Edwards: Deficit is not top priority

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Des Moines Register

By TONY LEYS
REGISTER STAFF WRITER

July 14, 2007

Maquoketa, Ia — America should train 150,000 people per year to work in new alternative-energy industries, presidential candidate John Edwards said today in Maquoketa.

“In addition to creating these new jobs, we need to make sure our workers are educated and trained in performing the jobs,” the former North Carolina senator told about 225 people at a community center.

The training would be for the 1 million new jobs the Democrat predicts could be created if America moves away from its oil-based economy and learns to rely on wind, solar and biofuels.

Grants could go to community colleges and unions, he said. His aides estimated the cost at $250 million per year, which would come from fees that power companies and other polluters paid for the rights to emit greenhouse gases.

Read more: http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070714/NEWS/70714003/-1/SPORTS04

[robcon]

1. Sounds like the shale oil boondoggle of the 80's

We burned through $8 billion, with barely a drop of oil being delivered, in the shale oil project. I think projects like this should be grounded in established/developing technologies, rather than hopes.

I think we should give tax benefits to alternate technologies (not train people who may never be needed) - the advantage of these is that energy is actually being produced or the tax breaks don't happen.

[1932]

5. Sounds like the New Deal.

[originalpckelly]

9. It sounds like a bunch of BS. I believe in economic realism...

hard facts, not pie in the sky BS.

[1932]

11. Sounds like you might benefit from reading this book:

http://www.amazon.com/John-Kenneth-Galbraith-Politics-Economics/dp/0374281688

[barb162]

19. Ditto that. Raise taxes if we want expensive social programs

and other programs but quit the deficit spending already. We won't be able to pay our bills soon and the dollar will drop to nothing. There's been insane spending the last several years.

[ozone_man]

8. Deficits do matter.

Whether they are priority number one or number two misses the point that they are very important. Deficits limit the amount of investment we can make in the country by having to pay interest on our deficit. That must be amounting to a significant amount at this point.

I think Edwards should have stayed on the point, which he makes well, of investing in renewable energy, and environmental programs. This will have to be the "next big thing" in this country and the world if we are to survive past this century, not the iphone. Try focusing a tenth of our brain power and a tenth of the investment we make on war toward making the world a cleaner place, for all biodiversity.

[originalpckelly]

2. You know, I've got a question.

Why the hell don't we trap the greenhouse gases instead of releasing them to the atmosphere?

[seriousstan]

10. How and at what expense?

[unkachuck]

3. 'Deficit is not top priority'....

....I'm sure glad John said this....

....if we can spend 2 trillion dollars on a useless war, we sure as hell should be able to spend 2 trillion dollars setting up a first-rate, single-payer, universal healthcare system....

[originalpckelly]

4. John Edwards is being totally ignorant if he hasn't a clue why a deficit is bad...

notice how the dollar is losing its value? That's why a deficit is bad.

[1932]

6. All serious Democrats are Keynesians now. And that is a good thing.

[Bucky]

13. The problem is that all the goofy ass Republicans are Keynesians too

The Republicans just won't admit it (or do Keynesian economics right, since they filter their deficit jobs-spending thru big fat corporations--but the Keynesian principle remains intact). But everyone is a deficit turkey these days. And the hell to pay will be paid by people younger than you and me.

[1932]

16. They're military keynesians. It's not the same thing. Puting billions into bombs

isn't the same thing as investing money into activities that pay a return on the investment.

[Amonester]

25. Putting billions into bombs pays a gazillion return on the (stollen)...

investment:
"The Outstanding Public Debt as of 16 Jul 2007 at 04:59:41 PM GMT is:
$ 8, 882, 969, 860, 413.05

The estimated population of the United States is 302,444,747
so each citizen's share of this debt is $29,370.55.

The National Debt has continued to increase an average of $1.30 billion per day since September 29, 2006!
Concerned? Then tell Congress and the White House!"
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

The problem is (apart from the investment itself being robbed... of course)
that the return only falls into "a selected few" (mostly, Cheney's pal$). :puke:

But... Who, in Congress, cares?

[nyublue]

28. devaluation is a good thing

Devaluation is a good thing, unless you spend $200 a week at Walmart buying Chinese imports. It means less imports and more manufactured here rather than abroad. It also makes our exports more competitive.

[sutz12]

7. When everything is screwed up, it is hard to narrow it down. nt

[seasat]

12. The amount of debt held by foreign countries limits our policy

Right now, Japan and China hold over a trillion in US debt. If China ever wanted to stick it to us, they could dump all their holdings. The result would be a huge spike in US interest rates. It'd hurt them but it'd hurt us the worst.

In 2006, the interest on the federal debt was 406 billion dollars. It is the fourth largest line item behind Defense, Social Security, and Health and Human services. We could pay for a huge single payer health care system by lowering the debt to reasonable levels.

Debt also raises long term interest rates. The treasury notes compete with bonds as investments. Bonds have to carry a higher interest rates since they have more risk. The only reason we haven't felt more of an effect from this is that exporters to the US have been snapping up bonds to aid in keeping exchange rates lower. Eventually, the US market is going to lose some of it's appeal as emerging middle classes in China and India increase in size and demand. We need to have our debt at a manageable level before that occurs and the demand for treasury notes wanes.

I've got 2 year old twins. When they get older, I don't want them to have to pay off bills racked up ars due to compounded interest on the debt. It'll take at least a decade or more to get some significant reduction in the debt. Interest on the debt is now about 8% of total US budget outlays and is predicted to top 10% in the next couple of years. We've got to start working on it now.

I disagree with Edwards, the deficit reduction is very important. His position on this is one of the reasons, he's near the bottom of the candidates I'm looking at supporting in the primary.

[calteacherguy]

14. Thank you for your post. Clearly, Edwards does not understand the global economy.

With the rise of China, India, and other economic powerhouses in the 21st century, a massive debt could leave as as vunerable as a third world banana republic.

[1932]

18. Posts like the previous two scare me.

If Americans really believe that we need to balance budget at the cost of not investing in the future (which we haven't been doing for the last 8 years) we're going to be in for a world of economic hurt.

[calteacherguy]

20. This isn't 1932. nt

[1932]

29. No, it's not. It's 1928-1931.

[silverojo]

21. Seasat, let me guess

You're one of the deficit-reducers who thinks the first things that should be cut are programs for the needy, right? I find it's always people who don't give a damn about the poor, who pooh-pooh Edwards.

John Edwards has said time and again that he plans to get rid of the tax cuts that Bush has given to the rich. That's a big step toward driving down the deficit. Stopping this insane war would also save a few trillion dollars.

The first and most important thing this country needs to do is make sure its citizens have healthcare and jobs. From there, we can tackle the other big issues, like global warming and the deficit.

[seasat]

23. You would guess wrong.

I really liked the Clinton/Gore reinventing government initiative. There are huge areas of government waste due to inefficient bureaucracies and duplication of service. We need to address those first. We need to eliminate several unnecessary DOD programs, such as downsizing our nuclear arsenal, the missile defense sheild boondoggle, and several other pork weapon systems. We also need to restructure government procurement to eliminate wasteful no-bid contracts to corrupt firms like Halliburton. We need to reverse some of the wasteful privatization schemes. They cost more money and give less oversight.

Finally, if we still need extra money to balance the budget then raise taxes but raise them enough to cover the programs. Deficits should only be run during periods of severe economic downturn to provide a Keynesian stimulus to the economy or a during a severe national emergency. I'm a Democrat realist and know that there's no such thing as a free lunch. Addressing the deficit helps assure that we will be able to afford to address health care and jobs.

[Deja Q]

26. But given China's own rocky market, they don't need to feel hurt right now.

Symbiosis.

I disagree with Edwards too and I will vote for any candidate who has a record of fiscal sense, based on actions and not lip service. Getting the budget in order is a significant priority.

[nyublue]

27. edwards is right--we WANT hyperinflation right now

The deficit is a big problem. But our "foreign" debt is all in US dollars. If we don't deal with it we will have two options: 1) austerity and huge debt payments, 2) turn on the printing presses, causing hyperinflation.

Hyperinflation will hurt those holding large amounts of cash assets the most--the rich. For the average american (and Edward's constituency) hyperinflation will be a GOOD thing. Basically, if you have a fixed rate home mortgage, that mortgage that was going to take 30 years to pay off will be payed off in 5 years if your salary goes up along with the hyperinflation (like it most likely will). Costs of foreign goods will jump, but that will just result in more products being produced in the U.S. again--meaning more jobs for blue collar workers.

[ozone_man]

30. Our creditors will drop us.

Regardless of what Ben "printing press" Bernanke says, there are limits to how much money can be printed before creditor countries lose confidence in our currency. We're only stalling on the inevitable collapse of this credit bubble that we've created by zero interest loans and home equity loans. The more we inflate, the bigger the "pop" will be.

Sure, investing in renewable energy, health care, and education are infinitely more worthy than investing in the Iraq war, or subsidies to SUV owners, but the national (and personal) debt interest payments are so much that our investment choices will soon be limited. Any politician who claims otherwise is just playing politics.

[roamer65]

15. We're a debtor nation now.

Sorry, John, but austerity measures will come into play at some point to stop hyperinflation.

[1932]

17. Because we put money into things that don't pay returns, like bombs and tax cuts for wealthy

And if you think this doesn't work, you need to review US history circa 1930s and 40s.

[JNelson6563]

22. Correct, it's the things causing the deficit

that are higher on the priority list. Like the damn war.

Julie

[sabbat hunter]

24. bio fuels

still produce greenhouse gases. we need to get away from using fuels that produce greenhouse gases.

that is why ethanol is merely a stop gap not a cure.