Does anyone have a plan for long term employment recovery?

[tjvh]

?

The Obama administration can simply do a census recount.

 

[oldfart]

I've read "The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money" and Keynes never taught anything close to what we've been doing.

He did say that short term debt was fine, so long as you paid it down during recoveries. It's all part of his "countercyclical fiscal policies" He taught that in a bad turn the government could aid the recovery with spending (something that has since been proven).

The problem we have now has nothing to do with that notion. It's that we have continued to spend like blondes on 5th Avenue when the economy was good. Wringing up massive debt when we should have been paying it down.

I found the General Theory almost unreadable without some help, which is why most people actually get the theory via John Hicks.

I would agree that the anti-Keynesian policy that created the deficit problem was the insistence of policy makers on the Right to cut taxes rather than reduce the debt when there was a surplus. As long as they raid the Treasury for the benefit of rich people, everyone else is doomed to pay a high price in inflation, unemployment, and low growth eternally. I suspect it never occurred to Keynes, who viewed himself as saving capitalism from violent socialist revolution, that western economies would destroy themselves through the cupidity and greed of most affluent of the monied classes.

 

[Wyatt earp]

A lot of the jobs that people with little education or skills that used to pay decent wages have gone to places like China.

Obama's tax incentives should help with that but, while it may seem or be a drop in the bucket, consumers can have a say too.

I just cancelled insurance we had with MetLife because they have a foreign call center.

Someone said we should end certain regulations. That won't do a thing except hurt the little guy. All you have to do is look at profits posted by those corporations to know that. That whole "job killing regulations" lie perpetrated by the Rs has been shown to be nothing more than a dog whistle non-issue.

We all know that President Obama has created jobs every month since being in office. We also know that Rs have filibustered every single jobs bill and have never introduced a jobs bill themselves.

Having all of congress, both sides of congress working toward a mutual goal would surely be a big help.

1. where are the jobs Obama created, you have links?
2. The Democrats did have all 3 branches and what did they do? pass Obama care, gave rise to the tea party and lost the house in 2010.
3. Wall street is doing fine, main street is hurting because of the Democrats policys. the rich do not want to invest, due to an uncertain future with Obama care, Obama wanting to raise the federal minimum wage, ect..ect... They are just holding onto the money they have and socking it away in offshore accounts.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

western economies would destroy themselves through the cupidity and greed of most affluent of the monied classes.

Most of the non-affluent get free health care education housing food stamps welfare and Social Security!! Thats greed?????????????????
Recently, Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, testified before the House Budget Committee on the growth of the 10-largest “means tested” federal programs that serve people who qualify by various definitions of poverty.


Here’s what Haskins reported: From 1980 to 2011, annual spending on these programs grew from $126 billion to $626 billion (all figures in inflation-adjusted “2011 dollars” dividing this by the number of people below the government poverty line, spending went from $4,300 per poor person in 1980 to $13,000 in 2011. In 1962, spending per person in poverty was $516.


Haskins’s list includes Medicaid, food stamps (now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP), the earned-income tax credit (a wage subsidy for some low-income workers), and Pell Grants. There are other, smaller programs dedicated to the poor. A report from the Congressional Research Service estimated the total number at 83; Haskins puts the additional spending on programs below the 10 largest at about $210 billion. The total of all programs for the poor exceeds $800 billion.

To be sure, some spending reflects the effects of the Great Recession. But most doesn’t. As Haskins shows, spending on the poor has increased steadily for decades. Consider food stamps. There are now about 45 million Americans receiving an average of $287 a month in food stamps, up from 26 million in 2007, according to a new Congressional Budget Office report. But the number in 2007, when the economy was healthy, was roughly 50 percent higher than in 2001.

And programs for the poor pale beside middle-class transfers. The giants here are Social Security at $725 billion in 2011 and Medicare at $560 billion. Combine all this spending -- programs for the poor, Social Security and Medicare — and the total is nearly $2.1 trillion. That was about 60 percent of 2011 non-interest federal spending of $3.4 trillion.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I would agree that the anti-Keynesian policy that created the deficit problem was the insistence of policy makers on the Right

Folks on the right have introduced 30 Balanced Budget Amendments since Jefferson's first to make deficits illegal!!
Newt's passed the House and fell one vote short in the Senate. Democrats killed all 30 Amendments that the right introduced and fought for!!

 

[Wyatt earp]

western economies would destroy themselves through the cupidity and greed of most affluent of the monied classes.

Most of the non-affluent get free health care education housing food stamps welfare and Social Security!! Thats greed????????????????? How stupid are you???

Recently, Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, testified before the House Budget Committee on the growth of the 10-largest “means tested” federal programs that serve people who qualify by various definitions of poverty.


Here’s what Haskins reported: From 1980 to 2011, annual spending on these programs grew from $126 billion to $626 billion (all figures in inflation-adjusted “2011 dollars”); dividing this by the number of people below the government poverty line, spending went from $4,300 per poor person in 1980 to $13,000 in 2011. In 1962, spending per person in poverty was $516.


Haskins’s list includes Medicaid, food stamps (now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP), the earned-income tax credit (a wage subsidy for some low-income workers), and Pell Grants. There are other, smaller programs dedicated to the poor. A report from the Congressional Research Service estimated the total number at 83; Haskins puts the additional spending on programs below the 10 largest at about $210 billion. The total of all programs for the poor exceeds $800 billion.

To be sure, some spending reflects the effects of the Great Recession. But most doesn’t. As Haskins shows, spending on the poor has increased steadily for decades. Consider food stamps. There are now about 45 million Americans receiving an average of $287 a month in food stamps, up from 26 million in 2007, according to a new Congressional Budget Office report. But the number in 2007, when the economy was healthy, was roughly 50 percent higher than in 2001.

And programs for the poor pale beside middle-class transfers. The giants here are Social Security at $725 billion in 2011 and Medicare at $560 billion. Combine all this spending -- programs for the poor, Social Security and Medicare — and the total is nearly $2.1 trillion. That was about 60 percent of 2011 non-interest federal spending of $3.4 trillion.

I thought this was supposed to be the no flame zone? not that I disagree with this post. but what the heck? I thought we were supposed to be polite here?

 

[Underhill]

1) Make unions illegal ( 10 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

2) make minimum wage illegal ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

3) end business taxation; especially tax incentives to off-shore jobs ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

4) make inflation illegal ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose


5) make Federal debt illegal( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

6) send illegal workers home(8 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

7) Pass Balanced Budget Amendment to Constitution( 3 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

8) cut pay of government workers in half( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

9) Make health insurance competition legal( 6 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

10) end needless business regulations ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

11) restrict Federal spending to 15% of GNP( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

12) support unlimited free trade( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

13) reduced unemployment compensation, welfare, food stamps, medicaid.( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

14) privatize education, social security ( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

15) end payroll taxes ( 1 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

Since Democrats always oppose wisdom and common sense the only serious option is to make them illegal as the Constitution intended.

Brilliant list.

Brilliant response.

How does a person respond to someone who simply pulls numbers like that out of his ass?

 

[Underhill]

I would agree that the anti-Keynesian policy that created the deficit problem was the insistence of policy makers on the Right

Folks on the right have introduced 30 Balanced Budget Amendments since Jefferson's first to make deficits illegal!!
Newt's passed the House and fell one vote short in the Senate. Democrats killed all 30 Amendments that the right introduced and fought for!!

So who would enforce a federal balanced budget amendment?

 

[AmazonTania]

Comparing this country to Greece puts on display for all to see that you have no idea what you are talking about.

Apparently, this sequester thing that everyone is bitching about is suppose to delay economic growth, stall job growth, among all other apocalyptic things everyone is so afraid of.

If $85 billion is enough to tank a $16 Trillion dollar economy, then you really are just like Greece.

 

[AmazonTania]

Let me see if I have this straight. You get your statistics from a second-hand source without checking them in the original source, because you "like" the second-hand source. But you don't like the "look" of the Eurostat site. And you "know" that US government statistics are cooked.

Where did you get your statistics training again? And have you ever read any of the methodological notes on any of these websites?

Google Finance is not a secondary website. It records most market and economic data for free and usually something to go to just for references. Euro Stat just has a lot of information that is not relevant to me.

 

[Sallow]

?

I have a plan!

• End the wars and bring everyone home
• Close the over 800 US bases around the world
• Cut the defense budget in half
• Issue government infrastructure construction projects across the country
• Subsidize matching funds for state and local governments wanting to do the same
• Provide tax rebates for companies manufacturing their products in the US
• Increase tariffs on companies manufacturing their products outside the US
• Use the remaining savings from defense cuts to pay down the deficit

That outta do it!

Nothing gets more American's back to work faster than the construction industry.

Add in:
-Invest in both adult and children education. Providing funding for anyone displaced by UE.
-Start imposing low limits on H1Bs.
-Introduce taxation for companies doing foreign hires. They must pay the tax revenue per worker lost by shipping jobs overseas.
-Companies with more than 70% of their workforce overseas would lose their status as an American company.
-Fund the IRS. Allow it to recapture liquidity from tax cheats.
-Impose a surtax on Americans with foreign bank accounts.
-Sunset Eisenhower tax incentives for foreign investment.
-Sunset all oil company tax breaks and loopholes.

 

[oldfart]

I thought this was supposed to be the no flame zone? not that I disagree with this post. but what the heck? I thought we were supposed to be polite here?

I think that by consensus we can call stupid ideas stupid. We just shouldn't call people stupid. Everyone gives Ed wide latitude because he is our pet troll. Sometimes he even has a good post, just don't expect it on a regular basis!

Jamie

 

[oldfart]

Let me see if I have this straight. You get your statistics from a second-hand source without checking them in the original source, because you "like" the second-hand source. But you don't like the "look" of the Eurostat site. And you "know" that US government statistics are cooked.

Where did you get your statistics training again? And have you ever read any of the methodological notes on any of these websites?

Google Finance is not a secondary website. It records most market and economic data for free and usually something to go to just for references. Euro Stat just has a lot of information that is not relevant to me.

I guess there is no law that says you have to know anything about the data to comment on it. Google Finance is the epitome of a secondary data source, it collects no data independently, like the Federal Reserve, BLS, or Dow Jones Corporation and it generates no statistical models like CBO or Wharton Econometrics does. It reports.

I don't use Eurostat much, but it seems to be pretty straightforward to navigate. If I were arguing European economic policies as you were, I would at least take the time to be able to look up the data. Or find it in OECD.

And I guess it's easy to dismiss most of the statistical profession because you don't understand or care to learn what they do. But it is intellectually lazy and dishonest to pretend that you know what you are talking about when you do it.

 

[OnePercenter]

Raise the minimum wage to $23.50/hr. The rest will fall in place.

 

[Sallow]

Raise the minimum wage to $23.50/hr. The rest will fall in place.

That probably should be rated on a regional basis.

It does not cost the same to live in Montana as it does to live in NYC.

 

[Rozman]

Minimum wage should be at least $25.00 per hr.
Tax rate should be 92% for anyone making $60,000.00 or more per year.
Anyone making less their tax rate should be 0%
Capital gains should be taxed at 30%
Anyone with $100,000.00 in their IRA or 401K Plan will be able to keep it.Anything over will be transferred to the treasury.
Anyone who wants to go to college will be given a grant of $150,000.00
More if they want to get a liberal arts degree or to learn the art of making puppets.

I think this will be an excellent start to our recovery.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Raise the minimum wage to $23.50/hr. The rest will fall in place.

better yet, cut all prices by 96%. We could all drive super cars then!! I could afford several!

A liberal lacks the IQ to know there is no free lunch!!

 

[OnePercenter]

Raise the minimum wage to $23.50/hr. The rest will fall in place.

better yet, cut all prices by 96%. We could all drive super cars then!! I could afford several!

A liberal lacks the IQ to know there is no free lunch!!

Raising wages and Social Security benefits to match cost of living is a 'free lunch'?

 

[OnePercenter]

Raise the minimum wage to $23.50/hr. The rest will fall in place.

That probably should be rated on a regional basis.

It does not cost the same to live in Montana as it does to live in NYC.

No it doesn't. But you don't have the same amount of or quality of services either.

 

[AmazonTania]

I guess there is no law that says you have to know anything about the data to comment on it. Google Finance is the epitome of a secondary data source, it collects no data independently, like the Federal Reserve, BLS, or Dow Jones Corporation and it generates no statistical models like CBO or Wharton Econometrics does. It reports.

I don't know what you think Google Finance does, but collecting independent data is exactly what it does. It collects data in Real Time, not reporting data. If it didn't no Broker, nor investor would ever use it. You probably would be better off if you've learned to use it.

I don't use Eurostat much, but it seems to be pretty straightforward to navigate. If I were arguing European economic policies as you were, I would at least take the time to be able to look up the data. Or find it in OECD.

Where I look up my data is irrelevant, so long as it is accurate. Google Finance is one of the most trusted data sources on the web, used by Financial Bloggers, Economist and Investors. It's not my fault you don't like that data which refutes yours.

And I guess it's easy to dismiss most of the statistical profession because you don't understand or care to learn what they do. But it is intellectually lazy and dishonest to pretend that you know what you are talking about when you do it.

No one questioned anything. I merely told you all the changes the Government has done with it's statistical data, and explained why it should be taken with a grain of salt. I know all the changes and adaptions institutions have done to all of their statistically data over the years. I'm a stock broker, and it's my job to know this. Otherwise, I cannot give accurate advice to anyone. If you want to be played for a sap, that is your right. Me on the other hand, I know what I'm doing.