How can Repubs claim credit for the economy if they had to go into debt

[neoteric lefty]

to "stimulate" it. Ok, the economy is better than it was a year ago (not by much) but they basically had to give the house away to turn it around. To me, that's like looking at a business that not doing too well and rather then restructuring it and putting money into key aspects, you instead just give the CEO 10x as much as needed and say, go at it.

[The Backlash Cometh]

1. Oh, is the economy turned around?

I must have missed that press release.

[neoteric lefty]

5. It is not as bad as it was

at the worse levels last year, at least for me, my family and my friends. I know that millions still have not seen improvement for them, but as a whole, the economy has gotten better, as all economies do at some point.

[ProfessorGAC]

9. Any Data To Support That Contention?

Personal anecdotal information and econometric analysis are two vastly different things.

Any data to prove that ALL economies get better at some point? Didn't think so.
The Professor

[neoteric lefty]

11. ok fine let me restate my "all economies"

theoretically, all capitalist-based economies, when left to their own accord, tend behave in cycles, growth and recession without being affected by foreign occurrences.

vague enough for you?

you seem to enjoy dissecting my words without addressing the point of my post. If that is what you like, then fine.

edit: You know what, don't even worry. It is pretty obvious that any opinion of mine concerning the economy is not up to the level of yours and won't satisfy you. I would really love to hear what you have say and I don't mind being corrected when I am wrong, but your tone makes anything you say pointless to me. If I am mistaken about your 'tone' then let me know.

[ProfessorGAC]

13. What Point?

You didn't make any valid points? And how could i not dissect your words. That's what you said. ALL economies.

You are spouting liberterian nonsense about macroeconomies as if they were absolute principles. They're not.

I've spent the last twenty years publishing peer reviewed papers that refute those simple and two dimensional theories as unfounded and unsupportable by actual data. I didn't expect to see those silly things used here on DU stated as absolute fact.

My other post did, indeed, point to the content and explained why you're belief is in error.

So, apparently i did address the point of your post. You just didn't like it.
The Professor

[neoteric lefty]

16. the point was about the tax cuts

any links to some of these papers? Or where I can read them? (I am not trying to question your experience. I would really like to see what you have to say.)

[ProfessorGAC]

18. Sorry No

First, some of them go back to pre-internet. (Sorry, i'm an old puke.)

Secondly, they're ALL published in rather esoteric trade or academic journals that either don't have a website because traffic would be so low, don't keep long term archives, or are subscriber only.

I've only written one in the last 4 years, and it was published in an economists' journal which comes out quarterly. That was about a year and half ago.

Seriously, i have a real problem with conventional economic theory, and i get my back up when i see it espoused as provable principle.

Sorry, i got on my high horse and ran over you. Couldn't help myself.
The Professor

[neoteric lefty]

21. at least you

can help get me up :). Well, I am a university student so I have acess to a huge database of journals in economics.

PM me the information if you want. I would appreciate it.

[Not Me]

2. Further, I believe that the historic (40 yr) low interest rates

that Greenspan has put into place during the past 3 years have had a significantly greater impact than the trickle down from tax cuts.

[truthspeaker]

3. Because they own a lot of the debt; our taxes pay them interest

Republicans LOVE the national debt.

[William Bloode]

4. Better as compared to what?

They claim the economy is better, but thats a false statement.It may be better than it was 2yrs ago, but where is it compared to 6 yrs ago?

It's like earning $100, losing $50, but then later crowing about how good you did because you now have $65.

Kinda lowering the standards in my book.

[neoteric lefty]

8. The economy is grow from the

lows of 2003. Thats the perspective I am talking about. You are right, that if you take a longer time period, say the 90's, then yes, Bush has done nothing.

I am not praising Bush for the economy, he ruined it and now is doing the wrong things to undo his damage.

[ProfessorGAC]

10. It's Not Growing

92% of the change in nominal GDP between early 2003 and now is due to government spending of borrowed funds and inflation. That looks like economic improvement if one is limited to viewing and understanding a single economic parameter.

In reality, the real GDP has barely moved in the last 18 months, the median income of the center 6 standard deviations of income earners has fallen v. inflation, unemployment is unchanged, personal debt is up, corporate debt has not improved, productivity is down (YES, it's down) and the net import number has increased.

These are not signs of a healhier economy, and no econometric model worth more than a penny, including my own, would translate those findings, no matter the causative links, into economic robustness.

You should leave the economic analysis to the professionals. You could hurt yourself.
The Professor

[neoteric lefty]

12. ok, thanks for trying to explain that

but you may need to understand that arrogance is not a healthy trait. I'll be the first to admit that I am not an economist. I find it to be boring and contrived. And, explaining why the economy is not growing to those less experience is a great thing; more of this needs to be done. I would love to hear what someone, who is more adept at this topic than me, has to say. But, your arrogant comment at the end makes everything you stated before mean absolutely nothing to me. Even the smartest and most well intentioned people can still have trouble with simple social skills now and then.

[ProfessorGAC]

14. Taking Yourself a Bit Seriously, Huh?

You had two posts that stated, as fact, things that are provably wrong, and my pointing that out is arrogant?

Sounds like your preconceived understanding of things economic are pretty deeply inbedded, and therefore, quite sensitve to scrutiny.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything. You can believe i'm an expert or not. Don't care one way or the other. But, as a long time member here at DU, i can't let economic misinformation go unchallenged.

Your information is unsupportable by the data, & your conclusions are unsupportable by any true analysis of econometric causation. Despite that, you made both of your posts as if they were absolute truth.

