Taxing issues
The decision to reduce VAT in the UK - and the allegations that it might have risen as well - highlight for me the sensible American practice of selling goods and services (mostly) for an amount that is the genuine price and then adding the sales tax afterwards so that you clearly see how much (or how little) it is. Inclusive prices are convenient but obscure the tax issue.
Odd if the UK becomes a high tax society again in the next few years - will Obama go down the same route? Printing money and cutting spending are the only other choices and neither seems like a long term winner for him. The fuss over Hillary (to be confirmed today) will be as nothing when the immediate crisis is over and the books need to be balanced...
Hello, I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~09~RS~)
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
Printing money in vast amounts is the only viable way out of the depression. Trillions of dollars of wealth were created in the construction of homes for which there is no money to pay for. On top of that, there is a financial pyramid scheme created to capitalize on the profits from mortgages which will also never happen. There is also no money to pay for the massive debt the government itself has run up. The government can't raise taxes, there's nobody left with money to take from in the quantities needed and to take what is still left in private hands would only drive more people into bankrupcy. The solution is simply to create more money far out of proportion to any increase in real wealth. This will result in massive wage price inflation, payback of all debts not geared to inflation with cheap dollars, pennies on the dollar, and a return to normal credit and business conditions. The losers will be holders of bonds and mortgages including banks, investment houses, and foreign governments. The winners will be those who owe money including the government. Anyone who saw this coming did well if they took out the largest mortgage they could get their hands on and is sitting on cash. This will allow them the opportunity to buy stocks at a very cheap level when the process initially drives stocks even further down. Interest rates will also go way up. The thing to do will be to buy stock when they are low, sell when interest rates crash the market again, and lock in high interest rates on governemnt and corporate backed bonds. The last time this happened was during the Carter Administration. The alternative is to remain in a deep recession or depression for the foreseeable future. It's the one answer the government has tried to avoid but I haven't heard a single viable alternative. Yes it will make a lot of people very angry. So what? Among those who will have to be taken care of are people on fixed income pensions which do not have a COLA (cost of living allowance.) When you see a train headed your way there are several options. One is to stand on the tracks like a frightened deer or just ignore it and get run over. That's what most people did. The other is to stand on the side and judge how best to jump on and take it for a free ride. In all situations like this there are losers but there are also winners. In a recession or depression, cash is king. The trick is to see it coming. How could anyone have missed it, the signs were so obvious? Most economists and "financial experts" are dumb and worth far less than the huge salaries and commissions they are paid. They should get a refund of the tuition they paid for their worthless MBAs.
Complain about this comment
Taxes:
Will have to reconfigure in
the United States and the United Kingdom....
Complain about this comment
Obama seems to be backtracking on some of his tax promises. His supporters are watching him and he needs them.
Complain about this comment
Point well taken--here in the US, we see the price, and then we see the tax bill on the purchase. Gasoline prices are, sadly, inclusive, because if the public truly knew how big the governmental 'bite' was, there would be general indignation.
The public in general is just now becoming dimly aware of how they, by voting for political leadership who have shown no restraint in their spending of the future wealth of the nation, have created a massive economic problem for the forseeable future. (And, the political leadership referenced come from both parties, so no finger-pointing intended here.)
The First Rule of Holes is: If you find yourself in one, for Pete's sake, STOP DIGGING!
Printing money(as is now being done) is the equivalent of bringing in a giant auger to increase the efficiency of the hole-digging project.
The only alternative is deep and politically painful cuts in spending. Obama, if he has the wisdom and will, could probably carry it off, since at least for a while, no Democrat will have the 'cohones' to stand up to him in public.
But, that presumes he has the wisdom and will. All indications are that he is calling in the excavating crew.
Complain about this comment
4, OldSouth.
"But, that presumes he has the wisdom and will. All indications are that he is calling in the excavating crew."
I sincerely hope you are wrong. What we see of him so far is that he is more conservative than some people thought. Will he also be moderate in his handling of the economy? He plays things so close to the chest that ....
Complain about this comment
Justin,
Didn't Steve Forbes support the VAT tax? Of course, like the gas tax and property tax, it is "hidden" and even "tax deductible". Which is purely B.S. to make the citizens think the a "Benevolent Goverment" wants them to have it easy. It's merely a ploy to get the votes to raise taxes in other ways. (Gas and Property being a foregone conclusion). But on the other hand both of these are state taxes. The Federal Tax is the FICA and Social Security tax. It is muddy waters to navigate when seeking a fair tax haven for all.
Both business and government are busy stirring while balking about the stick in the water...
Complain about this comment
Justin,
While I don't like paying sales taxes, I do like the visibility into the tax burden as you say. There are still some things (eg gas pump, airfare) where you don't really see the entire tax bill -- then there are other places (eg phone bill) where you see perhaps too much.
However, in the age of online purchasing this has become increasingly unwieldy. Do you tax at the seller's rate, or at the buyer's rate? And who is responsible for paying it? The traditional sales tax model breaks down, and the VAT becomes more appealing, in such cases.
Steve Forbes was in favor of the flat tax, not the VAT tax, if I recall correctly. Somewhat regressive, but a lot less paperwork.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Personally, I think that the US govt has no real control over the economy, but they do have influence. However, in order to exercise it, they need internal reforms.
Govt spending is wildly out of control, and I personally believe it is the essential fault of the 30 years of Republican right wing influence which became increasingly right wing over time. Military spending ballooned out of control. Basically, it's become an inefficient beast. Military use ballooned wildly out of control, if for no other reason than if all you have is a hammer, then everything looks like it needs pounding....
The Republicans/right wing have an astounding amount of influence over the US press, at least in the areas of political coverage. They are in the process of slowly losing that.
When I was younger, I agreed with what I was told about Republican goals, which were state over federal rights, a minimalist govt, but I was unsure about military spending. I was severely disillusioned a few years ago when I found out the truth, that they'd changed into the exact opposite as their love of military spending grew, so too did the govt desire for control over society. Oddly, control over the economy decreased as the corporations lobbied for less government oversight (deregulation), but spending on corporate aid increased. Wanna guess why?
As a result of the Republicans concentrating on the religious right, the right in general, corporate monetary assistance, ever lessening tax burden on the richest (income tax was originally for only the richest, but expanded wildly to other classes), military spending, usage of the military as global police, and of course lots of pork.
They are no longer conservative in any definition. "Conservative" is now a code word for American nobility who desire more control over the USA and the world.
These are my opinions, and not intended to insult anyone, including Republicans. I believe the party has lost its way, as indeed many of the party members from top to bottom believe as well.
Unfortunately, because of the Republican concentration on the most vocal of their supporters, the Democrats got everyone else if for no other reason that they DO have a well established structure. So the formerly leftist party became increasingly centrist, despite Republican assertions to the contrary.
Those of you who want to know the difference between the parties is this: the Republicans run their party from the top down and they all move together. This gives them speed and power.
The Democrats run their party from the bottom, it's the intellectual/social equivalent of the survival of the fittest. Every one of them believes passionately in a given subject and therefore is on a crusade. The only way they can succeed is to convince the other party members to agree in a massive group. There is a lot of competition, so whoever has the most support wins. If a cause/idea wins, it's sent further up the chain, to state and then national. This is how they define the party platform. Because of the party consisting of passionate crusaders (even the centrists) they spend a lot of time arguing. The decision making process takes forever, but in the end what survives is VERY well thought out.
In the end, the USA needs BOTH parties with both approaches. The Republicans to kick the Democrats into gear, and the Democrats to slow the Republicans down with some sober thinking. If one party gets power for too long, imbalance ensues. The pendulum has now swung radically to the Democrats in order to balance out the past 30 years of Republican's bad decisions. However, THIS WILL TAKE TIME!
I'm willing to bet Obama won't even LOOK outside the borders for the first 4 years, as he will be busy restructuring the federal government and kicking the economy in the pants. If foreigners are looking for handouts, they will be sorely mistaken. Then too, look for US military presence to drastically reduce, so all of you are getting exactly what you asked for. The Democrats have always believed in the Monroe Doctrine, which means if Europe and the world stays out of N and S America, the USA will leave them alone. We only step in when there's no other choice, remember WWI and II?
As a result, you will find global piracy to radically increase, and so too will countries become belligerent and so start throwing their weight around. Wars will ensue, of all types from economic to military. Most likely, after a decade of this, Europe and most of the globe will be begging for US intervention on an ever increasing basis. This is NOT meant to be egotistical. With the absence of the top dog, everyone else will be bucking for international power. This is not the first time this has happened! Remember Rome? How about the USSR? The Greeks? How about the Mongols? The French, British, Spanish, all of them collapsed eventually as all of them had a turn at being top dog. You can see this process in miniature in Iraq right now.
I dunno if the USA will collapse, but no matter what we will be more cautious in the future. It's as if we roll over in our sleep, and massive destruction ensues! (imagine Gulliver's Travels)
As I wrote before, on Nov 4th 2008, we voted Democrat by a landslide in nearly ALL of the elections. In effect, we are apologizing on a national basis to the world for what we have done by choosing the right. They got in power through the use of fear, by wildly overstrengthening the military and the govt by using the excuse that we needed protection from the "evil empires" across the world. We are sorry for that, and we are doing all we can as a nation to repair the damage first internally, and then globally.
Sure hope this doesn't provoke a flame war. I HATE fighting with a passion. A great way to get stress headaches. Please keep your reply posts civil and nonpersonal, or send them directly to me. There has got to be a way to privately message me.
Complain about this comment
# 5 ~ Marbles
You say that he plays everything so close to his chest. I offer that he is in an extraordinary and unprecented situation.
He doesn't get the keys until 20 January yet expectations of him and his team are sky high and there is a vacuum where the president should be.
I believe he even had to tell the Indian President that there is only one US Pres. at a time when he rang to offer his condolences.
He is treading carefully over hot coals at a terribly difficult time - with the 24-hour news media slavering for every look he gives, every phrase he utters.
Complain about this comment
9, Jeebers.
Too long, too long, for a blog, Jeebers. Some people won't read it. I didn't.
Complain about this comment
10, eightypercent.
Yes, you areprobably right. I was just thinking of his surprising choices for cabinet posts and the suggestion that he may let the upper income bracket keep its tax cut. This is confusing and makes me think there is an agenda yet to be revealed (that may not be what we expect).
Complain about this comment
#1 Marcus
Printing money in vast amounts is the only viable way out of the depression.
Isn't this the road to hyper-inflation? Interest rates need to be higher than the rate of inflation and also wage demands tend to be around (or higher than) the rate of inflation. Inflation will spiral out of control if the Fed decides to inflate the economy. The US may become like the Weimar Republic.
IMO the Fed needs to borrow money and stimulate the economy from the bottom up. People on low incomes, if given extra money, are more likely to spend it rather than their rich counterparts. It also helps eradicating inequality and poverty in a time of economic hardship. Contary to popular neo-con nonsense wealth trickles up.
Complain about this comment
allmymarbles
I personally guarantee that if you read it, you won't regret the time you spent in doing so. It sums up a lot of things I've been saying over time. Moreover, it has a lot of the truth in it, even truths I don't like to hear or talk about.
Make up your own minds, people. It's up to you to decide the course of your lives, no matter how much politics and religion tries to say to the contrary. If you don't want to spend the time to read my longer posts, then so be it.
Complain about this comment
# 12
Yup - we shall see.
What complicates the issue is that the whole situation has changed so radically since he first started laying out his stall.
What a nightmare for the man !
Complain about this comment
Slightly off topic - Justin, do you think your colleague Matt Frei has done enough to secure an Obama interview with his latest diary piece, or does he need to suck up to the incoming administration still further and be even more partisan (if that is possible)?
Complain about this comment
14, Jeepers.
OK, so I read about a third of it. To me it is an essay or a class lecture. It's not the way I see a blog. That is, it is not short and pithy. Others will probably disagree with me.
Complain about this comment
I have the reverse problem: when I go to the USA, I see a proice for something, and then discover I have to find an additional $2.37 or whatever in my pocket when I'm at the till. Really annoying.
No wonder Americans are so allergic to taxes, when they are never given the opportunity to internalise them as just a part of life. You should grow up knowing you have an obligation to others, not be told that you don't and then have it sprung on you at the last minute.
Complain about this comment
Bush was hardly a fiscal conservative with a needless war that is still costing billions and a bailout to banks. Tax breaks to the wealthy at the expense of the majority of Americans and basic infrastructure is the problem Obama has inherited and has to fix.
Complain about this comment
9, Jeepers.
This time I actually read most of it. I think it is remrkable that you can see so far into the future. Lie down and relax so you don't get a stress headache.
By the way you have proven to me that I am right about long posts.
Complain about this comment
18, vague.
"No wonder Americans are so allergic to taxes, when they are never given the opportunity to internalise them as just a part of life."
Ah, but we can go over a state line and pay lower sales taxes. We can move to another state and not pay state tax. I like things just the way they are. We have options.
Complain about this comment
allmymarbles
It changes over time. Once you get to the tail end, it has some predictions the UK might be interested in. However, to understand how I got there, you have to read the whole thing.
I thought blogs were "anything goes, so long as it isn't a personal attack", or am I wrong?
Complain about this comment
deceilar,
You are absolutely correct in the flow of wealth, but I know of a man who would disagree with you. He keeps asserting that the way to avoid poverty is to invest wisely in stocks etc.
I dunno. Seems pretty risky to me, IMHO. I'd rather just buy things that I know I'll use wisely. He asserts that this whole mess is because too many are ignorant of finance, interest, etc. I told him that this is gonna be natural, because of the wildly increasing nature of legalese style communication that the poor aren't taught.
Complain about this comment
Justin - you probably don't remember, but when VAT was first introduced in the 1970's retailers quoted the VAT exclusive price - and then added VAT to the bill at the till. This was considered to be unfair as buyers would not know the actual price they were going to pay for the goods (or services) until they actually came to pay. A code of practice was introduced to ensure fair pricing - so that retailers quote the final cash price to consumers. (to give a current example, I know we are all irritated by the practice of low-cost airlines to quote a headline price and then add all sorts of mandatory surcharges). Fair enough to itemise the VAT on your bill - but the price quoted on the restaurant menu, the tag or edge of the shelf should be the total price that you are going to pay.
Complain about this comment
Re 18 & 24:
Perhaps the best solution would be for all goods/services to have both the exclusive and inclusive prices given (as is normally the case with computers etc in the UK).
That way you know what your final bill will be, and you know how much of the cost is down to tax.
It does strike me as rather suspicious that retailers always manage to make the inclusive price come to (1p less than) a nice round number...
Complain about this comment
deceilar #13
I don't think the US will go as far as the Weimar Republic or Zimbabwe but a 60% to 80% devaluation of the US currency is what is needed. This will help Americans pay off mortgates, credit card loans, exporters, and retailers of American made products. It will also initially help the stock market. It will kill importers and those who export to the US, lenders including banks, other lending institutions, bond holders, and foreign governments. It will attract foreign investment. Why buy a house in London or Tokyo when the same money will buy a house in Florida or Sacramento for a half to a third of the price?
Yes the rest of the world will suffer terribly. But look at is as payback to America for all the wonderful things we've done for everyone else for the longest time. The era of high spending low tax low inflation is oveer. And now during a recession is no time to cut government spending. Given the external threats to America, now is no time to slacken off on military spending either although some savings on wasteful or unwanted and unnecessary programs which were political pork may get eliminated.
If you had illusions about who Obama was and what his programs would be like, you only have yourselves to blame. And by the way, it was McCain and the Republicans who were for free trade. Obama and the Democrats have the jobs of their friends n organized labor to protect. It would not surprise me to see changes to NAFTA and WTO treaties or barring that, the US dropping out of them altogether. There is no unwritten rule that says Americans have to compete in their own domestic markets with $2 a day labor in China or labor in Europe which will not provide for the common defense in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. You wanted change? Now you will get it.
Complain about this comment
3 Allmymarbles
As I have atated elsewhere Obama will raise taxation levels substancially. The very people he courted will be the ones who are hit hardest.
Dont for one moment think that Taxes is the only area the American people have been hoodwinked on either.
Most of the things Obama promised are impossible or totally unworkable but the Media presented him as some sort of second coming, now those fooled into voting for him really do have it coming.
Many Americans are in for a massive shock and, frankly, those foolish enough to vote for him deserve all they get, though i have a great deal of sympathy for the innocent
If, as expected Hillary Clinton is appointed to the State Depeartment things are likely to be even worse, as she will push for Social Programmes that again will hit those already being squeezed and will benefit few that ACTUALLY work for a living.
Complain about this comment
# 27
The people I feel sorry for are those millions who were led by the Rebuplican Administration of the past eight years into a totally unsustainable position.
When the new President has to explain just what he has been left with, people will listen to him and will blame the Republicans for hard decisions that will have to be made.
Complain about this comment
Devaluation or Rampant Inflation hurts everyone EXCEPT the rich who never had to choose between buying gas (petrol) or milk.
Printing money instead of cutting wasteful government spending could start a world-wide depression to rival the one my grandparents lived through.
Not even all the business-as-usual throw-backs from the Clinton administration can stop Obama from destroyning the global economy.
To the 63 million idiots who voted for 'change you can beleive in': change is coming, but you're not going to like it.
Complain about this comment
#26 Marcus
You've raised a valid point about the economic policies of Obama and McCain being a choice between protectionism and free trade. Obama, imho, needs to be careful about his protectionist policies - if they are carried out incorrectly, they may hinder the US economy as other nations will seek to protect their own economies and industries from the mighty US economy. It'll be global capitalism that'll suffer.
If the US devalues it's currency in the way you suggest wouldn't this effect it's credit rating with international investors in a bad way? Also many items in the shops would be more expansive thus hindering economic growth. Another issue is oil. If the dollar becomes so weak the OPEC countries may use the Euro instead, thus leading to the increase in cost of gasoline in the US.
#27 KAS
IMO the US needs a good dose of Keynesian economics. It has to spend its way out of recession by stimulating the economy at the bottom. The US is going to have a tax hike anyway because of engaging in expensive wars and increased (regressive) public spending butressed with deduction in taxes. It's pay back time soon and you can blame Obama as much as you want; the truth is that its Reaganist economics and neo-con foreign policy, inter alia, that are to blame
Complain about this comment
# 29
And millions of people don't think much of the mess that the Republicans have left.
I recommend Anatole Kaletsky's analysis in today's London Times to all those who - in their self-denying desperation - are trying to blame the incoming administration.
Get real you guys.
Complain about this comment
KAS1865:
What Social programs were you talking about? The only Social program in the State Department is the Peace Corps.
As a Senator, Hillary would have some ability to keep President Obama in check, as the Secretary of State, she'll get to travel around the world learning about foreign policy, but she'll won't have any influence over domestic policy.
By appointing Hillary to Secretary of state Obama has effectively kept her out of his way.
Complain about this comment
#27 KAS1865:
"Many Americans are in for a massive shock and, frankly, those foolish enough to vote for him deserve all they get"
&
#29 greysquirrel1867:
"To the 63 million idiots who voted for 'change you can beleive in': change is coming, but you're not going to like it."
And again with the slurs on everyone who voted for Obama, can't the ne-cons just accept people made a rational choice for the candidate who seemed to smartest and most competent? Don't worry that's a rhetorical question.
#27 KAS1865:
"If, as expected Hillary Clinton is appointed to the State Depeartment things are likely to be even worse, as she will push for Social Programmes that again will hit those already being squeezed and will benefit few that ACTUALLY work for a living."
Two things. First since Hilary has no responsibilities for domestic affairs her social suggestions carry no particular weight, Obama is hardly at the beck and call of the woman he defeated. Second is the assertion continually repeated by the right that social programs are only for the feckless and lazy. I hate to break it to you but plenty of hard working americans are facing the loss of their jobs, and many who still have them lack either health care or pension provisions through no fault of their own.
If you want blame someone for this economic mess I suggest you look to Mr GW Bush currently hiding under his desk in the Whitehouse, or so I assume since he's been quite absent lately.
Complain about this comment
My interpretation of fiscal conservatism is based on the premise that we should only buy or get those things we afford to pay for. If we are unwilling or unable to pay for the government services we currently get - from defense to social services - our government should announce which ones they are planning to eliminate or reduce.
Obviously, that's not the way things work in a consumer-oriented society and there is no chance such approach would be undertaken.
More borrow and spend is in the offing to continue to give an illusion of prosperity that is as flimsy as a house of cards.
Having said all this, I believe the Obama Administration has no choice but to lower middle class taxes to stimulate our decrepit economy, and may have to delay raising the taxes of the wealthiest Americans until we get out of our economic and fiscal malaise. He may also have to give the middle class another handout in the form of an economic stimulus check, which we will quickly spend (saving is not part of our psyche) to fuel an economic recovery.
Not only will Obama have to lower taxes, he will have to give money to States that are currently unable to meet their fiscal obligations to prevent further job erosion, minimize bankruptcies and prevent the discontinuance of badly needed social services. The same goes for our pathetic auto industry.
In effect, we have no choice but to dig a deeper fiscal hole to overcome our economic problems. The only question are how much longer will China, Japan, and Saudi Arabia continue to lend us money to pay for our excesses, and the long term effects of printing more money on an increasingly weak currency, which could easily aggravate our horrible trade deficits.
Complain about this comment
The nomination of Hillary Clinton to head the State Department is a clear signal to our foes and allies regarding what our foreign policy goals and prioties are going to be the next four years.
In my opinion, we will definitely be out of Iraq within the next two years, a major push will take place in Afghanistan and possibly in Pakistan to eradicate Al Qaeda and, most importantly, our positions on Iran's nuclear development and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will remain unchanged, although some concessions would not be surprising if regime change takes place in those countries.
Complain about this comment
#31 eightypercent
That's an interesting article in the Times. The economy is already benefiting from the Obama Presidency, as opposed to the failed Bush/Paulson policies which have made a bad situation even worse. The Obama influence was highlighted as:
Complain about this comment
#27 KAS1865:
"If, as expected Hillary Clinton is appointed to the State Depeartment things are likely to be even worse, as she will push for Social Programmes that again will hit those already being squeezed and will benefit few that ACTUALLY work for a living."
You may want to familiarize yourself with the duties and responsibilities of our government officials. As Secretary of State Hillary will be responsible for the implementation of foreign policy, as defined by the President of the USA.
Complain about this comment
Printing more money isn't a solution. Neither are taxes if they're spent badly. The problem isn't a lack of money, it's that we're a selfish nation.
If we'd all been a little more honest with ourselves (i.e. - I cannot afford this house, therefore I will not buy it) we could have avoided becoming foreclosure central.
If corporation and bank executive would be a little less selfish (i.e. 50 zillion dollars a year salary is more than enough, I can't possibly use it all and should use some of it to rescue my company instead of begging the government for more) we'd probably pull out of the recession tomorrow.
Complain about this comment
# 36 ~ dceilar
..... and today's Telegraph (no friend of the US Democrats) today describes Obama's National Security picks as "tough-minded realists".
It would be good if the hysterical rightwingers would pause a minute and acknowledge that the very best are being picked from across the political spectrum to serve their country at a critical time.
Complain about this comment
Hi marcus.
If you are so clever then you must be very rich.How about giving me some,to help the
less well off in Europe as pay back for the wonderfull things,we have done for every
one else,for the longest time.
You know it makes sense..............
Complain about this comment
27 Dom
I am more than aware of Mrs Rodman Clinton's duties should she be given the Appointment, but do you really believe that she will not interfere and use her influence with to push her pet projects such as Universal Health Care?
Its interesting that you only focus on that aspect of my prvious post. does that infer that my views may actually have some merit?
America is in for a very bumpy ride
Complain about this comment
KAS,
In common with the rest of the orld, and just who failed to build the road ahead? Was it paved with no-bid contracts issued from Cheney's basement?Enjoy the ride!
ed
Complain about this comment
#41 KAS1865
"I am more than aware of Mrs Rodman Clinton's duties should she be given the Appointment, but do you really believe that she will not interfere and use her influence with to push her pet projects such as Universal Health Care?"
Well health care reform is already part of Obama's agenda but the notion of Hilary as somehow able to push any domestic agenda is odd, where would her power base come from given that the other Clinton era appointees all serve at Obama's pleasure? Indeed I suspect having worked for the Clinton's in the past most of those people will be more cautious about taking her advice rather than less; 'once bitten twice shy.'
Since Obama has a clear popular mandate why would he slavishly follow the wishes of Hilary Clinton as you seem to imply he would? Any desire to reach out across the party is surely fulfilled by giving Hilary the SoS job, which I suspect is one she can be effective in.
Complain about this comment
Ref 27
KAS, the reason I made an observation on you opinion regarding Hillary's influence on domestic policy is because I agree with the rest of your post.
As a Cabinet member she will be free to voice her opinion on matters outside her area of responsibility, but her preferences will not carry any more weight than those of any other American. Besides, she will have enough on her plate to keep her occupied for years to come.
I think healthcare reform is badly needed, not only because the present system is expensive and unfair towards those who can not afford to pay high insurance premiums, but because healthcare costs are a huge burden on our industry and are a major factor in our inability to compete with foreign companies.
Complain about this comment
#9 Jee-man-eze
Landslide??? 56%Obama and 46%McCain, guess you needed to know,.. the numbers are even more impressive 66,882,230 for Obama and 58,343,671 fo McCain.
With that said, eight million is a landslide in a state election, but not a national, and we are no way apologising to anyone for all the good we have done world wide, not even to you, who obviously view us as an 'evil empire'.
Change we need will happen with President Obama, we just have to let the day come, weather the storm in place, and he'll do a fine job carrying out as many of his promises as possible.
But those over seas that dislike our lifestyles, diversity and money/power will not change because we have a President Barack Hussien Obama as president of the great 'SATAN', much to thier chagrin.
Complain about this comment
Meanwhile....
Peace and £1 buys $1.49
ed
Complain about this comment
34. , DominickVila
May I preface this in that I pray for the President elect even though I didn't vote for him, he is "My" president. So far his choices have shown wisdom and understanding, more than I expected from his campaign.
It's not that I disagree Dominick, it is that his policy of a monetary stimulus may be good for the short term. As to his fix as FDR did with the Great Society, I can't forget that the resulting fix was war.
... and the war machine,.. death of millions, destruction of mass proportions, geared manurfacturing with 100% employment, sorrow and a,.. clean slate so to speak, to rebuild upon.
As stated by another, sorry, don't remember the number or writer, the inflation and inevidable hyper-inflation will be world wide,.. with shortages, anger and blame for everyone,.. such is the formula for war.
In that is the prayer, that we don't rerun, as we have from the first writings of history. Always larger, more devasting war than the previous. The answer is diplomacy, but who will listen while their people starve or suffer?
