• "Today, 300 economist sent a letter to the administration and Congress urging them not to reduce spending right now. We're borrowing money at a cheaper rate right now."

    Three hundred economists out of about 15,000 employed in the US .....hmmm, I wonder what some of the others say about fiscal stimulus and the Keynesian "theory" ?

    John Cochrane of the University of Chicago recently noted that the idea of fiscal stimulus is “taught only for its fallacies” in university courses these days."

    Or maybe we should listen to the economists from the UK, ......uh, I know it seems silly but they seem to have the right idea. From the UK Telegraph:

    "Mr Congdon said the Obama policy risks repeating the strategic errors of Japan, which pushed debt to dangerously high levels with one fiscal boost after another during its Lost Decade, instead of resorting to full-blown "Friedmanite" monetary stimulus.

    "Fiscal policy does not work. The US has just tried the biggest fiscal experiment in history and it has failed.

    What matters is the quantity of money and in extremis that can be increased easily by quantititave easing. If the Fed doesn’t act, a double-dip recession is a virtual certainty," he said.

    Mr Congdon said the dominant voices in US policy-making - Nobel laureates Paul Krugman and Joe Stiglitz, as well as Mr Summers and Fed chair Ben Bernanke - are all Keynesians of different stripes who "despise traditional monetary theory and have a religious aversion to any mention of the quantity of money". The great opus by Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz - The Monetary History of the United States - has been left to gather dust.

    Mr Bernanke no longer pays attention to the M3 data. The bank stopped publishing the data five years ago, deeming it too erratic to be of much use.

    This may have been a serious error since double-digit growth of M3 during the US housing bubble gave clear warnings that the boom was out of control. The sudden slowdown in M3 in early to mid-2008 - just as the Fed talked of raising rates - gave a second warning that the economy was about to go into a nosedive.

    September 17, 2010 at 10:43 a.m.

  • John
    If we were to completely shut down the government, we still would not have enough money to pay off the debt in 20 or 30 years and certainly not in my lifetime. We are just paying for entitlements and defense spending...We have to borrow or substitute one program for another in a pay as you go system,just to keep going.. You have to remember other countries will not lend us money if we're going to just use it to pay down our debt; they would like to see it used for growth projects.

    We have a demand problem John, retail sales are down, consumers are not spending because they're paying off their past debt and practicing good habits, and the world is not exactly buying our goods. It's gonna take some time to get out of the deepest recession since the Great Depression.

    The new healthcare bill provides money for electronic recordkeeping but it takes time to implement that.

    Today, 300 economist sent a letter to the administration and Congress urging them not to reduce spending right now. We're borrowing money at a cheaper rate right now.

    Bottom line if they was an easy answer.... We would be using it.

    As for welfare and housing; that is just nickel and dimming the issue with popular scapegoats but it does not really solve the issue.

    September 16, 2010 at 3:42 p.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    September 16, 2010 at 3:17 p.m.

  • another thing,

    We are not paying into SS or Medicare for our own care. We are paying for those drawing it now, HOPING that when it is our turn, other people will be paying for our care. The money that we pay is not going into some account to be saved for us, so your arguments are a moot point.

    September 16, 2010 at 3:03 p.m.

  • itisi,

    Maybe you should go do some research on what SS and Medicare Trust funds really are, or aren't.
    There is no money in said trust funds and never has been. Whatever isn't used each year becomes a part of the budget and the government gives IOU's to itself.
    There is no money, but a pile of IOU's that the government will have to pay back one day. Of course, to pay them back will contribute to the deficit because they have already spent the money.

    September 16, 2010 at 3:01 p.m.

  • Ha! Well one of us will get her name right!

    September 16, 2010 at 2:26 p.m.

  • I think he meant Susan Angle but he is on a roll..As always..:-)

    September 16, 2010 at 2:25 p.m.

  • I have a problem with "S's" today - I meant Sharron Angle


    September 16, 2010 at 2:25 p.m.

  • "Republicans and Independents that will want nothing to do with the likes of candidates such as Christine O'Donnell and Shirley Sherrod et. al."

    Shirley Sherrod a candidate? Whatever, you were on a roll I guess.

    September 16, 2010 at 2:19 p.m.

  • Sorry itisi, I did not mean to misspell your screen name as itisis but I'm too lazy to go back and correct...This will have to suffice.

    September 16, 2010 at 1:52 p.m.

  • You're right itisis, I can never expected have a intelligent dialogue with someone that just posts randomly and relies solely on his perceived, experience and common sense.... The Social Security Act of 1935 was set up to provide old age, survivors and disability insurance for the workers of the United States of America and their families... Where did I get that? It's from a government web site called Social Security online-The official web site of the Social Security Administration.

    Let's see, do I believe a government forecast produced by professionals and placed in the Washington Post or one by a poster that thinks he never has to verify his facts because he is relying on his experience and common sense? That's a no brainer.

    Now, I don't believe democrats running in the Pacific Northwest, California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Delaware, Pennsylvania and Ohio are running away from the president... In fact I know he has scheduled campaign stops in those areas... You might even see him in the south where right wing conservatives reside. If you watch something besides the filtered Fox News, you might even see it.... You want talk about political hypocrisy, Karl Rowe another prominent republicans completely trashed Christine O'Donnell after her primary win but now they are eating crow and climbing on board. That just politics... Is this your first election?

    September 16, 2010 at 1:42 p.m.

  • Ha! 10 points for the humor.

    September 16, 2010 at 12:37 p.m.

  • You can speak of myths all you like.

    1. Democrats have caused dilapidation of the SS system, by increasing entitlements that should have never been placed under SS to start with. Everything from bi-polar to learning disabilities, if you believe these entitlements should be there, and then I have to disagree, because that was not the intention of SS system. No myth.
    2. If you believe the government forecast on Medicare. Have at it. When you take away money from Medicare to pay for Obamacare, and then the government is going strengthen Medicare and it will be liquid for a dozen more years then expected. Where in the hell is that money coming from? Maybe another congressional loophole…
    3. Myth my butt, democrats are moving away from Obama and Pelosi like a bad cancer.

    Kyle C., go have a warm beer somewhere and build a castle or something.

    September 16, 2010 at 12:35 p.m.

  • itisi
    I just love the way you right wingers accuse but don't look inward.

    You said "I love the way you insult people, because it is the only way you left wingers can communicate."

    Must of forgotten you posted at 8:15 this morning

    "The accolades that you present are certainly taken with a grain of salt."... Was that supposed to be taken as a compliment?

    I could go to your comment history and pull up some more of your quotes.

    September 16, 2010 at 11:38 a.m.

  • itisi

    This is what you said in a thread that was about the worst environmental incident in the history of our nation... Had nothing to do with politics.

    "Look everyone if Mike and Zorro, and rest of the liberals believe all this of this environmental crap that is going on and is going to change over night they better think again or you have been smoking some bad stuff."

    And now you have the audacity to try and lecture me about insults?Sure ,you apologized for those remarks but I would never accuse anyone of using illegal substances, just to prove a point... You do have a history.

    September 16, 2010 at 11:32 a.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    September 16, 2010 at 11:15 a.m.

  • @itsi

    "I love the way you insult people, because it is the only way you left wingers can communicate."

    And you can only communicate by making sweeping generalizations?

    September 16, 2010 at 11:13 a.m.

  • Oh yeah let me tackle those myths line by line.

    #1 Myth....Which side of the isle do entitlements come from?Democrats are proud that they passed Social Security ,Medicare, a greater improved VA Care.... Perhaps,Itisi can get a republican to run on repealing Social Security and Medicare..Good luck,even the Tea Party will vote against them.
    ,#2 Myth.... under the New Healthcare law, funds are being removed from Medicare to pay for healthcare.

    Medicare's finances have been strengthened by the new law setting in motion broad changes to the nation's health-care system, according to a government forecast issued Thursday, which says the fund that pays for older Americans' hospital care will last a dozen years longer than expected.

    Myth #3 they would like for OB to raise money for their cause, they just don’t want him around to speak on their behalf. Now you have Dems sounding like conservatives to avoid issues like healthcare, immigration, and the economy. So spare me the small changes, its just not adding up from you guys on the left…

    I don't who OB is but I'm assuming president Obama is doing what George W Bush did in 2008... I recall the president did not even show up to the republican convention because he was somehow busy in George bush didn't campaign for anyone in 2008, president Obama, Joe Biden, and even the first lady will hit the campaign trail for canidates.... Evidently,Itisi doesn't know that 52 conservative blue dog democrats have been given permission by the White House and speaker Pelosi to dog the speaker,health care or anything else that will enhance their chances of winning in their conservative districts... That's called old fashion politics.

    September 16, 2010 at 11:09 a.m.

  • Mike,
    I love the way you insult people, because it is the only way you left wingers can communicate.

    Please, take up reading comprehension 101, maybe you didn’t understand the words or meaning, I do apologize, should have remembered the rules of effective listen and communication, always a just your levels of communication♣♣♣

    September 16, 2010 at 11:09 a.m.

  • Personally speaking, I can't say I am happy with this perceived shift of the ideological balance to the right - especially those Democrats who seem to be protecting their hides to win in November. In the long run I don't think it's in the best interests of anyone to be disingenuous and support tax cuts for the wealthy when, given a different political, climate this would never have been an issue.

    Having said that, however, in the world of dog eat dog politics it makes perfect sense for Democrats to move to the center ground and capture the votes of those moderate Republicans and Independents that will want nothing to do with the likes of candidates such as Christine O'Donnell and Shirley Sherrod et. al.

    September 16, 2010 at 11:07 a.m.

  • Born2me,

    Let me try this on you. Which side of the isle do entitlements come from?
    Then you contradicted yourself, “I don’t have time to look up something that should be so obvious.” Why would I need to go to some “LINK” to prove something that is so obvious?

    SS funds have been used to pay for other entitlements, under the New Healthcare law, funds are being removed from Medicare to pay for healthcare. Why do I need to prove that? It’s a damn fact. I guess common sense has gone straight out the window with you guys on the “left’…

    It is completely understandable why the left does not want to mention “healthcare” while running for re-election, but they would like for OB to raise money for their cause, they just don’t want him around to speak on their behalf. Now you have Dems sounding like conservatives to avoid issues like healthcare, immigration, and the economy. So spare me the small changes, its just not adding up from you guys on the left…

    September 16, 2010 at 10:51 a.m.

  • itisi

    Your answer confuses me; on one hand it sounds like something coming from a school yard during recess" I've got common sense, knowledge, and experience and you don't" and on the other you seem to be standing up for your constitutional rights to criticize.

    You might try and improve your reading comprehension.

    1. I just established some unofficial ground rules; nothing else..... It just seems like if you're going to try to make a credible statement, you would have something to back it up... The rules were for me because you said" I won't admit it."..... If I'm shown the error of my ways; why won't I?
    2. I have been in the forum for five years, so I don't need to be reminded that it is open to the public.... That's why I normally supply references; others are welcome to challenge the references... There are times I try to lighten the mood by using a YouTube from John Stewart or I might quote a guest from Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow's show. It's all about context and not taking credit for someones words, as my own. I despise plagiarism.
    3. Oh I don't know about all this privilege you are afforded (I think you're going over the top one that one) but I have never commented on your blogs; in fact they don't even read them. That's how I handle subjects I will always disagree with......To each their own.

    September 16, 2010 at 10:12 a.m.

  • jbj

    Health Care will not be an issue in the midterm elections; it's all about jobs and replacing those currently in office.... Credential do not matter i.e. Joe Miller,Rand Paul,Susan Angle, and Christine O'Donnell. Most of the candidates are in session; not out campaigning.

    As you have said many times, the health care bill is enormous and quite complicated. Most of the bill has not gone into effect; major parts of it won't go into affect until the year 2014, when it will absorb 31 million new customers. That's why I keep the health-care bill on my iPad; I don't wanna be accused of spreading myths and misinformation but that same information is on the government web site.

    This is the the components that have been enacted in those there will be shortly.

    1.March 23,2010 it became law
    2. Effective January 1, 2010 up to four million small businesses were eligible for tax credits to help them provide insurance to their tax workers... The credit was 35% of the employer's contribution.
    3. April 1, 2010.... States were able to receive matching funds for Medicaid.
    4. June 1, 2010... About Four million seniors will start receiving a $250 check to help with the doughnut hole the republicans left when they passed their $7 trillion Part D prescription drug bill, that was not paid for but you never complained about that.
    5.July 1,2010 ... Access was provided to those uninsured with preexisting conditions who had been insured, this with just a bridge to that law when it will apply to all Americans in 2014.
    5.Note these provisions ;they won't be in effect until September 23,2010
    A. Under this new law young adults will be allowed to stay on their parents plan until they turn 26 years old.
    B. All new plans must cover preventive services such as mammograms and colonoscopies without charging a deductible or co-pay
    C. Prohibits the insurance company from rescinding coverage like finding a minuscule error to deny coverage.
    D. Allows consumers to appeal coverage.
    E. Eliminates lifetime limits on insurance coverage.
    F. Prohibits denying coverage on children based on pre existing conditions
    G. Insurance companies with excessive or unjustified premium creases may not be able to participate in the new Health Care Insurance Exchanges in 2014.

    Then more changes will come into effect in 2010 but that's why I liked the health-care bill although it has a lot of stuff that can be improved.... People were disappointed when Social Security and Medicare were first enacted, it was improved and it will be hard to find a lot of people that want to repeal those programs.

    September 16, 2010 at 9:43 a.m.

  • itisi,

    When you say something like the money for entitlements have been robed, mostly by the left, you had better be able to prove something like that. Until you can point out where you got that idea, then it is nothing more than your speculation and not worth a minute of anyone's time.
    BTW, it is not true because every party, every year, and whenever needed elsewhere, has used it. President Bush used it to fund the tax cuts and the war. Presiden Clinton used it to lower the deficit, and with further exploration, I'm sure I could find where it went at other times. It's just that I don't have time to look up something that should be so obvious.

    September 16, 2010 at 9:06 a.m.

  • The topic that you made available for all to read, which I assume was from “LINKS” and or opinions of others from within your circle of information. The accolades that you present are certainly taken with a grain of salt.

    The privities of my statement did not require “LINKS”; it was derived from common sense, experience, and knowledge. I can only assume the presumptive “LINKS” that you use are not always correct, given the source which sometimes is obtained from the “radical left”… The blog is by your hand, if you believe everything you read and write, it is a choice you make, but I have been afforded the privilege to criticize the context and content of your opinion or information, mainly due to the reason you made it “PUBLIC…”

    Have a great day

    September 16, 2010 at 8:15 a.m.

  • I believe in Moderation. I believe in both schools of economics.

    September 16, 2010 at 4:32 a.m.

  • This blog is about bandwagons. Fox just played some Democratic political ads with incumbents campaigning, bragging that they had not voted for health care. Some even bragged that they would stand up to Obama and Pelosi and vote against cap and trade. The funny thing was that when the ads were run no one said they were Democrats and they sounded like Republicans. Looks like some Democrats are jumping off the bandwagon.

    September 15, 2010 at 8:44 p.m.

  • Mike, what I say looks like distortion to you.

    However, you read as well as I do so you must have seen where I said that to let the tax cuts expire could lead to unemployment and that I am retired and well below the $250,000 per year. So that is not my main concern. I do have a right to my opinion of what it will do, you have yours.

    Health care is an albatross to the democrats, but hurt my feelings?? No, it enraged me that these arrogant fools would go over the will of the voters and pass a bill that will do what this one does. You had said some time ago that people are changing. Yes, they are. More are against it now with an overall of 52%, but in some places it is up to over 70%.

    If the Democrats lose seats, health care will be one of the main issues that caused it. You notice, not many are mentioning it in their campaigns. There is no way to defend it or their methods of ramming it down our throats. Over 18 months into this administration and nothing to run on that will help them keep their seats. What a waste.

    September 15, 2010 at 7:50 p.m.

  • Jumping on the bandwagon... well just read the article in the link yourselves... seems the President is jumping on a bandwagon too, to support some democratic candidates. It looks to me, that some members of both parties are breaking rank with their leadership.

    September 15, 2010 at 5:57 p.m.

  • I knew itisi wouldn't come up with any links or anything to back up his statements because facts are like kryptonite to a right winger. It's like Pastor Glenn Beck telling his flock that he held George Washington's handwritten first inaugural address in his hands. ... His flock believed

    Just put it out there and take a chance that no one will correct you... That's their motto.

    When you do correct them, it doesn't phase them because they will just come back tomorrow with some more lies,myths, exaggerations, or anything besides facts to make their point.

    I'm out of here because there just so much fun that an old man can stand.

    September 15, 2010 at 5:40 p.m.

  • itisi
    Well it really was 40 years but we have had GOP administrations since then who cast votes...I don't want myths or maybes because I firmly believe if you are going to accuse; show your evidence.

    Collective bargaining is just a bogyman to the right wing and Saul Alinsky is just Glenn Beck talk you seem to be comfortable with...When you can't produce facts, label, distort or change the subject....

    September 15, 2010 at 5:29 p.m.

  • and here's a breakdown of who was in power and when

    September 15, 2010 at 5:23 p.m.

  • jbj
    You continue to distort things because tax cuts do not lead to jobs.i.e. Clinton raised taxes, go back and look at the private sector jobs created during his time, compared to Bush's two tax cuts and the jobs that were created.

    There are two wars going on, demand is down, and you are still concentrating on the Health care Bill..I truly believe your feelings were hurt when that bill was passed and you haven’t gotten over it but look at the other government expenditures, it is not doing that much harm.....Unions will not be exempt, the bill was changed, where a huge tax would have been imposed on their Cadillac plan..Congress modified it but did not exempt them...Congress and federal employees were never in the bill that was passed. So what; it is a non event...

    I don't really care about a different perspective because unless I know both sides of a subject I usually don't participate..I don't write about or comment on things I don't have a working knowledge of....I just want to keep it truthful and not read talking points of the right.....I like links, sources, and creditable opinions, even if they are based on personal stories.

    BTW You are double talking because I showed you where Americans do not want the tax cuts for the rich but you ignore that...Then you said Obama and the dems ignored the will of the people by passing health care...but, you don’t really care if Americans are ignored when it comes to tax cuts for rich...If you can’t see that...

    September 15, 2010 at 5:21 p.m.

  • Mostly by the left my arse.

    September 15, 2010 at 5:17 p.m.

  • You must be joking about a “LINK”, the left was in control of the house for over thirty years, I know you’re as old as I am, I don’t think I need a “LINK”, maybe you do…LOL!

    GM should have gone into bankruptcy under restructuring, kick the Unions out, to big of a liability, then a complete overhaul of the company. This idea of the government owning a % of GM is not how the free enterprise system works. But that was an forestall right out of the Obama play book (SAUL ALINSKY’S), although I might be wrong.

    September 15, 2010 at 5:14 p.m.

  • Mike I am not double talking. My biggest concerns are not with tax cuts ... back before the cuts, the top did not pay as much in comparison as they do now. The middle class made more and paid more of the tax burden. What concerns me is the fact that with more taxes, more energy costs, health care costs, operating expenses go up. One very effective way to cut costs is to fire or lay off. I don't know how it would work to let the tax cuts expire in a recession but we will find out if the tax cuts expire on those who hire. Make me angry? No, I am retired. When I do work, I hire several contractors. They are suffering and operating on a skeleton crew now.

    By the way, the top 1% of earners pay almost 40% of the tax burden, the top 5% pay almost 60%. The bottom 50% pay almost 13%. Back when the top earners paid 39%, they actually paid less than they do at the 31% they pay now.

    I read what you said about Mitch and thought you meant he did not know what he was talking about. Sorry. Guess I assumed.

    My beef is with the current administration and the bills they are passing and wanting to pass. Looking at the health care bill, I don't think they are doing what most people want. They don't seem to think it will be good for them. I think they must be right because if it was good for the people, Congress and unions would not be exempt from it.

    I don't have a line to the White House, don't suspect you do, so what we think is not going to make a hill of beans. But by discussing what we think, we do get a different perspective.

    September 15, 2010 at 4:48 p.m.

  • The federal debt was 4.4 trillion in 1993 and 5.7 when Clinton left office. The deficit as defined by Congress is different from the increase in the debt. So Clinton did not really leave a surplus, he had an increase in debt every year he was in office.

    But he did reduce the debt as a percentage of the GDP from 66 to 57 percent. He did this because of a booming economy, smaller increases in government spending and large increases in revenues because of the economy .

    This boom also occurred when China was just starting to develop its economy so there wasn't as much offshore competition during his term.

    September 15, 2010 at 4:27 p.m.

  • itisi

    This how it works...Provide me a link or show me where you got that "mostly by the left" and I will admit;I have nothing to lose.... or have you forgotten that a republican has never found a defense expenditure they didn't like.I'm reading a story in Newsweek about the flack Robert Gates is getting from republicans over the the defense cuts he is making.
    It is never too late because the economy is a day to day proposition ;not one for election periods.

    Why do you want GM to fail?They are going to pay back their debt;that's a good thing.

    Too big to fail is still with us because everyone is scared to reform their donors.

    BTW I have said from day 1,if the Dems policies did not work;they will be voted out but I've have always said that it would take 3 years....My comment history is available.

    September 15, 2010 at 4:25 p.m.

  • I will have to agree, turnabout is fair play. The aforementioned entitlements were supposed to have been “PAID” for, it’s has been rob by Peter to pay Paul mostly by the left for quite some time now, which you will not admit. As for as this administration “a day late and a dollar short.” To big to fail, total BS! If GM had not been under the UAW, guess what, GM would have failed…

    September 15, 2010 at 4:11 p.m.

  • I know how the right wing mind works.

    September 15, 2010 at 4:08 p.m.

  • "Revisionist history only fools the naive." How would you know if it was "revised" history or not? You sound clueless.

    September 15, 2010 at 4:05 p.m.

  • iitisi

    I really don't need your accolades but it but if not for me and a few others, the right wing would never share the blame for current troubles. They continue to harp on this administration but when they're criticized; it's some kind of double talk or left wing babble...No, turnaround is fair play.

    If you don't like Social Security, Medicare and VA care (entitlements) then perhaps you should elect representatives that will repeal them. That's not double talk that just fact. Congressman Anthony Wiener introduced a bill to repeal Medicare; guess what not a single republican voted for it. His bluff worked.

    I believe the Clinton administration left the Bush administration a surplus, which they squandered. So,all this high debt has not always been around.

    September 15, 2010 at 3:43 p.m.

  • jbj
    Talk about double talk; you were angry because you thought the Obama Administration was going against the will of the people; yet when I showed you six polls that showed that Americans do not want the tax cuts for the rich; you shrugged that off.

    Our tax system is about redistribution of wealth... It's a tax progressive system... Redistribution of the wealth work both ways i.e. Supply side trickle down economics' takes away from the middle class and gives to the rich. It's a top down economics' system.

    I never said republicans don't know anything about running a business; you just made that up. Warren Buffett knows how to run a business and he is advising the administration. Government is not run in a vacuum; they are endless advisers. It's not necessary for congressman to have run a beer joint or a cleaners to have an idea how the economy and their policies will work.

    Where does the right wing get all these tax increases; the tax rate has been the same since 2003;the Bush Tax cuts. All I'm saying it's more than tax cuts for the rich.

    How we're gonna pay the debts we have? like we always have; no different.... I think we've only had about three balanced budgets in our history. And they balance the budget by raising taxes and they cut spending.

    You never answer the questions because you don't have any answers but you just make up stuff.

    September 15, 2010 at 3:33 p.m.

  • It is truly amazing how the right is being blamed for the down fall of this economic tide that has loomed for decades, although the left has set a formulary with no end to entitlements. Mike I commend you on leftwing double talk, you do such a fine job, may your rewards be tenfold.