If it hurts you to see your opinion proven wrong, and you need to call me arrogant, rather than face up to the fact that you're wrong, i can live with the name calling. Personally, i think it arrogant to post with total assurance about a topic which you now willingly admit you have no expertise. So, maybe we're both arrogant, or maybe i'm protecting my turf. Whatever.
The Professor

[neoteric lefty]

19. fine

I am glad you corrected me. I made a statement that seems to be less cut and dry than I previosly believed. I have absolutely no problem with you calling me out on that. That's a great way for all of us to grow as intellectual beings in this world.

Your comment "You could get hurt" just exudes the same arrogance that I see daily from those in my area of study (Software Engineering).

To me, basically you told me I was wrong, here's why I am wrong (which is good) and basically I do not have the gravitas to even speak about this subject at all (which is not good in my book). That is all I meant about the "arrogance" of you last statement. I am not hurt in the least that you wanted to correct me about an area that you have spent your life working in. I welcome that. I just think your post could have done without the closing remark. That is what I am saying

The social skills comment may have been a bit out of light. I take it back.

[whistle]

24. Perhaps we could say what we mean, mean what we say....

...but not say it mean. Common courtesy is a social skill which I know I need to continuously work on and by example, hopefully others may choose to follow also. This topic is way too important to dismiss by cutting off discussion. Let's not allow the social disabilities and retardation that the republicans demonstrate flow over to our side. Thank you both for your insights.

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance--that principal is contempt prior to investigation. " - Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), British philosopher and sociologist.

[proud patriot]

6. Not only into debt , but in debt to China

:wow:

[BillZBubb]

7. It's Repug/Enron accounting

Borrow and spend an additional 2% of GDP each year. The economy "grows" at 2-3%. It's friggin' magic!

If the someone with any brains were spending this much borrowed money, the economy would be growing 6-7% minimum.

Of course the nitwits say it's the tax cuts. That's bullshit. Had they cut spending to pay for the tax cuts, the economy would have tanked. They had to have massive and increasing deficits to get any growth. Tax cuts for the rich don't do much for economic growth and never have. It is far more effective to either cut taxes for those at the bottom who will immediately spend locally, or increase government spending on infrastructure (which is an investment in the future as well).

[whistle]

22. Good point, debt wisely applied could yield significant growth...

...and stimulate economic growth activity to be sustainable and long term. That's why we have economic advisers and professionals to help society make the best choices that move us along toward such goals. BushCo has a hidden agenda that enriches only a tight circle of beneficiaries from the policies and actions taken during the last 3 1/2 years. For example, military spending has increased substantially under Bush, but we have no ammunition to send our troops, so we are buying it from Israel. The Haliburton contracts fiasco is well documented as are the outrageous prices charged for gasoline to our military during the Iraq war, are all examples of this political corruption.

The American people are getting wise to this and hopefully will wake up by November 2 and send this bunch packing to their holes and rock caves in Crawford Texas and elsewhere. But, let this also be known that where these un-American bastards have committed criminal acts against the citizens of the U.S. and the rest of the world, they should be hunted down and be punished for their flagrant disregard of the common good.

[RichardRay]

15. There's nothing wrong with debt

as long as it's short term and focused. The problem with the fake improvement shown recently is that it's not only based on a huge and growing deficit, but that the revenue reductions that are driving it are long term, and the current administration is trying to make them permanent.

Short-term and focused economic stimulus may include deficit spending. I've seen quite a few references (I can find some if you'd like) that state that whatever single sector improvement we have seen in the last few years could have been bought with much less damage to the economy overall.

The Prof can be a bit high handed at times, but he's an academic (at least I'd guess so, based on his handle :-) and they're like that. Don't throw out any babies with any dishwater, though, his economic analyses are cogent and deserve careful attention.

Richard Ray - Jackson Hole, WY

[whistle]

17. This so called economic recovery is nothing more than a corrupt...

...form of economic stimulus based on excessive infusions of federal tax refunds primarily to the wealthiest persons in the country and boondoggle federal spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and numerous military systems that add nothing in the way of permanent jobs, but certainly has ratcheted up the national debt, devalued the U.S. dollar, caused record trade U.S deficits,started interest rates climbing, caused unheard of oil import demands and once again has set the stage for a raging inflation to begin. This has been accomplished by an administration and a zealot congress right wing majority that cares nothing about the welfare of the average American citizen.

There is no name that can be assigned to this type of economic system. It is not monetary, it is not fiscal, it is not supply-side, it is not Keynesian. It certainly is not capitalistic, although it has many of the earmarks of being fascistic because it is based on lies, deception, intimidation and distortion. There is no prior model that such a system is based upon, nor can it be imitated by other societies unless such societies wish to bankrupt their system. It is totally corrupt and verges on the criminal. This economy is for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many and because it has that characteristic, it will totally fail.

[johnnie]

20. 'Cause....

Clinton got a blow job....duh!!! :eyes:

[central scrutinizer]

23. Republican economic flow chart

1. Is the economy doing well?
a. if yes, are Republicans in charge of any branch of government?
i. if yes, that branch(es) takes credit.
ii. If no, go back in history and find when Republicans were in charge of any branch of government and give the credit to their policies finally taking effect.

b, if no, are Democrats in charge of any branch of government?
i. if yes, blame those Democrats.
ii. if no, go back in history and find when Democrats were last in charge of any branch of government and blame the bad economy on the lingering effects of their mismanagement.

wash, rinse, repeat