Complain about this comment
Apologies, 53% Obama, 46% McCain
Complain about this comment
Jeeber (#9):
I don't have paitence enough to read your life story, so when I scrolled past your post, I couldn't help but think of a line from Adam Sandler's film, Mr Deeds, right before the fat lady in the pizza parlor beats up the reporter/ girlfreind:
"I'm sorry, All I heard was: Blah Blah Blah, I'm a dirty tramp."
Complain about this comment
Ed (#46):
$1 buys 10,000 Viet Dong.
Complain about this comment
# 47
Doug - I am worried by your claim that the outcome of Roosevelt's approach to The Great Depression was war. This is an new interpretation of the build-up to WWII and America's eventual part in it.
Can you tell us the basis for your view ?
Complain about this comment
Diplomacy has been in action for the past eight years as evidenced by the now familiar Condi Rice. The question I ask, Will it be enought to stop a nuclear hot spot like the India and Pakistan tension?
And here to the south of Texas we have an undeclared war going on with blame to go everywhere. Event like this are daily, terrorism or house cleaning from within, it will be a small step to organise.
The Cartels and drug Lords are on the verge of becoming a revolutionary army between us and Mexico. The recipe is already mixed, supply line in place, just add a little Chavez, stir in Russia support and wella!
It's the events that shape a presidency, how well the president handles it is the measure of the man. Not a position that many would volunteer for in todays world.
Hillary just accepted!!
Just a thought
Complain about this comment
#47 DougTexan
"In that is the prayer, that we don't rerun, as we have from the first writings of history. Always larger, more devasting war than the previous. The answer is diplomacy, but who will listen while their people starve or suffer?"
Two hopeful thoughts Doug. The first ironically is nuclear weapons. Their existence rules out 'WWIII' in any meaningful sense as an answer to economic woes. Secondly even if one could neutralize the nuclear issue the sheer cost of the modern panoply of war makes it hard for any combatant to so much as 'break even' in the event of large scale conflict.
Complain about this comment
AsaScott (#33):
The choice for Obama wasn't a rational choice for the most qualified candidate,
It was misdirected anger for Dubya.
Democrats didn't think about who would do a better job, and didn't seem to care how un-american Obama's voting record is, but they sure felt good when they were voting for the first Black President.
Yay! You made history!
Another concept that's dificult for democrats of the far left to understand: Cause and effect; Your actions have consequences. You voted for someone completely unfit for to be POTUS. The consequence of that action will be irreperable harm to the global economy and the security of the United States and her Allies.
You shouldn't try to shift the blame or complain that voters who made the right are wrong to be angry with you for your completely idiotic choice.
Did I hurt your feelings?
Complain about this comment
49. GreySquirrel1867
"I'm sorry, All I heard was: Blah Blah Blah, I'm a dirty tramp."
That is to funny,.. Hah Hah,.. seriously funny.
I liked Hillarys acceptance speech. Got to like Obama on this one,. "the buck stops here with me". He is answering questions with strengh and definitive points. Cool!
Complain about this comment
Sciurus,
I'd call it disgust rather than anger, and it wasn't misdirected either. And you surely can't be arguing that McPalin would've been better? It was a very rational choice.Peace and a new beginning
ed
And $1 buys 5% less equity than it did Friday....
Complain about this comment
51. eightypercent
FDR, May 1941I'll do the best I can. What many forget is that he became president in 1932 and instigated the first "New Deal" in 1933 in answer to the Great Depression that affected the world, not just the United States.
The 'Second New Deal included labor union support, the "WPA" relief program when men lived in work camps far from home in the Nevada desert buiding a dam, or in the mid west open plains paving the interstate system.
It worked and the results were definitly benificial, but the money paid to the workers, and the conditions reported, were shy of ....
And we got a new tax called Social Security (now a program rife with fraud)
FDR was more than willing to 'try' great ideas, most had linited sucess thought he American Left promote him as the great saver of the American Dream. Scroll halfway down this piece for an alternative piece (the other side) on FDR.
Considering many of his proposals weren't working well and were continued till WWII when they were no longer needed,.. and many economic minds consider his "New Deal" prolonged the same depression he worked so hard to relieve.
Just information from both sides, ..
Complain about this comment
# 54
Rather than hurting anyone's feelings, you have exposed yourself as someone who is stuck in their own groove and is not watching what is going on.
Complain about this comment
#54 Greysquirrel:
"You shouldn't try to shift the blame or complain that voters who made the right are wrong to be angry with you for your completely idiotic choice.
Did I hurt your feelings?"
Hardly, rather than argue with you I'll just let people read your hysterical, in both senses of the word, post and judge for themselves.
Complain about this comment
Okay Hilary has been offered SoS but in the picture the BBC has used of her and Obama she hardly looks thrilled...
Complain about this comment
54. GreySquirrel1867
Why have you not re-evaluated Obama, forget the election? Honestly, even though I voted for McCain I find Barack Obamas handeling of the past three weeks and his choices for key componets of his staff interesting and refreshing, as he is looking to keep a more moderate stance.
If that stays true, all is good. In his little speech after Hillary today he did say that they all have agreed basicly to bow to his will,.. and that could be trouble... and I'll leave that to the future to pass judgement or opinion on.
Just last evening in conversation I wondered out loud (surprised myself) wether McCain would have made such good choices, or tried like he does so well, to apease the left by becoming more so.
Hmm, got to work, check in later.
Complain about this comment
#54 GreySquirrel1867
Another concept that's dificult for democrats of the far left to understand: Cause and effect; Your actions have consequences.
Damn, that's where we went wrong! LOL
Cause and Effect? Isn't that a bit Buddhist and un-American. Anyway, viewing action as solely being cause and effect is missing the point; the essence of action is accomplishment!
You're completely wrong about Obama btw.
Complain about this comment
My heavens, everyone is in a gloomy mood today!
Lighten up guys. Obama hasn't even been sworn into office yet, and he's having a good effect on the stock market. His choices for his economic team have reassured even the Republicans. He's been rational, calm, and decisive. A lot better than we've had for 8 years. Truth be told, a lot better than we had for the 8 years before Bush. As for who was the better candidate in the recent election, I still have a hard time seeing John McCain dealing effectively with the financial mess we're in.
It is going to be dicey for the next year or so, but personally I feel a lot more hopeful about the future than I ever did with Bush as president.
Complain about this comment
Believe it or not this is for real!
Now, for some more World News
Iraqi Parliament Approves Deal Keeping Halliburton There for Three More Years
Also U.S. troops.
Economic Crisis Forces Russians to Cut Back Vodka Consumption
Government may step in with vodka stimulus package.
ALSO IN THE NEWS . . .
White House Mistakenly Sends Xmas Card for Hanukkah
Card sent (right) was meant for former Jews.
Peace and Irony
ed
Complain about this comment
# As a Scot
Then that's naughtie BBC. I watched it all on CNN and was very impressed by the facial and body language of all. They mean busness, this lot.
Complain about this comment
Doug:
I'm not hysterical, I'm pragmatic. I hope for the best, but have the foresight to prepare for the worst.
Enough of the election.
Hillary's Apointment as Secretary of State:
She's be the easiest for a Democrat controlled Senate to Confirm. And State is where she does the least harm to his policies while still bringing her supporters on board.
Everyone else he chose from the Clinton administration shows that his lack of executive experience, he's just bringing in people from the last Democratic Administration. These business as usual apointees, will not change washington. They'll just bring in a third Clinto Administration with the same deffective thinking that let Osama bin Laden get away with repeated attacks on Americans.
Gates is interesting because he's the only Bush appointee that has been asked to stay on for Obama.
Obama and his liberal cronies haven't thought much about who has to lead the military, because don't have any room in their ideology for the military. They have neither have the experience, nor the inclination to lead the military. So why not keep on the guy who was confirmed so easily by a democratically controlled Senate?
One baby killer is the same as another.
Complain about this comment
For me, the glass isn't just half empty, it's tipped over, rolled off the table, and headed for a shattering crash on the floor.
I hope I'm wrong about Obama.
Complain about this comment
I have to echo the sentiments expressed by
some posters above that neither party has
exercised fiscal restraint. The Republicans
have created the largest deficit in history,
so how can they be considered conservative?
The Democrats seem intent upon compounding
this error, mistakenly confusing this era with
the 30's.
In the 30's, we had a collapse because of
over-investment, and lack of demand.
We didn't really have much of a global economy
at that point in time, and what we did primarily
affected ourselves.
Nowadays, what we have is a global economy
where the Americans consumed, until recently,
too much and produced too little; everyone else
on the planet saw us as a convenient place to
dump their manufactured goods to pay their
oil bill.
As a result, we racked up massive trade and
budgetary deficits (the two are related.)
Penalizing saving by printing up a whole new
batch of money is exactly the wrong thing to
do; we could easily go the way of Argentina
and wind up with capital flight out of the country.
Already, the Japanese are demanding to be
repaid in yen if they put money into T-bills,
so this is apparently the scenario which they
expect to occur.
