Tax cuts + spending != a healthy economy.

[Warriorbird]

Republicans and the US economy.

[Back]

Originally posted by Tromp
I don't even know what this economic model is called but the immediate short term looks scary and the long term effect is worse.

Heh, there is a name for it. FUBAR, or, Thanks for the debt, grandpa.

[Gan]

Atlanteax's detail on Venezuela and China are spot on and why I mentioned them. His Russia example is not exactly how I picture it, but an interesting angle none the less.

Russia (cold war era) proved that absolute power corrupts, and when you put a small group of people in the position to control a nation's natural resources you're going to to reap more sorrow than economic freedom and success.

I also left out Iran and Iraq who had/have nationalized natural resources... such shining examples of what happens when you give such things to governments.

I'm not saying democracy and its free market economy is the utopian example of society, its just the best one that the human race has found so far that promotes individual freedom, civilized growth, and scientific growth.

[Warriorbird]

You guys seem to be attacking Backlash's misplaced views on nationalizing industry rather than the original post.

And I'd still love to see some sources for how terrible Venezuela and China are doing.

Snakes on an Airplane! They're not there, really, they can't be!

[Edited on 9-23-2005 by Warriorbird]

[Back]

Yeah it really dosent have anything to do with the topic. I just like to throw into random posts.

[Seran]

Sure tax cuts sink money into a sluggish market, and that, if by itself were complimented by a balanced budget would halt inflation in it's tracks, but that isn't the case.

What we have here is a government budget that hasn't the money to fund it's own projects. That alone leads to an increasingly robust national debt. As our national debt grows, it undermines the value of our dollar against those countries, as the countries who own our debt in turn see a rise in their own currencies value.

It's been said, countless times, that the speculation in the oil futures market is the culprit for the disgusting price of oil. Is there a shortage? No. Are we in danger of a shortage? Possibly, but the chance is remote. Meanwhile, to make up for their own losses, traders continually bid higher and higher for future shipments, the fervor of which is often fueled by the possibility of terrorist attacks, the possibility of hurricanes knocking out major production. Can that cycle be stopped? Yes.

The increased cost of energy, and transportation increases the cost of all consumer items, and thus the CPI (or consumer price index) also takes a jump. Thus inflation rises in staggering amounts.

So, devaluation of domestic goods on a foreign level, increasing foreign debt, and the falling value of our own currency are all the cause of our economic woes.

At the top of all this, our brilliant commander and chief refuses to reverse the tax cuts that'd fuel the wholly UN-conservative rate of spending, thus driving us deeper in the hole.

Lot's of these things have been said by smarter people than me, and certainly smarter than you.

[Atlanteax]

Originally posted by Seran
Anyone wanna guess how long it'll take before we get a President who see's the truth behind that statement?

Does it take take an economics major to realize that what our country is doing will shortly lead us to disaster, especially when combined with the travesty (read: conspiracy) of oil futures?

I wonder how long you or I might last running amock with our personal debt, before our credit is taken away, and our purcheses are similairly revoked.

I'm concerned but not panicking.

Public debt as a % of GNP is still *low* despite a record-breaking large deficit. The debt % was higher during Vietnam.

So while I'm concerned that we have such excessive pending (Katrina + Rita are short-term spending packages, and Iraq is "short-term" in the regard of 5-7 years), I'm not that concerned as our Economy can handle it at this moment.

.

Additionally, interest rates are low and will continue to be low, as compared to the rest of the world, the US economy is significantly more stable. Nevermind that it is considered to be a "bad year" when the US economy only grows 2-3%.

Foreign investment is continuing to shift from China and Europe into the US, and as long that continues to happen, interest rates in the US will remain perpetually low (on a relative basis).

With that in mind, servicing the Debt should not be as financially damaging as it would be with in a higher interest rate environment.

Once the Iraq situation gets under control and some troop drawdown occurs (while still maintaining a presence in Iraq that is paying for its own Reconstruction with Oil revenues), we'll start seeing the Debt decrease significantly over a period of time as it did during the Clinton years (who benefited from inheriting Reagan's economic reforms).

Also, in the ideal Iraqi environment (relatively stable, and significant oil production), those Iraqi oil dollars will be spend on US companies doing the Reconstruction work (a bit of a payback there) as well as helping stabilize the international oil market supply-wise, and oil drops back down below $40 a barrel.

[Back]

Originally posted by Atlanteax
Once the Iraq situation gets under control and some troop drawdown occurs (while still maintaining a presence in Iraq that is paying for its own Reconstruction with Oil revenues), we'll start seeing the Debt decrease significantly over a period of time as it did during the Clinton years (who benefited from inheriting Reagan's economic reforms).

Also, in the ideal Iraqi environment (relatively stable, and significant oil production), those Iraqi oil dollars will be spend on US companies doing the Reconstruction work (a bit of a payback there) as well as helping stabilize the international oil market supply-wise, and oil drops back down below $40 a barrel.

Thats the biggest crock of shit I’ve read in a long time. Benefitted from Reaganomics? HAHAH. You mean cleaned up the mess.

Oh, and brilliant plan to boost the economy. Bomb another country then charge them to rebuild it. Brilliant.

[Gan]

Actually anyone with any economic education knows that any fiscal or monetary policy that is enacted by the fed or by the government takes at least 3 to 6 years for it to be felt by the economy as a whole. Apply that to Clinton's supposed 'years of good fortune' and you'll know why he's not given credit for the growth from the Regan years, except for those looking to wave the Democrat flag.

[Back]

Originally posted by Ganalon
Actually anyone with any economic education knows that any fiscal or monetary policy that is enacted by the fed or by the government takes at least 3 to 6 years for it to be felt by the economy as a whole. Apply that to Clinton's supposed 'years of good fortune' and you'll know why he's not given credit for the growth from the Regan years, except for those looking to wave the Democrat flag.

Republican doublespeak for if it was good, it was us, if it was bad it was them. Whatever dude. Not buying.