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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (656541)	5/25/2012 12:28:29 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1579785

Keynesians to the left of me, Keynesians to the right of me By Steve Benen - Fri May 25, 2012 10:53 AM EDT John Maynard Keynes The gist of Keynesian economics is fairly straightforward: during an economic downturn, caused by insufficient demand, it's up to the public sector to inject capital into the system while consumers and businesses pull back. It's what FDR used to rescue the country from the Great Depression and it's what President Obama used to rescue us from the Great Recession. *Republicans, at least the contemporary version of them, loathe* Keynesian economics. As the GOP sees it, supply and demand aren't as important as shrinking government during a downturn. When consumers and businesses pull back, Republicans argue, the economy will improve if government does the same -- taking capital out of the struggling system -- and focuses more on debt reduction and less on growth. It's why, in 2009, at the height of the global crisis, congressional Republicans not only vehemently fought against a Keynesian stimulus, they also strongly recommended a five-year federal spending freeze (a proposal even David Brooks characterized as " insane"). In 2012, however, Republicans have suddenly discovered the inner Keynesians within. Sen. Harry Reid's refusal to "back off" looming cuts to the Pentagon won't just harm the nation's security, Republicans say. It could plunge the fragile U.S. economy back into a recession next year. [...] "Puzzling" was how Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) described Reid's remarks. With CBO's warning, Congress should be looking at every possible option to renew the Bush tax cuts and avoid the automatic, across-the-board cuts to defense and domestic spending. "The whole point here is to try to get some economic growth, job creation, to get out of this recession," Kyl told POLITICO. "Why would we risk going backward with policy that even CBO says would be the wrong prescription right now?" Sometimes, I can't help but feel like I'm stuck in a Lewis Carroll novel. In this case, Republicans not only demanded debt reduction during last year's debt-ceiling hostage crisis, they threatened to crash the economy on purpose unless they got their way. Democrats struck a deal and the GOP got what it wanted -- with spending cuts due to kick in just as Bush-era tax rates expire, which happens to be another Republican proposal. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said this week that unless his foes want to strike a broader deal involving new revenues, he intends to stick to the plan the GOP said it wanted -- they asked for automatic spending cuts and deficit reduction, so Reid will stand by the automatic spending cuts and deficit reduction. And yesterday, GOP officials said spending cuts and deficit reduction would take capital out of the economy, undermine demand, and hurt economic growth. In other words, Republicans have enthusiastically embraced the very Keynesian economic principles they claim to hate. It's not just yesterday, either -- none other than Mitt Romney argued this week that he can't accept** too many spending cuts in his first year as president because it would undermine demand and push the economy into a recession. So he's a Keynesian, too. I realize, of course, that Republicans aren't actually genuinely embracing the left's economic model; they're just scurrying to protect tax breaks for the wealthy and Pentagon spending. This isn't about ideological consistency or policy principle; this is about the right doing whatever it takes to get the policy outcomes it wants. But that doesn't mean the GOP's new arguments should be dismissed out of hand. On the contrary, this is an opportunity for the left -- according to new Republican arguments, spending cuts and taking capital out of a fragile economy is dangerous and wrong. Perhaps, the next time conservatives scream bloody murder about a non-existent "debt crisis," or cry about the horrible burden the deficits will put on our poor grandchildren, Democrats might take a moment to remind their friends on the other side of the aisle what Republicans argued the week of May 25, 2012, when the GOP effectively argued, "Screw the debt crisis; we want more spending and extended tax cuts."

To: i-node who wrote (656541)

5/25/2012 12:43:01 PM

From: tejek

Respond to of 1579785

>> And CEOs are a special breed of humans? What makes K. Killinger who destroyed WAMU so special?

I think so. Highly trained, highly intelligent, driven, etc. That's not to say that all are perfect. Like teachers, there are good ones and bad ones. But usually, a person hired as CEO of a substantial organization is going to have shown some competence and will be hired on the merits, not on the basis of possession a union card.

Wrong. They are good bureacrats.........good corp. bureaucrats. Granted some are the best of the lot but they are still bureaucrats. They are no Bezos or Gates or Chambers who entrepreneurially built big companies from scratch. They are just the best of the typical bureaucrats.........like the gov't bureaucrat but on the corp side.

And yet, they get paid $10 million on average per year. Once again, American capitalism gone bad. And you are a fan. Sad.

That's the problem with unions: they make it impossible to differentiate between the good and the bad. So, you get incidents like this nitwit who, while bullying a student last week, told him he could be arrested for criticizing Obama (sounds like something YOU would have said!) She was placed on suspension with pay. A CEO would have been fired for something that stupid.

And there are many great teachers who do what's right by students. You only hear about the the bad ones...........very few in number compared to the hundreds of thousands if not millions of teachers who work for crap wages while teaching your kids.

>> Which places?

California, lots of places in the Northeast, where teachers are paid 60 or 70K plus insanely generous benefits & retirement compensation. Even in Arkansas, (where we're dirt poor, of course), they are paid well above the median income for a level of training, as in other states, that just doesn't warrant it. The overall compensation package goes well beyond that.

Do you understand that $60K in CA and the NE are crap wages for a person with a masters........and yes, you have to have a Masters in Education to command that kind of salary. With my Masters AND experience, my starting pay would be $42K. I haven't made $42 K since a couple of years after graduating the first time. In WA state, $42K is an insult to someone with a Masters.

And yet, you Rs complain about teachers' unions while withholding funds for education. Well, I'll tell you......if teachers unions were such a huge threat teachers would be making a hell of a lot more money than they are. Trust.

Truth is Rs don't like public education because it mixes up the races and people from different income groups.

Sadly, its public education which made the US great and a stand out in the world, and yet, Rs want to destroy it. Its evil weaving its web.