The Current Events, News, and Politics Thread
#2341
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
Here is my picture contribution to the employment topic:
If you want to see more of my posts on what that graph represents, search this thread for "employment population ratio."
Last edited by Braineack; 10-08-2019 at 09:48 AM.
#2344
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,030
Total Cats: 6,594
So, what conclusion are we to draw from this? That the economic recession of 1981 was less severe (in terms of its impact as a percentage change of US economic output) than the recession of 2007, and that the rate of recovery (as percentage change over time after the arbitrary point marked "recovery") was greater?
#2345
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,498
Total Cats: 4,080
yes.
forgot to show the employements one:
major jobs vs. major fail?
forgot to show the employements one:
major jobs vs. major fail?
If in this “recovery” our economy had grown and generated jobs at the average rate achieved following the 10 previous postwar recessions, GDP per person would be $4,528 higher and 13.7 million more Americans would be working today. …President Ronald Reagan’s policies ignited a recovery so powerful that if it were being repeated today, real per capita GDP would be $5,694 higher than it is now—an extra $22,776 for a family of four. Some 16.9 million more Americans would have jobs.
Last edited by Braineack; 10-08-2019 at 09:48 AM.
#2346
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,030
Total Cats: 6,594
Ah, yes. Because we all know that the President of the US is the single most influential factor in driving every single aspect of life in the US, and that other factors such as the banking system, the financial liquidity of our trading partners, etc., are of relatively little importance to the US economy.
#2347
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
So, what conclusion are we to draw from this? That the economic recession of 1981 was less severe (in terms of its impact as a percentage change of US economic output) than the recession of 2007, and that the rate of recovery (as percentage change over time after the arbitrary point marked "recovery") was greater?
Ah, yes. Because we all know that the President of the US is the single most influential factor in driving every single aspect of life in the US, and that other factors such as the banking system, the financial liquidity of our trading partners, etc., are of relatively little importance to the US economy.
Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis
Edit: I found looking at the slide rules of the depth of recessions pretty interesting also. It seems that most, if not all, "troughed" before the 2007-09 recession. That is, the 2007-09 was still in a contractionary period (in terms of jobs) even though the recession was officially marked as over.
None of that is to say that a more competent and cooperative government response (such as very large individual tax cuts and targeted spending) might not have (and might still) improve the recovery pace.
#2348
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,498
Total Cats: 4,080
Ah, yes. Because we all know that the President of the US is the single most influential factor in driving every single aspect of life in the US, and that other factors such as the banking system, the financial liquidity of our trading partners, etc., are of relatively little importance to the US economy.
i never said it was the president.
but i know how to fix the problem:
work mandates. force people to get a job or pay a tax...obviously this means unemployment benefits would kinda work in the reverse, but it's totally constitutional.
#2349
For some strange reason (sarcasm alert) we're just not snapping back from this recession like every one in the past. What's the statute of limitations for blaming Bush?
#2350
I wanted to join in the graphical fun everyone's been having.
Fun fact: more workers joined the federal government's disability program in June than got new jobs! Wow, that's real progress.
How about this fun fact: While the economy has created 2.6 million jobs since June 2009, fully 3.1 million workers signed up for disability benefits. There's no end in sight, as 275,000 people applied last month. How many will win the lucky disability lottery?!
3.1 Million Workers Join Disability Ranks Vs. 2.6 Million That Got Jobs In Obama Recovery - Investors.com
Fun fact: more workers joined the federal government's disability program in June than got new jobs! Wow, that's real progress.
How about this fun fact: While the economy has created 2.6 million jobs since June 2009, fully 3.1 million workers signed up for disability benefits. There's no end in sight, as 275,000 people applied last month. How many will win the lucky disability lottery?!
3.1 Million Workers Join Disability Ranks Vs. 2.6 Million That Got Jobs In Obama Recovery - Investors.com
Last edited by Braineack; 10-08-2019 at 09:48 AM.
#2351
If you think I "spin" anything, you are either not paying attention to what I am saying or I am doing a bad job of communicating. I make a concerted effort to be as objective in my posts as possible. Would you be surprised to learn that I voted for Ron Paul in the 2008 primary and McCain in the 2008 general election?
Your continued support of these failed policies simply leads me to believe that everyone else here on this forum is doing a bad job of communicating the facts to you. :(
#2352
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
Scrappy, you're the first person I've EVER heard of go from supporting a Libertarian to a Socialist. So I'm less surprised than shocked; central planning and liberty simply cannot coexist.
Your continued support of these failed policies simply leads me to believe that everyone else here on this forum is doing a bad job of communicating the facts to you. :(
Your continued support of these failed policies simply leads me to believe that everyone else here on this forum is doing a bad job of communicating the facts to you. :(
I would bet, it's more likely that you are assuming a binary decision making process.
#2353
Like I said, you are not paying attention to what I am saying. Please point out some examples of me supporting "a Socialist" (I assume you mean Obama) or "these failed policies" (specifying which ones).
I would bet, it's more likely that you are assuming a binary decision making process.
I would bet, it's more likely that you are assuming a binary decision making process.
If you voted for Ron Paul, are you Libertarian? Do you want the Fed abolished?
If you voted for McCain, do you want funding increased for the military?
If you like Obama, you can choose what the guy says or what he does. He was against gay marriage before he was for it. He wanted Gitmo closed--it's still open. He wanted out of Afghanistan before he added more troops. He was going to cut the deficit in half before he added $5 trillion to it. He wanted us to keep our insurance before they got too expensive for us to keep (mine went up 38% this year). He wanted the most transparent government ever, before he stopped taking reporter's questions--at least the scripted ones. And of course he was the one who said we'd be under 6% unemployment now if we went along with his stimulus program...
Lay it on the line Scrappy--the floor is yours. Here's your chance to shine.
#2354
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,030
Total Cats: 6,594
Correct- you actually took a page from Jason's book and didn't say anything at all.
You quoted a blurb from an article which said it was the president. Specifically:
You quoted a blurb from an article which said it was the president. Specifically:
President Ronald Reagan’s policies ignited a recovery so powerful that if it were being repeated today, real per capita GDP would be $5,694 higher than it is now—an extra $22,776 for a family of four. Some 16.9 million more Americans would have jobs.
#2355
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
I most aligned with Libertarians on social and foreign policy issues: government should not be involved in marriages, prohibition did not work against alcohol and it doesn't work against marijuana, the focus should be on national defense and not international offense, etc. We don't need a million different government agencies shutting down little rabbit farms and lemonade stands. Unions may or may not have their place in the private sector in today's world (they definitely used to) but they do not belong among public employees.
However, I do not believe all government spending is always bad, that all private sector enterprise is always more efficient, that all regulation stifles innovation or that the Free Market exists (outside of very small areas and theory). I do believe that a massive tax cut is generally better than a massive government spending program, but that they are both equal in terms of deficit effects.
I do believe in attempting to view issues from multiple sides rather than rejecting them from a knee-jerk ideological perspective. Because I call in to doubt Position A does not mean I automatically support Position B.
I voted against Obama in 2008, not for McCain. I will likely vote for Romney this year for similar reasons, because I feel he and the Republicans are more likely to keep deficits where they need to be via tax cuts rather than spending increases. I would prefer to vote for Joe Perez, but I am convinced he does not have a chance of defeating Obama due to the huge gap in fundraising.
Last edited by Scrappy Jack; 07-08-2012 at 01:39 PM. Reason: Added punctuation for clarity
#2356
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,498
Total Cats: 4,080
I voted against Obama in 2008, not for McCain. I will likely vote for Romney this year for similar reasons, because I feel he and the Republicans are more likely to keep deficits where they need to be via tax cuts rather than spending increases. I would prefer to vote for Joe Perez, but I am convinced he does not have a chance of defeating Obama due to the huge gap in fundraising.
and his polarizing view on the greatness of chickens.
#2357
Boost Czar
Thread Starter
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,498
Total Cats: 4,080
here's what some business people have to say on today's climate:
Why should I risk my savings and work 100+ hours/week, when I can just buy gold and profit from the U.S.’s devaluation and dilution of its currency?
Why should I innovate in building a business, when I can profit more and risk less by innovating in tax strategies and macro/currency trading?
I no longer feel any responsibility to create jobs and investments in the US–it’s hard to generate patriotic loyalty to a country whose leadership has declared me “the enemy”.
Why should I innovate in building a business, when I can profit more and risk less by innovating in tax strategies and macro/currency trading?
I no longer feel any responsibility to create jobs and investments in the US–it’s hard to generate patriotic loyalty to a country whose leadership has declared me “the enemy”.
