dayman Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 (edited) http://www.washingto...-next-3-months/ We know the budget from the WH won't be out on Feb 4 but within a week or so there will likely be some public suggestions that neither party will want to adopt. Then the sequester hits which will stall whatever economic recovery we do have if not addressed. Then w/ out action the CR expires and gov't shuts down. Then Congress has an artificial budget deadline whereby their cash flow stops but they still get paid later. Then finally, the debt ceiling comes up again and as we all know can create world wide economic crisis if not raised. That's the next 3 or so months. Of course some comprehensive deal at any point could address all of this. But that will never happen, certainly not since any more revenue at this point will not be given up, and any balance of where the cuts will come from will not be agreed upon. Long story short as I see it....there's just a series of more retarded fights coming about fiscal issues that are impossible to solve given the political bullcrap... and when you add in the gun debate, and looming immigration debate...there seems to be limited room for discussion of growing and transforming the economy even by such simple measures that would support advanced manufacturing as outlined here: http://globalpublics...ocus-on-growth/ Not that the suggestions in that link are somehow the sole measure of importance for growing the economy, or that fiscal issues, gun violence, immigration etc...are not also important...but the point is...basically all discussion on "growing the economy" will not take place at all. Of course various politicians on both sides will claim in budget fights that something will or will not help...but it will not get to heart of aggressive programs to realign ourselves with the future.... Edited January 23, 2013 by SameOldBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 (edited) The American people had four years of elected officials doing nothing but handing out more goodies, ignoring our real problems, and showing everyone what the country looks like when the leaders are unable to lead. We appreciate your comments, but please note: This is what America elected. This is what America wants. More of the same. Edited January 23, 2013 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Forward! Winning The Future! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRUsMP6ww98 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 So SOB, who is making immigration and gun control the issues rather than the economy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 It all starts and ends at the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted January 23, 2013 Author Share Posted January 23, 2013 So SOB, who is making immigration and gun control the issues rather than the economy? My point is that nobody is making investment and short term growth the top priority. Even assuming that a long term fiscal deal is linked and perhaps as important (although not likely and at most merely equal) .... everyone is stuck on budget... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 My point is that nobody is making investment and short term growth the top priority. Even assuming that a long term fiscal deal is linked and perhaps as important (although not likely and at most merely equal) .... everyone is stuck on budget... I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm saying that Obama hasn't done anything serious about the economy, budget or deficit since hes's been in office. And as you state below, it doesn't look like he intends to. "Long story short as I see it....there's just a series of more retarded fights coming about fiscal issues that are impossible to solve given the political bullcrap... and when you add in the gun debate, and looming immigration debate...there seems to be limited room for discussion of growing and transforming the economy even by such simple measures that would support advanced manufacturing as outlined here:" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted January 23, 2013 Author Share Posted January 23, 2013 Well I don't intend this topic to be about he or she did this or that...but there was some stimulus included in proposals during the cliff negotiations but instead of debating the merits of the plan and ways to make it more effective and possibly even less expensive it was characterized as a silly democratic stimulus which doesn't work and is simply more spending. Either way the point is....it's off the table and EVERYTHING is long term budget now...when short term growth is as if not more important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 My point is that nobody is making investment and short term growth the top priority. That's because the American people don't want either of those as a top priority. The country's top priorities are very simple: (1) Gimme, gimme and (2) I want more. My recommendation to you is this: save up, arm up, load up and shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Well I don't intend this topic to be about he or she did this or that...but there was some stimulus included in proposals during the cliff negotiations but instead of debating the merits of the plan and ways to make it more effective and possibly even less expensive it was characterized as a silly democratic stimulus which doesn't work and is simply more spending. Either way the point is....it's off the table and EVERYTHING is long term budget now...when short term growth is as if not more important. Why is short term growth a priority? Long term growth should be a priority. Short term growth is simply smoke and mirrors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted January 23, 2013 Author Share Posted January 23, 2013 Why is short term growth a priority? Long term growth should be a priority. Short term growth is simply smoke and mirrors. Then consider short term growth starting long term growth now. Which entails more than just fighting over long term budget and may well introduce that dirty word "invest" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 (edited) Then consider short term growth starting long term growth now. Which entails more than just fighting over long term budget and may well introduce