Increasing taxes on investment will have the
same result; people will move their money to
other countries. To some extent, this is already
happening.
In the end, if the Democrats follow either course,
they will get thrown out, even though the remedy
may work for a short time.
The problem with both parties is that they both
believe in Big Government. At least the Democrats
admit it, but that does not excuse them.
Complain about this comment
80%, more on the duration of the depression from,..
Umm,.. Odd, this quote, but more so, where it is about, not that it matters. And Labor Leader Lewis' remark
These are just more examples that bailouts and Work Programs will do the opposite of the intent, no maater how good the intent is.
Complain about this comment
#52, DT, this sort of thing makes one want to
zip across the border just to catch the local
culture and catch a quick meal, doesn't it?
#64, Ed, Adolf Hitler did some good things too.
It all comes down to that "vision thing."
Complain about this comment
22, Jeebers.
"I thought blogs were "anything goes, so long as it isn't a personal attack", or am I wrong?"
No, you are not wrong. But you have to ask yourself if anyone wants to read a long comment. If you want to be heard, you have consider that.
Complain about this comment
35, Dominick.
There are two very informative videos on NBC. They discuss Obama's choices and the situation of the Clintons. Aside from the possible problem with that latter, they think it is a fine working group.
If there is no problem with the Clintons they think Bubba would be an asset in negotiation. A good discussion on the India/Pakistan situation and why it is a fine opportunity for negotiation. According to the pundits Pakistan is not happy with its dissident group.
Complain about this comment
55, Doug.
"Got to like Obama on this one, 'the buck stops here with me.'"
He got that one from Harry Truman who had a sign on his desk that said."The buck stops here."
Complain about this comment
61, Doug.
"Honestly, even though I voted for McCain I find Barack Obamas handeling of the past three weeks and his choices for key componets of his staff interesting and refreshing, as he is looking to keep a more moderate stance."
His moderation was no surprise, at least not to me. The man's character does not suggest extreme left leanings. I do wish, however, that he would show a little more flair.
Complain about this comment
Just how many of the ten steps have we already implemented,.. Bush~Clinton~Bush~Obama
Communist Manifesto
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. (Foreclosure to banks, owned by Goverment thru Fanny Mae or Freddie Mac)
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. "...the duty rests upon the government to restrict such incomes by very high taxes."
(Sounds exactly like the plan coming)
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance. (1935 Wealth Tax Act with its confiscatory inheritance taxes)
(Already heavily Taxed, Thanks GW)
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
(read as Drug dealers, criminals,..after all we are all criminals just waiting to be caught)
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
(Done deal)
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state. (done with the implementation of the FCC)
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
(Go green big Auto, Steel and Energy!!)
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
(bring home the troops!)
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
(Our farms and livestock are done as factories)
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.
(Can you say pre-school indocturation)
Hey, we're communist with elections!
Complain about this comment
68, guns.
Lots of reasons are offered for the collapse of the market, except the most obvious. Because of excessive optimism, stocks were overpriced - all stocks. The market behaved sanely until the early 1990's. Then it started to go nuts.
All this unrealistic market needed was a trigger to burst its bubble.
Complain about this comment
GnR
I have to disagree, on one point, the world economy. We had a very large world economy in the thirties and before, but on a gold standard and limited through taxes, protectionism and time,..
Being either travel or communication. These were the difference, as Europe is now a second away for communication and less than a day if I wish to pay for same day shipping.
This said our economy is more "real time" now than in the 1900's, and more intertwined,..
Complain about this comment
DougTexan - "...he is "My" president."
Thank you. Your attitude is what I hope for from my countrymen, but so rarely see from members of either of the two main political parties.
You are a Patriot, and I hope the more hostile, vitriolic and vocal members of the Right, and the Left, who continue to smear and downright hate anyone who disagrees with their opinions will learn from your example how Americans conduct themselves.
Complain about this comment
#69 DougTexan
These are just more examples that bailouts and Work Programs will do the opposite of the intent, no matter how good the intent is.
Better to do evil then do nothing.
I'm not too sure of what the alternative is if Obama doesn't stimulate the economy.
You can nationalise industries, like the car industry, and fix them. What I've read about the management at the US car industry is a joke - it's class cronyism at it's most pathetic. In fact sell all three companies to Far East car manufacturers and let them fix it.
Recessions can be good things. They can get rid of things that don't work and start new things that do. States have an opportunity to invest in new technologies and economies; and create the new economy of the 21st century. This could be the start of something great.
Complain about this comment
#67 GreySquirrel1867
"For me, the glass isn't just half empty, it's tipped over, rolled off the table, and headed for a shattering crash on the floor.
I hope I'm wrong about Obama."
Sorry but I simply don't believe that last statement, I suspect you would rather see the USA fall into chaos than see Obama succeed in his presidency because if he succeeds then your entire worldview collapses and you have nothing left.
Complain about this comment
Doug.
I made a comment about the market collapse having to do with a huge bubble caused by the inflated price of all stocks, and that recent happenings were just the trigger. The mods are holding this comment. I have no idea why.
Complain about this comment
The only stocks I invest in are small caps, because the potential for growth out weighs the risk, but I consider land the best investment for the future. The whole house of cards may fall, but your own little peice of dirt isn't going anywhere (as long as you don't risk that too).
Complain about this comment
Ref 72, 74
Campaign rhetoric notwithstanding, the fact is that Obama's platform, the vision he articulated throughout the campaign, and what we can discern from his personal experiences indicate he is not the liberal politician that some believed he was. His appointments are center-right, and the stature and experience of the persons chosen confirm that Obama is a pragmatic and focused politician ready to tackle the daunting problems we are facing by listening to differing opinions and governing through consensus.
I would not be surprised if most of the opposition during the confirmation process comes from the left. The big losers, however, are the Hispanics who are conspicuously absent in the new Administration. In fact, some may be having second thoughts after the nomination of Janet Napolitano.
Complain about this comment
There was a time before the gold standard (gold was scarce) when silver was the currency of trade and every nation had a silver trade dollar.
Complain about this comment
66. At 6:19pm on 01 Dec 2008, GreySquirrel1867 wrote:
"Obama and his liberal cronies haven't thought much about who has to lead the military, because don't have any room in their ideology for the military. They have neither have the experience, nor the inclination to lead the military. So why not keep on the guy who was confirmed so easily by a democratically controlled Senate?
One baby killer is the same as another."
Incomprehensible. Gates is kept on because of Obama's liberal leaning?
That makes sense to you? If he had appointed Rummy, would that indicate he had became an out and out commie?
This is "goodthinkful" (ie the ability to hold two completely contradictory ideas at the same time - 1984) in spades.
Complain about this comment
Complain about this comment
Simon21
"goodthinkful", .. are you inner party? LOL
Just a prole that like beer and football...
Complain about this comment
Ms Marbles (81),
It has re-appeareed and I agree with its thrust. The Mods (who are as Gods) move in mysterious ways...
Peace and bottom fishing
ed
Complain about this comment
The US taxes have always been artificially low. Since US citizens do not enjoy the perks such as National Health that the Europeans take for granted, then it appears on the surface as though our taxes are low. However when you have to pay out of pocket for health care and other social services that the average European enjoys, then the true cost of living in the US becomes evident.
This is being slowly brought to light as former middle class Republicans along with the small business Bush like to tought as holding the American financial system begins to fail. 401K Retirement Plans and stock market investments were suppose to take the place of government sponsored Social Security have proven they are a failure.
Homeownership which guaranteed at lease an investment for hard times is now part of the problem not the solution. An investment in a home was what Bush said made the US the Ownership Society. Now all that we are is a debter nation.
When people pay higher taxes, it pays for a better quality of life. It is a sharing out of the financial and moral burdens in society. But in order to hide the actual burden of war and mayhem Bush-Cheney hid the fact by borrowing money from China and other parts of Asia to finance the so-called War on Terror, and for the illegal Invasion of Iraq.
Complain about this comment
No Simon, Rumsfeld would not have been kept on by Obama because the left has been clammering for his resignation since the start of the war in Iraq. Rumsfeld was confirmed by a Republican controlled Senate, not a Democrat controlled Senate, as Gates was.
My description of liberal thinking (or the lack thereof) toward military matters does not describe my own view, just my understanding of their view.
Gates is critical to implementing the surge strategy, that has been successful in Iraq, in Afganistan.
Having a basic understanding of an opposing view is not the same as having contradictory views.
Complain about this comment
AsaScot:
Believe or disbelieve as you like; I'd rather Obama be a mediocre president like Carter.
Complain about this comment
Jeebers, the Monroe Doctrine you mention is one of the reasons the USA has made itself so unpopular. "As long as the the rest of the world stays out of North and South America" indeed! South America has damn-all to do with you. You don't own it. It's not your "backyard".
As for those who can't read your long posting, the poor dears have been reading too many tabloid newspapers. Maybe you should break up the text with some pretty pictures.
