In pictures via Calculated Risk. You voted for it; bask in it.
7 hours ago
Monday, July 11, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Proactively “From the Sea”; an agent of change leveraging the littoral best practices for a paradigm breaking six-sigma best business case to synergize a consistent design in the global commons, rightsizing the core values supporting our mission statement via the 5-vector model through cultural diversity.
Listen to Midrats
Message Boards
Books of 2022
What is Sal drinking?
I'm going to be spending some quality time with the list of Southern cocktails from Garden & Gun through the new year.
I&W
-
-
8 hours ago
-
15 hours ago
-
1 day ago
-
6 days ago
-
2 weeks ago
-
3 weeks ago
-
4 weeks ago
-
1 month ago
-
3 months ago
-
6 months ago
-
11 months ago
-
1 year ago
-
1 year ago
-
1 year ago
-
2 years ago
-
2 years ago
-
2 years ago
-
2 years ago
-
3 years ago
-
3 years ago
-
3 years ago
-
4 years ago
-
4 years ago
-
5 years ago
-
5 years ago
-
5 years ago
-
10 years ago
-
12 years ago
-
14 years ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
Blog Archive
-
▼
2011
(703)
-
▼
July
(50)
- Sunday Funnies
- Oh, that ocean
- How we got here
- Fire Scout vs. DASH
- Fullbore Friday
- EMCON Bravo
- Another Ft. Hood attack thwarted
- Diversity Thursday
- I'll take that LCS Plan B ...
- The last professional
- If I could only talk to my Senator ...
- Spying is for me .... not for thee
- Just move along ....
- Mid-Summer Free For All, on Midrats?
- Fullbore Friday
- Well, you we could be Belgium ...
- Diversity Thursday
- Skipper, come sign your Page 13
- Suisun Bay will make you sober
- Doesn't help with the credibility issue ...
- The most important chart in the world
- T.E. Ricks joins Salamander on JFK
- Those worthless OHP Frigates ....
- Sunday Funnies
- Unbroken & Unforgotten, on Midrats
- SIMA Returns
- Fullbore Friday
- I'm married and north of, ahem, 40 - right?
- VADM Burke & McCoy, thank you
- Fire Scout Early Fielding Report
- Diversity Thursday
- Fire Scout Fail: some of the background
- The Navy and Sexual Assault
- Fire Scout; and Plan B is ...
- Obamanomics Update
- How about a medal for finishing PQS early!
- Sunday Funnies
- Reading the Board's Entrails ... and Then Eating Them
- The General Board, on Midrats
- Fullbore Friday
- Jobs Sailors do after the Navy
- Admiral Stavridis, don't confuse the issue
- Diversity Thursday
- The ongoing false-spin about LCS
- While we return the bust of Churchill ....
- I guess the Greek military is good for something ...
- Why do we serve?
- Sunday Funnies
- European pickle
- Fullbore Friday
-
▼
July
(50)
87 comments:
Calculate risk also has a new article showing the CBO projections to maintain current employment rates:
Jobs needed monthly -- 260,000 to 187,000
and to lower the unemployment rate by 1%
Jobs needed monthly -- 391,000 to 316,000
Last month's jobs number? 18,000. I'm sure you can do the math yourselves, but if you didn't notice there was a noted pall over the economic news the weekend. some even claimed the job numbers catalyzed some of the Debt ceiling negotiations.
Whistling by the graveyard, "The average American does not view the economy through the prism of GDP or unemployment rates, or even monthly jobs numbers," White House senior adviser David Plouffe said at a Washington event on Wednesday. "People won't vote based on the unemployment rate,..."
Sigh!!!!
President's Math Error: back in early 2010, while our President was "campaigning" to "sell" his new so called Health Care bill, I had the misfortune of listening to him on radio while he was in Ohio somewhere. He loudly proclaimed to the loyal crowd that if Congress would pass his new health law, that, "this will lower your health care costs by over 1,500 percent" !!! (or almost those exact words as best I recall).
Wow ! Reduce my health care premiums by over 1,500 % !!
Even my oldest grand kid, who is now in 7th grade, knows that NOTHING in this world can be lowered by more than 100 percent !!
If Mr. President lowers our health costs by even 100 percent (vice 1,500 %), then we get absolutely FREE health care !
Whatever High School our president attended did not teach him basic math. And whatever colleges he attended did not teach him any business concepts. Future presidents need to have at least a tiny amount of business savy since USA economics is so critical. Let's not elect another amatuer in the 2012 election. America needs older, more experienced Presidents, who can at least pass Jr. High School Math classes.
And your point?
Both sides are to blame so maybe you should focus on something else instead of snipping from the sidelines.
It's more than just the current recession--take a look at the 1990 and 2001 curves. Same recovery slope as the 2007. Then take a look at the other recovery slopes. Much steeper.
