Are you worried about the economy?

[sputnikgirl]

I'm worried, because I have a hard enough time finding a job as it is. I have a degree, so I don't get taken seriously by the retail & food service industries. Then there are office jobs, that want 2-3 years experience...that I don't have. Since I've been in college, I don't have a strong work history, which also is a strike against me.

 

[Funkwerkz]

I'm very sorry to see the global loss of economic balance.
I mean; Most socialist economies had been self-destructed in 1991 and faced with harsh hyper-inflation like Russian Federation got a 99% loss of ruble's value immediately after 1991. Economy is strongly related with politics. During the Cold War, global economy had two balancing powers which were American capitalism and Soviet socialism, as you already know. They were balancing themselves very well because both sides had fear of other side so they tried to plan their economies efficiently and effectively. After 1991, USA began to spread its economic power globally and obviously sucked. Americans thought they can take over the world with their green bucks. Although the 2nd Clinton administration provided a $55 billion budget surplus, i don't think that American economy goes better in a stable way. Jr. Bush administrations are a bunch of hotair headed people in terms of managing international politics and economy.

To save US and global economy, proper solutions for Iraq and Afghanistan must be found. Annual expenditure of Iraq invasion is about $ 400 billion, i think. Iraq invasion is the worst way to waste everything such as funds and especially human life.

American government should understand that wars and invasions do not provide more power. American economy is still in the Cold War structure which will drive them in to a stuation which Russia faced up in 1990s. Americans are still trying to find enemies to waste funds for destroying them instead of using funds to enrich human life and protect nature.

 

[negator]

I'm very sorry to see the global loss of economic balance.
I mean; Most socialist economies had been self-destructed in 1991 and faced with harsh hyper-inflation like Russian Federation got a 99% loss of ruble's value immediately after 1991. Economy is strongly related with politics. During the Cold War, global economy had two balancing powers which were American capitalism and Soviet socialism, as you already know. They were balancing themselves very well because both sides had fear of other side so they tried to plan their economies efficiently and effectively. After 1991, USA began to spread its economic power globally and obviously sucked. Americans thought they can take over the world with their green bucks. Although the 2nd Clinton administration provided a $55 billion budget surplus, i don't think that American economy goes better in a stable way. Jr. Bush administrations are a bunch of hotair headed people in terms of managing international politics and economy.

To save US and global economy, proper solutions for Iraq and Afghanistan must be found. Annual expenditure of Iraq invasion is about $ 400 billion, i think. Iraq invasion is the worst way to waste everything such as funds and especially human life.

American government should understand that wars and invasions do not provide more power. American economy is still in the Cold War structure which will drive them in to a stuation which Russia faced up in 1990s. Americans are still trying to find enemies to waste funds for destroying them instead of using funds to enrich human life and protect nature.

qft

i'd like to add that i think the clinton presidency enjoyed the upswing of an economy that has absolutely nothing to do with governmental leadership, and everything to do with idiotic tampering by central bankers.
and, call me naive if you must, but i think the best solution is to pull completely out of iraq immediately.

geopolitical specialist chalmers johnson
the pentagon strangles our economy

more

 

[Funkwerkz]

call me naive if you must, but i think the best solution is to pull completely out of iraq immediately.

Why calling you naive?! You just express your opinion. You have an opinion so, you are not naive. I support a complete pull out too.

What does "qft" mean, by the way?

 

[titsrock]

Prof--Calling Cali "heavily left" is a joke. It is moderate. Why else would we have tossed out Gray Davis and "voted in" Arnie? Arnie got nothing done and is now bringing out some of the policies that got Gray booted from office (see pandering to Indians and floating another car tax stories in various papers around here)...

And I think it's laughable for you to label Portland, OR "Libertarian." just because they happen to approach green issues the way you think they should be approached. If you look at an Oregon Income or Property tax bill, You Might not think so fondly of them. And why no Sales tax? Is there no truer and fairer tax than a sales tax? It is a Progressive/Liberal state. Boise, ID, is more Libertarian...actually.

 

[Friday on my mind]

qft

i'd like to add that i think the clinton presidency enjoyed the upswing of an economy that has absolutely nothing to do with governmental leadership, and everything to do with idiotic tampering by central bankers.
and, call me naive if you must, but i think the best solution is to pull completely out of iraq immediately.

geopolitical specialist chalmers johnson
the pentagon strangles our economy

more

While all presidents are somewhat prisoners of circumstances I don't think it is fair to dismiss the policys of Clintons economic team as having not played a part.They did bring some fiscal discipline to the govt spending and actually reduced and or cut the growth in some spending(mainly on defense).
I know that many find it hard to beleive dems were more responsible fiscally then republicans but the history of who has really driven up deficit spending is clear.It's been the republicans with more spending and tax cuts who have been irresponsible.

 

[Facetious]

Arnie got nothing done and is now bringing out some of the policies that got Gray booted from office (see pandering to Indians and floating another car tax stories in various papers around here)...

Don't Be Economic Girly Men !

So much for that scheme !

 

[titsrock]

Here's a timely editorial from the NYTimes about the lunacy of that gas-tax "holiday" that McCain/Clinton think is such a grande idea...

April 30, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist
Dumb as We Wanna Be
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

It is great to see that we finally have some national unity on energy policy. Unfortunately, the unifying idea is so ridiculous, so unworthy of the people aspiring to lead our nation, it takes your breath away. Hillary Clinton has decided to line up with John McCain in pushing to suspend the federal excise tax on gasoline, 18.4 cents a gallon, for this summer’s travel season. This is not an energy policy. This is money laundering: we borrow money from China and ship it to Saudi Arabia and take a little cut for ourselves as it goes through our gas tanks. What a way to build our country.

When the summer is over, we will have increased our debt to China, increased our transfer of wealth to Saudi Arabia and increased our contribution to global warming for our kids to inherit.

No, no, no, we’ll just get the money by taxing Big Oil, says Mrs. Clinton. Even if you could do that, what a terrible way to spend precious tax dollars — burning it up on the way to the beach rather than on innovation?

The McCain-Clinton gas holiday proposal is a perfect example of what energy expert Peter Schwartz of Global Business Network describes as the true American energy policy today: “Maximize demand, minimize supply and buy the rest from the people who hate us the most.”

Good for Barack Obama for resisting this shameful pandering. :thumbsup:

For the rest of the editorial...click on the link:
Where is our energy policy, anyway?

 

[Friday on my mind]

Here's a timely editorial from the NYTimes about the lunacy of that gas-tax "holiday" that McCain/Clinton think is such a grande idea...

April 30, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist
Dumb as We Wanna Be
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

It is great to see that we finally have some national unity on energy policy. Unfortunately, the unifying idea is so ridiculous, so unworthy of the people aspiring to lead our nation, it takes your breath away. Hillary Clinton has decided to line up with John McCain in pushing to suspend the federal excise tax on gasoline, 18.4 cents a gallon, for this summer’s travel season. This is not an energy policy. This is money laundering: we borrow money from China and ship it to Saudi Arabia and take a little cut for ourselves as it goes through our gas tanks. What a way to build our country.

When the summer is over, we will have increased our debt to China, increased our transfer of wealth to Saudi Arabia and increased our contribution to global warming for our kids to inherit.

No, no, no, we’ll just get the money by taxing Big Oil, says Mrs. Clinton. Even if you could do that, what a terrible way to spend precious tax dollars — burning it up on the way to the beach rather than on innovation?

The McCain-Clinton gas holiday proposal is a perfect example of what energy expert Peter Schwartz of Global Business Network describes as the true American energy policy today: “Maximize demand, minimize supply and buy the rest from the people who hate us the most.”

Good for Barack Obama for resisting this shameful pandering. :thumbsup:

For the rest of the editorial...click on the link:
Where is our energy policy, anyway?

Agreed the tax moratrium is a bad idea.It would just allow more consumption.But at least her proposal would be paid for unlike McCains.But the real problem is this kind of pandering is exactly what "the people" in the majority want.Your link from Tom Fiedman talks about how we need higher taxes on gas not lower ones and while that may be true,he wouldn't be elected dog catcher with that kind of rhetoric.But the truth is even a moratorium on the gas tax would mean little in savings consumers would see as the tax is under 20 cents a gallon.That would be rapidly made up for in the higher prices that are coming as demand keeps increasing worldwide,and it is LOL.

 

[Member2019]

Obama may not have answers, but at least he's not about introducing new problems ...

Here's a timely editorial from the NYTimes about the lunacy of that gas-tax "holiday" that McCain/Clinton think is such a grande idea...

Yes, when I first heard of this, I didn't need any article to point it out to me it was both a micro and macro-economically damaging idea.

I was extremely impressed by Obama's response.

I was more recently impressed with Obama's medical coverage plans (especially on focusing on kids first, foremost and across-the-board) versus Clinton's "open ended" and McCain's "tax credits" (God, Republicans really make me wonder when they throw around that word like the can balance it into their platform).

Obama has impressed me this past month, for sure. I could care less about the guilty-by-association of Wright, old news now.

 

[Nomad 800]

Am I thinking the economy will go way down? Of course it will (and is). Am I worried personally? No. I have bet most of my assets for months now that it will. If it does, and I time it right, I stand to make a bundle. So let it fall, the faster and harder and farther the better.
Is that selfish? Definitely. But it's also true.

 

[Member2019]

More and more I'm reminded of 2000 ...

Am I thinking the economy will go way down? Of course it will (and is). Am I worried personally? No. I have bet most of my assets for months now that it will. If it does, and I time it right, I stand to make a bundle. So let it fall, the faster and harder and farther the better.
Is that selfish? Definitely. But it's also true.

More and more I'm being reminded of 2000.

In 2000, the economy would dip, but when the stats came out, there would be a rogue quarter with a "minimum growth" that would starve off the official "recession" term. It wasn't until 2000Q4 and then 2001Q1 that it "really hit hard," with the job losses finally coming 12-18 months after the trouble started.

So I'm starting to wonder if 2008 will continue to be those teetering losses, but not the "big plunge," with job losses that were increasing, but not the massive layoffs. And then that "big plunge" will hit in early 2009, only far worse than 2001, with most of the job losses finally hitting then.

In any case, I've tried to balance my liquid against my meager (I'm not that old yet and I certainly didn't inherit money, much less did my wife), more long-term investments with different funds and assets over the globe. I'm in for the long-haul, not short-term, but I've never been risky enough to invest heavily in growth (always looking for solid income, despite the reduced potential) or bet for/against the economy (as it could swing hard the wrong way).

 

[Friday on my mind]

And why no Sales tax? Is there no truer and fairer tax than a sales tax?

I have to point out that sales taxes are not good ways to raise revenue in general as they are very regressive and impact the poor disproportionately.They are the opposite of progressive taxes which are based on ability to pay.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_tax


"Sales taxes are considered to be regressive tax; that is, low income people tend to spend a greater percentage of their income in taxable sales (using a cross section time-frame) than higher income people."

The only way to compensate for that is to have some items tax exempted which then gets into complicated tax laws and loopholes.I think progressive income tax which few exemptions allowed is much fairer with all kinds of income taxed the same.Meaning no lower rate for income from things like "capital gains" which is currently taxed at a lower rate then income from wages is.Not surprising given who has the money and lobbyists to influence tax law,the people with money of course lol.

 

[negator]

an analysis

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JE07Dj02.html

 

[negator]

Washington's Great Inflation Hoax

In short, there have been three big gainers from understatement of U.S. inflation: the federal government, wage-paying businesses and the institutions and markets of the swollen U.S. financial sector.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/84845/

 

[negator]

emergency bank holiday - june 5th
http://thisjune5th.com/

the parable of the banker:
http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_99/hannigan092099.htm

 

[Legzman]

emergency bank holiday - june 5th
http://thisjune5th.com/

Sounds good to me! I'll have to run it by my girl since she's a banker and could tell me all the ins and outs of this. But regardless, it sounds good to me!

 

[Dean Wormer]

emergency bank holiday - june 5th
http://thisjune5th.com/

the parable of the banker:
http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_99/hannigan092099.htm

The good thing is that people stupid enough to believe in and act upon this don't have enough money to make a difference.

 

[negator]

The good thing is that people stupid enough to believe in and act upon this don't have enough money to make a difference.

true. by the way, could i borrow five bucks?

 

[Facetious]

head up his ass