Complain about this comment
I'm willing to bet Obama won't even LOOK outside the borders for the first 4 years, as he will be busy restructuring the federal government and kicking the economy in the pants. If foreigners are looking for handouts, they will be sorely mistaken. Then too, look for US military presence to drastically reduce, so all of you are getting exactly what you asked for. The Democrats have always believed in the Monroe Doctrine, which means if Europe and the world stays out of N and S America, the USA will leave them alone. We only step in when there's no other choice, remember WWI and II?
As a result, you will find global piracy to radically increase, and so too will countries become belligerent and so start throwing their weight around. Wars will ensue, of all types from economic to military. Most likely, after a decade of this, Europe and most of the globe will be begging for US intervention on an ever increasing basis." - Jeebers76@9
Obama will have no choice but to look abroad: the economic crisis cannot be solved by the USA - or without the USA. Nor can the even more important, although less immediate, environmental and resource crises. You're right that some US military withdrawals and cutbacks will happen - which is much to be welcomed. I doubt that wars will increase, at least in the next decade: war is expensive, and offers poor prospects for economic returns at a national scale (although many opportunities for private profit), as the USA has discovered in Iraq. No other state has the potential to wield the degree of dominance the USA has had - indeed, the US will remain "number 1" for the forseeable future, but its dominance will be greatly reduced.
In my opinion, we will definitely be out of Iraq within the next two years, a major push will take place in Afghanistan and possibly in Pakistan to eradicate Al Qaeda and, most importantly, our positions on Iran's nuclear development and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will remain unchangedDominickVila@35
I agree about Iraq and Israel/Palestine - but what if NATO and other allies won't put more troops into Afghanistan? Can Obama afford to risk getting bogged down? As for attacking Pakistan - the Pakistani armed forces (rather than the government) really do have WMDs, remember?
Complain about this comment
#90 GreySquirrel1867
"Believe or disbelieve as you like; I'd rather Obama be a mediocre president like Carter."
Mediocre? How generous of you. Still better than a disaster like Bush eh?
Obama's picks do seem to reflect a centrist pragmatist, which after eight years of dogmatic neo-cons is a breath of fresh air.
Complain about this comment
#14. Jeebers76: "I personally guarantee that if you read (post #9) you won't regret the time you spent in doing so. It sums up a lot of things I've been saying over time."
1028 words and 32 paragraphs is a summation? I hate to think how much you would write if you gave us the benefit of all your wisdom. Start a blog of your own, but don't use this space as a personal pulpit.
Complain about this comment
# 83 DominickVila wrote:
"The big losers, however, are the Hispanics who are conspicuously absent in the new Administration. In fact, some may be having second thoughts after the nomination of Janet Napolitano."
Isn't Richardson tipped for Commerce Secretary. He may have wanted SoS, but I would have thought Commerce was reasonably prestigious.
Don't quite get the point re Napolitano. I understood she was nominated for Homeland Security?
Has Obama appointed any African-Americans to senior posts yet?
Complain about this comment
89. At 9:54pm on 01 Dec 2008, GreySquirrel1867 wrote:
No Simon, Rumsfeld would not have been kept on by Obama because the left has been clammering for his resignation since the start of the war in Iraq."
If by the "left" you mean the vast majority of the US then you are correct.
" Rumsfeld was confirmed by a Republican controlled Senate, not a Democrat controlled Senate, as Gates was."
Yes and that shows bipartisanship does it not?
"My description of liberal thinking (or the lack thereof) toward military matters does not describe my own view, just my understanding of their view.
Gates is critical to implementing the surge strategy, that has been successful in Iraq, in Afganistan."
I do not understand. What do you mean successfull? Have you seen the latest headlines? The surge was based on arming sunni gangs.
It will prove (is proving) to be a disastorous policy as it was in Afghanistan.
Complain about this comment
87, Ed.
I am always more interested in the forest than the leaves. It was overemphasis on minutia that led people to believe Obama would be far to the left.
Complain about this comment
88, mary.
"The US taxes have always been artificially low."
I disagree. You are not counting the hidden taxes.
Complain about this comment
90, Grey.
Carter wasn't mediocre. He was a disaster.
Complain about this comment
94, David, re: Jeebers.
Ditto. When a comment is so long you have to scroll down twice (or is long without paragraphs) I give it a pass. The shorter stuff is much more interesting and to the point.
Complain about this comment
95, John in Dublin.
I don't think people should be chosen by ethnic group to fill posts. You want the best you can get, whoever they are. As for the Hispanics, a large proportion are immigrants and new to this country. It will take them a while to move up in society (education and Americanization, not class). The future will show more and more of them in high positions.
Complain about this comment
#28, 80%, you are crediting the American people
with a lot of intelligence and common sense that
they don't possess.
Ms. Marbles, I agree about the stock market thing.
We've actually had a series of bubbles, first a
stock market bubble and then a real estate bubble,
which was really a global credit bubble.
This is more or less the reverse of the 20's, where
we had a real estate bubble (which burst), followed
by a stock market bubble.
Personally, I'm hoping to start the next bubble,
so I can get out on time.
Complain about this comment
"91. At 10:28pm on 01 Dec 2008, Belmons wrote:
Jeebers, the Monroe Doctrine you mention is one of the reasons the USA has made itself so unpopular. "As long as the the rest of the world stays out of North and South America" indeed! South America has damn-all to do with you. You don't own it. It's not your "backyard"."
Yes, we know we don't own it. It is, however, a really easy place to plant troops and missiles (like ICBM's) for a strike on the USA. This is probably why, IMO.
"As for those who can't read your long posting, the poor dears have been reading too many tabloid newspapers. Maybe you should break up the text with some pretty pictures."
ROFL! I could break out the crayons... But, I could never stay in all the lines as a little kid... Think they'd complain about THAT, too? Or, I could just post some pics of trashy women in tight outfits, I hear that's popular in tabloids...
Complain about this comment
Desperate times?
The collapse of the borrow and spend bubble leaves me wondering what the engine of future prosperity will be. With no savings, and negative equity in their houses, people can obviously not spend their way out of the recession by stocking up on cheap imported crap, or by buying ever bigger and more suburban monster houses, or bigger cars, boats, ATVs, etc. So it would seem to fall to the state to pump money into the economy.
If our money is being used, we should have a say in how it is to be put to work. Perhaps this is the time for a real paradigm shift; a rethinking of what we mean by prosperity.
Encouraging growth seems the only rational way out of the current malaise (and of course the usual Keynsian/trickledown arguments apply). But is there an argument to be made not only regarding the means of achieving growth, but as to the ends of growth as well? What do we want from the good life?
Yours,
Canadian Pinko
Complain about this comment
Jeebers:
Don't give up. You'll get the hang of it after a while. Marbles and David are right - short is good. It is actually more difficult to write a good short comment than a long piece.
81. Belmons: The great irony about the Monroe doctrine is that it had the tacit support of England, and de facto enforcement by the Royal Navy. The US Navy lacked the reach at the time. Nothing like the old silent service. England had huge commercial interests in South America, and the Monroe doctrine suited England very well.
80% - Yes, agreed.
I too think Obama has been steady so far, and right now steady is a really valuable trait.
A while ago (eight weeks) I was going to post a reply to marbles concerning the economy. Don't know where we are going, but some guesses:
Pensions are going to kick in one month later for every year, so that in 12 years they will start at 66 not 65, and so on.
Tax deductabilty of mortgage interest is going to be cut back, and old laws requiring a minimum down payment will be resurrected.
The habit of going to Orlando or Vegas every year is going to diminish.
We are going to make a sandwich at home, eat it at our desks, and only take 15 minutes for lunch.
The thermostat is going down. Sweaters will be back in fashion. Whatever happened to Barbara Hutton?
Complain about this comment
The person nominated by Obama who has the trickiest task at the moment is Robert Gates. He is effectively the servant of two masters until Obama takes office. Really is there any need for a three month transition in the 21st century?
Complain about this comment
re: Jeebers76 post @9: very interesting read.
Just wanted to comment, that given some of the purile and spiteful blogs posted over the last week, I think it was exactly what was needed to stimulate thoughtful debate free from acrimony and sarcastic rebuttals.
Whilst being succinct may be considered a virtue, it is more often a precision skill - the lack of which neither renders the content invalid or inferior.
As you rightly pointed out, those who cannot be bothered to read it because it contains 1028 words and 32 paragraphs, or have to scroll down a few times, are free to do just that. But unless they have become moderators and/or rule makers of this blog by common consent, Jeebers feel free to comment in the way the feel most comfortable. Some of us will continue to read, whatever the length - and criticise only its content.
LURKER
Complain about this comment
102 Guns: That's funny.
To finish the previous post:
The old flivver is going to rust another Winter. Or two. Or maybe three.
The scissors are going to attend to some credit cards.
The government will pump money into the economy to counteract collasping demand like a madman running up the down escalator. There are lots of opportunites for investing in public works.
We'll start re-reading Steinbeck, and J. K. Galbraith, and Keynes. Hayek and Friedman will collect dust for a bit.
We'll sit together in the evening, like we used to do when we were younger, play cards, and quietly enjoy each other's company. We'll be a lot more careful about spending money. And we'll hope our kids find jobs.
