• Victore
    I didn't get a chance to read your comments you deleted… Using the search feature, I saw where you said I claimed to be of the corporate world…. I did no such thing; I worked for a corporation… A corporation is just a business entity…It could have been a two-man operation.

    Again conservatives like to use the word “we” as if they are a spokesman for the forum.

    The blog I wrote, did not have anything in it that would incite people, so I really don’t know what got you angry.

    Re post your comments, because I thought it was a rather mild topic…Unless you think a difference of opinion is wrong...I did not get to read your version of the truth.

    Thanks Suzy.

    October 9, 2009 at 11:19 a.m.

  • You told your truth and that is not necessarily other people's truth. If you had kept it non-personal, it would have came across better, more believable.
    Naahhh, it's not painful. It's just your opinion. You hae a right to your opinion.

    October 9, 2009 at 12:32 a.m.

  • I told the truth. If that's painful so beit..

    October 9, 2009 at 12:07 a.m.

  • Well then, at 60 years old you should know better than to act like that. My kids are still in their 20's and have never talked to anyone like that. It's just not a mature thing to do.

    October 9, 2009 at 12:02 a.m.

  • Hey, Dems. Watch the two YouTube videos below if you have the guts.

    This is the country your president is creating. Looks kind of like a third-world country, wouldn't you say?

    Get used to it.

    October 8, 2009 at 11:57 p.m.


    October 8, 2009 at 11:51 p.m.


    October 8, 2009 at 11:48 p.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    October 8, 2009 at 11:37 p.m.

  • Victore had this to say....

    ....put this left wing garbage out there in order to start an argument over pathetic BS, because you a lone disagree with the way others think....

    It takes 2 to argue. Mike is putting his thoughts out there. No one is forcing anyone to believe what he is saying, or change their minds, and don't fool yourself that no one out there agrees with Mike. Many do.
    When it comes to politics. No one is 100% right, or a 100% wrong. A persons views are formed from their life experiences, and since no 2 people have the same life experiences, of course they think differently. It really does no good to keep calling people names because of their political views. It sure isn't going to change "their" minds.

    October 8, 2009 at 11:07 p.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    October 8, 2009 at 10:48 p.m.

  • I wouldn't say that Dr. Paul was stunned. He answered the question immediately. "Well, we haven’t reached the ideal and we’re not likely to, but I think our country started off pretty well. You know, fairly well. They had the intention. They recognized property rights, sound money, and contracts and you didn’t have the right to destroy your neighbor’s property and so I think…"

    The "stimulus" packages provided temporary relief. That's all it is. Another bubble has been created which will burst sometime in the future. Every administration is the same. They create temporary solutions while passing the longterm burdens to the next administration and the next generation. Destroying the value of money is not the way to rescue the economy.

    October 8, 2009 at 6:12 p.m.

  • Typical Obama voter:

    October 8, 2009 at 2:40 p.m.

  • Rollinstone
    You are right there are massive amounts of literature, pro and con. .. we do not have one central Bible on economics.

    I happen to agree with Paul Samuelson who developed a judicious blending of Keynesian and the proper use of government intervention. Samuelson believe that during a recession the government should be willing to make large interventions in the economy to get it moving again, when the economy is operating at full potential of the proper role of government is to provide public goods and take care of externalities.

    The federal state and local governments can work side by side… The government haters will never see that….. I am willing to wait for the final chapter to be written on” the collapse of September 2008 and the successful steps taken to bring back the economy.”….

    October 8, 2009 at 2:12 p.m.

  • dolysdad, try to understand. It's the policies that have led to this. Bad policy-making started it off with Reagan...maybe sooner, but I'm not old enough to remember that far back.
    When jobs started going to other Countries, it was the beginning of the end for this Country.
    Nothing, or no one, is going to fix this until they can figure out a way to get America's commerce back here again. People need good-paying jobs to support every aspect of this economy. Jobs will take people out of the Welfare system, help them pay their own way, pay more into the IRS, Medicare, etc.
    Big business has been raping America, with the help of our leaders, for far too long.
    This downturn would have happened years ago if it hadn't been held up with the false that was way too easy to get for those who shouldn't have gotten it.

    October 8, 2009 at 1:58 p.m.

  • There has been a massive amount of literature written about the Keynesian Multiplier. Keynesian Economics was largely abandoned after WWII because the countries that used it ended up with high and even hyper inflation.

    Economic models show that given a constant money supply stimulus spending will raise interest rates and "crowd out" an economic expansion. The other case is where the government prints the money to fund the stimulus and that has even more disastrous consequences.

