TPS Posted November 29, 2012 Author Share Posted November 29, 2012 Who is talking about QE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Rob, I would appreciate it if you provided me with a link so I can read up on where you are getting your views from. I'd really like to figure out what religion you belong to.... It's called independent rational thought. You should try it some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 It's called independent rational thought. You should try it some time. Rob, can you provide me a link as to what I should have for dinner tonight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Rob, can you provide me a link as to what I should have for dinner tonight? http://www.beefitswhatsfordinner.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Rob I want to order some original rational thoughts. How much do you charge? And can you create a link once they are created so I can source them when I use them on 3rd? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Rob I want to order some original rational thoughts. How much do you charge? And can you create a link once they are created so I can source them when I use them on 3rd? Are you sure you want originals? I can get you knock offs for a fraction of the price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Are you sure you want originals? I can get you knock offs for a fraction of the price. He's already been using those. http://www.beefitswhatsfordinner.com/ Naw, it's pork all the way. It's cheaper and whiter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Hell, this might just as well go here: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/mcconnell-burst-laughter-geithner-outlined-obamas-plan_664210.html "Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, says he “burst into laughter” Thursday when Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner outlined the administration proposal for averting the fiscal cliff. He wasn’t trying to embarrass Geithner, McConnell says, only responding candidly to his one-sided plan, explicit on tax increases, vague on spending cuts. Geithner’s visit to his office left McConnell discouraged about reaching a “balanced” deal on tax hikes and spending reductions designed to prevent a shock to the economy in January. “Nothing good is happening” in the negotiations, McConnell says, because of Obama’s insistence on tax rate hikes for the wealthy but unwillingness to embrace serious spending cuts. Geithner suggested $1.6 trillion in tax increases, McConnell says, but showed “minimal or no interest” in spending cuts. When congressional leaders went to the White House three days after the election, Obama talked of possible curbs on the explosive growth of food stamps and Social Security disability payments. But since Geithner didn’t mention them, those reductions appear to be off the table now, McConnell says. Obama is pushing to raise the tax rates on couples earning more than $250,000 and individuals earning more than $200,000. But those wouldn’t produce revenues anywhere near $1.6 trillion over a decade. The “guess” of those involved in the negotiations, Politico reported, is that a bipartisan deal “will include a rate hike, higher taxes on carried interest and probably capital gains and dividends, and either a cap on total deductions for rich people or some form of a minimum tax rate for them.” House speaker John Boehner said today that nothing has been agreed to. “No substantive progress has been made.” Besides raising taxes, Geithner was reported to have proposed a one-year delay in scheduled $1.2 trillion spending cuts to defense and domestic, and a $400 billion reduction in Medicare funding. The $1.2 trillion in cuts was mandated after Congress failed to reach an agreement in 2011 on reductions. Obama has talked up what he calls a “balanced” approach to averting the fiscal cliff of tax hikes and spending cuts in January. But he’s offered few specifics on the spending side." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Rob, I would appreciate it if you provided me with a link so I can read up on where you are getting your views from. I'd really like to figure out what religion you belong to.... The most effective policy over the past 4 years has been the permanent stimulus that's resulted from automatic stabilizers and extensions of unemployment insurance that are the largest contributors to the deficits of the last 4 years.. I am sure your ceo's are also all begging for the fiscal cliff to take effect so there's another $600 billion of demand wiped out next year... The CEOs managed fine squeezing more productivity by putting the fear of layoffs into employees minds. Meanwhile prolonging the unemployment puts a floor on near term demand, but it does nothing to stimulate real growth. I'm sure you hear some economists arguing that employment won't come back because wages got too high in the run up, and that the unemployment benefits are not helping in reaching that equilibrium. So we can heed Krugman's call to throw more money at the problem, and you will keep the hamster wheel rolling while continuing to roll up deficits, which no one cares about now because the rest of the world are bigger basket cases than the US. But is it really a smart bet to think that foreign investors will always like Tbills? Especially since the current administration's priorities don't seem to align with maintaining USA's global superiority? And while you didn't mention QE directly, don't discount its impact on corporate borrowing costs and access to credit which covers up a lot of operating ills by US companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted November 30, 2012 Author Share Posted November 30, 2012 The CEOs managed fine squeezing more productivity by putting the fear of layoffs into employees minds. Meanwhile prolonging the unemployment puts a floor on near term demand, but it does nothing to stimulate real growth. I'm sure you hear some economists arguing that employment won't come back because wages got too high in the run up, and that the unemployment benefits are not helping in reaching that equilibrium. So we can heed Krugman's call to throw more money at the problem, and you will keep the hamster wheel rolling while continuing to roll up deficits, which no one cares about now because the rest of the world are bigger basket cases than the US. But is it really a smart bet to think that foreign investors will always like Tbills? Especially since the current administration's priorities don't seem to align with maintaining USA's global superiority? And while you didn't mention QE directly, don't discount its impact on corporate borrowing costs and access to credit which covers up a lot of operating ills by US companies. Countercyclical deficits are always about putting a floor on demand--automatic stabilizers are designed to prevent a recession from becoming a depression. They are always temporary, as the deficit will contract once the private sector picks up spending. Most of the debate now is about whether we should pursue austerity now or later. Any sane economist realizes you need to wait until the private sector becomes the engine again of growth again. (That's what your CEOs seem to think too! They don't want short term austerity imposed by the FC.) Btw, CEOs realize that they "managed fine" precisely because big deficits also put a floor on profits. Wages high in the run up? That's a laugh. Have you seen the data on productivity and wages? Labor has been on the run since 1981. Employment won't come back because the two sectors that facilitated the bubble aren't coming back to where they were in 2007--housing and finance. As long as China, Japan and our other large trade deficit partners continue to rely on the US market for their exports, they will buy treasuries. Once they stop, a falling dollar will help balance the trade account and reduce the need for government deficits. That, along with an improving economy, and the defict will come down to a sustainable level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 30, 2012 Share Posted November 30, 2012 Your view always looks better in a rear view mirror. But for the guy in the executive suite, the question is where is the growth coming from. While it may take a long time to replace real estate and financial jobs, the point of dynamic capitalism is to create industries and jobs that never existed, and I'm not smart enough to know where they will come from. But I do know that under the current administration and regulatory environment, it's not going to happen. And Bartlett really should quit smoking crack, if he thinks Obama's rhetoric which feels right at home in Hollande's cabinet, would qualify as centrist right in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted December 1, 2012 Author Share Posted December 1, 2012 My views have been pretty consistent since first setting foot in TBD land some, what, 15 years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts