If anyone paid attention I profeticaly predicted this years economic news over a year ago. Right before the Dems took controll. So here is a reasonable list of stratagies (I do not entirely agree with) to stimulate the economy (that is not yet depressed). Analysis: Tax Rebates May Spur Economy Friday, January 18, 2008 7:51 AM WASHINGTON -- With the economy's prospects growing bleaker seemingly by the day, politicians in both parties have rallied around the three Ts, the mantra that any stimulus package needs to be timely, targeted and temporary. One might add the three Bs as well - the ability to deliver the biggest bang for the buck. In that regard, tax rebates have quickly risen to the top of a list that also includes extended unemployment benefits and a boost in food stamp payments. All three proposals have one very big advantage for politicians worried about what the economy will look like when voters go to the polls in November. They offer the promise of getting assistance out quickly to low and moderate income people who won't delay in spending the extra cash. That is considered crucial given the precarious state of the economy at the moment. The great fear is that consumers, who have been the standout performer during the current expansion, could now be faltering under the successive blows of a steep slump in housing, spiraling energy costs, a spreading credit squeeze, rising unemployment and falling stock prices. Some analysts believe the stimulus package may already be too late to prevent a recession, but even the most pessimistic think it is still needed to mitigate the length and severity of a downturn. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke lent his considerable weight on the side of a stimulus package on Thursday. "Getting money to low and moderate income people is good in the sense of getting a bang for the buck," he told the House Budget Committee. He said packages in the range of $50 billion to $150 billion would be "reasonable" to help the economy. Bush has gone down the tax rebate road before. Back in 2001, he added refunds of up to $300 per individual and $600 per household as a recession-fighting element of the tax cut plan that had been the centerpiece of his 2000 campaign. Economists said a reasonable range for tax cuts in the new package might be $500 to $1,000. Democrats would like to tilt the relief to the poor and lower income taxpayers by adding an increase in unemployment benefits, doubling the normal 26 weeks that a jobless worker can collect benefits, and by also boosting food stamp payments. Those proposals make economic sense because the more relief that is provided to lower income households, the more money that will get spent quickly, meaning a faster and bigger boost for consumer spending, which accounts for two-thirds of economic activity. A study showed that Bush's 2001 stimulus package was a success in this regard, with two-thirds of the tax refund payments getting spent in the first six months. The recession that year was mild. It began in March but was over by November even though the country got hit during that period by the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. A separate study of various stimulus proposals shows that some proposals provide a much greater boost than others. Leading this category was extending unemployment benefits, which provides $1.73 in spending increases for each $1 spent during the first year of the program. "Extending unemployment benefits helps bolster confidence," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com and the author of the study. "If people start running out of their unemployment benefits, they cut back drastically on their spending and it also scares people around them. It is very debilitating on consumer confidence." Providing states with federal support so they don't have to cut their own programs provides $1.24 in increased spending for each $1 it costs, while a targeted tax cut provides $1.19 boost, according to Zandi's study. The reason these items had a bigger payout than they cost reflects the fact that the assistance goes to poorer people who spend the extra benefits quickly. This helps trigger what economists call the "multiplier effect" in that a dollar of increased spending gets recycled through the economy, boosting the spending of other people. By contrast, other proposals which benefit wealthier individuals such as across-the-board tax cuts and reductions in dividends and capital gains taxes were found to return less than their cost during the first year. Bush started this year saying he did not know whether a stimulus plan was needed and if it was, he wanted to make sure that Congress made his first-term tax cuts permanent. But the deteriorating economic situation has now convinced him of the need to offer a stimulus package. Democrats are letting it be known that if Bush is serious about moving quickly, he will need to delink the proposal from his drive to make his tax cuts permanent. The betting is that he will do so and that Democrats and Republicans, with their eye on the November elections, will strike a deal. "For this to keep us out of a recession, it has to be passed by Congress quickly and I think they can do it," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's in New York. "If you are a lawmaker, are you going to vote against giving your constituents a check for several hundred bucks?"
Think of this. If I had a room full of 1000 investors comprising virtually the entire world’s stock market investors and held a secret meeting. Outside the conference room were a thousand computer terminals and phones waiting. If I told them things were awesome and economic prospects good in virtually all sectors of economy. And then call an end to the meeting. Regardless of weather the investors believed me or not they would know for sure that my words would at the least have a real effect on the more naive investor. The smart would take this knowledge and use it to ride a wave of investment craze. Now turn it around. Same investors pounded for 7 long years with negative stories of economic doom and gloom regardless of the fact that actual numbers against all odds were looking excellent. If I ended it with the biggest doom and gloom prophetic and terrifying financial predictions of the century. Would it not be prudent even for the smartest investor who even knew for certain that all of it was a bunch of rhetoric? Would it not be smart for them to sell their stock anticipating a bear market approaching so as to buy cheap later? In each scenario when the investors walked out the door of that meeting. What would they do? And then what over all effect could that take the shape of in news reports?
prophetically, control, strategies, demons .... just so you know. yawn I multitask while I am at work and often start a thread jotting my idea down and have to come back to it. I forget to proof read. Makes it fun though for the random idiot that can feel a sense of importance as the official spelle courecktor.
