America, the New Argentina
America, the New Argentina
A few weeks ago, Alan Greenspan got in front of the Senate Budget committee and told them that at current levels of taxation and expenditure, the country was headed towards unsustainable budget deficits. Now it seems that big thinkers on both ends of spectrum are joining the doomsday bandwagon. Yesterday, in a briefing on Capitol Hill sponsored by the Brookings Institution, Stuart Butler, head of domestic policy at the Heritage Foundation, and Isabel Sawhill, director of the Brookings Institution’s economic studies program, sat down with Comptroller General David M. Walker to lay out what they see as an impending budget crisis.
The Washington Post mentioned one interesting tidbit:
With startling unanimity, they agreed that without some combination of big tax increases and major cuts in Medicare, Social Security and most other spending, the country will fall victim to the huge debt and soaring interest rates that collapsed Argentina’s economy and caused riots in its streets a few years ago.
That’s right, big thinkers from the left and the right agree that left untouched, our economy is headed the way of Argentina. The Argentines are still struggling to restart their economy. Comparisons have also been made to the Asian financial crisis of the 1990s and its drastic effect on shares around the world.
– Theo LeCompte
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
time to cry for us Argentina
May 18th, 2005 at 5:27 pmHey, they were only supposed to get us through last November’s election anyway. Remember how stupid Bush’s supporters thought we were for suggesting this very same thing last year?
What’s Bush’s next slogan: everyone wants to raise your taxes but me?
May 18th, 2005 at 6:00 pmwe should be so lucky as to go the way of argentina… their leadership, not reknowned for its clean hands, nonetheless stood up to the big-money interests (imf, world bank, citi, hsbc, g7, etc) and told ‘em to screw off, that argentina was going to take care of its people first…! whaddaya know, what a concept…! i’d welcome an economic collapse if it would succeed in blowing this horrible gang of theoligarchs out of the water…
May 18th, 2005 at 6:03 pmIt seems Bush’s agenda, other than to comfort our plutocracy with tax cuts, is doing well. He has been attempting to defund the government for some time forcing us to get rid of pesky, godless, liberal programs while retaining pork for the rich.
May 18th, 2005 at 6:34 pmyeah, yeah, yeah. I didn’t cry for Argentina when they tanked and I doubt if they’ll cry for us. The economy is always tanking. Everybody is going broke everyday. It’s an age old story. Work is what solves the problem. Get to work.
May 18th, 2005 at 7:50 pmDo I hear any mention of rolling back the tax cuts given to the privilaged top 2% or maybe recinding the estate tax exemption or even firing Haliburton and demanding a refund. Why is it that the middle and lower classes keep paying the price for the greed, arrogance, and corruption in this administration. How can so few maniplate so many?
May 18th, 2005 at 7:55 pmWell, duh!
Is America finally waking up? The impending collapse of our economic structure began with the fascists appointed in 2000 and has only picked up speed.
Bush is a missionary man, a man on a misison. His hand is guided not by the secular law embedded in our Constitution but in his bible. Only those sections compatible with his superstition will survive. America will never be the same.
May 18th, 2005 at 8:00 pmListen to you!!!!!!!!!!!!
Demanding huge tax increases!!!! Don’t you “progressives” understand that the Dems were swept out of power for this very reason?
Working, tax-paying Americans are getting SICK AND TIRED of hearing of non-producers crying for tax increases.
The bottom half of Americans (by income) pay only about 4% of all income taxes paid in America now.
May 18th, 2005 at 9:25 pmSo where is the left represented in Alan Greenspan, the Heritage Foundation, and the Brookings Institution?
There is no “left” there.
May 18th, 2005 at 9:53 pmSounds like buckshot thinks the bottom half of America should pay half the taxes. What percentage of income is represented by the bottom half of America? Taxes are lower now than they have been since before WWII. Has that stopped economic growth over the past 60 years? And buckstop, Dems were swept out of power because republicans made gay marriage their central platform. And they exploited 9/11 for political gain and profit.
If wages weren’t going down, maybe you would have more money in your pocket, even after taxes. Either that or change your formula of “Dems were swept out of power for X (where X is whatever subject at hand)”.
Go live with your friends in Saudi Arabia, where you won’t pay any taxes. Here we own the government, and pay to protect our freedom. There, the government owns you. You commie bastard.
May 18th, 2005 at 10:06 pmBob…I have lived in Argentina for years and I want to tell you that you are dead wrong about the leaders of this sad country “standing up” to the IMF etc. Through their incompetence they ran a promising nation into the ground, they made dirty deals with business interests, cheated their own people out of their life savings…the list goes on and on. If you think things are so bad in the US, come here and live like an Argentine and see foir yourself! You’ll run back to the US a changed man!
May 18th, 2005 at 10:12 pmTom,
I wondered how long it would take before you had a complete meltdown and started calling me names. It took four posts.
It’s rough on a guy when you don’t pay your own way, isn’t it? Your only hope is that you can join with enough like-minded low-income people and use the power of the government to force productive people to pay higher taxes – and share the money with you.
You low income guys who get the big fat tax credits each year don’t give a thought to where the money comes from. You feel entitled to it.
You even call it a “refund”, even though you didn’t pay the income taxes in the first place. When a person pays in $1000 in income taxes and gets $3500 back, that isn’t a refund…that is a handout.
The trouble with getting handouts is that it makes people feel bad about themselves…and they have meltdowns…like you just had.
Tip…improve your skills…earn more money…pay your own way…pay income taxes….feel better about yourself.
You won’t need to call names then.
May 18th, 2005 at 10:19 pmBack to topic, it looks as though BushCo continues the failed fiscal policies of his voodoo economic forebearers. AWOL’s to huge deficit spending represents a sharp break from the recent past. During The Big Dog’s second term, the government actually ran on-budget surpluses and began paying down the national debt, the economy boomed even with Big Bill’s deficit reduction package, that shock jock pundits warned would ruin the economy. AWOL’s new level of deficit spending exceeds the previous records set during the Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush administrations, when on-budget deficits averaged 25 percent and 28 percent of on-budget spending, respectively.
The previous one year record for deficit spending, at 31 percent of total non-Social Security outlays, was set under President Reagan in fiscal 1983.
Shares of Non-Social Security Federal Spending Paid for by Borrowing
Fiscal 1947 to 2003 (projected)
Truman none
Eisenhower 3%
Kennedy-Johnson 6%
Nixon-Ford 14%
Carter 13%
Reagan 25%
Bush I 28%
Clinton 6%
Bush II, fy 2002 23%
Bush II, fy 2003p 32%
Note: in Clinton’s first term, 15% of non-Social Security spending was financed by borrowing. In his second term, the government ran on-budget surpluses.
Prior to the Reagan administration, the level of deficit financed spending was much lower.
* President Truman balanced his budgets, on average, from fiscal 1947 through 1953.
* The Eisenhower administration financed only 3 percent of on-budget spending with borrowing.
* The Kennedy-Johnson administrations financed only 6 percent of on-budget spending with debt, and left office with an essentially balanced budget in fiscal 1969.
* Deficit-financed spending rose in the 1970s, to 14 percent under Nixon-Ford and 13 percent during the Carter administration, but that was still less than half.
See a trend here? Bueller? Ferris?….anyone? Conservatives are full of…hot air to be polite about it. The numbers in AWOL’s own Economic Report of the President undermine his own rhetoric. The economy doesn’t go up faster under neoconartists, spending goes up faster under Republican presidents than under Democratic ones. And the economy grows faster under Democrats than Republicans. What grows faster under Republicans is debt. Neocons are getting get bacwards, they reward the Paris Hiltons and punish the hard working Joe Nascars.
Wrong Choices, Wrong Priorities
Forbes 400 Richest Americans: They Didn’t Do It Alone Private Wealth Counts on Public Investment, Infrastructure.
Abraham Lincoln said, “I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”
May 19th, 2005 at 3:24 amWhy do they call you buckshot? Is it because you can’t shoot straight and get the facts right? or because your comments spray out in all directions to deflect from the real subject of unsustainable budget deficits?
Meltdown?
Stop going of half-cocked and I mean that both ways.
Get back to watching FOX NEWS. You may miss some of what is NOT happening in the world.
