Are we spending enough on Domestic programs?

[concerned citizen23]

According to Alan Greenspan, former Federal Reserve Chairman, we are:

Greenspan expresses frustration at an expanding slew of social programs, proposed mainly by Democrats -- Social programs we should be providing for our citizens such as basic healthcare, education, and other necessary social services.

He complains "The whole slew of candidates, mostly Democrats but some Republicans, want to add to it more.”(is this a subtle political endorsement?)

Ironically he made no reference to the expanding military budget which is now about $626 billon annually, which has more than doubled since the fiscal 2001 military budget of about $304 billon.

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~jephrean/classweb/United%20States.html
http://www.nationalpriorities.org/Cost-of-War/Cost-of-War-3.html

Greenspan: Recession Odds Have Grown
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/article?f=/n/a/2007/09/17/national/w144958D94.DTL

[Benhurst]

1. Yeah, our infrastructure is the envy of the world, and we have the

best health care system in the Universe.

We need to reduce domestic programs and spend more on the military.


The World's Only Superpower

:patriot:

And this be our motto: "Root, hog, or die!"

Bombs Away!

[grilled onions]

2. Well the money may be earmarked but.....

it has to pass thru many pockets to get it's final destination!:crazy:

[FormerDittoHead]

3. Oh, he's chock full with all kinds of great ideas - like raising the minimum wage would cost jobs...

Seriously. NAME ONE FUCKING BUSINESS that's gone kaput because of the latest increase in the minimum wage.

For you college grads, here's another:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jared-bernstein/well-thats-one-way-to-l_b_44039.html

Alan Greenspan may be all kinds of wonderful, but his idea for reducing the scourge of wage inequality may strike some as counterintuitive: he wants us to raise the number of highly skilled immigrants in order to reduce the earnings of skilled workers already here. In other words, his solution to growing inequality is to reduce to the living standards of college graduates relative to the less educated.

He doesn't quite put it this way, of course. He said: "If we open up a significant window for skilled workers, that would suppress the skilled-wage level and end the concentration of income." Which is merely Greenspeak (tangent: you've got to love G-span's plain-speaking replacement, Ben Bernanke) for the basic economic principle that increased supply of a certain type of worker lowers their wages.

Greenspan isn't the cause, however, he's the messenger. I DID like him a FUCK lot more than Paul Volker, but I don't think he's any living legend. He was good at his job. What I have a problem with is with his employers.

[concerned citizen23]

4. Two opposing monetary principles

Good point on wages...

Greenspan may have been better than Volcker, but each have done a pretty good job of creating market bubbles that pop...the super low interest rates engineered by Greenspan has contributed greatly to the sub-prime and housing bubble pop we are now experiencing

I read a article recently (link noted below) that explained two key money prinicples:

The Keynesian theory
• Theory holds that full employment is the basis of good economics
• It is through full employment at fair wages that all other economic inefficiencies can best be handled, through an accommodating monetary policy

Say's Law theory
• Theory holds that supply creates its own demand
• Turns Keynesian principle upside down with its bias toward supply/production
• Monetarists in support of Say's Law thus develop a phobia against inflation, claiming unemployment to be a necessary tool for fighting inflation and that in the long run sound money produces the highest possible employment level
o They refer to this level as the "natural" rate of unemployment, the technical term being NAIRU (non-accelerating inflation rate of unemployment)

It is hard to comprehend how sound money can ever lead to full employment when unemployment is necessary to maintain sound money
o Within limits and within reason, unemployment hurts people and inflation hurts money
o If money exists to serve people, then the choice is obvious
o Without global full employment, the theory of comparative advantage in world trade is merely Say's Law internationalized

Dollar Hegemony
Henry C K Liu
http://henryckliu.com/page2.html