Post Reply
Page 3 of 5  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Switch to Forum Live View "The Private Sector Is Doing Fine"
2 years ago  ::  Jun 18, 2012 - 1:24PM #21
Find1Answer
Posts: 7,350

Jun 18, 2012 -- 9:40AM, voice-crying wrote:

Jun 17, 2012 -- 8:15PM, TENAC wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 7:58PM, Fodaoson wrote:


Yes some State spending reductions are for political reasons but many are because of the recession.  The local and state revenues are down. Those smaller revenues do not occur simultaneously recessions, there are lag times. State jobs are public sectors; The private sector is beginning to slowly recover.  The jobs needed to recover will not come from large corporations but from the local business and services as demand increases.


The president and government can do little to created private jobs     


p.s. Most posters demonstrate little understanding of how an economic system works




Curious.


The federal govt is nortorious for "creating jobs" by awarding monies to states that become mandates at some point in time.  I think it was Clinton the launched the program to add 100,000 policemen to states and cities.  The money from the fed stopped in two years and the states were expected to pick it up entirely after that which led to layoffs.  It is a double whammy when you have an economy like we have now then the fed cannot cover their part of the mandates.



Ok, let's see: 'the federal govt paid for 100,000 policemen (states and cities) for two years. After the two years the feds stopped paying and the states/cities laid them off.' Wouldn't that mean that after two years they found that they didn't really need an extra 100,000 policemen? Or, does it mean that the cities/states were left without adequate protection? Isn't it the duty of the public sector to protect its citizens?


IMO, it boils down to the fact that certain states don't want the federal government telling them what to do even if it is in their best interest.


and when Clinton dropped that little protect and serve nugget the act was written to only apply to cities under a certain population figure.  forgot what it was now.    That meant that small towns like my rinky dink town and others in my state got the loot.   They built kiddie prisons and bought swat trucks,  a bunch of equipment and sure hired more officers.      There are many rinky dink police depts throughout the state that have lockers full of crap that is over twenty years old.       and you folks complain about pandering to the latino vote and claim that crime doesn't pay.   lol


.   

Bush's "de-Bathification program" eliminated all vestiges of Sunni power in Iraqi society and set the stage for the Sunni insurrection against American occupation and the new Shiite-led government. Bush disbanded the entire Sunni-dominated Iraqi Army and bureaucracy. He didn't change it. He didn't make it more inclusive of Shiites and Kurds. He just disbanded it. It is no accident that two of the top commanders of today's ISIL are former commanders in the Saddam-era Iraqi military.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 18, 2012 - 1:49PM #22
Erey
Posts: 19,149

In my observation and experience the economy is improving and has been improving for some time now.  Of course, I live in a Texas bubble and people from other places have different experiences. 


 


I think govt. has gotten too big and we should cut back.  Although I don't cheer anyone losing their job/

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 18, 2012 - 1:54PM #23
voice-crying
Posts: 7,222

Jun 18, 2012 -- 12:10PM, Fodaoson wrote:


Jun 18, 2012 -- 9:43AM, voice-crying wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 11:40PM, teilhard wrote:


The "Private Sector" Recovery will "take off" when ordinary regular Working Families have MORE  $$$ to SPEND in Shops and Cafes and Stores ...


It's like this ...


An Ultra-Wealthy OverLord gets 3,000 Times the Annual Income of an Ordinary Family ... But (s)he ISN'T going to eat in 3,000 Restaurants on a given Day, leaving a nice Tip for 3,000 Waitrons, or go down to the Local Ford Dealer and buy 3,000 Cars, or go over to the Neighborhood Target Store and purchase 3,000 Pair of Blue Jeans ...




I think you've hit the nail on the head!!!



Exactly why money channeled to middle, working class and poor   better stimulate the economy; they spend  every dollar on subsistence and necessities mostly local,  with local sales and use taxes  and support local merchants and workers. Even if the lower economic classes spend more at WALMART  , it is paying local sales tax and employing local workers.


 


True! The middle class and the working class poor does keep the economy running (even if it is slow right now). They have a lot more power than they think, and IMO they should take control by only buying [made in the USA] that means they need to stay out of WALMART. They go to walmart because the prices are lower...the prices are lower becaue walmart pays low wages, and their goods are imported. The 1% (rich) can also help by paying a higher rate of taxes (after 10 years of free lunches). That way everyone will be helping. We are past the point of who drove us into the ditch, it is time to pull TOGETHER...rich, middle class and the working poor.  




 



 

"Death and life [are] in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof."Proverbs 18:21
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 18, 2012 - 4:44PM #24
Druac
Posts: 12,231

Here is some reality for everyone...on both sides of the ideology:



1. Our spending and growth was unsustainable...period. It took the recesion to make that painfully obvious to the HUGE number of people that were spending way beyond their means with credit...buying houses they should have never been able to take out a loan for, maxing out their credit cards, car loans, etc. etc. etc.