This would tend to suggest we have done something fundamental to our economy since the 80s and that the change has not been for the better. We would seem to have somehow induced a tenedency for hiring to "stall out" for long periods of time, like a plane mushing along at a high AOA and unable to generate the pitching moment to get back to a lower one, and for quick recoveries to not be usual. Government intervention and regulation would be a logical causal factor to start looking at, though there may be others. But something is preventing quick recovery, for three recessions in a row would appear systemic.
If the recovery curves of '90 and '01 were due to cutting of jobs that then did not come back--i.e., automation in the automobile industry, those kind of things--that would then explain the lack of recovery--a fundamental transformation of a sector of the economy leaving people scrambling for new opportunities that did not exist-- and would indicate we have a very serious problem today (whatever the actual transformation is and its cause(s)) that only new opportunities will counter.
Of course, the best solution to this national problem is to import more dirt cheap labor...
It would also indicate--and I admit my ignorance of economics--that you cannot have the government use cyclic techniques to get out of a transformative cycle. Only overall economic growth will do that.
Well, accept for the guys that are unemployed, they will probably vote based on their joblessness. The military is overwhelmingly voting against the current administration too. So, there are some swing numbers there.
Sooooo.....you don't like the picture, and now you just want Phib to shut up?
"lalalala...I'm not listening!"
Let us know how that works out for you...
As I continue my free stream of consiscousness--it also means stimulus attempts are by and large futile for a transformative cycle, because the economy cannot support the greater employment on its own once the stimulus is removed. In other words, you cannot "prime the pump", because the required suction head is too great and the pump will just start cavitating again once the priming is pumped through. To properly prime the pump, you would have to have a head as great as the required lift. In other words, the only stimulus that will work is one that is on the order of magnitude as the economy itself--and that can be sustained for years. That is just not possible.
The only thing that will work is economic growth. Stimulus can work, in small amounts, if it targets the right industries that can have somewhat rapid growth (i.e., a "boost pump"). In general, that is hard to determine ahead of time and you end up wasting a lot of money on things that don't pan out.
Instead, it is better to fertilize fields and clear them of weeds so that the wild plants of economic opportunity can more easily break through and thrive on their own--then you can harvest the crop that you did very little to bring about (and a relatively low cost compared to the value of the yield).
My guess is not that his math skills are defective, but that he is fully aware of how limited many others' math skills are lacking. Plus, he was preaching to the choir: the choir tends to overlook exagerations when it is convenient.
But they do vote on what they pay at the grocery and gas station, numbers kept out of the rate of inflation, for some silly reason....
MidMom, not using the ?volatile? numbers in inflation calculations, does not mean they are not felt and effect voting.
PSW, one tranformative event in the 70s was the shift to a worldwide economy. Increased competition might account for much of the differences. There is another policy difference from the 80s that may still be felt, and that is the change in Fed money policies. The period since has often been called the great moderation to mean the policy was used to ameliorate the economic high and lows.
The "Great Recession" appears to be the new change that shows new policies are needed.
Of course having an administration at war with nearly every segment of the productive economy except for the "Green" portions which are instead heavily subsidized. For me, that is the much better explanation for the slowness of the recovery. Couple that policy with a stimulus which had few long term legs, then we can see where we went wrong. Oh, to be clear that was in the 2008 elections.
"Both sides are to blame".
That is rich, no pun intended. Will OBama ever be responsible for anything in his presidency? Ever? Even once?
This economic situation is ENTIRELY of his making, and that of his economic socialist-communist anti-capitalist fellow travelers. Businesses are sitting on 15, 20, 25% of liquid capital in some cases, because to invest or spend on expansion, recapitalization, etc will have unknown but severe tax implications from environmental regulation, undefined corporate tax plans, and other fees and payments to the Federal Government that would render such investment or spending a disastrous outcome.
Obammunism, thy name is Democrat.
I remember in the early '90s even DC wasn't recession-proof. LOTS of vacant office buildings, apartments were a steal. It was the cusp of the IT revolution. Then remember all the jobs that came around in the late 90s? The absurd IPOs of companies that didn't do anything but hire techies who hired people to walk their dogs and had latte bars in their offices? Then someone realized those companies didn't exactly produce anything. And that bubble crashed.
A lot of this has to do with sending our jobs overseas and companies making very little here. And our tax laws not influencing companies that send jobs overseas. If it cost a company more to employ workers in Bombay than in Boston, maybe they'd keep the jobs here where we need them.
Problem is even with zero tax it is cheaper still to manufacture overseas where wage is often 10 times less...here in Poland, low-end wages pay about 300-400$ monthly, in China it is probably around 400$ a year - if you tried to pay such wages in the US, workforce would literally starve out. Even high tech jobs are not immune since somebody discovered Indian IT engineer can write codes as good as one in California and send the results via the net to the company central, and far cheaper...
