Green Chutes and Pink Farts

[Magox]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...id=aGvV2cMSUVO0

 

White House economic advisers expect “robust” job growth during the next decade in such industries as health care, green energy, transportation, construction and education, according to a report that calls for a “comprehensive strategy” to better prepare workers.

 

Bill Gross's take

 

http://alphadinar.com/2009/07/02/pimcos-bi...stment-outlook/

 

The supersizing of financial leverage and consumer spending in concert with the politicizing of deregulation describes in fifteen words our most recent brush with irrational behavior and inefficient markets. Greed will come again. But for now, the trend is the other way and it promises to persist for a generation at a minimum. The fact is that American consumers have suffered a collapse in wealth of at least $15 trillion since early 2007.

[Magox]

More Pink Farts

 

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/24899.html

 

The article in a nutshell:

 

President Barack Obama’s economic forecasts for long-term growth are too optimistic, many economists warn, a miscalculation that would mean budget deficits will be much higher than the administration is now acknowledging.

 

The White House will be forced to confront the disconnect between its original, upbeat predictions and the mainstream consensus about how the economy is likely to perform in a new budget forecast to be unveiled next month.

 

Obama later amended those remarks, saying the White House had “incomplete” information, which led to their miscalculations.

 

 

Either way, those admissions appear to pave the way for a significant rewrite of the White House’s economic outlook, starting with it growth predictions.

 

 

“Those numbers will prove to be much, much too optimistic,” said J.D. Foster, a former economic adviser in the Bush administration.

 

To appreciate the potential problems that can arise once those numbers are changed, consider this:

 

 

The White House projected revenues for 2012 are forecast at $3.1 trillion. But if growth is just 2 percent, rather than around 4 percent, as some economists now expect, that income would hover around $2.4 trillion — adding another $700 billion to the projected deficit of $581 billion.

 

 

“That would be a significant change in the deficit,” said Foster, who did the math.

 

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/...0LGJ281le&C

[IDBillzFan]

The White House projected revenues for 2012 are forecast at $3.1 trillion. But if growth is just 2 percent, rather than around 4 percent, as some economists now expect, that income would hover around $2.4 trillion — adding another $700 billion to the projected deficit of $581 billion.

 

No big deal. Just tax the rich some more. It's just a drop in the bucket to them.

[Magox]

No big deal. Just tax the rich some more. It's just a drop in the bucket to them.

You mean like this proposal? :

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...id=a7ZsDRJRtlAI

 

House Democrats plan to introduce health-care legislation today that increases taxes on the wealthiest Americans, including a 5.4 percent surtax on couples earning more than $1 million.

 

The surtax would also place a 1.5 percent tax on couples with incomes between $500,000 and $1 million, and a 1 percent surtax on incomes over $350,000. It calls for the taxes to increase if the overhaul doesn’t produce at least $150 billion in cost savings. Capital gains as well as earned income would be subject to the surtax.

[/dev/null]

It calls for the taxes to increase if the overhaul doesn’t produce at least $150 billion in cost savings

 

 

We're taxing you because you're rich. But we're not making enough money off you because you're not rich enough, so we'll tax you some more

[John Adams]

Atlas Shrugged movie comes out in 2011. Here's hoping they do a good job with it.

[IDBillzFan]

The surtax would also place a 1.5 percent tax on couples with incomes between $500,000 and $1 million, and a 1 percent surtax on incomes over $350,000. It calls for the taxes to increase if the overhaul doesn’t produce at least $150 billion in cost savings. Capital gains as well as earned income would be subject to the surtax. [/b]

When asked to comment on the attempt to once again raise taxes on the nation's small business owners in order to carry the weight of the unproductive workers of the world as funded by a government with no money, House Democrats unanimously signed a letter printed on official non-letterhead letterhead, which read, "Hey, how stupid is that Palin chick, eh? Whoo boy, there's a dumb chick. Retard baby. Whore daughter. Yep...that's some serious white trash right there. I'm sorry...what? More taxes? Why of course, what do you expect us to do in a down economy? Stop spending??? You people are so funny.

 

Sincerely,

 

House Democrats."

[Gene Frenkle]

54000 clams.

 

Most of us peasants would be pissed if we have to part with five bucks.

 

But those "evil rich" are asked to cough up another 54000.

 

Thats a lotta clams.

Well it's all relative to how many clams you're starting with.

