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: JohnM who wrote (257831)	8/8/2014 4:08:48 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 541437

it is equally as dishonest to portray everything he did as bad. He actually did a few good things as governor, despite putting us into 40 years of the Great Unraveling. Gun control, clean air act (only state which can set our own standards), first Bay Conservation plan in the world.

To: JohnM who wrote (257831)	8/8/2014 4:23:24 PM
From: Steve Lokness	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541437

<<<< saddled us with after his presidency was, at best bad. But in this particular case all Krugman is arguing is job creation>>>>> Right, job creation; Was at best bad? Do you think bringing down inflation from double digits was bad? Can you imagine buying a home today in the high teens as an interest rate? Okay, I get the argument that Reagan didn't do it alone - but it sure couldn't have happened without his agreement and acquiescence. So to the point about job creation; Reagan jobs took a HUGE hit in his early term that skewed the jobs numbers. Do you think Obama should be held liable for the jobs lost during the start of his term? That is what makes the Krugman numbers dishonest - at best. Now to Carter, the other side of Krugmans argument. Jobs mushroomed in Carters early term - but that is all part of the awful mess that led to runaway inflation. By the end of the Carter term job creation numbers were near zero. So the economy that Crater handed over to Reagan was in complete disarray. No jobs created, out of control inflation. Reagan brought it back into the realm of normalcy. ALSO, you can argue about who deserves credit for the end of the Soviet Union - and the peace dividend. BUT you can't argue the timing. It is history - it occurred when it did. Soooooo, all those jobs created by Clinton had that dividend. Im' NOT arguing that the republican way is good for the economy - all I'm suggesting is that the numbers need to be looked at honestly - and Krugman did NOT do that.

To: JohnM who wrote (257831)	8/8/2014 5:43:37 PM
From: Jeff Hayden	Respond to of 541437

I have to pipe-up here. What does high inflation mean? It clearly means it's costing more and more for goods and services. Why is that? Because demand is much higher than supply. To increase supply means businesses have to hire many more people to make things to increase supply. During Carter's time people were buying houses like crazy - housing bubble grew and mortgage interest rates skyrocketed. Obviously this wasn't the best regulated economy, but jobs WERE created like crazy. We definitely have to get at least reasonable inflation going again. I would hope for at least 4% for a couple years, then back off to 2-3% as the normal rate.