And tax policy gets meaningless ever more when you factor in that all big company needs to do to avoid taxes is to outsource particular job to some company registered in Bahamas, Bermudas or other tax paradise, that in turn outsources to some company in cheap labor countries. All that is left for US workforce to do is to become clerks selling in wal-mart things made in china or wherever is cheaper...
YES WE CAN!
Sal - so I'm guessing no adult conversation about the economy, with context, until you are done campaigning for whoever the Republican nominee is?
Does pointing out that President Obama has done a poor job make one a GOP supporter?
Oh, yay! An alternate universe post. I'll play... (till my computer explodes and my keyboard melts from having to type this stuff.)
Adult conversation on the economy! It's wonderful! Housing prices are through the ceiling! The money is rolling down the streets paved with gold! The unemployment rate has dropped sharply since January 2009 to the point it's .9 percent! Yes, WE DID!!!! Yay!
(How am I doin', Jay???) Hooray Obama! We're in the money! Happy days are here again! The recovery is coming. Every day it's a gettin' closer...rollin' faster than a roller coaster. We're going to make money at the mint and hand it out to everyone. Our leadership is amazing. Talking about raising taxes on the rich has really shown those greedy bastards. Now they stopped wasting their money on airplanes and private jets. Bastards. How dare they have those things and employ jet manufacturers and jet salesmen and jet pilots and jet... (oops... it's hard to do this. Bear with me.) Okay... back on track. We're going to.. wait. What were they going to do? Oh, yes. STIMULUS! We're going to pay people for shovel ready jobs. (My shovel is waiting, but I don't think dirt is what it's going to be slinging.)
Gosh, Jay. How DO YOU DO IT??? It's harder than I thought maintaining consistent happy views about this situation. You must be a cock-eyed optimist, whatever "context" you live in.
And the next time he makes a comment on corporate jet owners I'm going to scream. The guy that uses AF One as his own private bus service has no clue that corporate jet owners add more to the local economy than the tax dollars he sucks out of our pockets.
In Jay's world it does.
I just muted my tv because I couldn't take it anymore. Narcissist in Chief, explaining the need for "revenue reform" or whatever he calls it, cited all the extra hundreds of thousands in income he gets that isn't being taxed while some single parent is trying to find a way to send a kid to college and suddenly finds themselves with a few thousand less dollars because of some great tax inequity.
Where do we begin? It's all about him. Because he's never actually created a job or run a business he doesn't understand that for a LOT of people that extra money they get is RECYCLED into a business to expand. Until his band of pickpockets begins looking at them with "the look." Maybe the single parent working for such a "rich bastard with too much money on his hands" would have gotten a raise, except for those looming revenue reforms that Obama says won't take place till 2013. That's right! This could go on and on because of the fears businesses have TODAY about the effects of the economic landmines he's put in the economy that aren't due to explode for another 2 years. Sal's graph should be extrapolated accordingly.
Adult conversation about the economy. Good one. You really should go on tour.
The adult conversation starts with whom, exactly? Dick Durbin? Geithner? Harry Reid? Pelosi? Schumer? Barney Frank? Or is it Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorhn? Van Jones? Hugo Chavez? Castro? Oh, wait. With Obama. He, the economics expert. He has done swimmingly thus far.
Those pesky numbers! BTW Jay, those recessions in the graph covered Dem & Rep administrations. The numbers don't care. Adults deal with facts. Children hide from them.
I find it interesting that you arrive at the conclusion that somehow a McCain Presidency would have not also been facing econonmic difficulties and large-if not larger unemployment. Especially given the turmoil that went through world markets in 2008 and 2009. 2009 would have seen no renewed demand signal-especially as several large companies probably would have gone under. Since the wars would have gone on-and there would have been no repeal of the Bush Tax cuts, the deficit hole would have continued to grow. And the toxic effects of the wars on the rest of the countries economic issues would have continued.
Whoever won in 2008 was stuck with a huge mess created not by McCain or Obama-but by Bush.
"What we have looked at were several major contributors to the deficit: the tax cuts between 2001 and 2003 (on the assumption they get extended in 2010), the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the effects of the recession as well as the legislative response to the recession," James Horney, director of federal fiscal policy at the Center. "When you take those things into account -- in other words, if we hadn't enacted the tax cuts, had the wars, if we hadn't had the recession and needed the legislation to deal with those problems -- the deficits are much, much lower. And basically none of those represent Obama's policies. He didn't run saying he wanted to pass a stimulus to deal with the recession or that he wanted to continue the war in Iraq or escalate [to this extent] in Afghanistan. He inherited these issues once he took office."
"Now we still have a big budget problem in the long run," Horney added. "It is not inappropriate for people to say we have to deal with that. And it is not inappropriate for them to say Obama is president and has the responsibility to deal with this. But it is not appropriate to say that Obama's policies have contributed to the deficit problem."
Those pesky numbers! BTW Jay, those recessions in the graph covered Dem & Rep administrations. The numbers don't care. Adults deal with facts. Children hide from them.
Differences with a McCain presidency (which I'm <span>not</span> claiming would have been a land flowing with milk and honey):
**the stimulus
**Obamacare
**an EPA writing regulations for laws a Dem-majority Congress couldn't pass
**NLRB suing a corporation for building a new (not replacement) factory in a right-to-work state.
**the same NLRB writing new rules to sneak a close relative of "card-check," since the Dem congress, even in its lame-duck session, couldn't/wouldn't pass it.
I'm sure others could suggest a few others.....
Which is why are Galtian overlords hide from a persistent reality-if make reducing the deficit job one, then it requires a repeal of the Bush Tax cuts. Just that one act alone would stop the growth of the debt.
Now Obama could have forced this issue in December when the Teabaggers were chomping at the bit to extend the tax cuts, by demanding Congress raise the debt ceiling in exchange for extending the cuts. However- the longer they go on the more damage they do.
"It will get out of control and we will be lucky to live through it..."
It was an amusing quote in the movie...not so amusing when we are talking about our economic future.
OF--You don't get math at all. It means that you'll receive 14 times as much as you now pay!
"<span> the longer they go on the more damage they do."</span>
You meant the tax cuts. But it is really only true of the anti-capitalist Obammunist fellow travelers.
Let's increase the tax burden for the earners so our government can spend more of their money on the takers.
<span>Skippy,says: "<span>Just that one act alone would stop the growth of the debt. </span>" Tell us how the Bush tax cuts: $544.3 billion for everyone for two years. ($272.15B/Yr) offsets the ~$1.7T and nearly ~$1.5T deficits for 2011 and 2012?
Dems and other economically/mathematically challenged folks often make absurd statements like Skippy just did. Why do they not just do the math? The numbers are readily available to a couple of quick google searches.
Quit listening to the class warfare arguments and just do a little research. The numbers are amazing, the problem's solution is simple math. It's the politics that's difficult.</span>
hows that "Hope & Change" working out for you :-E
everyone claims Barack Hussein Obama went to Columbia & Harvard...
I have never seen a transcript or GPA of Obama's :(
Dems can't really use that 'over the last 8 years' rally cry anymore...
Don't both with facts, I know, you're on a roll!
Don't worry, they'll deal with the .mil vote as it usually is by dem administations. Send out the absentee ballots late or don't even bother to count them. Remember, defending a constitutional republic doesn't guarantee the rights to participate in it.
at the Center? I can only imagine what "Center" you are referencing. I am sure I can find another "Center" who can counter your center.
Funny stuff those center guys.
Perhaps this center, Redeye?
"<span>Will OBama ever be responsible for anything in his presidency? Ever? Even once?"</span>
He was responsible for getting OBL - remember? He even told us in order to eliminate confusion.
Won't stop them.
If he's of the alternate persuasion it's apparently working out just fine...
I am amazed at the heated political discussion at a problem that is deeply economic in nature... and at both sides seemingly blind faith that state, by acting or abstaining can change the long-term trends in the global economy...
it is as if somebody was arguing that change of man at steering wheel can change the fate of Titanic that is bound not for a single iceberg but solid ice pack on the course...
Safe and cheap transportation, coupled with information highway provided by the net allowed the globalization wave we are encountering. In a world where either capital flows towards cheap labor (US->China) or cheap labor flows towards the capital (Mexico->US) you cant anymore simply re-create economical isolationism. While Limes Mexicana could slow down influx of cheap labor, it would simply fasten flow of the capital that can be moved with a single mouseclick to an account in the second end of the world.
Note the rising oil prices despite failing growth. You know what that roar is? It is 9 million of bicycles in Beijing being upgraded to cars. And so is the story in Calcutta and Shanghai and Bangalore... and dozens of lesser cities.
The same goes for food as both most populous countries discover the joys of eating well straight from the times where famine was common occurence.
This is perfect setup for stagflation, or worse, depreflation with economy spiralling downwards while prices rise.
Even with US making nil corporate tax, most of the manufacturing processes are going to end cheaper in a country where average pay isnt enough to pay for food needed to feed one US worker, let alone other needs.
Still there are things that can be done, for almost entire US trading deficit an be summed up in 2 words: China and Oil. Drilling domestically, building nuke plants and taking drastic action towards automotive industry (like setting up maximum fuel usage limits for newly produced cars) can take care of oil, while some sort of tax on yuan/$ exchange will at least ease up the trade imbalance making Chinese exports costlier. This will not make Chinese completely uncompetitive in trading, but it would level up field for someone trying to manufacture things locally.
continued rant, seems js-kit ates long stories...
