A gentleman with a grasp of the problem.

Pat

Supporter
With a large portion of well respected economists saying that they weren't enough, and there needed to be more.

You'd note of course that the ARRA was signed just a few days after President Obama took office. Both sides/parties/Presidents worked on it.

And you'll note of course that it was proposed by a democratic congress. Yes, the same one that elected NOT to raise the debt ceiling or pass a budget.

As reported by the Huffington Post June 13th:

WASHINGTON -- The best cure for the economy now is time.
That's the overwhelming opinion of leading economists in a new Associated Press survey. They say the Federal Reserve shouldn't bother trying to stimulate the economy – and could actually do damage if it did.
 

Jeff Young

GT40s Supporter
You understand the difference between teh Federal Reserve taking action on monetary policy to stimulate the economy (by attempting to keep interest rates low, which they already are) and the federal government attempting to stimulate the economy via stimulus/deficit spending right?

And you'll note of course that it was proposed by a democratic congress. Yes, the same one that elected NOT to raise the debt ceiling or pass a budget.

As reported by the Huffington Post June 13th:

WASHINGTON -- The best cure for the economy now is time.
That's the overwhelming opinion of leading economists in a new Associated Press survey. They say the Federal Reserve shouldn't bother trying to stimulate the economy – and could actually do damage if it did.
 

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
Well guys,

Mr Boehner and the rest of the Republicans have caused another 600+ pint drop in the Dow!

Do we need any more evidece of their failed economic policy?
 
No need to fear old age in the UK, even if you don't have a private pension.

Keith,

I would be ecstatic with that amount, but I am not so sure us youngsters can be fearless, especially as they keep moving the goalposts. The retirement age is already going up for me and I expect it to go up further, providing I am lucky enough to hold on to a job for that long.

From December 2018 the State Pension age for both men and women will start to increase to reach 66 by April 2020.

These proposals affect you if you are one of the following:
a woman born on or between 6 April 1953 and 5 April 1960
67 between 2034 and 2036
68 between 2044 and 2046

The problem is these pensions are also reliant upon a working population continuing to contribute to the government coffers.

Maybe I need to get back to my West Country roots, get a boat in my old age, and do a bit of pirating to supplement my pension. :)
 
Last edited:
Really? Now, admittedly, I'm a retired BHOF and I've slept since then, so my memory might well be a bit muddled, but as I recall the Stimulus package was originated and signed into action by a Republican POTUS, to wit: GeeDub.

Right?

Wrong, Nancy Pelosi democrat congress, Harry Reed democrat senate, January 2007, two years prior to GWB leaving office.
 
Last edited:
Well guys,

Mr Boehner and the rest of the Republicans have caused another 600+ pint drop in the Dow!

Do we need any more evidece of their failed economic policy?

Think about how rediculous that sounds. Two thirds of the government is democrat and one third republican had its way. Doesn't say much for the democrats. Do you people ever accept responsibility for anything?
 
Really? Now, admittedly, I'm a retired BHOF and I've slept since then, so my memory might well be a bit muddled, but as I recall the Stimulus package was originated and signed into action by a Republican POTUS, to wit: GeeDub.

Right?

Wrong, Nancy Pelosi democrat congress, Harry Reed democrat senate, January 2007, two years prior to GWB leaving office.

The Troubled Asset Relief Program, known as TARP and more familiarly as "the bank bailout'' was hastily put in place in September 2008 as stock markets plunged, credit markets around the globe seized up and the world seemed on the verge of a cataclysmic financial meltdown.

Congress authorized the Treasury Department to use up to $700 billion to stabilize financial markets through the program -- a step that inspired widespread public outrage, helping to fuel what became the Tea Party Movement, and, in the mind of most economists, one that played a crucial role in pulling the global economy back from the brink.

The Treasury never tapped the full $700 billion. By the time its authority to spend the money expired on Oct. 2, 2010, it had committed $470 billion and disbursed $387 billion, mostly to hundreds of banks and later to A.I.G., the car industry — Chrysler, General Motors, the G.M. financing company and suppliers — and to what has been, so far, a failed effort to help homeowners avoid foreclosures.

The stymulus was also Pelosi and Reed with Obama.
 

Pete McCluskey.

Lifetime Supporter
+1 Al.
IMHO the markets are reacting to a number of things. Uncertainty in Europe, the poor economic positions of Greece, Spain and Italy.
And the lack of any sign of spending restraint by the U.S. Government. And the Grandstanding by both the Democrats and the Republicans making political points
rather than looking for the solution to the problems.
It is still not too late to buy gold.
 

Keith

Moderator
Keith,

I would be ecstatic with that amount, but I am not so sure us youngsters can be fearless, especially as they keep moving the goalposts. The retirement age is already going up for me and I expect it to go up further, providing I am lucky enough to hold on to a job for that long.

From December 2018 the State Pension age for both men and women will start to increase to reach 66 by April 2020.

These proposals affect you if you are one of the following:
a woman born on or between 6 April 1953 and 5 April 1960
67 between 2034 and 2036
68 between 2044 and 2046

The problem is these pensions are also reliant upon a working population continuing to contribute to the government coffers.

Maybe I need to get back to my West Country roots, get a boat in my old age, and do a bit of pirating to supplement my pension. :)

I haven't really worked now for 10 years and was never in the best frame of mind after the shooting in 2001. However, I supported myself for the last seven years and spent all my savings and compensation money + had zero thoughts of retiring as I felt I could (and wanted to) work well into my 70's. Then came the dreaded Black Lung and there was no choice.

Interestingly, during my "down time" I have (and continue to find) quite a few local business opportunities that would keep me in lager vouchers quite comfortably but regretfully need to be fairly mentally fit which I am not. As I have always worked for myself or run my own companies, I guess I make a bad comparison.

Personally, I do not want to reach more than "three score years and ten" anyway. I am tired, burnt out, and If I can't be hands ON I am not interested. If your increasing life expectancy means that in the future, you won't reach "middle age" until you are 65, they had better damn well increase the retirement age for you nippers!

Finally, remember one major thing I never even contemplated in my whole working career except for one short interlude. Retirement is fine IF YOU ENJOY GOOD HEALTH.

This is the Gypsies warning mate. Look after yourself now and live long and prosper... otherwise..........

Finally, there was no NHS when I was born, only National Assistance, (no-one would speak to you if you claimed that), the doctors were regarded as quacks and couldn't be afforded and Mother was Doctor, Psychiatrist, Medicine Man, carer, housekeeper and homemaker, and she had all the vast array of reference books to prove it dating back hundreds of years (they are stored in my garage as I speak).

Today? Luxury sheer bloody luxury mate. :)

PS The boat is not mine anyway, it is my sisters, but I get to use it if I can which so far I haven't :worried:
 

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
Think about how rediculous that sounds. Two thirds of the government is democrat and one third republican had its way. Doesn't say much for the democrats. Do you people ever accept responsibility for anything?

Al the President pleaded for a tax increase, the Democrats pleaded for a tax increase, the people pleaded for a tax increase the Market pleaded for a tax increase, I pleaded for a tax increase.

So Al tell me why we did not get a tax increase?
 

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
19 Different Polls Show That Americans Support Tax Increases To Cut Deficit
July 1, 2011By Jason Easley

Al the people want a tax increase.

So Al, yes it sounds rediculus but everyone but Boehner, the tea party, the moron Republicans And you wanted a tax increase.

Al can you come up with another reason why the market crapped?
 
Last edited:

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
From the New York times, today


Among Independents, Poll Favors Obama Over Congress
By MEGAN THEE-BRENAN
Independent voters make up an influential voting bloc that frequently decides elections, but they are an unpredictable bunch. In 2008, just over half of independent voters threw their support behind Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats, yet by the election of 2010, they had swung back to supporting Republicans for Congress. Now, just a few months into the new Congress’s term, more than twice as many independents approve of the job the president is doing than they do of the job Congress is doing, according to the latest CBS News poll.

***********

Al, I am not alone.
 
Last edited:
Al the President pleaded for a tax increase, the Democrats pleaded for a tax increase, the people pleaded for a tax increase the Market pleaded for a tax increase, I pleaded for a tax increase.

So Al tell me why we did not get a tax increase?

Jim, you are over simplfying as usual.
S&P made it clear that the bickering and last-minute deal-making between the political parties in Washington was one reason for the downgrade. The other reason: spending cuts were not deep enough and revenue increases (i.e. tax hikes) were not included in the deal.

Sounds like tax hikes were 1/3 of the problem.
I believe that both parties were blamed, I can accept that, what's your problem?
The poor democrat senate and president were being forced to do something by the other 1/3 of the government, those nasty republicans, pretty weak Jim.
 

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
Refusing to extend the debt ceiling until the last day...........republicans

Refusing to even consider tax increase...............................republicans

Spending cuts not deep enough..........................................democrats

I see two out of three.

And as I understand it, the Democrats were willing to make higher spending cuts if the Republicans would agree to a small tax increase.

That makes a tri-fecta, three out of three.

Al did you see the New York Times article. It appears that two out of three independents agree with me!

The election can't come soon enough!
 
Last edited:

Jim Craik

Lifetime Supporter
Al, I do not know about you but I lost a huge pile of dough today.

I bet your big Republican sugar daddies lost a lot more. They will not be happy!

Standard & Poor...................

We listen to a group who's name means average and below average! Not my line.
 
Last edited:
Refusing to extend the debt ceiling until the last day...........republicans

Refusing to even consider tax increase...............................republicans

Spending cuts not deep enough..........................................democrats

I see two out of three.

And as I understand it, the Democrats were willing to make higher spending cuts if the Republicans would agree to a small tax increase.

That makes a tri-fecta, three out of three.

Al did you see the New York Times article. It appears that two out of three independents agree with me!

The election can't come soon enough!

The New York Times is left leaning? No shit, that's amazing.

Do you realize that you are totally incapable of ever taking any blame for anything, ever! but then you are a demoblamer aren't you.
 
The simple answers are that we need to drastically cut spending, simplify the regulatory environment and tax code (see Simpson Bowles), grow debt only at a rate at or below that of GDP and get government out of Soviet style business micromanagement. It didn’t work on the collective farms and it’s not working for small business.

If you want something that might work, perhaps avoid what's failed in the past...

Veek, you're absolutely right, I couldn't agree more....in the long term that's exactly what is needed to run a responsible and sustainable budget. For the short term, we need to violate those principles in the interest of economic stimulation.

Our situation today is not that much different that the '29-42 time frame: economy in big trouble due to a period of excess and corporate greed, moderate level of involvement in foreign wars, public outcry over the lack of regulation of Wall Street and corporate behavior, and huge dissatisfaction with Washington D.C. Two things helped to turn the ship around: a) SEC Acts of '33/'34 designed to properly regulate Wall Street, and b) massive gov't spending via the CCC at the urging of Roosevelt. Public confidence gradually was restored in the markets due to the passing of the Acts and the enforcement of those laws, and millions of people got back to work through CCC (and other gov't) projects. Ultimately, it was WWII that finally got the country out of the economic depression of the Great Depression. Just a little bit of history for the day!
 
Back
Top