Obama to Call for Major Road, Rail and Runway Spending

[Gerald]

Vowing to find new ways to stimulate the sputtering economy, President Obama will call for long-term investments in the nation's infrastructure that would cost at least $50 billion, administration officials say.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/06/obama-major-infrastructure-spending/



Note:Published September 06, 2010

[The Third Man]

Keynesian economics gone wild. If $789 Billions doesn't do the job why would $50 billions?

In my opinion this shows the diconnect between Obama and the American people, especially the electorate. Who's money does this asshat think he is spending (read throwing away), on more failed policy?

Obama went on another vacation and spends $50 billions!

[Takeda Shingen]

I agree that our transporation infastructure is in dire need of overhaul and repair, and has for a long, long time. Still, I would question the wisdom in spending another $50 billion on top of the stimulus that was already supposed to include earmarks for infastructure. What happened to that money the first time around?

[The Third Man]

I agree that our transporation infastructure is in dire need of overhaul and repair, and has for a long, long time. Still, I would question the wisdom in spending another $50 billion on top of the stimulus that was already supposed to include earmarks for infastructure. What happened to that money the first time around?


I knew we'd agree on something eventually. :yeah:to you Takeda Shingen.

[Platapus]

Awesome! We do need to start rebuilding our rail systems. For a country with our resources it is a shame what has happened to our passenger rail systems in the past 40 years.

[Tribesman]

Obama went on another vacation and spends $50 billions!
Hold on, so he is working on his vacation.
I hope he is billing for overtime:rotfl2:

[The Third Man]

Hold on, so he is working on his vacation.
I hope he is billing for overtime:rotfl2:

http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/0903/ponzi-scheme-politics-congress-obama-president-madoff-democr-demotivational-poster-1237071852.jpg

[GoldenRivet]

America: noun - A massive hole located between Canada and Mexico that the government throws money into.

I agree that our nations infrastructure is in need of modernization.

i also agree that there are numerous things i need to do to improve my house.

unlike the president however... i have a budget to work with and i realize that now is probably not the time for such spending.

[Tribesman]

unlike the president however... i have a budget to work with and i realize that now is probably not the time for such spending
An economic downturn, especially one hitting the construction sector is the best possible time for such spending.

[The Third Man]

An economic downturn, especially one hitting the construction sector is the best possible time for such spending.

Did you miss the fact that part of the $789 billions was 'supposed' to take care of the infrastructure and construction concerns?

So if that didn't work, why, oh why throw good money after bad?

[GoldenRivet]

What tribesman appears to not understand according to his quote there... is that one thing that is really going to bring this economy back is consumer and investor confidence.

right now there are a lot of people who are upset about the exorbitant government spending we have seen over the last couple of years.

we need to go into savings mode. we need to create more jobs by not taxing the absolute HELL out of businesses.

think about all of OUR jobs over in China, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Mexico... if you want to know the story of America, read an effin "made in..." tag on virtually any product.

we need to be giving businesses and industry a reason to bring those jobs back to our shores and/or create new ones.

but unless you want to take it up the rear as a business owner - it is in your best interest right now to shrink your operation - not grow it!

[antikristuseke]

For production jobs to come back to the states another thing needs to change besides taxes, that is the wage expecations of people, as it stands it is cheaper to produce crap elsewhere due to workforce costs. That is not likely to change though unless the wage expecations grow to be on par with those in the states.

[Tribesman]

we need to create more jobs by not taxing the absolute HELL out of businesses.

Didn't you recently exagerate your business taxes by a massive amount here to make it look like you were getting really badly screwed?
Such episodes do not add much reliability to your claims about taxing the hell out of business.

think about all of OUR jobs over in China, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Mexico... if you want to know the story of America, read an effin "made in..." tag on virtually any product.

So is that an issue of low business tax or incredibly low third world wages?



Did you miss the fact that part of the $789 billions was 'supposed' to take care of the infrastructure and construction concerns?

Don't you mean that a part of it went towards starting to tackle some concerns which badly need addressing?

[The Third Man]

Watch and see the coming wave.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PvYGG22N7o

[August]

What happened to that money the first time around?

Darn good question.

[tater]

Gov spending is inefficient. Recently our utility had to trench the street and repave. Went well. Then last week the county fixed the road that leads to ours. There were about 8 guys just directing traffic. 2 would have done nicely. But 6 supervising 2 seems a gov norm.

The way Obama is going we'll lose our bond rating----which will be an unmitigated disaster.


Not having a massive tax increase would certainly help my family throw money into the economy.

BTW, I love trains, but passenger rail is a financial dog. Some commuter systems can be ok, but they are rare and virtually all other systems worldwide are massively subsidizEd.

[bradclark1]

I agree that our transporation infastructure is in dire need of overhaul and repair, and has for a long, long time. Still, I would question the wisdom in spending another $50 billion on top of the stimulus that was already supposed to include earmarks for infastructure. What happened to that money the first time around?
$507 billion in spending programs and $282 billion in tax relief
$150 billion in public works projects for transportation, energy and technology, and $87 billion to help states meet rising Medicaid costs.

[Gerald]

Gov spending is inefficient. Recently our utility had to trench the street and repave. Went well. Then last week the county fixed the road that leads to ours. There were about 8 guys just directing traffic. 2 would have done nicely. But 6 supervising 2 seems a gov norm.