    September 15, 2010 at 3:19 p.m.

  • Mike, Republicans are not the only ones looking at extending tax cuts for the rich and the death tax is not popular with most out side of the left wing. How can anyone even think of taking money from a dead person when taxes have been paid on it? That is one of those things we have done so long we think it is ok.

    This administration is about redistributing wealth. You think it is the best way, I don't. We are not going to agree.

    How are we going to pay for the huge debts we have? I don't think this administration has any idea. As they tax more the income will decrease because private business provides most jobs and they will not be hiring, some will be closing. You say the Republicans don't know about running a business. Who in this admistration does?

    September 15, 2010 at 3:17 p.m.

  • Revisionist history only fools the naive.

    September 15, 2010 at 2:49 p.m.

  • "The Great Depression I read about started in 1929 and even the most partisan free marketers will agree that some of it was due to the policies before 1929 and prior to the 1932 election. That only stands to reason but those are same people who like to say that the current recession started on January 20 of 2009."

    Pure authentic gibberish - what are you talking about? I didn't say anything about the cause of the depression, but it is well documented fact that FDR's policies prolonged the agony.

    September 15, 2010 at 2:43 p.m.

  • Sorry,That's the Tax Hike Prevention Act of 2010 not 2000.

    September 15, 2010 at 2:40 p.m.

  • Lol... Or a tornado that may be in the vicinity.

    Have a good one

    September 15, 2010 at 2:38 p.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    September 15, 2010 at 2:34 p.m.

  • jbj

    I just finished reading Mitch McConnell's" Tax Hike Prevention ACT of 2000".... The bill calls for extending the entire Bush cuts and a cut in the Estate Tax (death tax to right wingers) which will give about $95 billion to the richest 0.25 percent of households. How will he pay for it? He said he had a bipartisan plan to freeze spending by $300 billion over the next 10 years.That doesn't even cover the interest but it's gonna be interesting to see how the republicans spin this.

    The Congressional Budget Office said repealing the entire Estate Tax would cause us to borrow an extra $3.9 trillion over the next 10 years and paying $950 billion in interest.

    Speaking of spin, why is it that we have close to 15 million people unemployed , several without Health Insurance and the poverty rate seems to be growing but the leaders of the Republican Party are concentrating tax cuts for the rich and the Estate Tax. Spin that as a winning proposition. All this while we still have two active wars going on.

    September 15, 2010 at 2:30 p.m.

  • I'm just a lowly poster but I have two rules that I go by, I will not argue with those that use one sided hypotheticals or rewrite history. i.e. The Great Depression I read about started in 1929 and even the most partisan free marketers will agree that some of it was due to the policies before 1929 and prior to the 1932 election. That only stands to reason but those are same people who like to say that the current recession started on January 20 of 2009.

    I was watching Larry King interviewing Bill Maher last night, and I was reminded how all this works. A few days ago Jon Stewart caught Sean Hannity editing a speech by president Obama where he was saying that your taxes will definitely go up... If he would have let the tape run a little bit ,it would have president explaining that if we adopted the GOP's tax policy they would... Bill Maher explained that Fox News does this all the time, they never apologize and they just move on. This past Sunday, I saw Chris Wallace try to slip a lot of untruths past president Obama's chief economist,Autan Goolsbe, who would have none of it. Lies don't embarrass these folks.


    I don't know what you've been reading but how could we had been strong if Wall Street was fixing to collapse and we were losing 533,000 jobs a month.We went in a recession a year before that.

    It's no doubt that we do have the independents who are normally " homers," will stick with you for a short period but they don't have the patience to see things through. They are the reason we had we been having this " merry- go- round change of power" every two years.

    Medicare Advantage was a private insurance supplemented by the government. I believe 22% of those on Medicare were using this program. Doctors are continuing to opt out of Medicare but the doctors graduating from medical schools are no longer be coming primary practitioners. They're going into specially fields because that's where the money is. England and Canada are just right wing talking points that are losing their lackluster because it has nothing to do with our system. What the right seems to forget, is that healthcare costs were skyrocketing and they still are but there are several factors for that, not just because of the government i.e. The unemployed are putting a larger burden on the healthcare, so is our lifestyle, the high cost of the new machines were using etc..... I see where just today that the insurance stocks are all up but premiums are too.... It's a constant blame on the government but you never blame the vultures like the insurance companies.

    September 15, 2010 at 1:59 p.m.

  • The tide for McCain turned the day he said that the economy is strong. That comment probably cost him the election. One thought is that we probably were strong or we would have flatlined with the debt we have been accumulating. The other thought is that the Democrats did do some things to prop up our economy, but they overreached. Many voters who looked to the Democrats to know how to deal with the recession are now looking elsewhere.

    The health care bill will hurt seniors. Medicare advantage will be scrapped. Doctors are increasingly refusing to see medicare patients. As time goes on we will see how care of the older sicker individuals will fare. We have seen England and Canada ration care to older individuals and I believe we will see it here. Hip replacement, heart surgeries, and cancer treatments are the places they may choose to save on patients over 60. The fact that Congress did not want to be on this plan points to the idea that it isn't going to be good for us.

    Promises made regarding this health care bill are starting to fizzle.

    September 15, 2010 at 1:19 p.m.

  • 2009 my ass!

    September 15, 2010 at 12:04 p.m.

  • I wasn't trying to flatter you, sorry about that. Do you know (of course you do) that after we hit bottom in 1933 during the Depression we had the largest gains in GDP ever recorded until 1937 when the Roosevelt programs began to really hurt then the recovery stalled - sound familar?

    During that time government spending was a much smaller percentage of GDP and of course we weren't saddled with 13 trillion dollars of debt.

    September 15, 2010 at 12:01 p.m.

  • Well I don't plagiarize, I would give credit to the government Federal reserve source you used or are you trying to make people believe you actually understand what those figure's mean? Why else would you plagiarize? Seems like if you knew what those numbers meant, you would write out your definition in your own words....Just my opinion.

    lol...I was telling jbj about today's figures that will soon be released not 2009..

    It's lunch time

    September 15, 2010 at 11:52 a.m.

  • That was independents and democrats who elected president Obama into office. In fact 89% thought this country was going in the wrong direction, so it was disgruntled republicans, independents and democrats.

    Informed people know that you don't climb out of the biggest financial recession since the great depression, in two years. You do make take increment steps like reducing the job losses from 750,000 a month, that the administration inherited, to where it is today. Mistakes have been made by the White House and the economic advisers because they misread the data, did not count on consumer saving at a high rate, and and they should have never said that unemployment would never get above 8%... We currently have a demand problem and it's something that the McCain/Palin team would have never figured out because Senator McCain thought the fundamentals of our economy were still strong, even know we almost had a domino effect financial crash and we were losing 533,000 jobs a month.

    It's quite easy to criticize when your man Ron Paul will never be president, so your opposition can't compare results.

    Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery because it shows the opposition lacks imagination to post ones our own words.

    September 15, 2010 at 11:45 a.m.

  • Economic forecasting, Mike? Don't quit your day job as a professional party blogger.

    "Production in manufacturing rose 0.2 percent in August, and the factory operating rate moved up to 72.2 percent, a rate 7.0 percentage points below its 1972 to 2009 average. The output of durable goods edged down 0.1 percent, a decline that reflected a drop in the production of motor vehicles and parts following a sharp increase in July. The output of furniture and related products decreased 1.8 percent in August, but output in this category remained 2.2 percent above its year-earlier level."

    September 15, 2010 at 11:45 a.m.

  • "That's strictly disgruntled Democrats who didn't have the intelligence to see pass their anger." That's why we have Obuma as President and why we are in such a mess.

    September 15, 2010 at 11:18 a.m.

  • It's more about being practical not some sort of fairness because one group or another will always feel slighted. We have a progressive tax system and in some years, tax cuts will be targeted for the rich and in others to the poor, right now the middle class needs a tax cut. Taxes are not about one individual's needs or wants because we have entitlements, defense spending, infrastructure repair, and incentives for growth that have to be paid for with tax revenues.

    Lotto and state government, and the Federal government is really apples and oranges because we have a mandatory balanced budget. The Lotto should never have been earmarked for education because it is not a budgeted item. Education needs to have a budget set funds that they can rely on.

    The "I don't want government in my Medicare" is a standing joke.... When a group of tea partiers years were questioned at one particular event, they had signs decrying socialism, yet many told the interviewers that they were either on Medicare, Medicaid or,Social Security but did not want government run Health Care...Huh?

    Stick to the truth, no one is robbing seniors of their Medicare.... I have the entire healthcare bill on my iPad, care to point out that section? There is a bipartisan commission looking at ways to rein in the cost of the entitlements such as Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security. That commission will report to the president after the midterm election... Then, Congress and the administration do not have to abide by their recommendations.... We could've had a congressional bipartisan commission to reduce the deficit but the republicans backed off, when the president was for it. That commission would've had some teeth.

    September 15, 2010 at 11:14 a.m.

  • Mike, If they raised the $250 to a million it would be more fair, but would decrease the number of contributors significantly. We got a lotto in Texas for education. Where did it go? Money that goes to the government needs to be spent wisely, not to benefit a pet project or one party. That is mostly why I am against more taxes. I don't think I mentioned any numbers in that post, so I don't know where I have been vague.

    I don't have medicare, but I do want the government to leave it alone. They are admitting now that the robbing of medicare will hurt seniors. So they have a right to holler. (this in response to an earlier post)

    September 15, 2010 at 10:48 a.m.

  • Thanks jbj..I stand corrected.

    Your little vague with your information but another poll ,September 14,2010 National Journal with PEW just came out with figure's that 57% of Americans do not want to extend the tax cut for the rich.The numbers: Twenty nine percent support ending only the tax cuts for the rich, and 28 percent ending all the tax cuts -- meaning a total of 57 percent support letting the tax cuts for the rich expire. Only 29 percent, or less than a third, support the GOP position of keeping all the tax cuts in place.
    Support also runs strong among independents, with 28 percent supporting ending the tax cuts for the rich, and 31 percent supporting an end to them all -- a total of 59 percent

    That's six polls that favor letting the Bush Tax cuts for the rich expire, citing the wishes of the American people but the blind loyalist continue to shill for the rich.

    That $250,000 is not set in stone because democrats are contemplating whether they should move that up to $1 million or keeping it for one and two more years and then let them expire but all this will be negotiated. It's really not the central piece of meaningful legislation like the republicans are making it out to be.

    I saw some good financial news this morning indicating that we're not near deflation but I'm looking forward to hear what the manufacturing capacity number will be. If we are above 74% of capacity, then we're in pretty good shape but at this junction we would like to be at 78% or more, because that's when hiring begins.... You see it's not about left to right publications or any other type of media, it's all about pertinent data. The data will be released to the media and public from the government web site.

    September 15, 2010 at 10:20 a.m.

  • I guess you mean Al Greene? I didn't think Joe was running.

    September 15, 2010 at 10:10 a.m.

  • btw, Mike, regarding the taxes and your earlier comment to me. ... there is a lot of money between $250,000 and what makes a billionaire. In some parts of the country, $250,000 is not as much money as it is in other parts and there are plenty of businesses that fall in this category. The one between $250,000 and billions, I mean. I am in neither category, so this is coming from a standpoint of what is better for the country.

    September 15, 2010 at 10:04 a.m.

  • I have seen democrats have opponents but after the primary the DSCC strongly supported the eventual winner. They won't support Joe Greene of South Carolina. The democratic party is in no way affiliated with any grass-root tea party effort.... That's strictly disgruntled republicans who don't have the intelligence to see pass their anger. These are the same people they were saying " keep government out of my Medicare."

    September 15, 2010 at 9:32 a.m.

  • The Republican Party was once a third party. This is a grass roots revolt against the direction our country is being led by both parties. Peolpe want "change they can believe in" this time they really mean it.

    September 15, 2010 at 9:19 a.m.

  • The Republican Party may not win a majority in the senate. But we would not have had Delaware's senator either, he votes with the Democrats more than with the Republicans. Delaware took the least of the evils. This is how angry voters are at senators who do not represent their wishes.