Must go. Bless you CHILD.
May 19th, 2005 at 8:54 amHey Buckshot, what makes you think the people writing here are in the bottom half of income earners in this country? Hello, I’m a progressive in the top half, thank you very much, and I understand that if you want this country to be strong, the strong have to invest in this country – with taxes. Businesses will not get done what needs to get done, and when you – by some misfortune or illness – go broke don’t look to any business to help you.
The list of services provided by the federal government that business cannot cover is long. Shall we talk about the basic research that drives our high-tech economy? Even the high-profit pharma companies don’t do ANY of the basic research. All of their research is targeted to get specific drugs to market. The basic understanding of medical conditions that makes their targeted research even possible is done by the government. Or shall we talk about what the road and highway system of this country would be like without the government? Shall we talk about how polluted this country would be if there were not government oversight of businesses? We would ALL have cancer (not just me).
May 19th, 2005 at 9:43 amTHEO!!! You sly dog, you. I don’t have any comment on what your post said, but since I saw your name, I thought I’d say hi in recognition. I’m in Berlin, doing my thing.
May 19th, 2005 at 10:51 amI wish Greenspan would make up his mind about the ecconemy. First deficits are good then there bad, then don’t worry about it then we can’t keep this up. Just wish he would be honest and tell us the real story.
May 19th, 2005 at 11:02 amI am alway amazed how republican backers (here and elsewhere) will parrot anything their leaders say. Polls regularly say that most americans from all parties don’t agree with the Taliban Republican leadership, but we still get the wild eyed claims and subject changes from the droids in the room. Take a look at MSNBC’s new poll saying just that.
Let’s all watch who trys to change the subject.
May 19th, 2005 at 11:10 amIs that it buckshot? YOu come here and call people names just to see how long it takes before someone dishes it out back to you? By that standard, you’ve been melting down since you started.
May 19th, 2005 at 11:26 amMary,
None of what you said appears to legitimate discussion. I don’t get involved in junior-high level flame wars.
Albert,
I’m sorry to hear you have cancer. I can understand why you view government – funded cancer research as a possible savior. While you are correct that you won’t have any businesses rushing to your aid, be careful about bashing the very foundation of America. Business is like oxygen to America. Government doesn’t produce anything itself; everything it “gives” first must be confiscated from either businesses or individuals. Think about it.
On the other issues you mention, you are making some erroneous assumptions on what you think I believe.
The purposes of government are laid out quite well in our constitution. The use of the IRS for income redistribution is a relatively new thing. Discussion of incomre redistribution really brings out the anger in some folks.
I often think if they would spend their time improving their skills & increasing their income, and less time on blogs sharing their limited wisdom, they would be better off, and so would the people wading through their commentary.
May 19th, 2005 at 11:29 amand less time on blogs sharing their limited wisdom, they would be better off,
and so Mr. Conservative “buckshot” is spending his time, sharing the marvels of his parroted wisdom to the Dems because…..
May 19th, 2005 at 12:58 pmCheryl,
I’m not conservative. I haven’t voted for a GOP presidential candidate since 1980.
And as for how I spend my time, I have earned the right to spend it as I see fit. I’m not the one crying for handouts, remember.
Now I think I’ll go transplant a few tomatoes and then take a nap.
May 19th, 2005 at 2:17 pmCAFTA is the latest anti-worker, pro-slavery, “free” trade bills being considered in Congress. l urge everyone to write Congress and tell them to vote against CAFTA. This is another bill designed exclusively to facilitate outsourcing of American jobs. The bill is much worse than any of the previous “free” trade bills. The flaws are even more obvious. It is a dishonest attempt by the Bush administration to portray an outourcing bill as an attempt at “opening up markets.” Central American workers are so poor they will NEVER create a market for American goods. Impoverished Central American workers, however, will provide an excellent source of cheap semi-slave labor. This new source of slave-labor will be in direct competition with American labor. The only way American workers will be able to compete is to accept the same slave-labor conditions as their Central American counterparts.