The way Obama is going we'll lose our bond rating----which will be an unmitigated disaster.


Not having a massive tax increase would certainly help my family throw money into the economy.

BTW, I love trains, but passenger rail is a financial dog. Some commuter systems can be ok, but they are rare and virtually all other systems worldwide are massively subsidizEd.
but I guess where you live where there are avenues to move.....:hmmm:

[mookiemookie]

The way Obama is going we'll lose our bond rating----which will be an unmitigated disaster.

Take it from someone in the bond business - so long as the government retains the power to tax the American people, we won't lose our AAA rating.

Funny how people cry about Obama doing nothing about the economy. Then when he does something about the economy, they cry some more.

Politics. :nope:

[Zachstar]

I am kind of "meh" on this.

I much prefer his plan to stimulate technology and sciences. Those have the potential to really push us into the future.

[Gerald]

On Labor Day afternoon in Milwaukee, President Obama finally began to vigorously push the kind of high-profile, rebuild-America infrastructure campaign that is absolutely essential if there is to be any real hope of putting Americans back to work and getting the economy back into reasonable shape over the next few years.In a speech that was rousing, inspirational and, at times, quite funny, the president outlined a $50 billion proposal for a wide range of improvements to the nation’s transportation infrastructure. The money would be used for the construction and rehabilitation of highways, bridges, railroads, airport runways and the air traffic control system.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/opinion/07herbert.html?ref=barack_obama

[AVGWarhawk]

I agree that our transporation infastructure is in dire need of overhaul and repair, and has for a long, long time. Still, I would question the wisdom in spending another $50 billion on top of the stimulus that was already supposed to include earmarks for infastructure. What happened to that money the first time around?

I do not think there needs to be wisdom behind this. The infrastruture is in deep disrepair. Just bridge conditions in some places alone are scary enough. Waterways, sewerage, electrical grids are slowing becoming to small to handle the growing population. I support this from Obama but he not attempt to sell it as a stimulus type deal. It needs to be sold to the American public at large as a necessity.

[SteamWake]

Sounds like 'make work' projects to me.

Maybe Florida will get that high speed rail after all.

[Takeda Shingen]

I do not think there needs to be wisdom behind this. The infrastruture is in deep disrepair. Just bridge conditions in some places alone are scary enough. Waterways, sewerage, electrical grids are slowing becoming to small to handle the growing population. I support this from Obama but he not attempt to sell it as a stimulus type deal. It needs to be sold to the American public at large as a necessity.

I'm not disputing the importance of infastructure. It does need a major overhaul. However, according the the New York Times article linked by Vendor, it is being sold as another 'stimulus'. Frankly, that doesn't matter to me; spending on infastructure is spending on infastructure; he can call it anything he wants. However, according to the numbers that Brad posted, we've just spent $150 billion on infastructure, which is now followed by a $50 billion chaser. To me, this says one of two things: Either the bulk of the last $150 billion was lost to beaurocracy and inefficiency or that the problem is so great that the previous spending was inadequate to the degree of being virtually invisible. In the case of the former, if $150 billion was chewed up in the system, then the $50 billion proposed would stand even less a chance. As for the latter, the additional spending would amount to a Band-Aid on a gangrened limb, meaning that if you are serious about infastructure overhaul, your figures need to be pushing towards a trillion in spending. Anything else would be mere political posturing.

[AVGWarhawk]

Most definitely it should not be sold as a stimulus deal. As far as the the original $150 billion spent, certainly inefficency and pork can account for lack of stimulus growth. Also, the way the government works it is very slow. The BRAC (base realignment and closures) that were instituted in 2005-06 are just now being bid on by contractors. Long time and red tape to get the the ball rolling.

[Takeda Shingen]

I'll concede that at the very least it is good that someone in the White House is finally talking about infastructure overhaul. Politically speaking, it is never a very sexy initiative, which is why it has been ignored for so long. Whether he means it or not and whether the spending will be effective, we have yet to see. I suspect that it will not be, but I may yet be proven wrong.

[Biggles]

Well it helped you lot to push yourself out of the Depression back in the 30s. Same with Germany, same timeperiod. Makes sense to try it again I guess.

[The Third Man]

Well it helped you lot to push yourself out of the Depression back in the 30s. Same with Germany, same timeperiod. Makes sense to try it again I guess.

I suspect you are wrong.

Market Crash (Oct 1929) Depression begins

FDR Elected (Nov 1932) Depression continues

"First New Deal" (1933) Depression continues

"Second New Deal" (1935) Depression continues

Unemployment rate 19.0% (1938) Depression continues

Unemployment rate 4.7% (1942) World at War

[tater]

On topic, trains are a waste of money, sadly. If they want rail, give tax breaks to companies willing to do it 100% privately. Gov can chip in right of ways if they want certain routes.

Then see if anyone is willing to do it unsubsidized.

Actually, I'd be fine with a subsidy that is similar to highway subsidy. Similar in terms of dollars per seat-mile traveled. Seat miles to be calculated based on fare structures designed to not lose money—no using exaggerated ridership numbers based on ridiculously low fares.

