Do you know how to make money from AdSense automatically? You don’t!? I’ll teach you how!

This is similar to comment spam but avoids some of the safeguards designed to stop the latter practice. Six Apart started a working

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

I Googled for something completely different, but found your page…and have to say thanks. nice read.

Didn’t realise there was this type of information out there

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

Please keep these excellent posts coming.

Very interesting post. A little bit confusing, but still ok.

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
http://www.unlawflcombatnt.blogspot.com/

DO SOME RESEARCH PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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/

_________________
America 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.

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
http://www.unlawflcombatnt.blogspot.com/

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.

and so Mr. Conservative “buckshot” is spending his time, sharing the marvels of his parroted wisdom to the Dems because…..

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.

Let’s all watch who trys to change the subject.