CAFTA is nothing but an extension of the disastrous NAFTA scam. American workers will lose jobs, wages will decline, and 0 new jobs will be created. CAFTA’s advocates are 100% aware of this. They are simply lying when they talk about “opening up markets to American goods.” In reality, what they really want is to “open up” the American labor market to competition with foreign slave-labor. Don’t let Benedict Arnold corporations extend their economic treason any further. I urge you to continue supporting Economic Patriotism, and vote against this new outsourcing extension.
George Bush, and his fellow “economic terrorists,” continue to espouse outsourcing as being “good for America.” It is not. And they know it. It helps a selected few at the expense of the many. This bill is a typical product of today’s inhuman corporate greed, and its influence on the legislative process. And outsourcing is the epitome of this corporate greed.
Again, outsourcing is done exclusively so American corporations can use cheap foreign labor. The underlying motivation behind ALL free trade agreements is to enable American corporations to use the unskilled, impoverished, semi-slave labor of other countries. There has never been any real concern about “opening up markets.” That is more than just a mistaken concept. It is an outright lie from Bush and the economists that espouse “opening up markets.” The minuscule income of these 3rd world countries makes it impossible for them to buy American products. Bush knows this. Mankiw knows this. Snow knows this. The man on the moon knows this. Markets are created by aggregate consumer income, not people. Countries with little aggregate consumer income have minuscule-sized markets. Exporting countries that pay their 11-year old slave laborers $2/day will never, ever buy US products. Those wages don’t provide enough consumer income to do so.
Chinese and Indian industries would collapse if they had to depend on their own populations to purchase the bulk of goods and services they produce. Wages and consumer income are too low for them to survive on domestic sales. They depend on the American consumer market, which is created by American wages (and borrowing).
When American industry outsources jobs, it outsources consumer income as well. This is the same income that purchases their products. Loss of jobs also places downward pressure on employed workers’ wages. If labor demand decreases, so do wages. If this trend continues, Americans will be unable to purchase 80% of its own goods, as it currently does. Demand for goods, and the labor to produce them, will decrease further. This will further reduce consumer income and buying power. This is a self-perpetuating cycle, which will result in a continued decrease in DEMAND for American production.
The price reduction on foreign-produced goods does not make up for the income lost. It is simply illogical to think so. If it did compensate, there would be no benefit to outsourcing. Wal-Mart statistics, provided by Wal-Mart, provide some insight. A Wal-Mart spokesperson recently stated that consumers save $600/year purchasing goods from Wal-Mart. He also admitted, however, that Wal-Mart wages were $2/hour lower than those of the average retail sales worker. Here’s the math: $2/hr x 40hr/week x 52weeks = $4160 per year less income for a Wal-Mart employee. However, the $4160 is only a small part of the labor income actually lost, because it is confined to retail sales employees only. Nearly 100% of the labor income from production workers is lost, since Wal-Mart buys most of its products from production facilities ouside the U.S. The loss of income by American production workers is even greater. Does $600/year in consumer savings make up for income lost by retail employees and production workers? Of course not. Aggregate consumer income decreases FAR more than prices decrease. The price savings are MUCH less than the amount of labor income lost. The only income increase is in CEO salaries and corporate profits. And that increase is entirely at the expense of the American worker. Increased corporate profits are EXCLUSIVELY from reduction in labor costs. In other words, this profit comes directly out of the pockets of American workers.
American workers are the most highly educated, highly skilled, productive workers on the planet. They produce more goods per hour than any of the workers they are losing their jobs to. But they are not as productive measured in goods per dollar. American workers lack the “skills” to survive on $2/day. We need to begin retraining them to acquire this skill. Our educational system has completely failed us here. And the ability to survive on $2/day is THE most essential job skill in today’s market. We definiely need to increase federal funding to teach this “skill.”
In reality, the “re-training” mantra is just a copout. The solution to outsourcing is not increased worker training. Nor is it increased funding to job-displacement programs. It is not extension of unemployment benefits. The solution to the outsourcing problem is to stop outsourcing. Period. Repeal ALL “free” trade agreements. We have absolutely no need for any “free” trade agreements. We already had free trade before any of these agreements were ever created. NAFTA, FTAA, CAFTA and the others have only one real goal — to reduce the labor costs by using the slave labor of impoverished countries. This makes American workers compete with the exploited labor of poor countries. American workers then become no more than slaves themselves. Is this the job retraining Bush has in mind?