Good luck, President Obama.
Complain about this comment
Or maybe:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7755315.stm
Complain about this comment
Well did you all get the change you wanted? There isn't an unfamiliar change in the bunch. The deck has been shuffled but the joker in the deck is still Obama himself. The more things change...the more they remain the same. Hahahahaha. I wonder if we'll ever get out of Iraq.
Complain about this comment
From the writings of Chairman Ben, circa 2002, on the evils of deflation:
More on the virtues (??) of "quantitative easing" here.
Yours,
Canadian Pinko
Complain about this comment
"genuflector wrote:
Just wanted to comment, that given some of the purile and spiteful blogs posted over the last week, I think it was exactly what was needed to stimulate thoughtful debate free from acrimony and sarcastic rebuttals.
Whilst being succinct may be considered a virtue, it is more often a precision skill - the lack of which neither renders the content invalid or inferior."
Since the conclusions were on the startling side for foreigners, I felt it was necessary to write a brief "key" to understand how the US political parties think. You won't find this sort of thing elsewhere, because they like to think they're different in terms of issues, not thought process. You need to spend time among them to pick this up, and I have a background in psychology as well as history.
Actually, if you really want to fix the economy, pumping money into the banks won't help at all, Japan tried it and failed miserably. Instead, put people to work producing fundamental infrastructure, reduce dependence on foreign oil for more self-sustainable industry, and eliminate wasteful government spending in favor of better education (pre-school and up) in matters both financial and traditional (reading, math, science etc). Don't forget to exterminate the HMO's so we can keep the workforce from getting sick easily and paying outrageous administration fees hidden in the medical costs.
In the long run, you get a more stable populace with better paying jobs, and the infrastructure to back it up, like fiber optic cables and environmentally friendly power sources.
Complain about this comment
102 guns:
All that bubbling, and then MAII's gloomful posting made me think of a different kind of "trubble:"
FIRST WITCH.
Round about the caldron go;
In the poison'd entrails throw.--
Toad, that under cold stone,
Days and nights has thirty-one
Swelter'd venom sleeping got,
Boil thou first i' the charmed pot!
ALL.
Double, double, toil and trouble;
Fire, burn; and caldron, bubble.
SECOND WITCH.
Fillet of a fenny snake,
In the caldron boil and bake;
Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
Wool of bat, and tongue of dog,
Adder's fork, and blind-worm's sting,
Lizard's leg, and howlet's wing,--
For a charm of powerful trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.
ALL.
Double, double, toil and trouble;
Fire, burn; and caldron, bubble.
etc., etc., . . .
Come to think about it, they remind me more than a little of how hedge fund guys talk.
But we all know it ends badly, and one should never trifles with the fates.
Watch out for the bubbles!
Yours,
Canadian Pinko, shouting "fair is foul, and foul is fair!"
Complain about this comment
Re: 112 Jeebers76
In the long run, you get a more stable populace with better paying jobs, and the infrastructure to back it up, like fiber optic cables and environmentally friendly power sources.
I agree with you 100%. But the money has to come from somewhere. Tax revenues will be going down because of the slowdown, so the gov't is going to have to borrow, and I think it will be borrowing lots of that money the Fed will be printing.
The money only works if it is put to work (they call it "high powered money," I think). So the Fed creates it (out of thin air, really), the banks lend it, and it works to pump up the economy. Those witches in MacBeth make more sense to me.
Opacity notwithstanding, if it works, I'm all for it, as long as it is used sensibly, for green infrastructure and such, as you mention. Still, my penny pinching thrifty instincts tell me there is going to be a downside, beyond the eventual risk of inflation, that has to be considered. Am I just too conservative for my own good?
Yours,
Canadian Pinko
Complain about this comment
Pinko,
I haven't the foggiest! I don't like the idea of creating more money that has no relation to real wealth at all, it's really just fancy colored paper when you get down to it. The intricacies of high finance are lost on me. I just know what will work historically and psychologically, not with arcane mathematical formulas!
The whole thing gives me the willies! All I know is what the end result must be, not how we get there. Basically, for decades now nobody has wanted to spend on infrastructure, and so we get disasters like what happened in Minnesota's 35W bridge. It's jut not exciting to spend money on public transport, communication et al. Yet more US people die each year from car accidents than in Vietnam, all of it!
If you get the kids a good education, ESPECIALLY kindergarden and other grade school activities, they turn out 8x more taxes for every dollar spent now, according to one study I read. You want capable workers? Educate them and make sure they've got excellent preventative care, like vaccines, which HMO's hate paying for.
Complain about this comment
All the gloom-and-doom on this post reminds me of a scholarly article I read years ago, that suggested that when ancient civilizations began focusing on conserving and recycling resources, the end was nigh; populations did not turn to conservation until it was too late.
I guess the big picture of unsustainable population growth and overuse of resources helps me keep this current burp in the global economy in perspective.
I am not a proponent of gloom and doom. I do think that we'll muddle out of this tight economic spot; we've been through worse, and have a much wider base of prosperity upon which to build a solution.
It is still the longer term that scares me.
Complain about this comment
Jeebers,
Ya know, it's starting to make sense to me: the phrase "no relation to real wealth" in concert with your talk of the value of such things as education and infrastructure make me realize that the worth of this funny money is actually just a promise in the future. That is to say, we print it, and it does something useful (fixes bridges, educates kids, etc.), the multiplier effect takes over, and, hopefully, we all forget we are just trading pretty paper, or bits and bytes.
Does that make any sense at all?
Yours,
Canadian Pinko
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
chronophobe, somehow you have evoked in me
the image of Paulson, Bernanke and Greenspan
flying around on broomsticks instead of diligently
doing what they should have been doing all along:
measuring ingredients and stirring the pot over
an even flame.
Let's hope that Rubin and his clan can come up
with the secret ingredients needed to make the
soup come out right.
Complain about this comment
For the immediate crisis, I'm willing to pay more in taxes- if we also make serious efforts to reduce spending afterward.
Rebuild infrastructure (perhaps smartly, w. new emphasis on renewable and sustainable resources) and revamp governments' tarnished role of looking out for the people, for the common good.
Complain about this comment
Sorry 'bout the double post above.
Via-Media,
I'm wondering if this current bubble (or bubbles) will be bad enough that we are forced to confront some of those long term issues. Is it maybe the beginning of the end for consumerism as the main spring of our economies? Many of us have benefited from the growth and prosperity of the last 60 odd years, but it is becoming plain this kind of growth cannot continue. Is the New World ready to embrace the end of the Frontier mythology of endless abundance? Childhood's end, perhaps?
Yours,
Canadian Pinko
Complain about this comment
119 Guns,
LOL . . . economics may be the dismal science, but what those guys at Treasury and the Fed do is definitely a black art.
At least it is to those like me who don't know a fenny snake from a dog's tongue!
Cheers,
Canadian Pinko
Complain about this comment
#1
Marcus,
I love it. Brilliant. Print money as the only option. Massive expansion of the M0 money supply. That's never been tried. Not.
Except in the Weimar republic. And Latin America in their collapse. The Fisher price equation very elegantly links that particular measure of monetary supply to the velocity of transactions (fairly constant) and inflation.
Printing money results in hyperinflation and escalating interest rates. Wages never keep up. There are more foreclosures, more poor folks on the streets. Massive destruction in the value of bank deposits and any liquid assets held in the currency in question.
So your advice to hold all your assets in liquid cash and then pursue a hyperinflationary monetary policy is somewhat self destructive.
The alternative, which is being pursued in Europe and now the US, is a fiscal stimulus package which balances current deficit spending against a future increase in taxation on those who can afford to reduce their saving.
As for there not being anyone who can afford more taxation, of course there are and most of us are willing to pay.
The smart guys, the really smart guys, hold diversified assets in different currencies and instruments, including stocks, bonds, cash, art, property and others. You never suffer from the volatility of the markets that way, but you also need to be comfortable your net worth is what you need it to be without speculative gains. This needs a slow steady accumulation of wealth, many folks trying to make ends meet don't get that option. Your idea of printing money would destroy the very folks we need to help. And you.
Holding all as cash in a recession is idiocy, the purchasing power of cash always declines in a recession.
Just as a minor correction, Economists don;t hold MBA's, they hold a degree and typically doctorate in Economics. I will admit some business folks have an Economics degree and an MBA, but we are few and far between.
Guess we need those economists after all.
Economist Sam
Complain about this comment
#110
Marcus,
I think you missed the point. The change was from Bush, Rove, Brownie and all their ideological chums.
Yep, I got the change I wanted. Folks who take counsel, like science, decide using facts. Some adults in charge will be nice.
Happy Sam
Complain about this comment
#55
Doug,
I agree. These guys look serious. Whether we agree with their policy decisions we have yet to find out. Much will emerge over the next couple of years.
But we are looking at a bunch of folks who seem determined, pragmatic and fact based. And Obama looks very collected with the press, more presidential than, well, the President.
Hard times, and a hard pounding to come. But I think we will come through, and come through stronger.
God Bless America.
Patriot Sam
Complain about this comment
Hey chronophobe!