    There is really no magical foo foo dust to get our economy moving again except sound monetary and fiscal policies.

    And finally the problem with the welfare state is that it consumes so much wealth that there is little left over for federal, state and local governments to do what they are suppose to do, that is defend the country, enforce the laws and maintain/expand the infrastructure.

    I have to laugh when the federal government has to give money back to the states and local communities to handle infrastructure problems - why take it in the first place?

    These are primarily local issues. We know in our communities what needs to be fixed, we don't need some politician in Washington who is usually responding to some lobbyist to tell us what is good for us.

    October 8, 2009 at 1:52 p.m.

  • Rollingstone
    I do hear that coming from the right side everyday, The stimulus is not working and will never work.

    I do know that Moody Ratings (don't know it's ideology)claims that for every dollar we spend in unemployment benefits, the government receives back $1.34...etc.

    October 8, 2009 at noon

  • Dollysdad
    I never said anyone was right or wrong…. I was merely sharing a Newsweek article.

    Blaming Reagan goes to an economic philosophy of trickle-down economics…. Give the tax incentives to the top 2% and hope it will trickle-down… It's a top-down strategy.

    I really don't mind government spending if it is responsible spending….i.e. The Clinton/GOP congress era balanced the budget and had three consecutive years of surpluses…. True conservatives would use the surpluses to pay down on the debt and tax cuts… Liberals would use the surplus to invest in the people with childcare credits, education credits and sit some aside for alternative fuels and repairing the infrastructure.

    Liberals believe in a bottom-up strategy and conservatives a top-down strategy.
    A case could be made for both sides…IMO

    October 8, 2009 at 11:54 a.m.

  • Are you sure it was a right wing study? LOL

    October 8, 2009 at 11:40 a.m.

  • That's a recent bias, one-sided, right-wing study.
    We will not be able to tell the outcome of the stimulus until sometime next year when the bulk of the money reaches the states...Texas conservatives tried to refuse stimulus at first but they are now in line to receive more for...A lot of teachers,firemen, and policemen would have been laid off without the stimulus...I think about 8,000 teachers in S.C....Nope,the jury is still out.

    October 8, 2009 at 11:37 a.m.

  • The stimulus has done nothing in fact it may be harming the recovery by further weakening the dollar. A recent study of the Keynesian Multiplier has found that it is basically hogwash. Only under very special circumstances does it ever exceed one and then only by a trivial amount.

    The stimulus is basically a political patronage fund to reward lobbyists and party members. We are in a very tight situation more so than in the Great Depression because our debt is so large we are left with little wiggle room.

    An economy tends by its self toward full employment. There are things that prevent this from occurring. Like volatility of the money supply, excessive government spending that pulls productive wealth out of the private sector and government interference in free markets.

    These shocks to the economy along with tax policy reduce investment and innovation. This produces a long term reduction in the standard of living - something that is happening as we speak,

    October 8, 2009 at 11:31 a.m.

  • Victore
    Premature? The key words are "Depression 2.0...Averted” the article by conservative columnist Samuel J. Samuelson did not credit the Obama administration but said we do not know the reason the depression was averted. It could have been from President George W. Bushes’ $700 billion bailout; that destabilized the banks. (In the fourth paragraph I wrote) "Economists and scholars will continue to argue over what policies kept us going over the cliff.”

    I did not mention any Democrats in the blog, Glass-Steagall, lack of oversight, derivatives or any other reason for the financial collapse.

    I mentioned that 9.8% unemployment is terrible, how is that taking credit for any signs of progress? The jobs report this morning showed a downturn in jobless figures but the financial gurus think unemployment will go to 10.0% before trending down. Americans will not be relieved by hearing that retail sales are up; housing prices have increased for the last three months, stock market doing relatively well, or any other indications of an economy coming back; if they are unemployed.

    I just wondered what would have happened if the 6 million people that lost their jobs, did not have unemployment benefits or any other safety nets when our economy crashed last September…. That's equivalent to thinking out loud.

    Hate tends to cloud judgment; it's like wanting the economy to fail; just make this president and the Democrats look bad....I guess optimistic blogs are not allowed to those people.

    Only 40% of the stimulus package has gone out to the states; I think the administration needs to send out much more for infrastructure projects and other job creation projects.

    October 8, 2009 at 11:04 a.m.

  • I didn't say that. It started then with Reagan's policies, tax cuts for the rich, and his idea of free trade (NAFTA), tricke-down economics, etc.