Economists speak of “comparative advantage” with outsourcing. This outdated concept is nothing but economic fantasy. It’s what Right-Wing, “alternate reality” economists hide behind when defending outsourcing. They should lose their economic degrees for even mentioning this in public. It’s a long, twisted, completely non-applicable concoction, which is designed to disguise the real reasons for outsourcing. Mankiw and Snow know better than to hide behind the “comparative advantage” fairy tale. Bush may be too stupid to be held completely accountable for his policies. But Mankiw and Snow are nothing but taxpayer-paid liars. The Bush/Mankiw/Snow/Greenspan “economic axis-of-evil” may destroy our economy.
unlawflcombatnt
EconomicPopulistCommentary
May 19th, 2005 at 5:09 pmhttp://www.unlawflcombatnt.blogspot.com/
NEOCON ECONOMY
Bush supply-side pseudo-economic policies are destroying our economy. It would take all of about 20 minutes to explain to someone how his economic mismanagement is worsening the economy, in addition to the complete absence of logic to his economic policies. His policies are actively worsening life for the lower 98% at present. And they will make 100% of us poorer in the future.
Tax cuts for the affluent, and other “supply-side” giveaways make no economic sense. Many people aren’t aware of this, because it does take a little time to explain. But not very much. So I’m going to try here.
Our country became the world’s most powerful economy under administrations that practiced “Demand-Side” economic policies. In general, demand-side economics centers on consumer spending and demand. Profits are made when goods are sold, not when produced. Industrial production is driven by DEMAND for goods made from that production. Consumer spending creates the demand for that production. Without demand, there is no production. Because there’s no benefit to that production. No profits can be made from unsold production.
Consumer demand is the ONLY factor that increases job and wage growth. Demand for goods also creates demand for labor to produce goods. Increased demand for anything increases the price. Thus, increased demand for labor increases the price of that labor. In other words, it increases wages. It also increases hiring. Demand increases the number of people working, as well as the wages of those people working.
If more workers are working and average wages are higher, it increases the aggregate (or total) demand for goods in our country. Aggregate Demand, when measured in dollars, is the ultimate limiting factor of industrial production. Aggregate Demand in dollars is total spendable dollars available to consumers. (Republicans hate the concept of Aggregate Demand. It conflicts with their “alternate reality” economic theories.)
Again, aggregate demand for goods is the engine that drives our economy. It drives production, hiring, and wage increases. The demand cycle has a self-perpetuating effect. As labor/consumer income increases, so does the demand for goods. Because consumers have more money to spend. This increased demand further increases labor demand. Which further increases wages and hiring.
Supply-side concepts have never been accepted by a large number of economists. What I mean here is that they are not even accepted as a valid economic theory. Many economists refuse to call supply-side policies a theory. Some refer to them as “voodoo economics.” Supply-side policies are essentially economic mythology. They are a completely illogical set of ideas that were concocted to justify tax cuts for the rich. The major proponents were not even economists. Most were actually journalists, such as Robert Bartley, the late editor of the Wall Street Journal.
Let me try to show the error of some supply-side propaganda. A major point is about tax cuts for the rich. This is supposed to stimulate investment. That investment is supposed to go into building production facilities and increasing production (supply). There is an obvious problem here. What if consumer spending doesn’t necessitate increased supply? If consumer spending doesn’t keep up with supply, that investment money is completely wasted. Profits are made by SELLING products, not producing them. Un-sold goods do not “grow” our economy. (Neither do increased CEO salaries.)
Another less important, but even more illogical assumption, is that if you tax people less, they will produce more. It may be true that high-end taxpayers would have more money to invest. However, that’s where the truth ends, and the fantasy begins. Even acknowledging that smidgeon of truth, the benefit of that money is questionable. The extra investment money is supposed to lead to increased goods production(supply). Again, there is no benefit to producing more goods than consumers can pay for. This increased investment money is useless unless demand necessitates increased production.