Note that persistence of status quo spells trouble for China too, as it can find itself with no-one to export to, with US in recession and Europe in deep financial crisis/recession. You can imagine how the mandarins of the Communist Party must dread the idea of their deal "economic growth for keeping quiet" with the population falling apart. I wont even explore the idea of "short victorious war" to detract from domestic troubles (Argentine 1982 anyone?) becaus this is part of military thing and we are discussing economics here. As a footnote, I might add that oil thirst can drive China similar way Japan did in 1940s, though whether drive north towards Siberian riches guarded by ever more rusted Russian military or drive into sea with Spratlys as focal point will occur is beyond my ability to predict.
Always interesting, your perspective, Ewok...
nope, just 'rebranded' as being 'ushered out of the Bush/Cheney era'
It always surprises me how such relatively smart people (politicos) spend so much time dumbing down stuff to the least common denominator.
Ewok,
I will differ with your characterization of "blind faith in the state". What I have unwavering faith in is the ingenuity and work ethic of the American worker, that we can move with, and continue to thrive in, any shifting global economy.
The only certitude regarding the "state" is that, with the presistent economic interventionism path they are on, they are CERTAIN to do irreparable harm. That is by no means blind anything, but a recognition of the inevitable result when a government tries to transform an economic process into a political one. Your country, and all of its neighbors, are near the top of the list of those examples.
Indeed, in the United States, much of the damage to industry has been done by overly burdensome, punitive environmental regulation. (Drilling for oil, building nuclear power?) And an almost (with one notable exception) 90-year partnership of unions and government, which have given unions unprecedented power and leverage, which has been used to cripple and destroy the very industries they worked in. All the while, in partnership with mostly Democratic administrations (including this one) who spoke of business owners and corporate management in the language of class warfare as if they are the enemy.
Our government's policies (on both sides of the aisle) of importing manufactured goods from countries who heavily subsidize manufacture, capitalization, R&D, shipping, etc., have done precisely what those countries intended, and that is to pus US companies out of business or overseas. Japanese cars. South Korean steel. Chinese computers. You get the picture.
The above are not natural market forces, but the results of actions and inactions of our government. As is the War on Poverty and the Great Society. Which gave us the trillions in entitlement spending that is responsible for our current budget situation.
No, ewok, in the narrow scope in which this government should have acted (trade tarriffs against subsidized manufactured goods), they have consistently not done so. Instead, they have filled that time with myriad actions that are well outside their authority and expertise, currying short-term political favor while causing significant, if not irreparable, long-term damage.
Read where there are 2 kinds of "Reckless Faith"
1. At one extreme - relying on inner voices, feelings, fantasy.
2. At the other end of the spectrum - fixing your hope on some external human authority, the teaching of a supreme leader, magisterial dogma, or some other arbitrary canon.
Quoted from a book by J.MacArthur called, "Reckless Faith" back in 1994.
We are often warned in Church about this common trap:
"it isn't important what you believe, as long as you believe passionately enough".
an all-too-common lie ....
Trade tariffs usually end up only creating more smugglers, and sometimes a rebellion - ask George III :P
Plus, this might end up in a wholesale trade war between economic blocs which would make situation even more disastrous.
re: "heavily subsidized manufacture" - where do those countries get the money to subsidize that production from? The real deal is that Japanese, then Korean, then Chinese worker at the start of their boom was living on cup of rice daily in cramped quarters without decent heating nor AC, and usually without running water. US workers wont be going back to this level of living anymore.
re: environmental protection costs - there is a price to pay if you want your rivers clean enough to fish in... finding the right balance of priorities is important, and right now energetic security imho is more important than any environmental concerns... but try and translate it to general public that is easily led astray by Sierra Club, Greenpeace and usual suspects...
re: unions - I might say they had decisive and positive role in the times of indutrialization, but they have stagnated and become self-perpetuating political machines of influence. US is anyway amongst the least unionized countries of OECD... My take? Export unions to China, make Chinese workers earn more and level up playing field. Supporting Solidarity in Poland worked well against Soviets...
True enough.
Passionate belief produced St. Thomas Becket. It also produced Ernst Kaltenbrunner.
and re: Dems/Republicans mutal bashing - I dont give a damn what party is the candidate that will have the courage to put pension age at median life expectancy level (as it was at the beginning of the system)... but try to sell that to aging electorate of baby boomers...
<span>Google is your friend:
http://www.cbpp.org/experts/index.cfm?fa=view&id=23
Jim Horney is the Vice President for Federal Fiscal Policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, where he specializes in federal budget issues.
He was a Deputy Democratic Staff Director at the Senate Budget Committee from 2001 through 2004.
http://www.cbpp.org/about/
The Center conducts research and analysis to help shape public debates over proposed budget and tax policies and to help ensure that policymakers consider the needs of low-income families and individuals in these debates. We also develop policy options to alleviate poverty.
http://www.cbpp.org/experts/index.cfm?fa=view&id=21
Greenstein is the founder and President of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. He is considered an expert on the federal budget and a range of domestic policy issues, from anti-poverty programs and various aspects of tax policy to health reform and Social Security.
Right. Because the "War on Poverty" has been so effective over the past 45+ years...
</span>
Ewok,
You are attributing the most beneficial and least damaging effects to each of the causes I mention. This is hardly the case.
Where did Japan and South Korea get the money to subsidize? Do your own homework on that, but look at the costs their own governments bore for national defense in the 1960s-80s. While it is true that lower wages will give foreign businesses a leg up, all those other things, recapitalization, R&D, and shipping, would nearly even the field, if not heavily subsidized.
Environmental regulation in this country has gone well beyond ecology. It has become a club with which the anti-capitalists of the far left beat US manufacturing. I live in a state where environmental and energy costs drove every last bit of a thriving machine tool industry out. Either elsewhere, or out of business. All in the last 20 years. Because the Governors were virulent anti-capitalists, like our current president. Many other states have suffered similarly.
Unions in China? They already have them. One, official union. And another, unofficial one. The second being masses of political prisoners who manufacture a fair percentage of China's labor-intensive goods. Medical plans for a gulag are somewhat less than for a US company.
As for trade tariffs, I will disagree with you entirely. They are a centuries-old tool that, if properly implemented, prevent precisely the kind of industrial erosion that we have seen since the late 1960s by countries whose sole goal is to infiltrate US markets and drive domestic competition away. And who go about doing that by artificial suppression of manufacturing costs and by currency manipulation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot%E2%80%93Hawley_Tariff_Act
uh-oh, that once already went wrong, ne?
So.... Hawley-Smoot, enacted while the US was an exporting nation, represents ALL tariffs? I think not.
I could buy a one-item order turntable bearing from Pohang SK cheaper than I could as one of an order of 12 from Elkhart IN. Why? Seoul subsidized almost 100% of recapitalization of SK's steel and machine industry. Seoul subsidized 80% of R&D and retraining of SK workers for CNC machining. Seoul also subsidized 100% of shipping costs to LA/Long Beach.
When I was in Japan, the Honda Acura was the "highest quality car for its price" in America. Where it sold for just under $20k. How many were there on the streets of Tokyo? Almost none. Why? Subsidy. In Japan, that was a $55k car. Oh, and the rickety jalopies on Japan's streets were impressive indeed, while Japan was simultaneously banning import of brand-new US cars because of "safety concerns".
So please, save the "one world economy" stuff for someone who hasn't seen the true nature of our trading partners.
why isn't the treasury or commerece department screaming about the boeing thing in north carolina?
it appears as though they are a froghairs breadth of pushing the next boeing plant out of the country.
don't they know just what the sale of large aircraft to foreign countrys does for the balance of payments thing?
C
wasn't it the peanut farmer that put a ruinous tax on building large pleasure craft (yaghts) in the united states and then watched an entire industry move from florida to italy?
C
would you fly in a plane maintained and dispatched from boston????
think about it.
C
That's the guy! Moved from RI and CT, and even southeastern MA, and MD, to Italy.
perhaps we might get rid to a few regulations and laws.
it is nearly impossible for an honest citizen to do anything without fear of being illegal and so they don't do anything.
think about it. in southern california an honest citizen cannot get a parking place adjacent to the entrance to a business.
ever.
there is a handicapped accessibility law. lots of people park in these places that either don't have stickers, or have fraudulandt stickers. law enforcement of this issue is so erratic that when they do it shows up on the evening news.
we need fewer laws and regulations.
C
<span>we seem to have a sufficeincy of book smart idiots in the administration. if they are so good about books why don't they remember their history lessons? every thing they are doing except the epa and greenie stuff has been tried in the past and found wanting. yet they don't pay attention to previous mistakes.
for example the europeans and the academics constantly tell us that we are running the world wrong. we reply, the world was in constant military turmoil until 1945 (when we more or less took over) until then military people could count on about two "world wars" in their life (unless it was truncated by professional requirements). since then we have had 65+ years of relative peace. (brushfires don't count, the wars i'm talking about involve significant portions of continents or the entire globe). so how is that bad????
they don't seem to hoist it aboard that the military people are intelligient and a massive pool of the greatest historians about. their stuff is usually pretty accurate because THEY WERE THERE.
C</span>
<span>ewok:
its not all the wages. </span>
<span></span>
<span>we buy a machine tool in the united states and it costs us $280,000 US in 1992. the same machine sold in mexico without the osha required features was $110,000.
getting rid of hazardous wastes generated by manufacturing is horrendous. at one time in the los angeles area it cost $35,000 to properly dispose of one truckload of hw in a class 1 land fill (the only one in many many miles was in santa barbara).
the types of paint allowed by the airquality folks falls off the whatever in anywhere from a few days to a few years. (all of the industries that used to paint large amounts of product (ships, aircraft, peekup trucks, automobiles, locomotives have moved out of the los angeles area pretty much for good)). one of the things that we used to laugh about was that the southern pacific railway would bring a decrepit old clunker locomotive into town that obviously needed a paint job and within a month or two the local taggers would apply a multicolored primercoat and then the railway would take them to sacramento and paint over the top of that.
then there was the 9.75% sales tax on all "stuff" sold in la county. its really hard to sell machine tools, bulldozers, road graders, kenworths/peterbilts, truck cranes........... with that hovering in the back ground. so all of the businesses that sold that stuff moved out of the county. some of them landed on the other side of the street from the county line but others made it to nevada (there are a couple of buisnesses there that make quite a good nickle and dime facilitating these moves) and others just kept on going across the us boarder.
YOU CAN'T BLAME IT ALL ON WAGES!!!!!!!!!
the other idiocy helps it along.
C</span>
what state is that URR?
possibly conneticut, or ohio, or michigan??
C
<span>Hope the rest of you weren't counting on next month's retirement check...so much for "supporting the troops":</span>
"I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3rd if we haven't resolved this issue," Obama said, according to excerpts of the interview released in advance of its broadcast.
"Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it," Obama said. He said veterans checks and disability benefits could also be affected without a deal.
VT, actually. Between Madelaine Kunin and Howard Dean, they drove just about every last piece of industry out of here. And now, Shumlin and his "single-payer" system is threatening to drive IBM out, too. Incidentally, our state's largest employer at 5,800 people.
The People's Democratic Soviet Socialist Republic of Vermont.
The chattering people on the television say the luxury jetliner bastards employ 1.2 million people in the USA.
Couple that with targeting Boeing for its attempts at a non-union plant...
Seems this administration is fixated on destroying one last bastion of American pride... as we did pave the way in airline innovation.
I cannot understate the importance of such an industry for executives and people who run corporations in states like Texas and Alaska where driving just isn't feasible between headquarters and outlying plants. Too big. Too much travel. Oh, wait... these.are.oil.states. Nevermind. Mystery solved.
if an expert of national reknown and ability (not the govt guys that presided over the carribian mess last spring) is charging $5000/hr portal to portal, then it makes sense to get hiim on a small aircraft that can land at a near to the site field get the work done and get him home as fast as possible.
its just real good economics.
C
Wow. Big surprise that the Skippy-san Economic Center for Forcible Redistribution of Wealth recommends forcible redistribution of wealth.
I have done the research , so have a whole boatload of othervwriters. http://fareastcynic.com/2011/05/12/the-next-time-someone-says/. The numbers and the cumulative effect of the tax cuts on the debt, coupled with lack of revenue due to the recession ( a fact most of you are ignoring) Corev it is the folks like Grover Norquist and most of the tea party are the ones who are mathematically challenged.
Look at that graph again and then go look at the work Ezra Klein has done or better yet go the NYT and try their interactive budget simulation and you can see it for yourself .
And if you really want do some frightening math go look at the direct and indirect effects of the wars which sums out over 3 trillion for the decade. NOW THAT is some spending you could cut right now.
The poor will always be with us. Red Letters quoted from the Bible in John 12, Mark 14, and Mathew 26.
3 separate, slightly different statements from Jesus that poor will always exist. Yet the U.S. Gov't (democrates especially from LBJ up thru the present leader of the Executive branch) say that government can eliminate poverty.
So, who is correct ?
Capitalism = a system in which the land, factories, etc. used in making goods are owned and operated privately for profit.
Socialism = any of various systems in which the means of producing goods are publically owned, with all people sharing in the work and the goods produced.
Socialism takes on the premise that profit is bad because only a few share in the profits of companies. Marx felt it was better to eliminate profit for few and spread it around for all.
If one guy wants to jump off a thousand foot cliff and another does not you can always count on some idiot saying you should split the difference and jump off at 500 feet. Both sides are wrong? Only if you're not paying attention.
No, Guest. Marx felt that the government would take over profit and distribute it as he saw fit. There is a huge difference between the liberal utopia you are describing and the authoritarian reality of Marx's design.
When things go right (aka we get bin Laden): "THANKS TO OUR DEAR LEADER BARRY!"
When things go wrong (aka the economy sucks after 1 year in office and you've controlled congress for years) "IT IS BUSH'S FAULT!"
When things go wrong (aka the economy still sucks after 2 year in office and you control the Congress too): "IT IS BUSH'S FAULT!"
When things go wrong (aka the economy still sucks and we still don't have a budget and you still control the Senate): "It's everyone's fault."
Bullshit. No it's not.
You are ignoring so many things that make your statement about Japan incorrect. First, lets start with Toyota brand loyalty which is much larger than that of Honda. Toyota is a symbol of Japanese manufacturing. Then add to that fact that there are many cars in Japan that do not have US counterparts-at least at the start. ( The Cube for example, and the Saloon). Second of copurse is the fact that the Japanese have other transportation options we don't so in Japan the purchase of a car is for a different purpose than simply go to/from work.
Then of course, there is the weight tax scheme which makes a car more expensive the longer you own it. ( Americans in Japan generall don't see this because they are essentially exempt from it as they can buy used cars much more cheaply than Citizen Sato can).
Finally, even if one could import US cars freely-there is a strong bias against US cars among Japanese. Just ask my SO ( she hates our Ford). European cars do much better than American ones if you have the yen.
Skippy,
The infiltration of the US auto industry was a plan that Japanese auto makers began around 1970. They did just as I explained they did. Massive subsidy for their product to flood the US market, causing their cars to be sold here at a fraction of their actual price. And that after cross-ocean shipping. Japanese auto makers cornered a good deal of the US market with an artificial and government-sponsored suppression of prices. They not only admitted it, but in talks with South Korea in the late 1970s touted it as the way to leverage imports into the US domestic market. Which the South Koreans have copied with steel and machine products.
All of the legislation, tax rules, and import restrictions you mention do not refute my point, they prove it.
I'm not talking about the US- I'mtalking about buying cars in Japan.
Skippy, let's talk reality for a second. As of Dec, 2010 the tax cut became Obama's. Additionally he doubled down with a 2% cut in FICA. Looking at the chart below we see the Bush tax cuts actually had little effect on the deficits as compared to those since 2008. Looking at the chart we could project, and many were, that Bus would have balanced the budget in ~1+ additional budget years. That would have been faster than even Clinton. all of that while he was fighting those two costly wars you claim, getting us out of a recession, and implementing the other costly internal defense measure.
The housing bubble burst and everything went out the window. We lurch from one economic bubble to the next. It's called the business cycle. It's not called the Dem/repub policy cycle by the apolitical economists.
Finally, the chart you showed means that every dollar spent over available revenues is tallied against the Bush tax cuts, even though they may have had zero relationship. But looking at the below chart again, the difference is not the tax cuts, but lessening of revenues. Clearly that did not happen due to the Bush/Obama tax cuts but due to the recession. So that chart is not only wrong, but hypocritical, and your comments are hyperbolic.
That one's worth a sheesh, Skippy.
Skippy, BTW, please do the math. Scary 10 year numbers, $3T for the effect of war as you phrase it) average to a fraction of the annual Obama deficits. Add in the Bush tax cuts on an annual basis, $400B, and we get an even larger fraction of the Obama deficit. But, when its all calculated we are still left with ~$1T in Obama deficits. Now that's scary!
No matter how hard you try to blame others, its still Obama's policies that are causing the huge rise in deficits/debt.
BTW, Ezra Klein is a political hack, but at least not as bad as Paul Krugman.
Ewok, it is very difficult to remove politics from economics. Political policies can have tremendous impacts upon economies. Just look at Greece and the other PIIGs.
We can thank Dear Leader for this announcement, too. I'm glad he's acting like an adult over the debt limit situation.
<span>The last time the United States was placed on review for downgrade was in 1996, by Moody's.</span>
Gee, who was in the White House in 1996? Hmmm....
No it is not- it's worth a "do it again" for not doing your home work. First of all the Heritage statistic is flawed and it's also distorted by TARP and the stimulus. Repeal of the Bush tax cuts in 2010 would have at least stopped the bleeding. Unfortunately for the nation, he failed to recognize that only he wanted compromise and GOP wanted extortion. Having gotten away with it once they are more than happy to try it again.
Nor do you even look carefully at the sources of lost revenue. Sure the loss of revenue happened due to the recession- but you ignore the fact that the GOP nor their corporate masters are doing any thing to fix that problem. The thugs have been very effective in convincing people that a default will not be a major market catastrophe- when it will be. And more importantly that's exactly what it seems most of you want- because hating Obama is more important than hating people who want deliberately trash a weakly recovering economy. What you haven't answered is how would the economy be any better with McCain in office and even more massive failures of companies and people.
What you also don't get is that the normal "business cycle" has changed- and even if there is a recovery- it will be a jobless one. The efforts to screw American workers are paying off and even when the economy comes back t he real level of wages and economic benefit for most Americans will be less than 10 years ago. But today's GOP does not care about that so long as rich people get to become even richer.
Skippy,
Your use of the language of class warfare speaks to the bankruptcy, literally and figuratively, of your argument. Save it for Hugo Chavez Appreciation Day.
Oh to hell with it.
I strongly encourage you to read "To big to fail" - it is about to happen again. I have no desire to be a part of your Galtian vision for this country. It's wrong, both economically and morally too. I 'd rather be a class warrior than to be part of an evil vision of this country.
And spare me the lectures on how "Christian" it is to cheat people. That's wrong too.
A longer response to you here.
Post a Comment