that this recovery requires structural solutions)

 

I'm right about this, and the solution isn't the typical left-wing or keynesian one which is the standard "we need more demand" answer. What we need are structural solutions, why? Because structural labor problems require structural solutions. Before you came to this site, I spoke in detail about why Obama's demand side solutions wouldn't work, and this was before the failing results came in, and I've been proven right.

 

What we need is to give confidence to the business community, both at the corporate and small business level, that the US is open for business, and that Government for the most part is on your side.

 

How do we do that? Well, you lessen regulations, you allow businesses to keep more of what they earn, you seek new avenues of demand for our exporters by improving trade relations with growing companies and most importantly don't get in the way of their progress.

 

Obama is incapable of making the economy thrive, he isn't up to the task, why? Because it isn't in his DNA, he is a community organizer, he cares more about "fairness", and even though that is nice concept that appeals to some people, it by no means is a way to reinvigorate an economy. "fairness" economic models are built through regulations and wealth distribution, and these two points that I listed are job and growth restrictors.

 

What we need to do is figure out a way for those corporations and businesses to spend and invest that money, that is the key to getting this economy going, and guess what? It won't cost the taxpayer money because it is money that is just sitting their owned by the private sector.

 

In regards to the housing market, there is no quick fix solution. Let the market find it's bottom, stop placing ball buster regulations on the banks in the name of populism and at some point, the prices of the homes (which we are about there) will be attractive enough for buyers to step in. So it's just a matter of the banks having enough confidence to lend again. But if regulations are going to cut further into profits, does that make it more or less likely they will loan money to consumers? The answer is obvious.

 

 

In regards to Romney and Obama, there is plenty of difference between the two. SOrry, I don't buy into this vogue comparison that there isn't much of a difference between the two. People can try to justify all day long how these two are similar but they are nothing alike.

 

Romney will work tirelessly in figuring out a way for businesses to get going, Obama works tirelessly in building a more "fair" economy.

 

That is an incredibly stark contrast in how these two men will promote policies to move this country forward.

Edited June 1, 2012 by Magox

[B-Large]

Your view is too singularly myopic. In your first paragraph, you are making the case that without sales, nothing else matters. Well yeah, but that isn't the case, there are sales. Again, the argument you make is either black or white. White being red hot sales, black being none at all. The reality is that sales are below what we normally see in a normal economy, and the only way we will get back to a normal economy is through higher employment. We know that profits from corporations aren't the problem, the issues is getting corporations to spend that money. So the million dollar question is; Why aren't they spending and investing that money?

 

It's simple, you can either read WSJ, tune into CNBC and apply a little logic and hear what the CEO's are saying or you can read HUFFPO or the spin from the Whitehouse and congressional Democrats. I guarantee you, that if you listen to what the Dem's are saying or hear the spin from keynesian economists that promoted the stimulus (like a Mark Zandi) and have time in and time out been proven wrong on almost all their projections, then you are going to continue to never find the right solution. Guys like Mark Zandi feel as if their reputation is on the line, they heavily promoted the stimulus and have defended itwith incredible zeal, so they are stuck attempting to justify their error. (BTW I am not an anti keynesian, just that this recovery requires structural solutions)

 

I'm right about this, and the solution isn't the typical left-wing or keynesian one which is the standard "we need more demand" answer. What we need are structural solutions, why? Because structural labor problems require structural solutions. Before you came to this site, I spoke in detail about why Obama's demand side solutions wouldn't work, and this was before the failing results came in, and I've been proven right.

 

What we need is to give confidence to the business community, both at the corporate and small business level, that the US is open for business, and that Government for the most part is on your side.

 

How do we do that? Well, you lessen regulations, you allow businesses to keep more of what they earn, you seek new avenues of demand for our exporters by improving trade relations with growing companies and most importantly don't get in the way of their progress.

 

Obama is incapable of making the economy thrive, he isn't up to the task, why? Because it isn't in his DNA, he is a community organizer, he cares more about "fairness", and even though that is nice concept that appeals to some people, it by no means is a way to reinvigorate an economy. "fairness" economic models are built through regulations and wealth distribution, and these two points that I listed are job and growth restrictors.

 

What we need to do is figure out a way for those corporations and businesses to spend and invest that money, that is the key to getting this economy going, and guess what? It won't cost the taxpayer money because it is money that is just sitting their owned by the private sector.

 

In regards to the housing market, there is no quick fix solution. Let the market find it's bottom, stop placing ball buster regulations on the banks in the name of populism and at some point, the prices of the homes (which we are about there) will be attractive enough for buyers to step in. So it's just a matter of the banks having enough confidence to lend again. But if regulations are going to cut further into profits, does that make it more or less likely they will loan money to consumers? The answer is obvious.

 

 

In regards to Romney and Obama, there is plenty of difference between the two. SOrry, I don't buy into this vogue comparison that there isn't much of a difference between the two. People can try to justify all day long how these two are similar but they are nothing alike.

 

Romney will work tirelessly in figuring out a way for businesses to get going, Obama works tirelessly in building a more "fair" economy.

 

That is an incredibly stark contrast in how these two men will promote policies to move this country forward.

 

But that is just it, companies are making plenty of money, even with current tax rates and regulations- I am not advocating more taxes and red tape, but think about it- For what reason do I hire and invest? I have plenty of capital, machinery, people and capacity to handle the business I have now... if I had enen more money, I am not going to hire anyone or buy a new machine to just sit there idle... no matter how much money I have on hand, if there is no incremental money to be made or return through more business, I am hanging onto to that cash or cleaning up my balance sheet. I just can't wrap my head around the notion that supply-side is the issue. Would I want more cash sitting idle, or a line of hungry customers strapped with cash want to buy my widget? I take the line up and day, I can manage the tax liabilies, the demand is keeping my doors open.

 

It can only be a matter of time until the country is top heavy and bobbles from side to side as the base of its citizens are economically anemic. I wish this issue would get more serious attention, America simply cannot thrive with hundred of millions of citzens continually marginalized and losing financial means.

 

Look, we probably will not see it from the same point of view ever, but I do appreciate the discussion, Mag.

[....lybob]

But that is just it, companies are making plenty of money, even with current tax rates and regulations- I am not advocating more taxes and red tape, but think about it- For what reason do I hire and invest? I have plenty of capital, machinery, people and capacity to handle the business I have now... if I had enen more money, I am not going to hire anyone or buy a new machine to just sit there idle... no matter how much money I have on hand, if there is no incremental money to be made or return through more business, I am hanging onto to that cash or cleaning up my balance sheet. I just can't wrap my head around the notion that supply-side is the issue. Would I want more cash sitting idle, or a line of hungry customers strapped with cash want to buy my widget? I take the line up and day, I can manage the tax liabilies, the demand is keeping my doors open.

 

It can only be a matter of time until the country is top heavy and bobbles from side to side as the base of its citizens are economically anemic. I wish this issue would get more serious attention, America simply cannot thrive with hundred of millions of citzens continually marginalized and losing financial means.

 

Look, we probably will not see it from the same point of view ever, but I do appreciate the discussion, Mag.

 

This is exactly right explained very well by Nick Hanaurer

 

[Magox]

But that is just it, companies are making plenty of money, even with current tax rates and regulations- I am not advocating more taxes and red tape, but think about it- For what reason do I hire and invest? I have plenty of capital, machinery, people and capacity to handle the business I have now... if I had enen more money, I am not going to hire anyone or buy a new machine to just sit there idle... no matter how much money I have on hand, if there is no incremental money to be made or return through more business, I am hanging onto to that cash or cleaning up my balance sheet. I just can't wrap my head around the notion that supply-side is the issue. Would I want more cash sitting idle, or a line of hungry customers strapped with cash want to buy my widget? I take the line up and day, I can manage the tax liabilies, the demand is keeping my doors open.

 

It can only be a matter of time until the country is top heavy and bobbles from side to side as the base of its citizens are economically anemic. I wish this issue would get more serious attention, America simply cannot thrive with hundred of millions of citzens continually marginalized and losing financial means.

 

Look, we probably will not see it from the same point of view ever, but I do appreciate the discussion, Mag.

It's not just a "supply side" argument, it is about certainty and unleashing the animal spirits of American capitalism. The key to getting this economy going is motivating corporations to unleash those trillions of dollars that are sitting on the sidelines. Burdensome nonsensical regulations, and the least competitive corporate tax rates in the world don't help. If you (the president) can somehow give added certainty by providing a long-term plan to reduce the debt, lower personal and corporate tax rates and broadening the base, and sending a signal to the business community that you are on their side by undoing some of these ridiculous regulations, corporations and small businesses will begin to hire. Of course, it doesn't address all our structural labor issues, but it would at least turn this "recovery" from an anemic one to bordering on average.

 

Keynesian demand side solutions are useful to help jump start an economy, or help fill a void, the problem is that isn't a structural solution. It's temporary, and corporations and small businesses know that it will eventually run out. So we need permanent long-term solutions, not these short-term sugar highs.