2. That has GONE AWAY, along with MANY JOBS. I know MANY people that will NEVER go back to that kind of spending, because they learned their lesson the hard way. On top of that, credit is much harder to obtain now. It used to be so easy it made me sick how students that could NEVER afford it were getting credit card accounts with thousands of dollars (I guess the banks assumed mom & dad could poney up?)...or house loans for hundreds of thousands of dollars, or car loans for cars they had no business buying or owning on their income...etc...etc...etc...


3. There is no path to get us back to what we thought was "normal". There is no President that can do it on their own. It is NOT DOABLE, in my honest opinon. And even if it is, we shoudln't be trying.

Jesus Is My Savior...He Saves Me From REALITY!
---------------------------------------------
We created god in our own image and likeness!
[George Carlin]
---------------------------------------------
"Reason & Logic" - A Damn Good Slogan!
---------------------------------------------
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg, an American physicist
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 18, 2012 - 5:31PM #25
teilhard
Posts: 51,829

***Ummmm ...


So ... You contend that the Shops, Cafes, and Stores WOULDN'T see an IMPROVED Economic Situation if and when Regular Folks spent more $$$ in them ... ???


You're kidding, right ... ???


Consumer Spending --------> Increased Business Income


It doesn't get any more BASIC than THAT ...


(It's Econ 101) ...


Jun 18, 2012 -- 11:04AM, Bodean wrote:


Jun 18, 2012 -- 9:43AM, voice-crying wrote:


Jun 17, 2012 -- 11:40PM, teilhard wrote:


***The "Private Sector" Recovery will "take off" when ordinary regular Working Families have MORE  $$$ to SPEND in Shops and Cafes and Stores ...


It's like this ...


An Ultra-Wealthy OverLord gets 3,000 Times the Annual Income of an Ordinary Family ... But (s)he ISN'T going to eat in 3,000 Restaurants on a given Day, leaving a nice Tip for 3,000 Waitrons, or go down to the Local Ford Dealer and buy 3,000 Cars, or go over to the Neighborhood Target Store and purchase 3,000 Pair of Blue Jeans ...




I think you've hit the nail on the head!!!


 




 





Man ... you people just do not get it.


Public Sector Jobs REQUIRE Tax Revenue.  Tax Revenue is a strain on the Private Sector.  A Strain on the Private Sector results in people becoming really skiddish about spending .... and that puts the brakes on any recovery. .... and as noted in the WSJ ... taxing the rich 100% would not cover the short fall.  Further, such narrow minded opinion, fails to realize the massive increase in unemployment that would result from doing so .. which would offsett Most if not more than the gains you see from taking ALL of the Rich's income.  I mean .. it's just crazy


Now .. Obama et al., tried to stimulate spending by taking out a few trillion in loans and hirering a bunch of Public Secotr workers ... 225,000 to be exact.  In addition, they gave grants to States, to prolong employment in those public sectors, in hopes of staving off the correction.  Not to be left out, Obama et al., bailed out Union Shops and other Democrat Special Intersts sectors, to keep those jobs.  But ... there is one thing that is certain .. there was absolutely NO STIMULUS for the private sector.


In fact, the mountains of debt that have been heeped on the National Debt thanks to this incompetent boob, serves at yet another negative for the Private Sector, .. because in the end .. it is the PRIVATE SECTOR that has to pay it off.  Not the Government, not the Public Sector, not the Unions ... the PRIVATE SECTOR.


The stimulus didn't work..  As noted in the article ... the claim that the public sector is being hit hard, is because the public sector didn't get hit until later.  It's kinda like that "women" article.  Men lost their jobs a long time ago .. .now women are losing theirs.  Had the stimulus actually stimulated the PRIVATE SECTOR ... the Public Sector would not be getting hit as hard, if at all.


You people can keep singing your la la dream song that the public sector somehow contributes, but it doesn't.  They are net takers.  They are a drain on the people who actually pay the bills.  They are like the cleaning ladies and yard boys you hire at the house.  They bring nothing to the table.  They are like your children who you give an allowance ... they SPEND .. but they bring nothing back to your bank account.


Like I said ... the partisan support for this incompetent idiot we have in the White House, is just wow .... beyond comprehension.





Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 18, 2012 - 5:33PM #26
teilhard
Posts: 51,829

And lest we forget ...


The Extraordinary Concentration of Wealth in the Hands of a very few Individuals and Families is ALSO an "unsustainable" Economy (unless we just go ahead and make the Change BACK to The Good Old GLORY Days of Feudalism) ...


Jun 18, 2012 -- 4:44PM, Druac wrote:


Here is some reality for everyone...on both sides of the ideology:



1. Our spending and growth was unsustainable...period. It took the recesion to make that painfully obvious to the HUGE number of people that were spending way beyond their means with credit...buying houses they should have never been able to take out a loan for, maxing out their credit cards, car loans, etc. etc. etc.


2. That has GONE AWAY, along with MANY JOBS. I know MANY people that will NEVER go back to that kind of spending, because they learned their lesson the hard way. On top of that, credit is much harder to obtain now. It used to be so easy it made me sick how students that could NEVER afford it were getting credit card accounts with thousands of dollars (I guess the banks assumed mom & dad could poney up?)...or house loans for hundreds of thousands of dollars, or car loans for cars they had no business buying or owning on their income...etc...etc...etc...


3. There is no path to get us back to what we thought was "normal". There is no President that can do it on their own. It is NOT DOABLE, in my honest opinon. And even if it is, we shoudln't be trying.





Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 18, 2012 - 6:24PM #27
Bodean
Posts: 9,702

Well ... I don't recall "credit" being part of econ 101.  Ya see, not all spending = increased business ... in the LONG RUN.  Sure, you can borrow and spend now that which you you would be able to spend later, but that means a decrease in spending later ... and decreased business.


Our whole ponsi scheme is based on credit.  Credit of itself is not bad, that is, until it orginates from nothing, which is what credit derived from the Federal Reserve constitutes.  It's been this credit from the Fed that has propped up our economy, and as such, we've leveraged our future to a bunch of crooks who've invested NOTHING.  All they did was run the press, and hand out dollars that didn't belong to them [the real dollars belonging to people who aren't even born yet].


Econ 101 revolves around having something to sell.  You can sell a good, or you can sell your labor.  The problem with our economy is that we no longer utilize our labor force anymore, thanks to regulations and pricing ourselves out of the market.  We have oil, we have trees, we have ag products, we have ores, .... all raw products that we no longer refine [which is LABOR], because it's cheaper to run business elsewhere.


You guys on the left are reeping the rewards of your flawed thinking.  You support Unions who drive up labor and benefit cost.  You push regulations that make doing business more expensive, and feel no obligation to share in the load of implementing those regulations [tax credits].  Sure, they are all fine and good with regards to intentions .. but the untoward effects has been that the only people getting "rich" in America these days, are the owners of the Capital, as we do not refine our raw products anymore.  It's cheaper to just sell the raw material to China, and let them refine it.


Jun 18, 2012 -- 5:31PM, teilhard wrote:


***Ummmm ...


So ... You contend that the Shops, Cafes, and Stores WOULDN'T see an IMPROVED Economic Situation if and when Regular Folks spent more $$$ in them ... ???


You're kidding, right ... ???


Consumer Spending --------> Increased Business Income


It doesn't get any more BASIC than THAT ...


(It's Econ 101) ...


 





Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 18, 2012 - 7:14PM #28
teilhard
Posts: 51,829

*** Ummmm ... Let's try it again ...


You claim that Regular Folks spending $$$ (NOT  "Credit," but REAL $$$) in Shops, Cafes, and Stores DOESN'T  stengthen the Economic Situation of those very Shops, Cafes, and Stores ... ???


Hello ... ???


Jun 18, 2012 -- 6:24PM, Bodean wrote:


Well ... I don't recall "credit" being part of econ 101.  Ya see, not all spending = increased business ... in the LONG RUN.  Sure, you can borrow and spend now that which you you would be able to spend later, but that means a decrease in spending later ... and decreased business.


Our whole ponsi scheme is based on credit.  Credit of itself is not bad, that is, until it orginates from nothing, which is what credit derived from the Federal Reserve constitutes.  It's been this credit from the Fed that has propped up our economy, and as such, we've leveraged our future to a bunch of crooks who've invested NOTHING.  All they did was run the press, and hand out dollars that didn't belong to them [the real dollars belonging to people who aren't even born yet].


Econ 101 revolves around having something to sell.  You can sell a good, or you can sell your labor.  The problem with our economy is that we no longer utilize our labor force anymore, thanks to regulations and pricing ourselves out of the market.  We have oil, we have trees, we have ag products, we have ores, .... all raw products that we no longer refine [which is LABOR], because it's cheaper to run business elsewhere.


You guys on the left are reeping the rewards of your flawed thinking.  You support Unions who drive up labor and benefit cost.  You push regulations that make doing business more expensive, and feel no obligation to share in the load of implementing those regulations [tax credits].  Sure, they are all fine and good with regards to intentions .. but the untoward effects has been that the only people getting "rich" in America these days, are the owners of the Capital, as we do not refine our raw products anymore.  It's cheaper to just sell the raw material to China, and let them refine it.


Jun 18, 2012 -- 5:31PM, teilhard wrote:


***Ummmm ...


So ... You contend that the Shops, Cafes, and Stores WOULDN'T see an IMPROVED Economic Situation if and when Regular Folks spent more $$$ in them ... ???


You're kidding, right ... ???


Consumer Spending --------> Increased Business Income


It doesn't get any more BASIC than THAT ...


(It's Econ 101) ...


 









Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 18, 2012 - 8:34PM #29
Bodean
Posts: 9,702

Ummmmm .... let's try this again [since you didn't get the message the first time] ...  try and follow it.


Question:  Where are those "regular folk" getting the money to spend??  Government Checks!


Question: Where are those Government Checks comming from???  DEBT .. to the Federal Reserve!


SO ... question: .. what about people's MONEY.. .Savings etc ... THEY AREN"T SPENDING IT, because the ECONOMY SUCKS!!  ... so ..question: why does the economy suck??? ... because "some" among us think that PUBLIC SECTOR jobs actually produce something??  Question" Well, how come the money public servants get doesn't count?? ... BECAUSE .. it comes from TAX REVENUE! [ie., there is NO SELLABLE GOOD OR SERVICE!! .. thus there is no net income to the economy]  Question .. what's wrong with that??? ... Because WE DON"T HAVE ENOUGH TAX REVENUE .... and thus we are having to BORROW THE MONEY!


Question .. why not just TAX THE RICH EVEN MORE?? ... Because, even taxing them 100% will not provide the necessary tax revenue needed ... AND ... since they hold the CAPITAL that employs labor, they will cut labor even further!  Question" ..how come they aren't spending their captial to employ more labor?? ... BECAUSE ... Government Regulation, and a whole host of other LEFTIST ideas have stifled the business environment here in the STATES ... to the point that it doesn't make sense to do business here anymore.


LEFTIST are so "hung up" on their Social Justice and Equality perspective, as well as senseless regulation that they are incapable of speaking the language of the people who could bring the economy back to life.  THUS .. what do the DEMOCRATS think is the answer ... Raise Taxes on the Rich, and keep all of their Social Justice Spending in place.  All their ill concieved, Social Justice perspective does, is to push more business off shore, and pile up more debt.


Jun 18, 2012 -- 7:14PM, teilhard wrote:


*** Ummmm ... Let's try it again ...


You claim that Regular Folks spending $$$ (NOT  "Credit," but REAL $$$) in Shops, Cafes, and Stores DOESN'T  stengthen the Economic Situation of those very Shops, Cafes, and Stores ... ???


Hello ... ???


Jun 18, 2012 -- 6:24PM, Bodean wrote:


Well ... I don't recall "credit" being part of econ 101.  Ya see, not all spending = increased business ... in the LONG RUN.  Sure, you can borrow and spend now that which you you would be able to spend later, but that means a decrease in spending later ... and decreased business.


Our whole ponsi scheme is based on credit.  Credit of itself is not bad, that is, until it orginates from nothing, which is what credit derived from the Federal Reserve constitutes.  It's been this credit from the Fed that has propped up our economy, and as such, we've leveraged our future to a bunch of crooks who've invested NOTHING.  All they did was run the press, and hand out dollars that didn't belong to them [the real dollars belonging to people who aren't even born yet].


Econ 101 revolves around having something to sell.  You can sell a good, or you can sell your labor.  The problem with our economy is that we no longer utilize our labor force anymore, thanks to regulations and pricing ourselves out of the market.  We have oil, we have trees, we have ag products, we have ores, .... all raw products that we no longer refine [which is LABOR], because it's cheaper to run business elsewhere.


You guys on the left are reeping the rewards of your flawed thinking.  You support Unions who drive up labor and benefit cost.  You push regulations that make doing business more expensive, and feel no obligation to share in the load of implementing those regulations [tax credits].  Sure, they are all fine and good with regards to intentions .. but the untoward effects has been that the only people getting "rich" in America these days, are the owners of the Capital, as we do not refine our raw products anymore.  It's cheaper to just sell the raw material to China, and let them refine it.


Jun 18, 2012 -- 5:31PM, teilhard wrote:


***Ummmm ...


So ... You contend that the Shops, Cafes, and Stores WOULDN'T see an IMPROVED Economic Situation if and when Regular Folks spent more $$$ in them ... ???


You're kidding, right ... ???


Consumer Spending --------> Increased Business Income


It doesn't get any more BASIC than THAT ...


(It's Econ 101) ...


 













Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jun 18, 2012 - 8:56PM #30
TENAC
Posts: 27,248

Bo thats a lot like taking a bucket of water, filling it at one end of the pool then pouring it in the other end.  You think you are filling it up.


Except the pool has a leak that is getting bigger.


Soon there will be no water to take from one end and pour into the other.

Any man can count the seeds in an apple....
.......but only God can count the apples in the seeds.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 3 of 5  •  Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook