dagblog - Comments for "What Obama Sacrificed"

What I do not understand is

Richard Day — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 23:54:36 +0000

In reply to What Obama Sacrificed

What I do not understand is what the American Automobile Association has to do with all of this.

I mean why should a map maker dictate our future?

Everybody wishes for these triple A ratings.

Fuck em!

Barrack "Quisling"

Resistance — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 04:44:08 +0000

In reply to You're buying int o the great

Barrack "Quisling" Obama?

Excerpts of Lyrics by Pink Floyd

CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN

Come on, now
I hear you're feeling down
Well I can ease your pain
Get you on your feet again

OBAMA COLLABORATING WITH THE REPUBLICANS

Okay
Just a little pinprick
There'll be no more
But you may feel a little sick

Can you stand up?

CAN YOU CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVE?

I do believe it's working good
That'll keep you going through the show

THE CONTINUING CRISIS SHOW

There is no pain you are receding

WIN THE FUTURE WHEN THE SHIP COMES IN
A distant ship's smoke on the horizon

OBAMA HOPES, YOU’RE COMFORTABLY NUMB, SO HE CAN CONTINUE WITH THE SURGERY

You're buying int o the great

AmericanDreamer — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 03:25:17 +0000

In reply to You're buying int o the great

You're buying int o the great deception that somehow Obama was weak or a bad negotiator when that is not really the case.

I don't agree that destor is doing that. If you've been reading him, he has expressed growing skepticism, consistent with a record of decisions and actions calling into increasing question the hopes or assumptions many progressives have had about Obama's true policy beliefs and intentions.

You're buying int o the great

oleeb — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 03:09:12 +0000

In reply to What Obama Sacrificed

You're buying int o the great deception that somehow Obama was weak or a bad negotiator when that is not really the case. Obama, in partnership with his Republican friends, used this fake crisis as an excuse to pursue the highly unpopular policies they both favor: cutting vital domestic spending programs in the midst of depression which will put more people out of work and fatally damaging the very foundation of income security and stability for the elderly and the poor Social Security,Medicare and Medicaid. Obama is with them in this and is against the very people who voted him in office. It's as plain as day yet normally perceptive people like yourself refuse to admit this obvious reality and instead keep writing and speculating about the latest Obama appeasement effort as though the result was not something he had wanted all along. He did this with the stimulus, healthcare, the budget, and again now with the debt ceiling. He ain't on our side. He's playing for the other team. And no, if he loses the Republicans won't be worse because at least if they are in command, the remaining Democrats will once again start defending the elderly, the sick, the poor and the workers of this country instead of going along with it in order to support the allegedly Democratic President.

Right. Street wisdom is that

Oxy Mora — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 02:54:43 +0000

In reply to Be careful Remember "A fool

Right. Street wisdom is that the small investor is a contra-indicator. Anyway, I didn't use all my dry powder, more down days to go before it settles out.

Actually a pure investor, which I'm not, may think this is an historic stock market opportunity. They can't go wrong with Obama, or Perry. If Obama wins he'll let the Bush tax cuts expire. Sure that's a few percentage points on earned income. But broadly speaking, the tax revenue would ameliorate some of the spending cuts, the deficit would be more in hand and the economy could take off. If Perry wins, he may keep the Bush tax cuts but unless he uses stimulus to overcome the dire cuts, the economy is going to drag on and he'll be out in four years. So he will become a compassionate Keynesian.

Doh! I think you're right.

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:58:04 +0000

In reply to I may have gotten him

Doh! I think you're right.

By confidence, I didn't mean

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:56:46 +0000

In reply to Are you saying you really

By confidence, I didn't mean merely the irrational animal spirits, but the expectation of return on investment, which includes both rational response to "real economic facts" and irrational factors. (I believe that Keynes used the term more narrowly to mean confidence in ones economic forecast, in contrast with uncertainty.)

The problem we're facing is not that companies are laying off tons of worker--that happened already. The problem is that companies are not hiring new workers nor investing in new production. There is no expectation of future demand or--consequently--no expectation of a profitable return on investment. Companies are not going out of business, but they are saving rather than investing, i.e. excessive saving.

So in addition to the multiplier effect that Dreamer mentions, stimulating aggregate demand should provide an accelerator effect that restores investor confidence and restarts the growth cycle. I called the measure "stop-gap" because the public spending is not meant to permanently replace private spending but rather to stand in during a period when there is limited private spending.

I prefer this one: "Potter

Verified Atheist — Thu, 04 Aug 2011 00:35:42 +0000

In reply to Be careful Remember "A fool

I prefer this one: "Potter isn't selling. Potter's buying! And why?"

Do not be fooled into

Resistance — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 23:59:14 +0000

In reply to I assume "did not". Ya'll

Do not be fooled into participating in strengthening their grip.

They will manipulate the market to suck you in, they want you to ignore the plight of millions. "Come get in the water, theres money to be made, forget about the losers, come get your reward come get some of the blood money".

When these bastards stole our homes, they stole our wealth.

Now they want you, to ignore those who have been cast aside. “Move along folks nothing to see here” Too bad, to sad for them, but time to move along, forget about them homeowner folks .

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out --
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me -- and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niemöller

The rich have divided the spoils and now they want to divide the working class.

I believe the majority of homeowners were the base of the Democratic Party.

Don't ask me to contribute to your reelection President Obama, I want YOU to feel what its like to lose, living in the Whitehouse.

Stimulus done right is also

AmericanDreamer — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 23:49:12 +0000

In reply to Are you saying you really

Stimulus done right is also supposed to lead to a multiplier effect. Businesses, aware that those inclined to spend additional money will be getting some (through tax cuts to middle class and poor, direct federal job creation, federal assistance helping state and local governments cover shortfalls they would otherwise have to cover in part through layoffs, etc.), plus with the federal government spending more money as a direct buyer, now have reason to expand or produce more, and do so. They hire and pay people who in turn spend money to boost the health of other enterprises. And so it goes, a virtuous cycle. As excess capacity gets soaked up and as you get nearer to full employment, inflation becomes a concern. But the deficit is decreasing, both as a percentage of GDP and in absolute terms, as a result of the growth, which means more tax revenues for whatever the given rates are and fewer counter-cyclical outlays (federal expenditures that automatically go up during hard times and down during good times, as a result of the way the programs are deliberately set up), such as unemployment compensation, Medicaid, and foodstamps.

Keynesian stimulus should still be in Econ 101 textbooks even though his views are not dominant in the economics profession today. An accessible, non-technical, short book that is not just on Keynes' economic philosophy is Keynes: Return of the Master, by his biographer, Robert Skidelsky, for those interested. Skidelsky's view is that today's economics profession is in disarray, that the greater volatility in our economy, with 5 recessions since the golden age ended in 1973, reflects bad economic policies resulting from bad economic thinking and ideas. (Keynes once said that societies are built on little else besides the ideas in peoples' heads.) Skidelsky believes economics is badly in need of reconstruction, and that Keynes' contributions remain very relevant to that task as well as to vital issues of our day.

Keynes thought the purpose of economic policy, and of economies, was to generate abundance, leading to shared prosperity. Not for its own sake but so that ordinary people could live wisely and well and not have to forfeit quality of life just to survive (or not). Keynes thought that was a possibility 60 years or so from the 1930s and calculated that the amount that would be "enough" to live well would be roughly $60,000 per year in current dollars. Which the US is presently a bit short of, farther short of because our income distribution is lopsided right now. Skidelsky sees Keynes as a philosopher who happened to devote himself to the study of economics.