They should scrag any "light rail" projects completely, I'm pretty sure there is not one even close to break even in the US. My state's budget is in deficit to the exact tune of Richardson's "Railrunner." I like the train—cause my 4YO loves it—but it's basically a half-billion dollar "choo choo" ride, and they set the fare to be attractive to unemployed teenagers ($6 to ride all you want all day). Given that the bulk of commuters work for the State (offices in Santa Fe, court houses in ABQ downtown), and they are overpaid, they could pony up "real" commuter fares. The trip is comparable to Metro North, but the fare is absurdly low.

[Biggles]

I suspect you are wrong.

Market Crash (Oct 1929) Depression begins

FDR Elected (Nov 1932) Depression continues

"First New Deal" (1933) Depression continues

"Second New Deal" (1935) Depression continues

Unemployment rate 19.0% (1938) Depression continues

Unemployment rate 4.7% (1942) World at War

Didn't say it fixed it, I said it helped you fix it...

[The Third Man]

Didn't say it fixed it, I said it helped you fix it...

But it didn't help. If you can't see that it is only because you are used to the high unemployment rates of European nations.

US Unemployment in recent years

2002, 5.8%

2004, 5.5%

2006/2007, 4.6%

2008, 5.8%

EU Unemloyment 2005-2010

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b7/Flag_of_Europe.svg/22px-Flag_of_Europe.svg.png European Union (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union)
8.9/ 8.4/ 7.3/ 6.7/ 8.3/ 9.6

[tater]

Didn't say it fixed it, I said it helped you fix it...

Or it made it worse.

Certainly FDR created a sense that nothing was safe while he was around, which is not an environment for growth. The Amity Shales vs others thread already happened a while back, though ;)

[The Third Man]

Or it made it worse.

Certainly FDR created a sense that nothing was safe while he was around, which is not an environment for growth.

Sounds familiar. If not by words, certainly by action.

[Tribesman]

But it didn't help. If you can't see that it is only because you are used to the high unemployment rates of European nations
Is there any particular reason you are using two completely different sets of years for your measure?
Though of course the only way you copuld be correct about the policy not working is to prove that the unemployment figures without the measures taken are lower than those which exist.
Not that it matters really as your president could bring full employment , discover a cure to cancer, settle the middle east conflicts and you would still start a topic tomorrow complaining that obama made it rain and you don't like rain so you need a new president

[The Third Man]

Is there any particular reason you are using two completely different sets of years for your measure?


I cannot change the web postings. And official gov't statistics are often political in nature. So to be fair I tried to show the most recent figures for both. I am sorry if it strikes you as unfair, but I was trying to show all available information. For those who want to tread deeper into the weeds I have given them a place to start. Again is that wrong?

[Gerald]

certainly have a role for the long term to get people and economy of the interaction,work in a relevant way U.S. is a powerful engine in the global economy and are in many cases the foundation of other countries and decided to which benefits not only U.S. but all, so it must be likely in positive terms to get back,and if a significant part seeks to establish a positive test is a stimulus so well worth every cent.

[Tribesman]

I cannot change the web postings. And official gov't statistics are often political in nature. So to be fair I tried to show the most recent figures for both. I am sorry if it strikes you as unfair, but I was trying to show all available information. For those who want to tread deeper into the weeds I have given them a place to start. Again is that wrong?
Which is curious as one quick click off your link gives the numbers for both areas with matching years.
But onto the other thing, have you found the umnempoyment figures for the US without the stimulus?
After all as you said it hasn't worked you must be able to show how the inevitable increase in unemployment was smaller with the government not spending the money it spent.

[tater]

The "stimulus" is nonsense. Really. Very little of it can even be construed to potentially have an impact. For the most part it was political payback—pork—plain and simple.

The idea that we should spend our way out of overspending is... bizarre.

People need to remember that during the FDR administration, total federal spending was a fraction of what is is now—even before Obama—as a fraction of GDP. If FDR type spending solved depressions, it would be impossible for us to be in this predicament, since spending for the last decades has been a higher % of GDP than 1930s spending.

Total outlays in the 30s at most reached 10% of GDP. Most of the time it was closer to 1/2 that.

That hasn't touched 14% since 1950, and it's typnorm.

Spending doesn't help.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/pdf/hist.pdf

[The Third Man]

Which is curious as one quick click off your link gives the numbers for both areas with matching years.
But onto the other thing, have you found the umnempoyment figures for the US without the stimulus?
After all as you said it hasn't worked you must be able to show how the inevitable increase in unemployment was smaller with the government not spending the money it spent.



Funny. Show me how God exists and I will show you how Obama has helped anyone.

[mookiemookie]

The idea that we should spend our way out of overspending is... bizarre. Economic stimulus is not meant to alleviate budget deficits. It's meant to jump start an economy.

And as far as trashing the New Deal goes:

"The government hired about 60 per cent of the unemployed in public works and conservation projects that planted a billion trees, saved the whooping crane, modernized rural America, and built such diverse projects as the Cathedral of Learning in Pittsburgh, the Montana state capitol, much of the Chicago lakefront, New York’s Lincoln Tunnel and Triborough Bridge complex, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the aircraft carriers Enterprise and Yorktown.

It also built or renovated 2,500 hospitals, 45,000 schools, 13,000 parks and playgrounds, 7,800 bridges, 700,000 miles of roads, and a thousand airfields. And it employed 50,000 teachers, rebuilt the country’s entire rural school system, and hired 3,000 writers, musicians, sculptors and painters, including Willem de Kooning and Jackson Pollock."

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/09/the-real-lesson-from-the-great-depression-fiscal-policy-works/#more-58608

And what happens when you set upon a fiscal austerity course too early?

"Consequently, Roosevelt ran (in 1936) on a platform that he would try to reduce, if not eliminate, the deficit. He won the election by a landslide — understandably, as the U.S. was out of depression by 1937. True to his campaign promise, government spending was cut significantly in 1937 and 1938, and taxes were raised to “fund” the new Social Security program. By 1938 Roosevelt submitted a budget in which the deficit was virtually eliminated (0.1% of GDP). The resultant economic relapse, based on efforts to balance the budget, exacerbated by a nonsensically tight monetary policy brought on by the Fed, duly followed. This is unsurprising. Any type of fiscal austerity during a period of economic slowdown, whether via government spending cuts or higher taxes, will indeed depress economic activity."

[Tribesman]

Funny. Show me how God exists and I will show you how Obama has helped anyone.
So you do know that you cannot back up the claims you have made.
It won't stop you making up more claims though will it

[tater]

Economic stimulus is not meant to alleviate budget deficits. It's meant to jump start an economy.

Most of the stimulus bill could not be construed as even trying to do that. Heck, it was passed in a total rush—must be passed INSTANTLY, because it was time critical... then the vast majority of spending doesn't even start for over a year.

Actual stimulus spending might well have a positive impact. I doubt 10% of that bill was actually "stimulating."

[mookiemookie]

Most of the stimulus bill could not be construed as even trying to do that. Heck, it was passed in a total rush—must be passed INSTANTLY, because it was time critical... then the vast majority of spending doesn't even start for over a year.

Actual stimulus spending might well have a positive impact. I doubt 10% of that bill was actually "stimulating."

Agree. Just being pedantic. :woot:

[tater]

Mookie, I have to say, of all the people who are usually on the opposite side, you're one of the few capable of changing my mind sometimes. I think I've posted to that effect before, but <S> anyway.

I still think this bill was utter rubbish, and was worse than doing nothing at all, IMO. Better to cut spending than wasting money on pork.

If 10% was "good" then keep that 8 billion, and cancel all the rest.

[mookiemookie]

:shucks:

[AVGWarhawk]

Here is the thing...approving and passing the bill in a rushed manner is one thing. Getting the wheels in motion are all together different. When getting the government to move it is best to hurry up and wait.

Let me intruduce you to a nice example. Here we have BRAC:

http://www.brac.gov/

BRAC was introduced in 2005. Currently the bids to move these bases and close others are still in the works!! This is 2010! Red tape at it's finest. If I remember correctly there was a news article showing a very small percentage of the original stimulus package as being spent. It is very slow this process.

[tater]

I'm pretty staunchly against bills that cannot be read and understood by those voting on it. If that means breaking the bills down into smaller pieces, so be it.

The stimulus was a pork bill. And I'd wager that none of those who voted for it read more than a couple pages that pertained to their own pork. They have a staff, I understand, but guess what, I bet no one on each critter's staff read the entire bill and understood it, either. Ditto healthcare bill, etc, ad nauseum.

Rushing bills that don't take effect immediately is nothing more than politics. It's trying to slip something over on us---regardless of which side does it. A emergency bill that takes effect in the next few weeks? I'm fine with that, but such a bill should be short enough to read. Proper readin is important, since legally, semantics matters. One wrong wording can bite everyone in the butt.

If a politician says that something needs to be done quickly, that's a powerful argument to vote against it, whatever it is.

[Ducimus]

For production jobs to come back to the states another thing needs to change besides taxes, that is the wage expecations of people, as it stands it is cheaper to produce crap elsewhere due to workforce costs. That is not likely to change though unless the wage expecations grow to be on par with those in the states.

Wage expectations aren't going to change given how expensive it is to live here. (in California at any rate). You simply are not going to survive on a 7 dollars an hour when something as basic as a roof over your head costs at least 1100 dollars a month.


I suspect you are wrong.

Market Crash (Oct 1929) Depression begins

FDR Elected (Nov 1932) Depression continues

"First New Deal" (1933) Depression continues

"Second New Deal" (1935) Depression continues

Unemployment rate 19.0% (1938) Depression continues

Unemployment rate 4.7% (1942) World at War


It's always been my thought that WW2 is what really got us out of the depression. The mobilization and industrialization of America during WW2, is what set our lifestyles as a people from then until these last 10- 20 years. I think the results of WW2 are THAT far reaching. With production jobs going away, so is most of the middle class. Now were on this downward spiral that is probably not going to stop any time soon.

[mookiemookie]

I'm pretty staunchly against bills that cannot be read and understood by those voting on it. If that means breaking the bills down into smaller pieces, so be it.

The stimulus was a pork bill. And I'd wager that none of those who voted for it read more than a couple pages that pertained to their own pork. They have a staff, I understand, but guess what, I bet no one on each critter's staff read the entire bill and understood it, either. Ditto healthcare bill, etc, ad nauseum.

Rushing bills that don't take effect immediately is nothing more than politics. It's trying to slip something over on us---regardless of which side does it. A emergency bill that takes effect in the next few weeks? I'm fine with that, but such a bill should be short enough to read. Proper readin is important, since legally, semantics matters. One wrong wording can bite everyone in the butt.

If a politician says that something needs to be done quickly, that's a powerful argument to vote against it, whatever it is.

It's a complete political thing. Say you have a funding bill to build opera houses or symphonies. You are opposed to increasing spending on the arts. You vote against it. Oops! Someone slipped a VA funding amendment in the bill. Now during the next election cycle, your opponent runs ads saying that you hate veterans and they find Ol' Sarge who lost a foot in the war and show him in a TV spot with a tear in his eye. How do you come back from that one?

I would be in favor of simplifying bills keeping them focused on one issue. These 2000 page behemoths are politics at its worst.

[AVGWarhawk]

I'm pretty staunchly against bills that cannot be read and understood by those voting on it. If that means breaking the bills down into smaller pieces, so be it.

The stimulus was a pork bill. And I'd wager that none of those who voted for it read more than a couple pages that pertained to their own pork. They have a staff, I understand, but guess what, I bet no one on each critter's staff read the entire bill and understood it, either. Ditto healthcare bill, etc, ad nauseum.

Rushing bills that don't take effect immediately is nothing more than politics. It's trying to slip something over on us---regardless of which side does it. A emergency bill that takes effect in the next few weeks? I'm fine with that, but such a bill should be short enough to read. Proper readin is important, since legally, semantics matters. One wrong wording can bite everyone in the butt.

If a politician says that something needs to be done quickly, that's a powerful argument to vote against it, whatever it is.

Agreed 100%. We now see in what shambles the government really is in. Truth be told, the government, meaning the folks elected to be in the Capital, are only in it for themselves. It is self-serving. They get the fat checks, vacations and all the other benefits that they simply vote in for themselves. If we discuss term limits and why this was never voted in and instituted then you have the perfect proof of how self-serving the government (your elected officials) really are. I don't believe you will find another entity other than perhaps Wall Street that is self-serving and know it. Both agree that greed is good.

So, we play the stimulus game once again. How nice when the voting in the states has commenced. Obama courting some union over the weekend. It is all a game. They get in. Get a bank full of dead presidents. They retire. For most I believe it is the art of politics that truly drives these people. Not the desire to make it right for the country. This is why I'm a firm believer in term limits. It will never happen. Would you vote yourself out of a job?

[The Third Man]

With production jobs going away, so is most of the middle class. Now were on this downward spiral that is probably not going to stop any time soon.

And why do you think production jobs are going away? Is it government intervention, or private initiative?

[August]

With production jobs going away, so is most of the middle class.

I wonder at what point a production worker began to be considered "middle class". It wasn't always like that.

[mookiemookie]

And why do you think production jobs are going away? Is it government intervention, or private initiative?

Private initiative. If I can pay an Indian or Chinese assembly line worker 10 cents a day to manufacture something, my profit motivation says that's what I'm going to do. Don't be so dogmatic.

[The Third Man]

Private initiative. If I can pay an Indian or Chinese assembly line worker 10 cents a day to manufacture something, my profit motivation says that's what I'm going to do. Don't be so dogmatic.

And if the EPA and their other gov't regulation, including NAFTA, didn't force US manufacturing off seas, what then?

Looking at the world since 1994 isn't realistic. Look at history or die because of it.

In 1994 people of all stripes were earning a good and fair wage.

[tater]

Or even if your cost of sales for something made in the US is $20, and you can have it at Long Beach for $17.50—still a net win to make it elsewhere. Add in possible labor problems you can completely forget about, and that makes it very attractive.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Mookie, I have to say, of all the people who are usually on the opposite side, you're one of the few capable of changing my mind sometimes. I think I've posted to that effect before, but <S> anyway.


Isn't he great?:yeah: I like getting his perspective, too.

Unfortunately, I have to disagree with him on his assessment of the New Deal and his apparent taste for the new stimulus.

Economic stimulus is not meant to alleviate budget deficits. It's meant to jump start an economy.


It's meant to, and sometimes it does, for a little while. I'd hope it would, given the vast sums of money spent. However, the idea of jump-starting an economy through cash infusions and government-directed spending fell out of the economic boat decades go, along with Keynesianism. It's still practiced, much to the chagrin of modern mainstream economists who advocate free trade.

The problem is that you can't just frak around with an economic system by arbitrarily dumping vast amounts of created or appropriated currency into certain sectors of it without negative consequences. Currency injections are like a drug for the economy. They seem to make the problem go away for a time, but unless the money keeps coming the market will eventually undergo a natural correction. The severity of it depends upon how much was spent without generating a significant ROI, and with government spending, that percentage tends to be high. Governments are inefficient and easily manipulated sources of power that are just asking for abuse by self-interested parties at every level. They work just like monopolies, except that the results are much more harmful and permanent.

Even worse, the time and money spent "under the influence" creates diminishing returns. Like a drug-addict's body, the market will alter its homeostasis to the point where more stimulus is required to achieve the desired effect. Sooner or later, the market will reconcile the disparity between the supply of goods and services and the supply of currency. We've learned this from those damned economic bubbles time and time again, why would a government-generated economic bubble be any different?

What we need now is an influx of new (viable, not fiat) economic activity to shore up our currency. We could easily do this by drastically cutting taxes, especially business taxes, redacting BS regulations and licensure fees, and otherwise making it easy for people to generate economic activity by producing and spending. This is doubly true now when Non-US are weak (read, ripe for the taking). Think of the industries we could absorb by effectively lowering our labor prices We could turn the US into a gigantic, more advanced version of Hong Kong, which rocks. The Mints and the Fed would have a field day just trying to stave off both long and short-term deflation.

[The Third Man]

Isn't he great?:yeah: I like getting his perspective, too.

Unfortunately, I have to disagree with him on his assessment of the New Deal and his apparent taste for the new stimulus.

It's meant to, and sometimes it does, for a little while. I'd hope it would, given the vast sums of money spent. However, the idea of jump-starting an economy through cash infusions and government-directed spending fell out of the economic boat decades go, along with Keynesianism. It's still practiced, much to the chagrin of modern mainstream economists who advocate free trade.

The problem is that you can't just frak around with an economic system by arbitrarily dumping vast amounts of created or appropriated currency into certain sectors of it without negative consequences. Currency injections are like a drug for the economy. They seem to make the problem go away for a time, but unless the money keeps coming the market will eventually undergo a natural correction. The severity of it depends upon how much was spent without generating a significant ROI, and with government spending, that percentage tends to be high. Governments are inefficient and easily manipulated sources of power that are just asking for abuse by self-interested parties at every level. They work just like monopolies, except that the results are much more harmful and permanent.

Even worse, the time and money spent "under the influence" creates diminishing returns. Like a drug-addict's body, the market will alter its homeostasis to the point where more stimulus is required to achieve the desired effect. Sooner or later, the market will reconcile the disparity between the supply of goods and services and the supply of currency. We've learned this from those damned economic bubbles time and time again, why would a government-generated economic bubble be any different?

What we need now is an influx of new (viable, not fiat) economic activity to shore up our currency. We could easily do this by drastically cutting taxes, especially business taxes, redacting BS regulations and licensure fees, and otherwise making it easy for people to generate economic activity by producing and spending. This is doubly true now when Non-US are weak (read, ripe for the taking). Think of the industries we could absorb by effectively lowering our labor prices We could turn the US into a gigantic, more advanced version of Hong Kong, which rocks. The Mints and the Fed would have a field day just trying to stave off both long and short-term deflation.


What we need is gov't policy which makes it posible to manufacture all sorts of things . Forget about the acid rain of the Euro's complaints, the wory over depletion of resources, which are replenished by the businesses which want to stay in business.

It is time to be selfish in every sense of the word.

[mookiemookie]

the wory over depletion of resources, which are replenished by the businesses which want to stay in business.
:haha::har:

Yeah, right. Just like all those responsible businesses who didn't let the Cuyahoga River catch fire. Or all of the farmers who were responsible enough to not let the Dust Bowl happen. Or Killer bees. Or the Pacific Garbage patch. Or the Citarum River. Or all the other wonderful and responsible environmental decisions that big business has made throughout the years.

[The Third Man]

:haha::har:

Yeah, right. Just like all those responsible businesses who didn't let the Cuyahoga River catch fire. Or all of the farmers who were responsible enough to not let the Dust Bowl happen. Or Killer bees. Or the Pacific Garbage patch. Or the Citarum River. Or all the other wonderful and responsible environmental decisions that big business has made throughout the years.

Well there you go. $789 Billions spent to make us happy, allows you to spend another $50 billions, without thinking about the consequences of such spending.

Not very bright are you?

Not your fault...stupid is,,,

[August]

We'll never win back our manufacturing as long as our foreign competitors don't have to abide by the same environmental standards we require of our domestic factories.

I say tax the heck out of any imports from countries who don't toe the same line.

[The Third Man]

:haha::har:

Yeah, right. Just like all those responsible businesses who didn't let the Cuyahoga River catch fire. Or all of the farmers who were responsible enough to not let the Dust Bowl happen. Or Killer bees. Or the Pacific Garbage patch. Or the Citarum River. Or all the other wonderful and responsible environmental decisions that big business has made throughout the years.

We'll never win back our manufacturing as long as our foreign competitors don't have to abide by the same environmental standards we require of our domestic factories.

I say tax the heck out of any imports from countries who don't the the same line.

Bring it back. Thaty is the key. Europe and Asia will be ****ed, lets make American first. Get out of the way EPA>


Let us work to bring manufacturing back toi the US !!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Ducimus]

I wonder at what point a production worker began to be considered "middle class". It wasn't always like that.


My Dad's a machinist. The company he's worked for, for as long as i've been alive, produces the machines that seam the lids on cans. Coke cans, food cans, you name it, the machines my dad worked on sealed them. Most of that time he was in the Steel Workers Union. He's made around 18 to 20 dollars an hour for many many years. If not more. I honestly don't know but it was at least 20 as a union man.

He worked in parts, assembly, and fabrication. The man knows lathe's, laser cutters, and other tools I've never used in my own shop experience. When I think of a skilled craftsman, I think of people like my dad. You can't get much more middle class then that.