that dirty word "invest" But it isn't really investment. You want long term growth, the private sector has to feel ready to jump in. The large national debt, whether relevant or not is on peoples minds including the private sector. If there isn't at the very least an attempt to get that **** in line, businesses will hold back capital. Edit: FFS you've had the last three years of QE 1, 2 and 3 that was supposed to be "short term stimulus" that hasn't really had any actual growth impact on the economy (given that GDP is not increasing). Edited January 23, 2013 by meazza Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted January 23, 2013 Author Share Posted January 23, 2013 But it isn't really investment. You want long term growth, the private sector has to feel ready to jump in. The large national debt, whether relevant or not is on peoples minds including the private sector. If there isn't at the very least an attempt to get that **** in line, businesses will hold back capital. Which is why I said it is almost as important...point being...either slightly more or equal to this part of the equation are various policy decisions effecting now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Which is why I said it is almost as important...point being...either slightly more or equal to this part of the equation are various policy decisions effecting now. Though I do agree with you, can you name me a recent presidential candidate who said there should be no austerity until growth kicks in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 (edited) It's pretty obvious, Obama won and he feels empowered. There is no hiding who he truly is now, he's an unabashed liberal who cares more about from his view, dealing with social inequities through implementing bigger government policies while instituting punitive measures amongst those who feels owe it back to society, than trying to restore a vibrant economy. If anyone saw his inaugural address, knows that his agenda is the antithesis of Clinton's second term, when he decreed "The era of big government is over"... Well, Obama basically said "The era of big government is back, and we've juiced it up". So of course, it wasn't surprising to me that he never made mention of the economy and debt, why would he? Those are his failures, not to mention that liberals don't really enjoy discussing the debt. Rather than discuss these topics, that most of us care about, he is going to try to push through his leftist agenda. He's a borderline megalomaniac, it's gonna be his way or the highway, and he has the election results to prove it. At least that's how he sees it. The only hope I have of there being a grand bargain is if he comes to his senses and decides that addressing the entitlements and tax reform is part of the legacy he wants to leave behind. My guess is that he won't deliver, first because he isn't equipped to come through on a grand bargain, simply because he isn't able to connect with the opposing party. Secondly, liberals don't want to touch the entitlements, and he has always been beholden to their beliefs. The only reason why he ever pissed off liberals with some of his "compromises" is because he had to. If there is anything he loves more than his liberal orthodoxy, it would be himself. Which means that he compromised not for the sake of the good, but for his legacy and his re election. Well now that he has been re elected, I expect to see an even greater movement to the left. Edited January 23, 2013 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted January 23, 2013 Author Share Posted January 23, 2013 Edit: FFS you've had the last three years of QE 1, 2 and 3 that was supposed to be "short term stimulus" that hasn't really had any actual growth impact on the economy (given that GDP is not increasing). I'm not talking QE I'm talking industry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Seriously. You expected just what exactly to change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Well, we bitched and moaned for four years then promptly voted the incumbents (for the most part) right back in the saddle. If you always do what you always did, you always get what you always got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted January 24, 2013 Author Share Posted January 24, 2013 (edited) Saw statistics recently that we spent 5% of GDP on investment in the future in the 50s/60s....now it's 3%...and we currently spend $4 for people over 65 for every $1 for those under 18. Add the fact the tax code is something over 15,000 pages and about $400,000,000 we are owed each year is not collected....plus we need better trained workforce and to keep foreign students we educate as well as preserve our seasonal immigrant workforce (both of these immigration issues tie into our economy) ....on and on...how to reform medicare/SS may be contentious but if we should is not, how much and in what way to invest in our youth may be contentious but whether we should shouldn't be, tax reform is same deal, immigration is now the same deal after last election, and IMO infrastructure still is a no brainer although some politicians disagree for some reason I will never know... Point being the hardest part of all of this is and will be reforming that $4 we spend on those over 65 for every $1 on those under 18...yet with so much out there to do...it's all the republicans insist upon and all the democrats counter and talk about as well....sure if we take the approach that a big deal could open up some short term investment wiggle room for more infrastructure, industry, and education investment now that would be great but why not flip it (since no big deal is possible) and say this is what we need now and then evaluate the long term budget knowing what it is we did b/c we needed certain things now for the future etc.... Not the most well worded post I've ever made and that is saying something coming from me but my point is simple...there's a lot of stuff that should be on the table and there's a huge brick that can't be moved right now so push it aside and come back to it once we deal with some stuff that is as important. In proceeding from one budget crisis to the next...we do nothing else. Edited January 24, 2013 by SameOldBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts