Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (90026)	10/14/2008 5:45:11 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542009

What we’re going to see, in short, is the Gingrich revolution in reverse and on steroids. There will be a big increase in spending and deficits. In normal times, moderates could have restrained the zeal on the left. In an economic crisis, not a chance. The over-reach is coming. The backlash is next. I think he is--not for the first time--dead wrong. Obama's economic advisors are people like Buffett, Rubin and Summers. First task will be to get the financial house in order. That will take the entire first term. Without that, no "big programs" are possible. These Republicans are addicted to predicting that deficits and spending will increase wildly under any Democratic administration, despite the fact that the record of the past 30 years clearly shows that they increase far more under Republican administrations than under Democratic ones (of course, they blame Democratic Congressional majorities for the increases--nevermind the first 6 years of the Bush admin; and Republican Congressional majorities for the restraint under Clinton, nevermind that from the time he first announced his intention to increase taxes on the wealthy, he said his goal was to stabilize the deficit and bring down the debt in order to assuage the bond market and get interest rates down, which would be the best possible tonic for the economy). That said, I don't doubt that he will try to do something on health care. But my prediction--which have been in general far better than Brooks's in the past--is that he will try to do it responsibly. If you wish, I will wager that the Obama deficits of the last two years of his first first term won't be as large as the Bush deficits of FY08 and FY09. Unless, of course, we are still suffering from a recession two and three years hence. In that case (and no one can rule it out at this point), all bets are off--we will all need every penny we can scrape together (or need wheelbarrows to buy a loaf of bread).

To: Lane3 who wrote (90026)	10/14/2008 7:17:31 PM
From: Steve Lokness	Respond to of 542009

Chris Mathews quote; "Comparing Palin to Hillary is like comparing an igloo to the Empire State Building." Ouch. steve

To: Lane3 who wrote (90026)	10/14/2008 7:32:19 PM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542009

<<<One the one side, liberals will argue (are already arguing) that it was deregulation and trickle-down economic policies that led us to this crisis. Fears of fiscal insolvency are overblown. Democrats should use their control of government and the economic crisis as a once-in-a-lifetime chance to make some overdue changes. Liberals will make a full-bore push for European-style economic policies. On the other hand, the remaining moderates will argue that it was excess and debt that created this economic crisis. They will argue (are arguing) that it is perfectly legitimate to increase the deficit with stimulus programs during a recession, but that these programs need to be carefully targeted and should sunset as the crisis passes. The moderates will stress that the country still faces a ruinous insolvency crisis caused by entitlement burdens.>>> Where is the logic in these two paragraphs? One the one side, liberals will argue (are already arguing) that it was deregulation and trickle-down economic policies that led us to this crisis. That is the liberal arguement, but how do you go from there to the next sentence. Fears of fiscal insolvency are overblown. Hold it right there. Give me a name. Who is saying that? He goes on to say: "Democrats should use their control of government and the economic crisis as a once-in-a-lifetime chance to make some overdue changes. Liberals will make a full-bore push for European-style economic policies." Wait another minute. The only person that is saying this is David Brooks - Trying to put fear into those that are undecided voting democrat. He has a way with words, but it is not truthful. He goes on to say: On the other hand, the remaining moderates will argue that it was excess and debt that created this economic crisis. But, we all agree on that. They will argue (are arguing) that it is perfectly legitimate to increase the deficit with stimulus programs during a recession, No one is sayin that. Give me a name. But they are saying that "there should be stimulus programs during a recession". But"that these programs need to be carefully targeted and should sunset as the crisis passes.". No democrat is sayng that we need to increase George Bush's deficit spending. Democrats know how to balance the budget. They have done it before - only eight years ago. Okay, maybe they won't be able to balance the budget under these circumstances, but they are not going to increase George Bush's deficit in percentage terms. David Brooks is just out and out not telling the truth. He is a liar.

To: Lane3 who wrote (90026)	10/14/2008 10:53:53 PM
From: bluezuu	Respond to of 542009

The first stimulus package, passed early this year, was a failure because people spent only 10 percent to 20 percent of the rebate dollars and saved the rest. Martin Feldstein of Harvard calculates the package added $80 billion to the national debt while producing less than $20 billion in consumer spending. Deficit spending has been generating diminishing returns in GDP. This is just one more example.