Businesses are supposed to be productive, not just create jobs. But the government keeps interfering in the market to create incentives for unproductive labor, and reduce incentives for productive labor.
We need to get back to the idea that a job is not an end in itself. The value of a job comes from the useful products that it can provide to other citizens. (Not just consumers, by the way. Citizens.)
We need to get back to the idea that a job is not an end in itself. The value of a job comes from the useful products that it can provide to other citizens. (Not just consumers, by the way. Citizens.)
I’ve laid off one worker and didn’t replace another. Our sales are down but our profit is the same. Why take the risk of more employees, more taxes and more overhead for the same money?
The current direction of the U.S. and of California gives me no incentives to pour even more money into my business and end up paying even more taxes and high health care benefits.
The current direction of the U.S. and of California gives me no incentives to pour even more money into my business and end up paying even more taxes and high health care benefits.
I am looking at starting a business myself, but not until the end of next year (after the election). If for some reason Obama gets re elected I will have to reassess whether or not to proceed. I’m not going to risk my money and work 80+ hours a week to create something that [certain people] just want to take and redistribute to those who do not want to work for it. Not sure why they think that we will want to continue to create businesses and jobs when they take the motivation away. I’ll just do nothing and stick my hand out for my freebies as well.
There is a corollary to these comments about business. I’m a retired doctor, a surgeon. I worked long hours, weekends, Christmas, New Years, etc. I made a good living but never got rich because I’m not a very good investor. I now teach medical students. It will take two, if not three, of these students to take the place of a doctor of my generation. They don’t have the work ethic, largely I believe, because they have few incentives. They also have been through the late 20th century university which is hostile to private enterprise.
I hope I keep my health.
I hope I keep my health.
I ran a profitable oil exploration consulting company for decades. With my experience, I discovered and brought to market millions of barrels of oil & gas in several states. Our drill rigs employed hundreds over the years and those workers spent their earnings generously. I employed 4 people in our office, and with the price of oil rising, we were in a position to grow enormously in 2005 and beyond. My accountant informed me that year that my effective tax bracket was 55% including Federal, State, Local, Self Employment, and Property. That excludes Sales, Government Fees on Electric, Heating, Communication, Auto Registration, taxes hidden in every product we bought, etc., etc., etc. I suspect I went home with 25-30% of what I made. I never worked after that beyond my Standard Deduction and Personal Exemption on my taxes. Result: I no longer pay tens of thousands of dollars in taxes, my well paid employees are now working on commission selling clothing, Rig Workers are on unemployment, the stores where they shopped are hurting or closed, and people who could have used the oil we produced can now do without. Congratulations, you killed the golden goose. Get your money from the 48% of the public who pay no income taxes at all.
#2358
I feel myself commiserating with all of the business people quoted by Braineak most of all. I ran a successful small company in 2007 and was very proud to employ 15 people. What so many people--most--don't understand is that if you have to meet payroll and have vendors to pay, AND have customers that slow-pay, Uncle Sam doesn't care. He gets paid first, and he gets paid really, really well. If as a small businessman I make a whopping $250,000 per year in this scenario, most of that is on paper. Some months you've got $40k in the bank but you need to make payroll, Uncle Sam has his hand out, and your "good" customers are on net 60. You see the money on your balance sheet, but rarely in your bank account.
These "rich guys" are the Americans who get demonized. These are the jackasses who don't deserve a one year extension of the Bush tax cuts. These are the guys who would LOVE to hire more people or buy a new machine, but THEY'RE NOT SURE WHAT THE GOVERNMENT WILL CHARGE/CHANGE NEXT YEAR. It's not a BS excuse, it's the life (or death) of a company. Do you want to guess wrong and then have to lay someone with a family off?
Only the truly stupid would unwittingly do this to an economy. This is on purpose. Obama is trying to fire the engine of a centrallly-controlled economy by wiping out the engine of capitalism.
#2359
Report: 83 percent of doctors have considered quitting over Obamacare | The Daily Caller
Anecdotally, a 40-something doctor friend of mine let his license lapse this month. He's chosen not to practice...
Anecdotally, a 40-something doctor friend of mine let his license lapse this month. He's chosen not to practice...
#2360
The Scam Wall Street Learned From the Mafia | Politics News | Rolling Stone
InB4 "B..b...b...but Obama!".
InB4 "B..b...b...but Obama!".