If you think THAT blows your mind, check this out...
Essentially, the only crisis we have is something we made up out of our collective imaginations. We lose jobs and can't keep our homes just because of some worthless pieces of paper with no real connection to wealth other than what our imaginations give it! This is not something imposed upon us by some outside force, this is just a silly human custom that has people scared!
How's THAT for some perspective? All my life I've tried to get people to sit back and realize what's happening in the world around them, to think in other words. Been doing it ever since I was old enough to speak....
Complain about this comment
#26
Marcus,
An 80% devaluation in the $. Interesting idea. How many folks could drive to the gas station at $14 a gallon? How many more foreclosures with mortgages at a 25% APR? What asset depreciation would we see? Who could buy a car at $100k? Use credit cards with a 120% rate?
I love your economic policies. But please, please let's give thanks that only whack jobs have tried them. Say 'Hello Robert, I like your country'. Because you want to live there.
LMAO.
Economist Sam
Complain about this comment
Marcus,
Not to pile on but I did a quick Price Per Square Foot comparison on property, since you raised the issue.
Sacramento runs right now at about $228 PSF. My apartment in London is running at $986 PSF. Not quite your ratio, but close.
Yet folks would still rather live in London than Sacramento. Could it be a more 'happening' place?
My place in Manhattan is in the $1300 PSF range. Would folks choose to live in a hyperinflationary NYC vs a more stable London if NYC became 'less' expensive?
It's an interesting question for the few of us who can choose (immigration laws etc being what they are).
I think we would still choose both, but it is a personal choice. How many other folks can make that decision?
I'd also suggest that Florida or Sacramento are not really options as a professional, unless you were retired. You live in London or NYC for work, not relaxation.
I'd still choose neither Floridas or Sacramento. In that scenario Tuscany, Provence and Buenos Aeries have better climates. Rome, Paris or Delhi better food. Plus a few weeks in London in Summer and NYC in Fall, to get the best of the weather.
So all this is really just to say, you describe a 'hypothesis' that really exists today and ask a question 'Who would choose between London and Sacramento?'. Well, anyone who can and wants to work. And they would choose London, or NYC, or Chicago, or . . . .
Apologies to all for the offensiveness of this post, but it seeks to address a hypothetical that to me is a real decision. And a no brainer.
Real Estate Sam
Complain about this comment
#128.SamTyler1969: "My apartment in London is running at $986 PSF."
The cost to purchase or rent property in London would greatly depend on where is was located - you couldn't find anything less that $1,000 in Central London. Prices in Knightsbridge can run as high as $5,000 psf with similar rates in Notting Hill and Belgravia. No doubt on the outer edges of suburbia you might find something more reasonable but few "professionals" would do so, preferring to commute from beyond London itself if a smart address in town were to be beyond their means.
"'Who would choose between London and Sacramento?'. Well, anyone who can and wants to work."
That just isn't so. Americans can't just fly over and work any more than Britons can decide that Sacramento might be a nicer environment. Work permits and visas stand in the way - "immigration laws etc being what they are."
Complain about this comment
David & Sam.
On a bluff atop the Palisades, overlooking the Hudson River, minutes from Manhattan by tunnel, are lovely Victorian houses that start at $300 PSF. $1000 PSF gets you a mansion. Trees, wildlife, birds and a view of the Manhattan skyline, without the noise, dirt and inconvenience, yet with all the advantages of the City. And no parking fees.
Complain about this comment
I can't believe Justin is actually suggesting that the US system is more sensible!
I like to know what the price is before I buy it, not after. If a Big Mac is advertised at 99c it should cost that not a $1.25. As a visitor you don't know what the local sales tax is so you have no idea of the price.
Hotel bills are even more ridiculous - a room tax and an occupancy tax - does that mean it's cheaper if I don't occupy the room?
VAT is simple in the UK; you know what you're going to pay and if you don't know VAT is 17.5% you're not going to be interested in how much tax you're actually paying
Complain about this comment
74. At 7:28pm on 01 Dec 2008, allmymarbles wrote:
"His moderation was no surprise, at least not to me. The man's character does not suggest extreme left leanings. I do wish, however, that he would show a little more flair."
Sarah Palin in charge of conservation, perhaps? At least she knows where all the antlers are hidden!
Complain about this comment
Excessive spending?
I just received an e-mail that said the cost of flying Nancy Pelosi to and from California once a week costs the taxpayers $120,000 for every week she makes the trip. I checked this on the internet and it is correct. Figure out what that would cost in a year. Millions of our money!
The Speaker of the House used to fly on a commercial airline until 9/11, after which it was thought the speaker needed greater security. She is entitled to army transport, but the smaller cheaper jet cannot fly in bad weather, and must refuel for the long trip, so it was decided she take a 200 passenger C-40. All of this because she is third in line for the presidency. Are there also arrangements like this for the fourth in line? For the fifth in line? For....
Complain about this comment
133, correction.
I meant to say Pelosi was second in line for the presidency.
Complain about this comment
131, badtaxes.
I don't remember paying taxes for food either in a grocery store or in a restaurant. Have I gone senile?
Complain about this comment
Ms. Marbles, considering how Nancy Pelosi votes,
it would save us considerable expense if she just
stayed in California.
Complain about this comment
136, guns.
Or we could have her fly commercial and take her chances.
Complain about this comment
The price shown on the item should be the price you pay. Anything else would be deceitful.
(However, retailers could show the price without tax in smaller numbers as well, for information purposes).
Complain about this comment
#129
Hi David,
Agreed on the choice point, I think Marcus 'choice' was kinda naive. That said L1 visa's on the US side allow a lot of flexibility if you work for a multi national and have a degree, I believe the UK has a similar scheme.
As for Central London, agreed also. I just can't afford Knightsbridge, and I dislike Harrods since it became a theme park.
Realtor Sam
Complain about this comment
"Inclusive prices are convenient but obscure the tax issue. "
Oh Justin - you've spent too long in the US!
Having to work out the real prices for things is great for practising mental arithmatic, but a complete nightmare when knowing what a shopping basket will actually cost....
Every American I've meant says the US system of tax exclusive prices is not sensible at all!
Complain about this comment
#135. allmymarbles: "I don't remember paying taxes for food either in a grocery store or in a restaurant."
I don't know how it is in New York State, but here in California there is sales tax levied on restaurant meals, in fact it's an easy way of determining the tip by doubling the tax amount. Fast-food outlets charge tax depending on whether the product is to to be eaten on the premises. which is taxed, or "to go", which is not.
Complain about this comment
Re #115 Jeebers76,
...arcane mathematical formulas...
Reminds me that over the weekend some friends and I watched an old (not sure how old) 3-part BBC documentary called The Trap. One section went into what a mess Blair made of things trying to borrow American ideas about performance measures based on the theory that human behavior could be explained, predicted and controlled with the help of mathematical models.
As to your thoughts on education, I could not agree more. A mere 8 years into my current career I am making (and paying taxes on) more than triple the best wage either of my parents ever made, all because of my education. I think you need to get to the kids even earlier than kindergarten, though. Parents who read to/with their toddlers, try to teach them their colors and letters etc., and who make the financial commitment to send their children to pre-school are setting their children up to succeed on numerous levels. Investment in higher education pays as well. I have more than paid back the grants I received to go to college.
Complain about this comment
141, David.
Actually I am not in New York, but a displaced New Yorker. Nearby, though, and watching things.
Complain about this comment
#130
Thanks Marby,
If only Mrs Sam would let me. She likes our old historic house and as she managed the restoration of the wreck we bought I think that is where the family hearth must be. Our NY place is just a condo that, to be honest, is a guy place I sleep in because I hate hotels. Especially at NYC rates.
Pax Vonbiscum,
Commuter Sam
Complain about this comment
143
You peeking tom you.
139 Mr tyler
on this printing money scheme , is that the sort of scheme where we all get told to get a pen and write another few 0's at the end of the note.
to add to your list Zim, ,Yugoslavia,before the break apart.
Complain about this comment
Re: 126 Jeebers76
Yo, Jeebers, I hear you. Read any Foucault lately? This'll really mess with your head:
More here.
Yours,
Canadian Pinko
Complain about this comment
#110
"Hahahahaha"
Is that how you actually laugh? It sounds like a really camp super-villian.
Complain about this comment
105 really this is just a joke I agree with the letter
"We are going to make a sandwich at home, eat it at our desks, and only take 15 minutes for lunch."
maybe we can take an hour to eat our sandwiches and do some stuff in town, read the paper, blog for a while, not at the bosses expense .Or relax and enjoy that cigarette,mmm
15 minute lunches probably have a negative health effect.
Complain about this comment
64. At 5:44pm on 01 Dec 2008, Ed Iglehart wrote:
Believe it or not this is for real!
"Bush to receive first-ever International Medal of Peace.?"
Ed, is this news from a parallel world in which Georgey actually has the will of the people; or for that matter the will of the world in mind? This isn't happening, it just can't. It's not true what they say, money can buy you everything. Even a false, undeserved metal. I am speechless.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS