Hillary's absurd efforts to help an "ailing" econo

Home :: Search :: Memberlist :: Privacy Policy :: Donate!

Hillary's absurd efforts to help an "ailing" econo

Home // Liberals Versus Conservatives

Goto page 1, 2 Next

cornopean
Forum Elder

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:43 pm Post subject: Hillary's absurd efforts to help an "ailing" econo

We have full employment, low inflation, decent GDP growth and Hillary wants to spend 70 billion on the US economy. but govt spending means GOVT TAKING!! the govt can only stimulate the economy by spending less!

http://www.politico.com/news/s...../7842.html

TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 7:48 pm Post subject:

Sadly, this information false on deaf ears. By definition, the voters to which Hillary appeals are those who feel the government is always failing to do enough for them; they are always clamoring for more, and will always vote for anyone promising more. It doesn't matter whether we really need more or would be far better off with less; these people have little or no experience thinking in sufficient depth to grasp concepts like the reality that the government can't give to one individual what it doesn't take from another.

joeyjock
Forum Elder

Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 2108
Location: Fort Lauderdale

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:21 pm Post subject:

My word full employment.....it was at 5% The problem isn't the amt of employment now
It's the TYPE of employment
for the first time in this century
people are doing less well than they were doing 30 yrs ago
and now the main asset most people had ...their House
is worth less money than it was a year ago
tie this to the mortgage crunch and people who want or need to sell are in big trouble
the coping mechanisms for the middle class are fast and furiously being eaten up....
women are working now....two income families are the mainstream
credit is at an all time high .... and defaults on those credit cards are up and climbing every year

so for you guys to paint a rosy picture about this economy
only makes me think that you have some agenda that you're not telling us

TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:27 pm Post subject:

I don't believe Corny was suggesting that things are ideal; what he indicated was his belief that Hillary is painting an inaccurate picture to woo voters. On that, I think he is quite right. (She isn't the first, and won't be the last; and YES, politicos on from both parties do this all the time. I'd complain regardless of party. How about you?)

BTW, how is the government responsible for people overusing their credit? That's certainly not a good thing, but seems to me to have more to do with the erosion of personal accountability in our culture than it does with federal fiscal policies.

cornopean
Forum Elder

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:23 pm Post subject:

TrespassersW wrote:

Thomas Sowell calls it Santa Claus politics.
http://www.realclearpolitics.c.....itics.html

cornopean
Forum Elder

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 10:29 pm Post subject:

joeyjock wrote:

My word full employment.....it was at 5%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_employment

Quote:

The problem isn't the amt of employment now
It's the TYPE of employment
for the first time in this century
people are doing less well than they were doing 30 yrs ago

this is so palpably absurd. today, a person can buy a computer that people never dreamed of 30 years ago for 300 bucks. check this out;
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/.....38111.html

Turk
Forum Elder

Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 3340

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 1:35 pm Post subject:

Eliminate the income tax and that will stimulate the econamy

cornopean
Forum Elder

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 4:11 pm Post subject:

Turk wrote:

Eliminate the income tax and that will stimulate the econamy

I agree. What is your preferred method of taxation?

TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 5:00 pm Post subject:

I prefer the Fair Tax over any other alternative of which I'm aware.

jusdeadphunky
Forum Elder

Joined: 05 Dec 2006
Posts: 2222

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 5:22 pm Post subject:

TrespassersW wrote:

politicians lying...go figure. you have to hand it to her, the crying gimmick was innovative and seems to have done her all sorts of good.

Quote:

I'd complain regardless of party. How about you?)

always do...

Quote:

BTW, how is the government responsible for people overusing their credit? That's certainly not a good thing, but seems to me to have more to do with the erosion of personal accountability in our culture than it does with federal fiscal policies.

for starters, the government is given the task of both protecting the people from nationwide scams and protecting the economy. while it is not the sole cause of the declining housing market, the sub-prime lending debacle has played a major role. the government knew about this, they knew the dangers of this and they allowed to continue on. the government no longer feels the need to think about what will happen 5 years down the road, because like people who abuse their credit, they are only concerned with instant gratification.

i like the personal accountability and federal fiscal responsibility statement, because both examples dermonstrate the same destructive actions. the government's fiscal practices are no different from that of an irresponsible person who makes $35k a year and lives in a $350k house and leases a new mercedes E class. it is not the government's fault that people are stupid with credit, but the government is stupid with credit and believe it or not, that has an impact on all of our lives.

cornopean
Forum Elder

Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 3534

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 5:30 pm Post subject:

TrespassersW wrote:

I prefer the Fair Tax over any other alternative of which I'm aware.

I used to like the FairTax but then I read the President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform. It is a superb document. It is not written in technical jargon. It's surprisingly accessible to anyone who is moderately familiar with economic concepts. I highly recommend it.
http://www.taxreformpanel.gov/final-report/

anyways, they say the FairTax would have major problems with tax evasion since one could evade all taxes with just one transaction. the incentive to evade would be HUGE! The President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform mentioned another plan which is very similar to the FairTax but does not have the problems of evasion. It's a Value Added Tax.
They talk about it here.
http://www.taxreformpanel.gov/.....rm_Ch8.pdf

I think my plan would involve the following particulars:

1. The elimination of all federal taxes.

2. Instituting the FairTax but instead of one big sales tax, substituting a comparably sized Value Added Tax.
http://www.nationalreview.com/.....090845.asp

3. Limiting govt spending to 10% of GDP.

4. Eliminating all Federal welfare programs and substituting Charles Murray's plan described in his book In Our Hands.
[short version]
http://www.aei.org/books/bookI.....detail.asp
[detailed version]
http://opinionjournal.com/edit.....=110008142

5. Repealing the 16th amendment.

did I miss anything?

Very Happy

TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 5:32 pm Post subject:

jusdeadphunky wrote:

for starters, the government is given the task of both protecting the people from nationwide scams...

Where in the Constitution do you find the federal power to protect the people from anything other than enemies foreign or domestic?

jusdeadphunky wrote:

...and protecting the economy...

Managing the economy through their oversight of interstate commerce and through economic treaties with other nations... sure.

jusdeadphunky wrote:

...while it is not the sole cause of the declining housing market, the sub-prime lending debacle has played a major role...

But I asked how the government was to blame for people using too much credit. I'll assume you agree that they are not.

jusdeadphunky
Forum Elder

Joined: 05 Dec 2006
Posts: 2222

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 5:44 pm Post subject:

TrespassersW wrote:

jusdeadphunky wrote:

for starters, the government is given the task of both protecting the people from nationwide scams...

Where in the Constitution do you find the federal power to protect the people from anything other than enemies foreign or domestic?

there are a lot of roles that the federal government has assumed that can not be found in the constitution. the federal government permanently took up the task of protecting the people of this country from wide-spread scams when they adopted the policy of "trust-busting" and in the area of sub-prime lending they failed us.

Quote:

jusdeadphunky wrote:

...and protecting the economy...

Managing the economy through their oversight of interstate commerce and through economic treaties with other nations... sure.

sure but also not included in the constitution but here is the federal reserve, which goes a few steps beyond that and the fed failed us in allowing the sub-prime lending to go on unchecked. they had to know the potential risks of what was going on, but i personally believe that no one could convince themselves that our housing market which had been growing for three plus decades could go into a recession, and that is why i believe no action was taken.

Quote:

jusdeadphunky wrote:

...while it is not the sole cause of the declining housing market, the sub-prime lending debacle has played a major role...

But I asked how the government was to blame for people using too much credit. I'll assume you agree that they are not.

oh totally, people are so stupid when it comes to credit that it makes me sick. but i think it is funny because it is a do as i (the goverment) say and not as i do sor tof a deal.

TrespassersW
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Mar 2007
Posts: 988
Location: North Carolina, USA

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2008 10:14 pm Post subject:

jusdeadphunky wrote:

...the fed failed us in allowing the sub-prime lending to go on unchecked. they had to know the potential risks of what was going on, but i personally believe that no one could convince themselves that our housing market which had been growing for three plus decades could go into a recession, and that is why i believe no action was taken.

I see your point, but does the fed actually dictate what loans can and can't be offered? I thought they just set key rates and assume that other rates will track upward and downward with those. Aren't banks free to lend at any rate they choose, outside of those few rates the fed specifically sets? (I'm admitting my ignorance here; feel free to help me out.) Embarassed