    I will send my check to her instead of the Republican party and urge others to do so also. If she turns out to be a wing nut at least we have a conservative holding a place. If she loses, we had already lost with the current seat holder. Wing nuts have been very successful in Congress. Nancy Pelosi is one example, and she is even more unpopular than O'Donnell. Criminals do well also. I can't list names here, too many.

    I have written a letter to the Republican Party telling them that the pulling of support of candidates who win Republican primaries is a vote for the Democratic party.

    September 15, 2010 at 9:18 a.m.

  • Last night's primary results served another defeat for the Republican Senate Campaign Committee because the republican voters of Delaware chose dumb instead of a sure senate seat. I have seen and heard a lot from Christine O'Donnell and believe it or not, she makes Sarah Palin look like a genius. It's no skin off my nose but last night the RSCC said they would not finance her campaign. That's pretty unusual after a win. Karl Rowe expressed obvious disappointment, after she defeated Mike Castle. This just goes to show that Tea Party is pulling the Republican Party to the far right...... That's like the other night when the Washington Redskins took 3 points off the board and then had to settle for zero. They eventually won the game but they had to rely on the mistakes by their opponent. What so important about Delaware? The Republican Party needs to make clean sweep to regain the majority in the senate.

    September 15, 2010 at 8:54 a.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    September 15, 2010 at 8:52 a.m.

  • Oh and BTW here is a news clip of some "great" reporting by the "jackass" - you know who I mean. Warning, not for anyone with a weak stomach - severe nausea hazard.

    September 14, 2010 at 10:55 p.m.

  • I have known many very smart Democrats in my lifetime. We had disagreements on how to get there but we all agreed on many aspects of our goals of where we need to be. Today more of our goals are different. Those who believe in big government are dedicated to moving our country toward bigger government and have put this goal above listening to voters or keeping our government from bankrupcy. They have a habit of trying to make those who disagree seem less informed. Never before have we had a government that required this type of tactic to support their programs.

    We have had some serious financial issues with our economy. Fannie and Freddie have been subjects of many warnings over the years yet it was not something anyone could or would address or investigate. Now many people in power today will not even acknowledge that the fraud and mismanagement were such a huge problem. Dodd and Frank, who were in charge of much of this part of the mess have written the financial reform bill. So what does one expect?

    Many people are voting for a candidate who promises to undo what this administration has done. They are not listening to anything else. This is not good but this is the only way they can make the change back to what they believe in.

    September 14, 2010 at 7:33 p.m.

  • I've read the Wall Street Journal for about 36 years now. They have change very little since Murdock took over. They have been critical of every administration that make stupid economic decisions.

    They have warned their readers for years about what was coming with the "affordable housing" program and sub-prime mortgages by Fannie and Freddie. I will put their judgement up against that big jackass Chris Matthews any day - Chris Matthews you got to be kidding.

    Finally they aren't anti-Obuma they could care less about him - what they are against is the damage he is doing to our economy and our country.

    And as I've said many times here, "it's the spending stupid." And I've also said that we should not be putting taxes on employment and job creation. These taxes come in many forms such as healthcare mandates, regulations and direct taxes on payrolls and profits.

    Mike you're a genius so how can business prosper when we raise their expenses in a global economy? If you can't answer that then maybe you're not as smart as I think you are - maybe huh?

    September 14, 2010 at 5:52 p.m.

  • You do know that the Wall Street Journal is an anti-Obama publication; especially since the Rupert Murdock take-over...If you had an ounce of intelligence you would know that Matthews is a political historian who once worked for Tip O’Neil...I think he knows politics and inside Washington, more than you ever will...Keith is just an intelligent lefty commenter and Bill Maher is very knowledgeable when it comes to current events than you are...I will proudly continue watching them...Your comment history is still active, I bet I can easily pull up your quotes from Sowell and Beck.

    Now on to the important things...Your Ron Paul leanings (you did say "someone should mount that man on their shoulders" )because someone mentioned his stance on the economy...You are a laissez-faire,anti-union,anti-tax,anti-government,.....the private sector can do no wrong but if by some miracle it does; it will self-correct...Yeah sure like BP & Wall Street.

    Same old talking points “Keep taxes low"...They are at their lowest point since Truman but those that don't want to pay their fair share, want it at 0% and just let the infrastructure crumble ,forget about growth and the poor....I’ve got mine.

    I’m out of here...its supper time.

    September 14, 2010 at 5:15 p.m.

  • I get my doom and gloom from the Wall Street Journal and reading other financial news. Where do you get your Roses and Lollpop news, Chris "jackass" Matthews, Keith "mad dog" Olbermann or Bill "I'm really not funny" Maher?

    All this "tinkering" won't do a damn thing. To "run" a 14 going to 13 trillion dollar economy the government needs to provide a firm base, a foundation on which business can grow and prosper. The government should support business and employment by keeping government expenses and taxes low - this means spending must be low - get it?

    What we have now is a "foundation" made of quick sand that is constantly shifting and squirming - bouncing from one political special interest to another - welcome to Obuma "world."

    September 14, 2010 at 4:52 p.m.

  • In any other year, the $30 billion small business aid package would pass by more than a 61-37 margin. This small bill will allow community banks with less than $10 million in assets, to start lending to small business and and it has some tax breaks for large and small companies. Republicans usually love this stuff but it is an election year and it might be seen as a victory for the democrats. We can't have that. Let the unemployed stay unemployed until the next year when the GOP takes over.

    Today is they pretty big day because it seems like the Obama administration will bypass the senate with a interim appointment of Elizabeth Warren to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. It's about time and Wall Street will not like it.

    September 14, 2010 at 3:59 p.m.

  • If not the idiots in Washington; it would be your Idiots like Glenn Beck or Thomas Sowell, who don't have the faintest idea what it takes to run a $14 trillion economy.... They come with a blank resume; all hat no cattle. They can and do give you that daily gloom and doom report , you crave.

    September 14, 2010 at 3:41 p.m.

  • When my car is broke I take it to a mechanic that knows what he is doing not to a bunch of idiots in Washington DC.