    October 8, 2009 at 11 a.m.

  • @Truly Twisted:

    I hope you are joking...

    October 8, 2009 at 10:50 a.m.

  • No Victore, this started with Reagan.

    October 8, 2009 at 10:43 a.m.

  • Good article, however, President Obama, credit is a little to premature by the Newsweek contributor. The current economy has stalled at a moderate level. There was not a total collapse of the finical system (BANKS).

    Soup lines, a pathetic statement. Why it is these liberal progressive Democrats pat themselves on the back? When infect they’re the root of the problem of the finical melt down. Sub prime loans, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, and Chris Dodd among a host of others started this mess back in the 90’s under Clinton’s administration. They continue to act as if this happen over night. “You need heat to boil water”. The American people are very resourceful, but the LPD will continue to walk around with a silver spoon in their mouth and take the credit “we saved America”, total BS..

    October 8, 2009 at 10:16 a.m.

  • Econ 101, I quote, " Since the end of the Civil War there have been six major economic contractions, in the following periods: 1875-1879, 1892-1894, 1907-1908, 1920-1921, 1929-1933 and 1937-1938. Preceding each of these downturns there was a decline in the money stock which was caused by forces clearly unrelated to income."

    Milton Friedman wrote this statement during the 70's. However the recessions of 1980-1981, the SNL fiasco during 1988-1990 and the housing crash of 2008 were also caused by contractions in the monetary base.

    The housing crash of 2008 crippled banks and other financial institutions - it dried up credit. The Fed prevented an economic collapse by providing liquidity (money) to the financial institutions. But in this case the financial institutions were really screwed up with securities held as reserves that were worthless or probably worse had a value that no one could determine.

    These securities were a result of the policy to make "housing affordable." They were an ill advised attempt to spread out the risk of all the crappy subprime loans that were being made by the banks and then by Fannie and Freddie. The flood gates were open when Fannie and Freddie got into subprime business because these loans were backed by the US government. Companies like Country Wide could not make these loans fast enough. These mortgages were then sold to Fannie and Freddie so more loans could be made. It was a feeding frenzy encouraged by the Fed with easy money.

    The money supply to an economy is like carbohydrates to humans we will suffer if we consume too much or too little - it has to be closely and efficiently regulated. Unfortunately this is difficult to do especially since politicians get involved in the process - I mean look at our politicians, most of them are dumber than a sack of dirt, so it should not be a surprised to anyone we are in this current situation.

    Economies will recover on their own, they need a stable platform to do this. The highest growth in GDP in our history occurred in the middle of the Great Depression from 1933 to 1937. The growth was over 9% during this period and it was ended by the Fed contracting the money supply - again!

    October 8, 2009 at 8:53 a.m.

  • Praise be to Obama!
    Hail, Obama, full of grace ...

    October 7, 2009 at 5:18 p.m.

  • According to the latest report from the Social Security and Medicare Trustees, the Medicare program is facing a $35 TRILLION shortfall over the next 40 years. The administration states that they will use the $500 million in savings they claim their changes to the Medicare program will produce to pay for Obamacare. The question that needs to be asked is how you can have ANY "savings" from a program that is facing a $35 TRILLION deficit?

    October 7, 2009 at 4:48 p.m.

  • Hope I didn't sound too optimistic....My wife still doesn't have enough nerve to look at our quarterly statement from Edward Jones.:-)

    October 7, 2009 at 3:27 p.m.

  • I pray that you are right, Mike.

    October 7, 2009 at 3:12 p.m.

  • Ha, the GOP had their hands in the high healthcare prices. That's why they didn't do anything about it.

    October 7, 2009 at 2:26 p.m.

  • Barry
    we still have a few years to get a bipartisan committee together, to make the Social Security and Medicare solvent.

    Government run health care program is just a talking point.... As Paul Ryan(R-WI)told Barney Frank,the GOP should have done something about the high cost of health care six years ago.

    October 7, 2009 at 1:47 p.m.

  • Mike: "I often wonder how long the soup lines would have been last November; if we didn't have Social Security,Medicaid,Medicare and unemployment benefits in place.Where would unemployment be,if we would have let the banks,AIG,Wall Street, and the auto industry fail"?

    We will probably know in a few years becuse I don't see the Fed doing ANYTHING to right Social Security or Medicares ships. But, hey, we'll have a nice inexpensive, shiny government run healthcare program to take care of us......or not.

    October 7, 2009 at 1:39 p.m.