Economics Thread

sturg33 said:
You've been slurping him for a month now in your White Knight mission to tell us how scary the orange man is.

Posting raw numbers out of a recession is useless.

It was the worst recovery in US history
Click to expand...


Oh really. How many recoveries after recessions were followed by 10 straight years of economic growth and 95 straight months of job creation?




Also the only thing I recall posting positive about Obama that could in any way be considered an opinion is that the bailout saved 3 million jobs. I am sorry if posting factual data doesnt jive with the narrative you push. That doesnt make me Pro-Obama. I am pro-fact.
 
Last edited:
the tone deafness of individuals looking only at their finances and not regarding what is happening around them, next door, next desk, next stairclimber is astonishing>

The Wall Street Journal
@WSJ
Auto debt is up. Student debt is up.
Unsecured loans are back.
The American middle class is drowning.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/famili...iddle-class-11564673734?mod=e2tw&page=1&pos=1

and now the wall - with money illegally confiscated from military funding.
Who knew Mexico wouldn't put up a dime
$3.5B with a B.


Take a second to understand what that $3.5B circulating in the national economy.
 
https://earther.gizmodo.com/trumps-energy-department-swoops-in-to-save-us-from-tyra-1837889616


Though the energy efficiency rules were signed into law by Bush and had bipartisan support, they became one of the many tiresome flashpoints for right-wing outrage during the Obama administration, with Republicans trying to paint the issue as socialist big government sticking it to the working man. That didn’t stick—the National Electrical Manufacturers Association told the Times that they estimate 84 percent of “general purpose” lighting fixtures will use CFLs or LEDs by the end of 2019—but apparently that Republican elephant never forgets a grudge.

“It makes zero sense to eliminate energy-saving lightbulb standards that will save households money on electricity bills and cut climate change emissions,” Appliance Standards Awareness Project executive director Andrew deLaski told the Washington Post in a statement. “Instead, the Trump administration is siding with manufacturers that want to keep selling outdated, energy-wasting lightbulbs.”


With a creative cooking of the books that $14B per year savings could pay for 4 Mexico Walls
 
I’m a little confused as to how sturg’s giving Obama **** for a weak recovery, yet apparently believes that the bailouts were the wrong move. What would the recession/recovery have looked like without intervention? With millions more out of work and pervasive uncertainty across the financial sector?
 
I dont believe we should reward irresponsibility with bailouts.

The fed has created a monster that we cant seem to roll back. It's why you have your massive wealth inequality and it's why we have so much debt across the board.
 
sturg33 said:
I dont believe we should reward irresponsibility with bailouts.

The fed has created a monster that we cant seem to roll back. It's why you have your massive wealth inequality and it's why we have so much debt across the board.
Click to expand...

I’d say there was, er, a little more going into wealth inequality than Fed policy.

Whatever the downside of the bailouts was, my point is that you’re making a factually inconsistent case. What I’m asking is whether or not the post-Great-Recession recovery would have been better had the bailouts not happened.
 
Julio3000 said:
I’d say there was, er, a little more going into wealth inequality than Fed policy.

Whatever the downside of the bailouts was, my point is that you’re making a factually inconsistent case. What I’m asking is whether or not the post-Great-Recession recovery would have been better had the bailouts not happened.
Click to expand...

massive fiscal stimulus was the correct policy and Obama got it broadly right

the bailouts of the auto and banking industries were a particular aspect of the fiscal stimulus details of which could be thoughtfully debated by thoughtful people
 
I think there’s plenty of room to debate the relative merits of the bailouts, in each sector. I’m not making an across the board case for that, just pointing out that it’s downright silly to criticize Obama for bailouts while simultaneously criticizing him for a weak recovery. I’d like sturg to explain to me how the recovery would have been better if several major banks and most of the domestic auto industry been allowed to fail.

I agree with striker that Obama (and W) basically took the same fairly moderate technocratic approach, guided by the same experts, which also would have been largely the same regardless of who won the 08 election. Personally, I think they undershot the Keynesian stimulus aspect and went too soft on the banks, but I’d be curious to hear the case that they could have let it all burn and gotten better results.
 
They could have nationalized the banks that needed bailouts. But the "socialism kills people" chorus would not have liked that.

They also had the option of nationalizing GM with the intention of privatizing it later.

I agree that they chose a middle of the road course.

In the UK the government became part-owner of the banks that accepted rescue funds and imposed restrictions on executive pay and other matters.
 
Last edited:
I dont believe in bailouts either. Now if these industries were bankrupted by criminal actions maybe I would consider it after the criminals have been convicted. Yhat said, GWB started the bailouts and BOTH McCain and Obama were going to do it. Must be some kind if derangement syndrome to blame Obama when it was supported by every Republican who would have been President.




One thing we could have done is made drugs legal and allow banks to take money from drugs. Banks laundering cartel money helped keep banks afloat in the second half of 2008 as banks lacked liquid assets to operate.
 
Are there more 'experts' who are going to predict the doom of the UK because of Brexit? How about the recession in the US because of the trade war with China?
 
Julio3000 said:
I’d say there was, er, a little more going into wealth inequality than Fed policy.

Whatever the downside of the bailouts was, my point is that you’re making a factually inconsistent case. What I’m asking is whether or not the post-Great-Recession recovery would have been better had the bailouts not happened.
Click to expand...

I've learned over time that trying to engage you in a substantive debate is a waste of time... as your go to move is to ignore the entirety of the post and nitpick on a random semantic to change the subject.

As far as bailouts... we should have let it burn down. It would have been much more painful in the short term, but we'd be in a healthier long term position.

Instead, 10 years later, we are in an unimaginable debt bubble. Not just the national debt, but corporate and consumer debt. This was allowable bc the fed went to crazy town by manipulating markets and asset prices. The entire global central banking system has done it. We have major countries with negative interest rates and the US is close. There is no apparent way out of this until a massive economic crisis that will make 2008 look like peanuts.

I know I know... you'll believe it when you see it.
 
China suspending tariffs. They are out of bullets and are suffering.

Trade wars are easy to win.
 
nsacpi said:
the smarter strategy for them is to do nothing

rope-a-dope
Click to expand...

Yourr a smart man. You have read the pork inflation and the nationalization of banks. China has some major issues right now and with some manufacutring leaving they know they have to deal before it gets worse. Xi could be assasinated at any moment.
 
It is complete ignorance to suggest China isn't hurting right now.

Bit so is America. The massive tax increase imposed on us has put the breaks on growth
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top