    September 14, 2010 at 3:28 p.m.

  • I am still am a firm believer in Kensyanian economics'; I always said it would create short term deficits, considering where we were, it was the only solution and about 90% of economists thought the same thing. I have not change my position but after reading several business magazines; I saw month to month differences in opinion. If someone had a truth certain, they are keeping it to themselves. I won't name names but one magazine had a headline that said " our economy is back" and another said " Beware of the double-dip recession."...

    A lot of what we're doing right now is about the November election... It doesn't matter what policies we put in place, the 9.6 unemployment is here to stay for while because retail sales are barely moving. It's a myth that CEOs are awaiting government decisions before hiring... I will guarantee you that if demand picks up; hiring will follow... I also know that consumers were in deep debt so they are reluctant to spend. We have a demand problem and we are in a world economy that we depend on.

    September 14, 2010 at 3:07 p.m.

  • So instead of uncertainty, just leave it like it is? When something is broke, leave it broke, and it will somehow magically fix itself?

    Tell me rollinstone, when was the last time your car fixed itself when it was broke down? Did it not take money to fix it?

    September 14, 2010 at 3 p.m.

  • I'm really confused now. Weren't you the one saying all along that tax cuts did not reduce unemployment? Weren't you the one saying the Keynesian Multiplier for tax cuts was less than one?

    Are you now,.....chuckle, a supply sider? Wasn't something like 300 billion dollars of the Stimulus Package used for tax cuts? What did that do - oh yeah it "saved" 2.5 million dollars as calculated using an "appropriate" Keynesian multiplier.

    All of this crap is just tinkering and screwing around with the economy. It creates uncertainty and makes it almost impossible to make sound investment decisions. It puts us that much further behind in job creation. Uncertainty about Obuma is just prolonging the misery.

    September 14, 2010 at 2:52 p.m.

  • jbj,

    it's not going into the economy now. It's going into banks, and we all know where that money is going, and not going. It's also going into stocks and bonds, overseas investments, etc. There is only so much that people can buy, then it goes to investments.
    Taxes, do go back into the economy one way or the other.

    September 14, 2010 at 2:47 p.m.

  • jbj
    The billionaires you are lobbying for, will get a tax cut on their first $250,000 and then will be taxed accordingly... Their rates will go up about 3% or what it was in the prosperous Clinton years. The rich will spend the money on nonproductive items such as yachts, gold, and other luxury items that will not manufacture anything. I wouldn't stay up nights worrying about the rich the; they don't care about you.

    You gotta get off the bogeyman like unions, government, Obama so you can think rationally.

    Your side has lobbyist against reforms, big oil, and Wall Street, so all would not be so quick to judge.

    The government needs revenues to pay entitlements and defense spending ,then they must sit down and discuss ways to cut spending while not hurting this economy.

    September 14, 2010 at 2:47 p.m.

  • Any idiot would understand that we need more tax money coming in to start paying down the deficit, and since it just not feasible to try and get more blood from those who are already bled dry, it only makes sense to ask those who have more than the rest, to start helping out a little bit more. It's not like they are not going to be forced into bankruptcy or starvation, like so many of the middle class already are.
    The tax cuts are what started this fiasco, so why not go back to where it was before they were implemented? It's not like those tax cuts have helped the economy or creation good-paying jobs here anyway.

    September 14, 2010 at 2:43 p.m.

  • So if we let people keep the same amount out of the money they make, like they are doing now, the same amount of money goes into the economy. If we raise the tax burden on the "rich", then some of that money that was going straight into the economy goes to the government. Then where do you think it is going to go? Labor unions, bail outs, ... let's see what else have they spent it on? My vote is to put it straight into the economy.

    Track record shows it would be wasted if it has to make a stop and get chewed up and spit out by Washington DC.

    September 14, 2010 at 2:37 p.m.

  • I agree,the voters know better;I agree "A majority of Americans favor letting the tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration expire for the wealthy. While 37% support keeping the tax cuts for all Americans, 44% want them extended only for those making less than $250,000 and 15% think they should expire for all taxpayers."

    Need to get off talking points of " a tax increase in the middle of a recession" because even Fox News viewers are now aware that if we borrow money to extend the tax cuts; it will increase the deficit. You can't have your cake and eat it too.... The people that responded to the Gallup poll know this. That's why the republicans intentionally wanted a 10 year expiration date; they knew we could not afford it.... They barely passed it by using that evil "reconciliation" process.

    It's funny watching people change their positions as they find new heroes... The former chairman of George W Bush's, Council of Economic Advisers team,Greg Mankiw,said " I used "Keynesian logic" in designing his tax cuts. "The idea that demand is an important driver of the economic cycle" -- that's Keynesian -- "is uncontroversial."

    Bottom line; tax cuts= stimulus.... Stimulus= Keynesian logic... First year economic students know that.

    September 14, 2010 at 2:24 p.m.

  • "Extending those tax cuts to the top 2% will cost $700 billion over ten years." Cost? In what world? That $700 billion is not the government's money. It belongs to that 2% of taxpayers who EARNED it, i.e. did not get it through welfare payments from a benevolent, Socialist government.

    The Democrats may call this "extending the tax cuts" until they are blue in the face. The voters know better. This is a TAX INCREASE, in the middle of a recession, no less. Even the most brainless adherent of intellectually bankrupt Keynesian economics should be able to see this, unless they are practicing deliberate ignorance. It is difficult to imagine a better policy for ensuring that this becomes a double-dip recession, a la FDR in the 1930's.

    September 14, 2010 at 1:44 p.m.

  • All of this tax cut crap is just shuffling around the chairs on the Titanic. Within the next three years 5.2 trillion dollars of short term treasury notes will come due and need to be refinanced. That's when the fit will hit the shan.

    In addition we have so much unfunded liabilities including all the federal, state, municipal gold plated pension plans there is little chance we will be able to avoid default or serious inflation. We must stop spending and I don't care who does it or how they do it - but one thing is abundantly clear, Obuma will not be the one to do it.

    September 14, 2010 at 12:41 p.m.