These days, hes a company man now. Sorta. Made low level management (foreman) by virtue of his time in the company, and his knowledge. His company was bought out a few years back. Now, everything has stopped.

No more retirement pensions, no more company picnic's, and... no more skilled craftsman. They've gone about dismanteling the place. Outsourcing what they can, and what they can't, replacing with unskilled laborers who can only do one thing. But even then, this place's days are numbered. That company sold the land, but rented back the buildings it occupies. My dad showed me around the other week. Place is practially a ghost town. Of the 5 large buildings they used to have, that occupied one city block, their down to 2 now, and even that is a skeleton crew. This new management has been working him 6-7 days a week getting what they can out of him before he retires.

I'm sure the executives are enjoying their large salaries.

edit: Have to say, touring my dads work, i can only imagine the experience and knowledge lost because once these craftsmen are gone, they are NOT passing down their knowledge to new apprentices. The whole thing is bloody sad, and in my mind, representative to whats been going on in this country for some time.

[mookiemookie]

Well there you go. $789 Billions spent to make us happy, allows you to spend another $50 billions, without thinking about the consequences of such spending.

Not very bright are you?

Not your fault...stupid is,,,

You can make a point without namecalling. Or can you?

[August]

Get out of the way EPA>

That's a dumb attitude.

Maybe you're too young to remember the days before we became environmentally conscious but I do and it wasn't a pretty (or healthy) sight.

[August]

My Dad's a machinist.

A machinist isn't a production worker Duc.

I'm sure the executives are enjoying their large salaries.

When has that ever not been the case? I'm sure Union Workers are enjoying their large salaries too. Especially the part where they tell their more honest co-workers not to work so fast.

[Ducimus]

That's a dumb attitude.

Maybe you're too young to remember the days before we became environmentally conscious but I do and it wasn't a pretty (or healthy) sight.

Just google image search china's pollution for great examples of what happens when the EPA is out of the way.

A machinist isn't a production worker Duc.
[quote]

Well, I come from a blue collar family. So in my mind, i kind of lump all blue color jobs together in the same.... "caste". Some just pay more then others is all.

[quote]
When has that ever not been the case? I'm sure Union Workers are enjoying their large salaries too. Especially the part where they tell their more honest co-workers not to work so fast.

The difference is with executives is they **** everybody. They screw the country over by outsourcing America to China, india, and where ever, for their own personal gain. While at the same time, putting their countrymen out of their livelyhoods, ALSO for their own personal gain. I have one of these executives at the reins of the company I work for now. My days are numbered. I've worked there over 10 years, and it doesn't amount to spit when some guilded member of the upper class can walk into our company, not even a year in service, and be able to get rid of people who've worked there nearly a decade. Their heartless bastards who will walk over, and **** on anyone so long as they make their quotas, and get their nice salaries. They'll screw you, and then expect you to smile. I swear to god, and all that is holy, the only lifeform lower then a ambulance chasing lawyer, is a god damn CEO.

[August]

...the only lifeform lower then a ambulance chasing lawyer, is a god damn CEO.

I know that union people have a thing about the ebil corporate exec but you know that CEOs only do what their bosses, ie the stock holders, want them to do, which is maximize the return on their investment.

If they don't then one of two things will happen. Either the stock holders will can the CEO for someone who will do the job, or the company will become uncompetitive and go out of business soon thereafter.

So you can sit there and blame them all you want but you're still gonna be out of a job.

[Ducimus]

I know that union people have a thing about the ebil corporate exec but you know that CEOs only do what their bosses, ie the stock holders, want them to do, which is maximize the return on their investment.

If they don't then one of two things will happen. Either the stock holders will can the CEO for someone who will do the job, or the company will become uncompetitive and go out of business soon thereafter.

So you can sit there and blame them all you want but you're still gonna be out of a job.

Uh huh......

, so explain to me why the CEO of my company told me their stopping 401K matching in any capacity because "nobody else is doing it in this economy"? Considering our company was making its quarterly quota's, that is utter BS.

Oh, and explain to me why I haven't recieved my last bonus from a year ago that was promised if we made our quarterly goals (which we did), and yet the company has money for the CEO to travel all over the world?

Oh and explain to me why our company's revenue is going up, but the expenses are also going up due to the CEO travellling around all the time? From what I heard, hes travel expenses are breaking the company.

Oh and explain to me why a CEO will boot people out of their office that they resided in for the last 8 years, only to turn it into his private conference rooms while said people end up in some cubby hole? Did i mention he's never even there?

This guy is a stark contrast to our last guy. He founded the damn company, and cared about its people. He took care of us, we took care of him. He got results and didnt travel anywhere near as much as this new guy we have. He also took a "whats good for the goose is good for the gander" approach. He never sat upon a virtual throne and treated everyone like ****.

I can go on and on. Yeah the board wants results, but there is a point to achieve those results that crosses an ethical line. (edit: decided to cut back on the vitriol a bit, however therapeutic. )

[August]

I can go on and on. Yeah the board wants results, but there is a point to achieve those results that crosses an ethical line.

Yeah like Union Workers deliberately lowering their productivity and sabotaging the product are the epitome of ethical behavior. The bottom line here is the stock holders, which the board of directors represents, are the ones who call the shots. If they think the CEO is giving them a big enough return on their investment they vote him out or they sell off their stock. Either way the company stands and falls on it's profitability, not whether it is a cushy job for a bunch of union thugs.

Pity that DC sniper wasn't targeting CEO's instead of random people. :haha:

Well isn't that just special. You know it's that kind of thinking that has made Unions the social pariahs they are today.

[Tribesman]

That's a dumb attitude.

Maybe you're too young to remember the days before we became environmentally conscious but I do and it wasn't a pretty (or healthy) sight.
Good point, plus of course it works out very very expensive when all the crap eventually has to be dealt with.

[Ducimus]

Yeah like Union Workers deliberately.....


And where did I say I was supporting unions? I only stated my dad was in the Steel Workers union. Still, at least unions try to keep jobs here at home. CEO's and similar executives would sell the entire country off to china if it meant a larger salary, lavish life styles, and golden parachutes for themselves. They are scumbags of the lowest form, growing fat while trodding, and ****ting upon the backs of other. There really isn't anything you can say that would change my opinion of those bastards.

[mookiemookie]

And where did I say I was supporting unions? I only stated my dad was in the Steel Workers union. Still, at least unions try to keep jobs here at home. CEO's and similar executives would sell the entire country off to china if it meant a larger salary, lavish life styles, and golden parachutes for themselves. They are scumbags of the lowest form, growing fat while trodding, and ****ting upon the backs of other. There really isn't anything you can say that would change my mind.

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. :D

[Ducimus]

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. :D

Hah. The truth is, im both angry and scared. Scuttlebutt at my work from someone that has their ear close to the ground is that Myself, and about 9 other people are probably not going to be around very much longer after the first of the new year. Our CEO is looking to "cut costs", that means cutting heads. If he wanted to cut costs, he could cut back on his travelling with "investors" that im told is breaking the company financially. Instead, i hear he wants to cut heads, and really doesn't care about anybody. The fact that he's distanced himself from everyone only proves this. It really sucks how you can give a company a decade of dedication, only to have your job cut by some total stranger who walks into the "captain's chair" so to speak, who doesn't have a fraction of the time into the company that you do. The worst part of it is in a few years he'll probably move on to his next abomination. of course by then' hes reaped his rich's and screwed everyone over in the process.

Not only that, but the job market REALLY sucks right now. I've barely started to look at my options, but man, its depressing. What was really depressing is that Even getting into the AF is compedative now. People are starting to look at the miliary more as job option apparenly. Im way past re enlistment age, so once my job is gone, i'm not sure what i'll do.

But, its therapeutic to vent, and here is the only place I can. There's really nothing else I can do about things. I talk a bunch of ****, but really im just scared, and crying on a messageboard about it.

*sigh* As the saying goes, "It's good to be the king". The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. Middle class is declining, everythigns made in china, etc etc. The American dream is so far from my grasp. I never asked for much in life. A job i could count on that would put a roof over my head that I could call my own, food on my plate, and the occasional vacation. And even that, is slipping further and further from my grasp.

It sucks.

[AVGWarhawk]

Duci, employer employee loyality has not been around on any grand scale for well over 20 years. As soon as companies started looking at 401K for retirements and pension plans abolished employees became nothing but a number to the HR department as well as management. Incentives to get the fat bonus was more important than employee loyality. So, I agree whole heartedly with your assessment of the current state of affairs in the working world. I too worked for a company for 11 years. Dropped me like a bad habit because a new regional manager came onboard. He wanted to cut everyone out of my terminal. Including me. His manager said I stay and eveyone else was sent packing. I survived about another 12 months but the writing was on the walls. Trained people and moved an entire trucking terminal to a new 100 door facility. Got my walking papers after that. However, it was a blessing. I love were I work now. I'm well taken care of.

[Gerald]

Obama to Outline Goals in Speech.President Obama is prepared to announce his opposition to extending tax cuts for the wealthy during an economic speech in Cleveland Wednesday, but White House officials told Fox News not to expect the president to draw a line in the sand.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/08/wh-dismisses-reports-obama-announce-decision-tax-cuts/







Note:Published September 08, 2010

[geetrue]

I would question the wisdom in spending another $50 billion on top of the stimulus that was already supposed to include earmarks for infastructure. What happened to that money the first time around?


As of September 3, 2010 Stimulus spending



$289 billion
Spent
$144 billion
In process
$69 billion
Left to spend
$223 billion
Tax cuts issued
$65 billion
Tax cuts remaining



Updated weekly (last update: September 3, 2010) Source: Government Agencies and ProPublica Research

[Gerald]

As of September 3, 2010 Stimulus spending



$289 billion
Spent
$144 billion
In process
$69 billion
Left to spend
$223 billion
Tax cuts issued
$65 billion
Tax cuts remaining



Updated weekly (last update: September 3, 2010) Source: Government Agencies and ProPublica Research :hmmm:

[Tribesman]

As of September 3, 2010 Stimulus spending

So when people say the stimulus money has been spent and it hasn't worked they mean some of it is spent and its years too early to call it a success or failure.
When they say they don't want a stimulus package they want lower taxes do they mean they don't want the tax reductions that are financed in the package or that they want tax reductions financed from another package?