There is also a definite negative to these supply-side fantasies. Increasing the deficit to fund these cuts increases inflation, as well as devaluing the dollar. That means consumer dollars are worth less. So consumers will buy less. And provide less demand for goods, causing less demand for labor. Which starts us on another self-perpetuating downward spiral.
The big picture is this. In order for production to increase, demand for production must increase. Consumers need to have enough spendable wealth to purchase increased production. Inreasing production without increasing consumer spending is putting the cart ahead of the horse. The horse isn’t going to “push” the cart forward. And manufacturers aren’t going to “push” consumer spending forward. Only consumers can drive our economy. They provide the demand that “pulls” production forward. Remember the old adage: “Necessity is the mother of invention.” So it is that “Demand is the mother of production.” Demand for goods leads to increased production of those goods. However, supply of goods does not increase demand. Unsold goods are worth absolutely $0.
Demand-Side Economics were almost universally accepted until the mid-1970’s. However, sometime in the 70’s, supply-side mythology was born. (Under a rock, in a dark cave.)
Today we’re seeing the fruits of supply-side mythology.
Consumer income has decreased during Bush’s “economic reign-of-terror.” Tax cuts for the top 2% favor investment, not consumer spending. Though consumer income was obviously declining, Bush decided his rich friends needed more money to “grow” the economy. According to Bush, they would produce more goods and increase production capacity. Also, as Bush dishonestly claimed, they would hire more workers.
Does this make any sense? Will a company hire more workers just because they have more money? Do they hire more just because they can afford to? No, absolutely not. They only hire workers when they NEED them. No amount of corporate giveaways will increase hiring, unless demand for production increases.
Let me give an example. Let’s say I’m a doctor who sees 6 patients per day. I need one nurse. What if my new friend, George Bush, gives me $1 million because he likes me. (for some unknown reason.) Will I hire more nurses? Of course not. I don’t NEED more nurses. They won’t increase my profits any, so I’m not going to hire them.
Let me change the example. Let’s say I’m the same doctor, and my ex-friend, George Bush, takes back the $1 million. Then he gives it to the potential patients who live around my office. Now more people can afford medical care. Now I have 30 patients per day. Am I going to hire more nurses? Yes, indeed. Because now I NEED more nurses. The DEMAND for nurses has increased. Hiring more nurses increases my profits.
I hired more nurses only when I NEEDED them. I hired none when I didn’t need them, even though I could afford them. Being able to afford hiring of nurses had no effect on hiring. Demand for their services did. This increased demand was due to increased consumer income. Increased consumer income ALWAYS increases aggregate demand. (It may effect demand for individual products differently. But is still increases the sum total of demand for goods and services produced.)
In the above example, nurses spendable income increased because of demand increase. In turn, their income increased aggregate consumer income. This increases demand for the goods they buy, and the labor that produces those goods.
Again, increased consumer income increases demand for production. But how does consumer spending increase, if consumer income decreases? Through credit and borrowing. Consumer spending has been maintained through increased borrowing and credit card spending. To phrase this differently, it has been maintained by consumer “deficit” spending. And this is becoming an increasing portion of consumer spending. A lot of this deficit spending has been financed by the artificially increased value of homes, and the resulting increase in home equity loans. Interest rates have almost a direct effect on the market value of homes. The higher the fraction of buyer’s cost going to financing, the less the market value of the home. This is because the seller receives a smaller fraction of the total payment. If interest rates are low, the seller receives a higher fraction of the buyer’s payment.
Let me give a brief illustration. Let’s say I want to buy a home. Let’s say I am a perfect example of all potential buyers in my area.
I’m willing to pay $300,000 total for a home. This includes all finance charges, as well as principal payment. Let’s say the total financing costs $150, 000. That means the seller will get the other $150,000. That means the market value of his home is $150,000, because that’s what he actually gets.
Let’s change the finance charges. I’m still only willing to pay $300,000 total for the home, including all finance charges. But the finance charges are only $50,000 now, because of a lower interest rate. The seller now gets $250,000, instead of $150,000. The market value of his home is now $250,000. The market value of his home has increased $100,000 because of a reduced interest rate. The reduced interest rate accounts for 100% of the increase in market value. This increases the equity, and increases the amount he can borrow off this equity.
Lowered interest rates have greatly increased home equity values. They have also greatly increased the amount of money that can be borrowed off this equity. This money has made a significant contribution to consumer spending during the last 4 years. It’s prevented consumer spending from sinking. As interest rates rise, home equity values will decrease. Money borrowed from this reduced home equity will decrease. The contribution to consumer spending from this money will decrease.
From this, it becomes obvious that consumer demand cannot be maintained by this consumer deficit spending. We are nearing the limit now. We are going to reach this limit in the near future. The home-refinancing loan bubble, and its contribution to consumer spending, is about to burst. When it does, consumer spending and demand will drop. And they will continue to drop, because this is also a self-perpetuating cycle. As demand decreases, hiring will decrease and layoffs will increase. This will further decrease demand for production. Further decreasing demand for labor.
We need to change our economic course. We can’t let Republicans distract us from major issues. We can’t let them waste our time with discussion right-wing planted distractions. Subjects such as steroids in baseball, the Robert Blake trial, Michael Jackson, and Terry Shiavo provide cover for what the Republicans are really up to. Corporatization of social security and extension of tax cuts for the rich affect all of us. Job loss to the cheap slave labor of foreign countries affects all of us. Let’s not help provide cover for the
Bush/Mankiw/Snow/Greenspan “economic axis-of-evil.”
Clinton was right. It is “the economy stupid.” Let’s not let the Republicans convince us otherwise.
unlawflcombatnt
unlawflcombatnt: Economic Populist Commentary
http://www.unlawflcombatnt.blogspot.com/
_________________
May 19th, 2005 at 5:13 pmAmerica needs a return to Demand-Side economic policies. Consumer spending and demand drive our economy. Investment “permits” growth, but only DEMAND will cause such growth. Production is limited by Aggregate demand for that production.
American workers are the most highly educated, highly skilled, productive workers on the planet. !!!!!!!!!!
DO SOME RESEARCH PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
May 23rd, 2005 at 1:42 pmLuis,
You’re ignorance is overwhelming. I’ve done ample research. You’ve clearly done little. Maybe you need to go back to school and improve your reading skills, since you obviously haven’t done any reading. Clearly you’re incapable of comprehending my letter. You’re either challenged in the reading comprehension department, or the critical thinking dept. You’re clearly lacking in at least one of those skills, unless your problem is just plain laziness. Once you get your reading skills up to speed, try “researching” some government statistics, like I have. You need to spend less time posting your ignorant soundbites on blogs, and more on your own research. I’ve done plenty. You could even benefit from it by visiting my blogsite. I’ve done a lot of the research for you. You could investigate the links I have provided, assuming that doesn’t exceed your research ability. In the mean time, I’d recommend that you keep to the right-wing wacko blogs — where ignorance, laziness, greed, and stupidity are cherished.
unlawflcombatnt
EconomicPopulistCommentary
May 29th, 2005 at 3:03 amhttp://www.unlawflcombatnt.blogspot.com/
Nice site, I have bookmarked your site yet and I will come back again ! You have a gratest site!
June 14th, 2005 at 10:19 pmWhat are you on about? generic Zocor ,
December 8th, 2005 at 6:34 pmlist of ways to lower income taxes
Very interesting post. A little bit confusing, but still ok.
March 15th, 2008 at 5:13 pmInvestment Centers Of America
Please keep these excellent posts coming.
March 16th, 2008 at 1:13 amWeight Loss Pill Identifier Pills
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 2:56 ambuyer government home loan
Didn’t realise there was this type of information out there
April 1st, 2008 at 4:06 pmamerica’s job bank
I Googled for something completely different, but found your page…and have to say thanks. nice read.
April 2nd, 2008 at 5:05 amAccounting Financial Financial Success
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 5th, 2008 at 2:05 amlist of weight loss products
This is similar to comment spam but avoids some of the safeguards designed to stop the latter practice. Six Apart started a working
April 9th, 2008 at 9:16 amAdSense Money Maker
Do you know how to make money from AdSense automatically? You don’t!? I’ll teach you how!
April 11th, 2008 at 1:38 am