So, the Democrat lie that we have a demand problem and further stimulus is the answer is a lie by just a basic perusal of the objective facts. The objective fact, according to the Commercie Department, is that consumption spending is already recovered in 2010 and higher now than it was during the recession. So obviously there is no "demand side" issue with the economy. It's a lie. http://reason.com/archives/2011/09/15/they-gave-a-recovery-and-nobod
There is still inadequate consumer spending, but not to the extent of production. If we increase production, consumer demand and spending will improve even more.
The highest revenue of the Federal Government was in FY 2007, before the bubble burst. That year we took in $2,568 trillion and had a deficit of $161 billion. This year Federal revenue projects to be $2,352 or $216 billion less than the best year ever. BUT,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, the deficit projects to be $1,350 TRILLION. The problem is government spending............................................
I offer facts with numbers, and instead I get... talking points. Is there some kind of chart or something that shows "pent up demand"? Someone please show me the numbers that prove that there is a ton of "pent up demand" out there, because I don't see it. Consumer spending is already above pre-recession levels and that's still not good enough?
I wouldn't get all negative about disposable income if I were you. You gotta have have faith that our esteemed commander-in-chief will create millions of government jobs in these next 14 months. This stuff doesn't happen overnight; obama's only been in office just under 3 years now. Have faith dear...have faith! LMFAO...........
No, it isn't when you consider that an increase in production is necessary to allow further improve consumer spending. Right now, we have inadequate consumer spending, but even worse production. We first need to balance production in accordance with consumer demand and spending, and then increase both factors.
Liberals have a pent up supply of excuses. Post any actual number, they will have a string of excuses. Odrama, "The EXCUSE ADMINISTRATION!"
That can be easily remedied by increasing taxes, enacting more and stricter regulations on energy/oil exploration and production, boosting inflation by flooding markets with devalued, debt saddled currency, and keeping interest rates artificially low to lure consumers into more debt.
No, it can be resolved by enacting policy based upon positive economic analysis that allows policy-makers to make educated decisions on how the economy should run based upon how it actually runs.
Isn't it fascinating how people can use up the whole dictionary and yet manage to say absolutely nothing of substance?
My previous statement is substantive. It's a statement on how our policy-makers fail to utilize positive economic analysis, or economic analysis on how the economy actually works to create normative economic policy. Therefore, when considering consumer demand, we must utilize positive economic analysis on the matter to determine whether we enact policy that focuses on only increasing consumer demand, or policy that focuses on increasing production, which could lead to an increase in consumer demand. I'm not making a statement on what policy I prefer, but what approach I prefer in determining economic policy. To properly utilize make economic decisions, one must examine the economic models, graphs, and production possibilities curves, and weigh the opportunity costs of a particular economic decisions. Through this process, our policy-makers can make better economic decisions for all based upon intelligent factual, statistical, and graphical evidence.
I demand gambling, cheap women, painkillers, lemonade and herbal substances. What do you Nazis have for me?
So if people have plenty of money and are spending as much as they ever have then I guess the millionaires amongst us can pay more in taxes to help out with the debt. Right?
I was never against a rise in Capital gains taxes. I am against a rise in income tax marginal rates. I support a severe reduction in our outrageously uncompetitive corporate tax rate, it doesn't matter what their effective rate is, that number is a psychological albatross on businesses. You do realize that in order to retire in America with any comfort for your entire remaining life you have to amass a grand net worth of 2.3 million dollars right? Why are you trying to take away people's retirement money and force them to live on Social Security Poverty wages?
Oh, I'd like to go shopping and buy all sorts of things. And a new truck would be nice too. My budget won't allow all that. Something the govt spenders have no clue about. We need to CUT THEM OFF from our hard earned money. They're thieves and wasteful ones at that.
We've heard the liberal mantra over and over again. "Government is not supposed to operate in a cost effective manner, they are to provide the services that The People demand no matter what the loss, because The People demand it and if the Government runs out of money, it should confiscate the earnings of the rich to whatever level is necessary to make up the shortfall." That is Liberal psychology.
The elitist, authoritarian, collectivist, statist left always know how to better spend your money, what foods you should eat, what car you should drive, what energy you should and shouldn't use, what countries to bomb, what is, and isn't socially acceptable, politically correct thought or behavior, what is, and isn't newsworthy, who is 'rich' and who is 'poor', which 'victims' deserve your compassion, and which 'oppressors' should receive your scorn. Obama's anointing offered them cause to perceive a mandate to advance their agenda...which only further exposed these "qualities" to a previously asleep citizenry.... who cannot wait to get these frauds out of power.
Oh please.. it NOT that complicated.. When middle class Americans lose their jobs and go upside down on their mortgages they have less disposable income.. They forego movies and dinner out.. They wait longer between haircuts.. They skip vacations.. they don't finance a new car or buy that sofa. Its a CONTRACTION of the market and it can't be offset by increasing production in CHINA.
Average income in all quintles have been interesting over time. Go ahead I'm sure you're going to say that it's not.
The government is inflating the (*)(*)(*)(*) out of the dollar, did this chart compare with any commodities? And demand is irrelevant of spending or prices. A recession doesn't impact demand, it impacts supply. Demand is how much people desire a product. Demand of a house is the same as it was 10 years ago, only the supply has increased, because of the artificial demand the government pumped in.
I find the main idea in this thread very interesting. So if true, people who have money are still spending plenty of money, but this money is just not finding its way down to the typical worker. So if the government tries to use "stimulus", it will likely just increase inequality as the money will flow to the business owners who get government contracts.
demand is a bs concept, if you don't have PRODUCERS able to PAY for what they want, without bs welfare handouts distorting everything. you can't just burn or sink your products in the ocean. so "consumers" are not the answer, either, UNLESS those consumers have real money, earned by productivity. "demand" that's based upon welfare handouts, stolen from other people, is complete bs.
