Peter_Puget Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 From the NYT : “Most significant, the economy is finally adding jobs after being battered by the overhang of the popped Internet bubble, terrorism, corporate scandals and the war with Iraq. More than a quarter-million jobs were created in the last two months, according to figures released Friday, and plummeting new claims for unemployment benefits suggest the labor market will only get stronger. ... Nobody is yet suggesting that these are the best of times. The country will be hard pressed to regain anytime soon the 2.5 million jobs lost during the Bush presidency. hmmm the “overhang of the Internet bubble, terrorism and corporate scandals” all occurred or developed under Clinton. My question is just when will these lefties move on from the corrupt Clinton Clique? Aren't they continuing to flog a dead horse by blaming him? Move 0n…faster please. PP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willstrickland Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 C'mon Pete, Look at some statistics buddy...war has historically boosted the economy. Now do you think that the $300 rebate check you got has kick-started the economy (personally, I used mine to pay a stafford loan payment, and offset the money I lost in an index fund holding Enron as part of assets)...or the countless billions spent on the war(s). Check out this site Cost of War With all the loot being pumped into Lockheed-Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, United Tech, Litton, etc...we should have a big recovery. The question is: Are the lives of our servicemen worth it? I'm a DOD employee, I'm around alot of soliders and airmen on a daily basis and I workout with some of the Arctic Warriors...alot of these guys are not happy with BushCo..in fact I heard one Cpt who was citing Carol Mosely Braun (threw me for a loop) and some stats on budget cuts for VA services (I can't elaborate because I didn't see the speech he was citing). If you've ever been around a VA hospital, you know how understaffed and underfunded they are already...not everyone buys into the hype...including those who are willing to put their lives on the line for this nation. It's not about Clinton, it's not about the left or the right...it's about deceiving the populus into supporting what is rapidly turning into a quagmire the likes of which we haven't seen since, oh, about 1964-1975. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrambler Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 Nobody Died when Clinton Lied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 scrambler said: Nobody Died when Clinton Lied. Word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al_Pine Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 wordy word werd werdophone Bumper stickers should be issued Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunglehead Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 Well said Will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryad Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 Just as a general statement, the kind of war that boosts the economy is the kind like WWII where industrial production has to be increased substantially to crank out large amounts of supplies to replace the supplies that are destroyed in battle. In other words, the kind of war where LOTS OF PEOPLE DIE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted November 10, 2003 Author Share Posted November 10, 2003 “Nobody died when Clinton lied” Those who claim this are either liars themselves or completely ignorant of even the most basic elements of the Clinton regime. Ask those who died from US Cruise missiles sent specifically to divert attention from “Monicagate.” Ask where the intelligence failure was then. As far as the military expenditures impacting the economy the data in fact indicates strong growth in areas apart from defense related industries. To claim that recent improvements in the economy are the result of the war are simply not in agreement with the facts. My post is a passionate plea for people to leave Clinton in the dust bin of history. I was the one saying "hey NYT move on this is the days of GWB!" PP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jopa Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 willstrickland said: C'mon Pete, Look at some statistics buddy...war has historically boosted the economy. Now do you think that the $300 rebate check you got has kick-started the economy (personally, I used mine to pay a stafford loan payment, and offset the money I lost in an index fund holding Enron as part of assets)...or the countless billions spent on the war(s). Check out this site Cost of War With all the loot being pumped into Lockheed-Martin, Northrop Grumman, Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, United Tech, Litton, etc...we should have a big recovery. The question is: Are the lives of our servicemen worth it? I'm a DOD employee, I'm around alot of soliders and airmen on a daily basis and I workout with some of the Arctic Warriors...alot of these guys are not happy with BushCo..in fact I heard one Cpt who was citing Carol Mosely Braun (threw me for a loop) and some stats on budget cuts for VA services (I can't elaborate because I didn't see the speech he was citing). If you've ever been around a VA hospital, you know how understaffed and underfunded they are already...not everyone buys into the hype...including those who are willing to put their lives on the line for this nation. It's not about Clinton, it's not about the left or the right...it's about deceiving the populus into supporting what is rapidly turning into a quagmire the likes of which we haven't seen since, oh, about 1964-1975. Here is to you Will . Finally someone posts something without an agenda. The debate that takes place on the subject always turns into an "us v. them". No one seems to have any real interest in learning anything; they just want to rationalize the reality they have chosen to make their life a bit more easy to manage. That rationalization is bull shit, and represents the thought process of a child. One can show stats, figures, graphs, histograms, and run regressions to support any "side". Big deal. The fact remains, very few people are interested in learning something new, they just want to feel better about themselves at the end of the day. That is so weak..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EWolfe Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 I thought this thread was going to read: "I am sick of all your silly antics. I am going back to (insert other website).com Bye Bye, Peter" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottP Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 "US Cruise missiles sent specifically to divert attention from “Monicagate.” Corroborating evidence please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott_harpell Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 catbirdseat said: scrambler said: Nobody Died when Clinton Lied. Word. Albanians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 scrambler said: Nobody Died when Clinton Lied. OH REALLY, Scrambler?.... I think the folks who died in this aspirin factory believe otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carolyn Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 I tend to avoid these political conversations all together. In fact, I am one of those folks who tries to ignore politics as much as possible. It seriously depresses me too much. I did however hear about all these new jobs. WIth all the budget cuts in the social service field, human services, etc. I wonder, what kind of jobs these are? Are they at McD's? Burger king? Walmart? Etc. Are they jobs that help people feel satisfied with who they are and what they do? Im not trying to be defensive or start an argument. Im actually curious.... Even if these jobs are mcD type, will this boost the economy enough in the long run so people CAN go to school and PURSUE (meaning get employment) careers which are meaningful to them? (this is by no means dissing on those who actually enjoy working in the service industry). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 ha! yes. who do you believe these days? http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20031104/us_nm/economy_layoffs_challenger_dc_2 US Job Cuts Surged 125 Percent in Oct.-Challenger Tue Nov 4,12:03 PM ET Add U.S. National - Reuters to My Yahoo! NEW YORK (Reuters) - The number of job cuts announced by U.S. employers more than doubled in October, after declining for two months, calling into question the strength of job market as other segments of the economy surge. Planned layoffs at U.S. firms shot up to 171,874 jobs in October, from 76,506 in September, job placement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas said on Tuesday. Layoffs were at their highest since Oct. 2002, when 176,010 job cuts were announced. Some economists say the data may not provide a complete picture of the labor market, but investors seeking clues about Friday's employment report sent bond prices higher after the Challenger report. "With factors like technology, outsourcing, and consolidation working against job creation, any job market rebound we see in the near future will be relatively small," said John Challenger, chief executive at Challenger, Gray & Christmas, in a statement. In a signal that the job market may face another difficult month in November, Tyco International Ltd. on Tuesday said it would eliminate 7,200 jobs as it dismantles its far-flung global empire. "We're not out of the woods yet with regard to the labor market," said Lehman Brother economist Drew Matus. The job market won't really turn the corner until the economy shows a few quarters of strong growth, Matus said. [...] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billygoat Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 What I understand is that the oilfields aren't going to pay for the war, we are (to the tune of 150 Billion or more) and we are even paying here at home, directly: The price of OSB has just doubled because of the demand for the product overseas to rebuild Iraq. Now I have to charge this nice couple , about to retire on a fixed income, even more to build their house. My question to mr. Peter Puget: How has this war helped us out ?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17169 The Professor Takes the Gloves Off By Terrence McNally, AlterNet November 12, 2003 Accustomed in economic circles to calling a stupid argument a stupid argument, and isolated (in Princeton, New Jersey) from the Washington dinner-party circuit, Paul Krugman has become the most prominent voice in the mainstream U.S. media to openly and repeatedly accuse George Bush of lying to the American people to sell budget-busting tax cuts and a pre-emptive and nearly unilateral war. Krugman cannot be dismissed by opponents as some dyed-in-the-wool lefty. He's a moderate academic economist who's been radicalized by the Bush White House and the right wing it represents. Krugman joined The New York Times in 1999 as a columnist on the op-ed Page and continues as professor of Economics and International Affairs at Princeton University. His new book, "The Great Unraveling: Losing Our Way In The New Century" (#9 on the New York Times best-seller list and a top seller on Amazon) is a collection of his op-ed pieces from January 2000-January 2003. [...] McNally: I read one quote where you said: "Tell me one real problem that they took on and offered an actual solution." Can we narrow our focus to economics? What is most alarming about the deficit? We know in Keynesian economics deficits are okay... What's the real problem here? Why is it as bad as you think it is? Krugman: I'm sorry, there's one-and-a-half problems. It's still a jobless recovery. That's a very nasty prospect and we have seen no real sign of turn-around there. But beyond that... Look, deficits are okay, but Keynes never said it was okay to run deficits forever. He said that deficits are good for stimulating the economy temporarily during downturns. What we have is the prospect of deficits that are not temporary. The last estimate is, of the $500 billion-plus deficit, only about $60 or $70 billion would go away even if the economy does recover. And it's much worse once the baby boomers retire, which happens in about 10 years. We have the finances of a banana republic right now. If current tax rates and current programs continue, at some point the U.S. government will simply be unable to pay its debts – and long before that point happens, industries will pull the plug. And we have the same thing internationally as well. We have a huge trade deficit. It roughly matches the domestic deficit, and foreigners are lending the country money to cover that. At some point they will pull the plug. Some people say we now have a faith-based currency. I think we have a faith-based government. People believe that we're going to get our act together, but there's no sign that we will. McNally: So perhaps a lulling effect – similar to the one we were talking about earlier – may be working right now to cover our butt for a while, but it could turn quickly. Krugman: That's right. At the moment, the actual fiscal state of the federal government is substantially worse than that of the state of California. The laws are different: the state of California is obliged by law to balance its books each year. It'll fudge a bit but eventually it has to clear the books. The federal government does not. Also, you might say that Bush has some un-earned credits from the responsibility of his predecessors. In the past, U.S. presidents have always in the end done enough of the right thing so that the solvency of the government was never at stake. And it comes back to this denial that I talk about. People can't believe that we're dealing with something completely different now, but we are. McNally: Let me get this straight. You're not saying that we will actually go bankrupt, but that we are too dependent on foreign investors and at some point, they'll say: "You know what, I'm putting my money elsewhere." Krugman: Well, in fact, that does produce something that looks like bankruptcy. When you have a huge debt, not only do you have to pay interest on it, but you have to keep rolling it over. The point comes when investors say: "I don't trust these Americans. They don't seem to be responsible." Then all of a sudden you cannot raise the money to service the debt when it comes due. McNally: We've watched this happen in other countries and the thought is – that's Thailand, that's not the U.S. Krugman: That's Argentina. This is my specialty. I watched it happen in other countries and you look at the numbers and you say: "Geez, we have a budget deficit that's bigger compared with the size of our economy than Argentina before their 2001 crack-up. We have a trade deficit that's bigger compared with the size of our economy, than Indonesia before its 1997 crack-up." You say: "Well, yeah, but this is America and it can't happen here." But there's a lot of things we didn't think could happen here. Something very seriously wrong is going on now. McNally: What I haven't heard quite yet is the point which you make very strongly in the book, that the purpose behind the tax cuts is to bankrupt the government, to undermine social programs, so that no one who comes into office after them will have an easy time restoring them. Krugman: I'm not making that up. That's exactly what the lobbyists and the others behind these people say. The program that the Administration is following looks as if it was designed to implement their ideas. I think it is. [...] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthumbs Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 nice one j_b tool, another waste of bandwidth that nobody will read. can't you say what's on your little pea brain in a couple of sentences like everyone else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 the object was not to say what was on my mind but to let you read what was on professor krugman's mind. i am so sorry for you that it takes him more than a couple sentences to express himself Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scrambler Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthumbs Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 j_b said: the object was not to say what was on my mind but to let you read what was on professor krugman's mind. i am so sorry for you that it takes him more than a couple sentences to express himself I'm don't give a shit anymore j_b, and I'm done baggin on ya. Do what the fuck ya want with my blessing. You're an outstanding citizen. trask happy now erik you cockbiter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratboy Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 Thanks for posting it, j_b. Very interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erik Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 trask said: nice one j_b tool, another waste of bandwidth that nobody will read. can't you say what's on your little pea brain in a couple of sentences like everyone else? i readi it you fuck face. why dont you leave j_b alone and work on your own spray. fuck get something original trask, the whole hounding j_b makes you and your points look shittier then they already are.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelle Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 Trask - I read it and thought it was interesting. For more info on some of the legislation changes that affect pensions (what lobbyists are pushing through on the social programs front) check out today's NYT. It is pretty sad to see that so many pensions have failed in the past year, and that congress is actually talking about relaxing the rules that require certain assumptions that are in place to ensure adequate funding. They are helping companies that would have to put millions of dollars in their plans by the end of the year, avoid doing so. Just one more issue that will have an impact on the economy one way or the other. Companies will have to put money into the pensions to make sure they can cover the checks to gramps and grammy. This will cause them to have reduced profits which will affect stock prices. At least in the large cap market. OR Congress will push through the legislation, companies will record profits, stock prices will be largely unaffected by the issue, and gramps and grammy may have to get jobs to pay the rent because the checks they worked for are vastly reduced or eliminated when the plans fail a few years down the road. Don't even get me started on social security as aback up plan. That bomb will go off in 10 years or so... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allthumbs Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 e- fuck you in the ass cum-guzzler douche- fine, you want me to quit pickin on j_b? done he's not worth pickin on anymore anyway how bout you go fuck yurself in the skull, beyotch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.