TPS

Bills most improved in league, and props to to Levitre and Bell. He also mentions something I posted about the Pitt game--the toughnous of the Bills as they went "toe-to-toe" with one of the toughest teams in the league. Brian Baldinger Courtesy of rumblings.

There has never been verifiable proof that Supply-side and the laugher curve theory worked as suggested. Tax cuts were supposed to increase revenues by changing behavior--more investment, more work effort, less tax avoidance, etc. The outcome from tax cuts in the 1980s and the 2000s were deficits, which then creates economic stimulus in the standard Keynesian way. As David Stockman(REagan's budget director) said, Supplyside was a political/economic philosophy used to get tax cuts passed for the rich. It's closer to a religion than an economic theory. As I've posted here quite often, the long run growth rate of real GDP in the US shows very little relation to tax policy changes--tax changes have impacted the distribution of income, the structural deficit, and the composition of output (tax policies that favor certain industries), but not the average real growth rate. The little correlation one can find is actually the reverse--growth was higher under higher marginal rates in the 1960s and 1990s, vs the 1980s and 2000s when marginal rates were cut. tax cuts and small business

Hmmm...I thought conservatives believed that taxes changed behavior in a significant way? You mean cutting the marginal tax rate won't increase revenue? That's a laugher!

I hope you're not saying it was about saving those jobs?

Because it's a crock.

It would be asking a lot to have the Bills sweep the last three games, but 2 out of 3 wins against the division opponents with only one home game would make me very happy. And, for me, beating the Pats would make the season. What a Merry Christmas it would be!

Amen. Despite Fitz's play, I'd still vote for Freddie as the O's MVP. They should've tried to run FJ more for sure.

Funny, I was going to post that Gailey quote too--he got humbled this week, which I think he needed.

I think that's what Gailey says in the intro ad on most of the BB.com videos. This team went toe-to-toe with one of the most physical teams in the league. The boys in the "trenches" deserve a lot of credit. I thought Carrington had his "coming out party" today. It will be difficult to keep him out of the line up now. I think it's a matter of 2 playmakers at the LB positions and this team competes with anyone. This was a barometer game for the Bills, and "a storm is a brewing"! I can't wait for the Pats game.

I'm with you--it's the lack of talent with the LBs. The Bills now have 6 solid players for the 3 part of the 3-4. Akin also made a bone headed play that went for long run. Bring in 2 playmakers at the LB position, and this D becomes top 10.

Once again Johnson out (injury still keeping him on sideline) and Carrington in. It looked like he held up ok last week, so good to see him get more experience. This will be his type of game--good n' physical. I hope the D builds on its second half performance last week. A good test for both sides of the ball.

Surprised no one is picking up on the Wrotto part. I won't be surprised to see him there for quite some time.

Should I start Fitz? Stevie? Freddie? Well, maybe not this week against one of the best D's in the league.... On the other hand, I think this week tells us exactly where this team is offensively. I think 20 is a good number.

Buffalo Rumblings reporting that he's been waived off the IR list. Gailey apparently likes Wrotto (and depth on roster)

the humble and the humbled. If you're not in the first group, you'regoing to find yourself in the second." Or something to that effect in his presser this evening on BB.com. A wise man that Gailey.

Let us know how the numbers look this week. Thanks.

Some people need to get a grip--including Sullivan of the B-News, who keeps throwing little darts about Carrington not cracking the lineup. I think he is going to be a solid if not excellent player eventually, but to expect that a 3rd round non-D1 player is going to come in and light it up or take away significant playing time from some pretty good veteran players? sheesh!

I think any current change has to include allowing the top rate to expire; I would keep the "middle class" tax cuts. As for her other investment-related tax increases, I'd prefer to see a financial transactions tax on short term ativity, rather than taxing long-term investment earnings.

Wasn't criticizing you about the Keynes quote, just surprised when someone, who is usually "critical of so-called Keynesian economics," quotes him. To be clear, I am also critical of the bastardized version of keynesian economics that is preached in academia. I follow Minsky's interpretation of Keynes, which describes the economy as one that is never in a stationary equilibrium, rather it's an inherent cyclical process. Keynes also said (from the same chapter, 12), "Speculators may do no harm as bubbles on a steady stream of enterprise. But the position is serious when enterprise becomes the bubble on a whirlwind of speculation. When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done."

Here's a good piece on the input cost issue--article from Bloomberg on Cotton prices. Also, the PPI came in less than forecast, so that probably makes the fed happy. cotton prices

He obviously doesn't know what he's talking about then... The Fed is focused on demand-side inflation which comes from spending by households, businesses, and govt. As I mentioned, the bernanke doesn't think firms have the pricing power to pass rising input costs along--they don't think supply-side inflation will be a problem. I'm not so sure about this belief--I lean toward your view here. As for low i rates and corp bond issues, it's no different than mortgage refis--corps are taking advantage and locking into historically low rates--who wouldn't? You do realize they are simply repaying one bond with another, yes? It will reduce their interest expense. Agree on the $. they can't say it, but that has to be part of the policy to stimulate. I didn't know you were such a Keynesian? All of this "animal spirits" talk.... And yes, the fed can always reverse its actions to try and restrain inflation. Plus, I don't think the dudley means they will try to pull reserves back by paying higher interest on them, rather it would help maintain the excess they already hold--as I've said a million times, it's close to $1 trillion. Again, all of these actions help restrain demand-side inflation. They are in a fix with commodities. The only way you can prick that bubble is with higher interest rates, but that ain't gonna happen.

Is that a convoluted way to say that you agree with me?

Not quite true. As I mentioned, the Fed also looks at PPI, which does include input costs other than wages. This has been increasing by 5% on an annual basis. Bernanke is on record as saying he didn't think firms had the ability to pass these costs on--That's Bernanke's position. I have not disagreed with you about commodity prices; I have disagreed about the main source of those price increases. As I said in my article, this round of QE2 is adding fuel to that fire. I said it would probably lead to stagflation. I agree with you on all of that, I just disagree with you that the main source of increased commodity prices is demand from China and EMs--I've said it's driven by investors jumping into that market making speculation the driving force. It seems as if you must agree now, since you say that Fed intervention is causing asset bubbles. Inflation can come from demand-side issues or supply-side issues. This is not a demand-side issue (hence it's happening without loan creation), it's a supply-side problem, which is being fueled by Bernanke's irresponsible actions. There is a fairly easy way to prick the bubble if policymakers wanted to, but it won't happen.

nothing in that video that I would disagree with. In fact, I like that part about the Fed buying securities directly from the Treasury. I am wondering also when the fed will start printing money and giving some to me...

ON Moats, in the Bears game I thought he looked more active and was getting close to pressuring Cutler. He is getting better. I don't now if he will be the longer term answer, but he could well be the best pass rusher we have at the moment.