fiscal conservatives should remain concerned re the deficits removing monies from the market resulting in lost potential.
Posted by: OhioOrrin at July 25, 2006 09:14 AM
C'mon, everybody! Chant it with me! Screechy Hillary for President! Screechy Hillary for President! For when you don't get enough nagging at home! :p
Posted by: Bret Helm at July 25, 2006 09:28 AM
Unfortunately, we cannot rely on any liberal for any true understanding of the economy, foreign policy, or any thing of true consequence.
I always figured a liberal was either a) a person who has allowed emotion to dictate their opinion and has not fully thought out the issue; b) a person that feels that people exercising their God given rights is the most dangerous event in the world and therefore government needs to be used and put in place to "protect people from themselves"; c) a person so concerned with personal aggrandizement and power that they feel that only they can run the world/country and if only "greedy warmongering racists" would be eradicated then the world would be a utopia; or d) they are people that do not live in a rationale world because they are afraid of living a moral and god fearing life because they view mankind as gods i.e. Marxist Leninist political theory.
Sorry, I rambled.
Posted by: Don Dudley at July 25, 2006 09:39 AM
It takes a democrat to raise your children to be dependant upon the government for food, school, morals, and existence.
Question - If democrats didn't believe in abortion would there be more democrats? How would the unborn vote if they could?
Hilary looks scarier than screaming Howard Dean did when she gets all excited and raises her voice, much like Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi.
Posted by: dl at July 25, 2006 10:31 AM
You forgot Oil prices, those are grea... oh, That's right, Bush's international policy (like WAR)have caused a huge hike in prices.
Posted by: Dan at July 25, 2006 10:52 AM
slightly off topic - but very funny.....
http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20060724-111915-6219r.htm
Posted by: Kahn at July 25, 2006 11:15 AM
does krugman still have a job?
Posted by: OhioOrrin at July 25, 2006 11:16 AM
How many times do we have to go through this?
Bush's economic policies created the deficit. He took the economy from record surpluses to record deficits. Cutting the deficit in half still leaves a huge deficit which, given that we are already at full employment, we can't simply 'grow' our way out of. This remaining deficit is still Bush's creation, and is projected to grow in the near and long term.
The fact that you would brag about this situation shows just how desperate you are for something, anything, to praise Bush for. Sad, truly sad.
Posted by: steve at July 25, 2006 11:46 AM
Matt, I heard a great comment from someone on television who stated, " the dems can only spin 5.6 GDP growth so much, they can only spin 4.6 percent unemployment so much".
Posted by: james allegro at July 25, 2006 11:50 AM
I am monitoring votes by Democrats and Republicans on the issues of illegal immigration. People that come to our country illegally should return to their country of origin. We do NOT want to pay for their unemployment, nor for their health care.We do NOT want them to break our crippled Social Security System. We do NOT want them taking jobs from our veterans and our young. OUR votes will be determined by YOUR vote on this issue!"
Posted by: Janette at July 25, 2006 12:11 PM
Dan,
Democrats and liberals [progressives] are responsible for the high oil, gas, heating, and energy prices.
Liberal Democrats have blocked American efforts to produce American oil and gas. Liberal Democrats have blocked American efforts to produce more refineries, nuclear generating sites, and the use of coal!
Liberals Democrats have caused more American jobs and companies to go to other nations -- along with the wages, taxes, and economic growth. Liberal Democrats have increased our trade deficit and reduced the value of the dollar.
AAR
Posted by: AAR at July 25, 2006 12:15 PM
Democrats Clueless About The Economy
Getting a little wordy? You could have stopped with:
Democrats Clueless
Posted by:
Reverend Scaramonga at July 25, 2006 01:01 PM
Rev,
When did the highest rates of forclosure, bankruptcy, personal debt, coupled with lowest rates of savings and stagnant real wage growth make for a healthy economy?
Posted by: Third Eye Open at July 25, 2006 02:09 PM
TEO,
It doesn’t and that’s not the case now.
Go away, troll.
Posted by: Bane of Liberals' Existence at July 25, 2006 03:06 PM
When did the highest...
Get lost, troll.
Posted by:
Reverend Scaramonga at July 25, 2006 03:08 PM
Bane,
We have been over this before...
"According to the National Bureau of Economic Analysis, this expansion started in November 2001 when the average hourly pay of non-supervisory workers was $14.70.This figure was $16.62 in May of 2006 for an increase of 13.06%. Over the same period, the inflation gage increased from 177.4 to 202.5, or an increase of 14.15%. Therefore, wages for non-supervisory employees have decreased a little over 1% since this expansion began."
"the unemployment rate dropped below 5% in December 2005, signaling "full employment". Has the decrease in labor supply increased wages? No. In December 2005 the average hourly wage of non-supervisory employees was $16.35. In May that number was $16.62 for an increase of 1.65%. Over the same period, the overall inflation measure increased from 196.8 to 202.5 or an increase of 2.89%. Therefore, since the economy hit "full employment" wages have decreased 1.25%."
Bankruptcies are at an all time high, even before the rush in the begining of the year.
Personal debt is at all times high.
we are dis-saving...that means we are borrowing from somewhere.
Posted by: Third Eye Open at July 25, 2006 03:47 PM
Posted by: Bane of Liberals' Existence at July 25, 2006 04:04 PM
We have been over this before
Still trolling? Get lost.
Posted by:
Reverend Scaramonga at July 25, 2006 05:10 PM
Our economy grew last year - more than the entire Chinese economy. Their whole bag - less than our growth alone.
Posted by: Kahn at July 25, 2006 05:56 PM
YEEEAAAAH TEEEEEEOOOOOOOO!!!
GOOOO AAAAWAAAAAY TROOOLL!!!!!
Jeremiah
Posted by: Jeremiah at July 25, 2006 06:27 PM
Kahn,
That's exactly my point. With productivity sky-high, the markets chugging along, corporate profits breaking the banks, and full employment, why the heck haven't wages responded in kind?
Why are the average Joe's working harder, yet getting less pay after inflation?
Posted by: Third Eye Open at July 25, 2006 08:04 PM
That's exactly my point
You don't have a point other than the one on top of your head. Get lost, troll.
Posted by:
Reverend Scaramonga at July 25, 2006 08:14 PM
Why did you limit your observation?
There is no need to include the words, "About The Economy", in your headline.
Posted by: LaMano at July 25, 2006 08:14 PM
It's absurd that pro-bush people do not even acknowledge the impact of the housing market on the economy. Real wages barely increased, but borrowing against an investment did.
Let's see what happens when the housing market cools. This 'great' economy was fueled by consumers spending debt on their HOUSES!!!!!!!!!! It wasn't a stupid tax cut or bush, it was the natural market.
Blogs for bush knows the economy? HOw about that recent post to "sell of your oil stocks!" Tankers are just sitting in the ocean and oil will be at 50 a barrel. Chit, you know all know as much about the economy as whatever other pro-bush material you read tells you.
The economy is not liberal or conservative, therefore, it can be understood by members of either idealogy.
Posted by: grosseMann at July 25, 2006 11:40 PM
It's absurd that pro-bush people...
Would you like a nice French cheese with that whine?
Posted by:
Reverend Scaramonga at July 26, 2006 10:21 AM
"why the heck haven't wages responded in kind?"
mmmmm, how about the need for the almighty bottom line to be bigger and bigger... greed... or maybe, it's Clinton recovery time...
Your hero, Bill Clinton, was given the gift of an economy on the upswing. He managed to kill that and pass on an economy that George W. is still improving on...
Posted by: Joan at July 26, 2006 11:20 PM
And what, exactly , is the Lib solution to what they claim is the Bush economic disaster?
Cut entitlement spending? PLEASE.... No arguments there. Is that your plan?
Raise taxes? As tax revenues are rising steadily, and as economists are in agreement that the tax cuts stimulated economic growth resulting in the record tax revenues we are seeing now, can you explain why that would be a good thing for the country? After all, Bush implemented John F. Kennedy's tax cut strategy, even using Kennedy's actual media ads to promote it. So tell us what is wrong with it.
Slash military spending again? What a fine idea. Please expound on that. As a huge amount of our deficit now is the result of the combination of having to rebuild a grossly weakened military after the Clinton anti-military years and the costs of fighting terrorism post-9/11, it would be fascinating to see an economic plan which explains how to address these two problems without spending money.
Just curious. It just seems to me that all you guys do is sit around till someone else does something, and the complain about it. The economy is better? Not good enough---it's not perfect.
So what's your plan?
Or Shrillary's plan?
Or Kerry's plan?
Or Gore's plan?
Got a plan? Or just plan to sit around carping at everyone else's plan? Clinton's plan was to be in office when the R&D efforts enabled by the Reagan tax cuts started to result in a technological boom, while slashing military spending. What's yours? Is it just confiscating more money from those who have it to spread it around to those who don't?
Posted by:
Almiranta at July 26, 2006 11:22 PM
fiscal conservatives should remain concerned re the deficits removing monies from the market resulting in lost potential.
C'mon, everybody! Chant it with me! Screechy Hillary for President! Screechy Hillary for President! For when you don't get enough nagging at home! :p
Unfortunately, we cannot rely on any liberal for any true understanding of the economy, foreign policy, or any thing of true consequence.
I always figured a liberal was either a) a person who has allowed emotion to dictate their opinion and has not fully thought out the issue; b) a person that feels that people exercising their God given rights is the most dangerous event in the world and therefore government needs to be used and put in place to "protect people from themselves"; c) a person so concerned with personal aggrandizement and power that they feel that only they can run the world/country and if only "greedy warmongering racists" would be eradicated then the world would be a utopia; or d) they are people that do not live in a rationale world because they are afraid of living a moral and god fearing life because they view mankind as gods i.e. Marxist Leninist political theory.
Sorry, I rambled.
It takes a democrat to raise your children to be dependant upon the government for food, school, morals, and existence.
Question - If democrats didn't believe in abortion would there be more democrats? How would the unborn vote if they could?
Hilary looks scarier than screaming Howard Dean did when she gets all excited and raises her voice, much like Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi.
You forgot Oil prices, those are grea... oh, That's right, Bush's international policy (like WAR)have caused a huge hike in prices.
slightly off topic - but very funny.....
http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20060724-111915-6219r.htm
does krugman still have a job?
How many times do we have to go through this?
Bush's economic policies created the deficit. He took the economy from record surpluses to record deficits. Cutting the deficit in half still leaves a huge deficit which, given that we are already at full employment, we can't simply 'grow' our way out of. This remaining deficit is still Bush's creation, and is projected to grow in the near and long term.
The fact that you would brag about this situation shows just how desperate you are for something, anything, to praise Bush for. Sad, truly sad.
Matt, I heard a great comment from someone on television who stated, " the dems can only spin 5.6 GDP growth so much, they can only spin 4.6 percent unemployment so much".
I am monitoring votes by Democrats and Republicans on the issues of illegal immigration. People that come to our country illegally should return to their country of origin. We do NOT want to pay for their unemployment, nor for their health care.We do NOT want them to break our crippled Social Security System. We do NOT want them taking jobs from our veterans and our young. OUR votes will be determined by YOUR vote on this issue!"
Dan,
Democrats and liberals [progressives] are responsible for the high oil, gas, heating, and energy prices.
Liberal Democrats have blocked American efforts to produce American oil and gas. Liberal Democrats have blocked American efforts to produce more refineries, nuclear generating sites, and the use of coal!
Liberals Democrats have caused more American jobs and companies to go to other nations -- along with the wages, taxes, and economic growth. Liberal Democrats have increased our trade deficit and reduced the value of the dollar.
AAR
Democrats Clueless About The Economy
Getting a little wordy? You could have stopped with:
Democrats Clueless
Rev,
When did the highest rates of forclosure, bankruptcy, personal debt, coupled with lowest rates of savings and stagnant real wage growth make for a healthy economy?
TEO,
It doesn’t and that’s not the case now.
Go away, troll.
When did the highest...
Get lost, troll.
Bane,
We have been over this before...
"According to the National Bureau of Economic Analysis, this expansion started in November 2001 when the average hourly pay of non-supervisory workers was $14.70.This figure was $16.62 in May of 2006 for an increase of 13.06%. Over the same period, the inflation gage increased from 177.4 to 202.5, or an increase of 14.15%. Therefore, wages for non-supervisory employees have decreased a little over 1% since this expansion began."
"the unemployment rate dropped below 5% in December 2005, signaling "full employment". Has the decrease in labor supply increased wages? No. In December 2005 the average hourly wage of non-supervisory employees was $16.35. In May that number was $16.62 for an increase of 1.65%. Over the same period, the overall inflation measure increased from 196.8 to 202.5 or an increase of 2.89%. Therefore, since the economy hit "full employment" wages have decreased 1.25%."
Bankruptcies are at an all time high, even before the rush in the begining of the year.
Personal debt is at all times high.
we are dis-saving...that means we are borrowing from somewhere.
Bankruptcies are down. Foreclosure Rates remain low despite a recent surge as the housing market cools, down 10 basis points form one year ago. Earnings are up. Household income and savings are on the same trajectory they’ve been at since the 1980's.
I get tired of showing you for the fool you are. I'm not going to bother responding to your convoluted logic anymore, you're wrong; read up and stop wasting my time.
Go away, troll.
We have been over this before
Still trolling? Get lost.
Our economy grew last year - more than the entire Chinese economy. Their whole bag - less than our growth alone.
YEEEAAAAH TEEEEEEOOOOOOOO!!!
GOOOO AAAAWAAAAAY TROOOLL!!!!!
Jeremiah
Kahn,
That's exactly my point. With productivity sky-high, the markets chugging along, corporate profits breaking the banks, and full employment, why the heck haven't wages responded in kind?
Why are the average Joe's working harder, yet getting less pay after inflation?
That's exactly my point
You don't have a point other than the one on top of your head. Get lost, troll.
Why did you limit your observation?
There is no need to include the words, "About The Economy", in your headline.
It's absurd that pro-bush people do not even acknowledge the impact of the housing market on the economy. Real wages barely increased, but borrowing against an investment did.
Let's see what happens when the housing market cools. This 'great' economy was fueled by consumers spending debt on their HOUSES!!!!!!!!!! It wasn't a stupid tax cut or bush, it was the natural market.
Blogs for bush knows the economy? HOw about that recent post to "sell of your oil stocks!" Tankers are just sitting in the ocean and oil will be at 50 a barrel. Chit, you know all know as much about the economy as whatever other pro-bush material you read tells you.
The economy is not liberal or conservative, therefore, it can be understood by members of either idealogy.
It's absurd that pro-bush people...
Would you like a nice French cheese with that whine?
"why the heck haven't wages responded in kind?"
mmmmm, how about the need for the almighty bottom line to be bigger and bigger... greed... or maybe, it's Clinton recovery time...
Your hero, Bill Clinton, was given the gift of an economy on the upswing. He managed to kill that and pass on an economy that George W. is still improving on...
And what, exactly , is the Lib solution to what they claim is the Bush economic disaster?
Cut entitlement spending? PLEASE.... No arguments there. Is that your plan?
Raise taxes? As tax revenues are rising steadily, and as economists are in agreement that the tax cuts stimulated economic growth resulting in the record tax revenues we are seeing now, can you explain why that would be a good thing for the country? After all, Bush implemented John F. Kennedy's tax cut strategy, even using Kennedy's actual media ads to promote it. So tell us what is wrong with it.
Slash military spending again? What a fine idea. Please expound on that. As a huge amount of our deficit now is the result of the combination of having to rebuild a grossly weakened military after the Clinton anti-military years and the costs of fighting terrorism post-9/11, it would be fascinating to see an economic plan which explains how to address these two problems without spending money.
Just curious. It just seems to me that all you guys do is sit around till someone else does something, and the complain about it. The economy is better? Not good enough---it's not perfect.
So what's your plan?
Or Shrillary's plan?
Or Kerry's plan?
Or Gore's plan?
Got a plan? Or just plan to sit around carping at everyone else's plan? Clinton's plan was to be in office when the R&D efforts enabled by the Reagan tax cuts started to result in a technological boom, while slashing military spending. What's yours? Is it just confiscating more money from those who have it to spread it around to those who don't?