 

Which begs the question - why are you railing against somthing that has no direct effect on you personally? Oh yeah, it's the allure of the "morality" of the Conservative movement...

[Magox]

Well it's all relative to how many clams you're starting with.

 

Which begs the question - why are you railing against somthing that has no direct effect on you personally? Oh yeah, it's the allure of the "morality" of the Conservative movement...

Great argument! If it doesn't affect you, then screw them, right?

[Gene Frenkle]

Great argument! If it doesn't affect you, then screw them, right?

More like...I can think of about 101 other issues to get all fired up about because they do affect me directly.

 

That's the problem with you damned hippies and your pro-establishment sentiment.

[Magox]

More like...I can think of about 101 other issues to get all fired up about because they do affect me directly.

 

That's the problem with you damned hippies and your pro-establishment sentiment.

So taking money away from the one's that employ the majority of people won't have an impact on job growth?

 

There is a reemerging and transformative pandemic out there and it is called Short sightedness which is an insidious disease that is now affecting approximately 58% of our population. Seek help

[GG]

Welcome to the "somebody else's problem" mindset.

[/dev/null]

I propose a $54,000 tax on people who use fictional SNL character names as their internet message board names

 

If that doesn't produce enough "revenue" I propose adding an additional tax on those same individuals who use NFL players as their avatar

 

Hey, it doesn't affect me personally. Why should I care?

[Kelly the Dog]

Welcome to the "somebody else's problem" mindset.

You mean pass it on to the next administration, like how as a nation we have been dealing with health care, and energy and education for a few decades and counting?

 

The Senate bill in all likelihood is not going to have the millionaire tax. Hopefully, the final bill, that will be passed in the fall, will not either. The House Dems, as usual, are going overboard and being idiots on several levels and issues.

[John Adams]

You mean pass it on to the next administration, like how as a nation we have been dealing with health care, and energy and education for a few decades and counting?

 

The Senate bill in all likelihood is not going to have the millionaire tax. Hopefully, the final bill, that will be passed in the fall, will not either. The House Dems, as usual, are going overboard and being idiots on several levels and issues.

 

The Bill will pass and be set up for 2013 implementation without specifics laid down on funding, or with funding to be determined based on some optimistic projection.

[Magox]

The Bill will pass and be set up for 2013 implementation without specifics laid down on funding, or with funding to be determined based on some optimistic projection.

I believe the Bill will pass as well, and those "optimistic" economic projections are nothing but B.S, and the only way that this will be able to get paid for is by taxing people. Of course the people who will get taxed the most will be in the minority, which is the one's who have more, so the majority of voters won't have too much of an issue with it, but of course, most people are short sighted, like our friend Finkle, and they don't see the implications that it has for job growth opportunities, so ironically, what will most likely happen is that many of the same people that voted for their legislators to implement this Bill, could very likely lose a job opportunity because of the same Bill.

 

I would expect that the White House, some time soon are going to have to come back to the American public and scale down their Rosy economic projections.

[Gene Frenkle]

I propose a $54,000 tax on people who use fictional SNL character names as their internet message board names

 

If that doesn't produce enough "revenue" I propose adding an additional tax on those same individuals who use NFL players as their avatar

 

Hey, it doesn't affect me personally. Why should I care?

Gene Frenkle is not a fictional SNL character. Perhaps you've been licking your hypotoad?

[GG]

You mean pass it on to the next administration, like how as a nation we have been dealing with health care, and energy and education for a few decades and counting?

 

The Senate bill in all likelihood is not going to have the millionaire tax. Hopefully, the final bill, that will be passed in the fall, will not either. The House Dems, as usual, are going overboard and being idiots on several levels and issues.

 

You can add Social Security to the list. Although I wouldn't place energy on that list, as it's a manufactured problem.

[/dev/null]

Gene Frenkle is not a fictional SNL character. Perhaps you've been licking your hypotoad?

 

Hate to break the news to you my friend. But Gene Frenkle is a creation of SNL and never lived (or died for that matter)

[IDBillzFan]

More like...I can think of about 101 other issues to get all fired up about because they do affect me directly.

 

That's the problem with you damned hippies and your pro-establishment sentiment.

Is there anything more fun than watching a liberal spend one minute talking about how we all need to band together to help those who can't help themselves when it comes to jobs and health care, and then the next minute explaining that they don't care what happens to others as long as it doesn't affect them directly?