Sorry Joe, but your predictions and ideas toward the economy suck balls. I was predicting this before the Democrats took control, and you were all like, "That won't happen unless the Democrats take control." Well they took control and now you have your scapegoat. This has absolutely nothing to do with partisan politics. I mean damn Joe, what the hell do you think? They have control over the banks and their unscrupulous lending practices? Or free trade? Fuck, when the economic depression happens you'll blame them for that too, like that shit happens in the span of a few years. We've been accumulating dept in the US for about 30 years now. Give it a fucking rest Joe. Here's a couple good articles: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/24f73610-c91e-11dc-9807-000077b07658.html http://www.nypost.com/seven/01242008/business/you_should_be_wary_of_this_market_reboun_412433.htm Like I've told you before, this guy has been predicting this shit since before I've been talking about it: http://www.markswatson.com Keep blaming it on the democrats if you want, Joe. I don't think it will be very long after the depression starts before you realize just how dumb that is.
Hey dumbass we need to see a recession before a depression we have not yet seen a recession. Have we? You want to find a conspiracy look at your boy Soros. He made his fortunes manipulating and betting against the British pound. And hopes to cash in on the U.S. the same people harping constantly about U.S. economy are buying into it when it’s in a suppressed state knowing it will bounce. Predicting an economic downturn for the last 20 years and actually trolling along and finding some follower like you is pretty stupid. I predict it's going to rain. There, now you just watch and see if I am not right on the money.
Hey, dumbass. We've been seeing one for a long ass while now but people were too stupid to see it. With all the interventions that have happened like rate cuts and money laundering on massive scales to buy up our equities it would have been much worse. They're already arguing all over the news about whether we're in a recession or not because they're fucking stupid. They wouldn't know shit if they stepped in it. I will be laughing at you when you lose your retirement Joe.
Laugh at me because I loose my retirement. Gee wiz Smurf you sure are mean. How was I to know the definition for recession changed a long time ago to: Creation of jobs and lowest unemployment rate. Economic growth that exceeds expectations consistently for 12 quarters. Despite unprecedented and costly natural disasters and the only attack on the continental U.S. in history. And to think I thought that was a good as it gets. I guess in the history of the U.S. there has never been a time that we were not at the least in a recession.
Wow Joe, yeah we're doing so great. That's why they're talking about recession fears and banks are losing billions due to a subprime meltdown and GM and Ford continue to ship jobs overseas. What a fucking awesome period of growth. Look Joe, all I'm saying is don't blame it on the Democrats. This has nothing to do with partisan politics and we'll see a depression here shortly. Just wait for the banks to start floundering and the public will be immediately filled with fear.
For real. I think the 3-5 year ARMs are like title pawn. That and interest only loans. I can understand getting an interest only loan for a house you are going to flip in 6 months. Of course you have to get one hell of a deal on it, and be able to still sell it for a good deal. People are buying houses, they just arent buying as stupid as they used to. My area is notorious for low cost of living. When the housing boom hit, people were buying way over their heads with these ARMS and Interest only loans. Now that they are reaching the end of their terms, they are screwed. It was initially thought, "Hey I buy this house for 280k, I can sell it for 340k in a couple of years." well unfortunately the market shit all over these people. We have a relatively low population in the Augusta area, I would say less than a million (probably between 3 and 500k) and the majority of those people are low-middle income. I think 25k a year is the average per person here. So who are you going to sell all these houses to? We have a nice Army base here, in Ft. Gordon, and we all know soldiers dont make enough oney. I talked to an Army doctor and he is almost at his 20, and he makes 40k a year. ???? so they arent buying these houses. Its nice, though. Cause as the prices are falling the value of mine has more than doubled. Of course I bought reasonable, and remodeled a lot. We will be able to sell it for less than it appraised at, and walk away with a nice chunk of change. Its not a recession, its an idiocracy. Thats like saying if we deport all the illegals who will do the work? Well obviously other people will. It will force the wages up for legals, and start taxing monies that have been sent abroad for too long. No wonder the dollar is worthless. We have 8 million illegals working for cash and sending most of it out of the country. Duh. CONSUMPTION TAX!!!!!!!!!!! GM and FORD are moving jobs overseas because they are idiots. They need to get rid of the Unions (since the government pretty much handles regulations and stuff) and start offering reasonable salaries to auto workes. Paying someone 45.00 an hours to fix one rivet on one car every 5 minutes is kind of stupid. Honda, Nissan, and Toyota have built plants in the US and are very successful running them. Why? No Unions. You think if Ford and GM got rid of the unions they would have a problem replacing the workers? Hell no. There are a ton of people out there that would do the work for 18.00 an hour and be happy. Of course the fed would have to come in and regulate car prices, if the overhead associated with making the vehicle dropped that much, the price of the vehicle had better drop. If not - boom - you are still stuck. You cant afford the car you are building. Weeee.... I mean come on, a 60k pickup truck? I like my F-250, but I never would have bought a new one. Hell the last one I looked at was a stripped down work truck for 40.
Fucking BANG!!!!!!! CONSUMPTION TAX! Hell yeah Before I left Lebanon TN (Near Nashville) there was a ridicules subdivision going in and people were buying 4 and 5k square foot homes. And not just that they were the type that would pull a few million out on the left ot right coast. They were around 500k avg. But if you look at the mean average income there is simply no way. My neighbor him and his wife owned a survey company dealt in their line of work with the developers and such all the time. He was saying nearly everyone was purchased on an ARM and the people were extended as far as possible with their credit. That was on 2004 and the mentality of the buyers were that they would get lucky and be able to refinance in a locked rate before shit hit the fan. Others did not care and were figuring if shit hit the fan there would be a government bail out.
Government bail out and Mortgage reform. Yea, changing the rules because there are idiots out there that live well beyond their means. I am just waiting. Im making a little over 20k more than I was last year at this time, so when we sell in the spring I will be set to take advantage of all these foreclosures. Not to mention they keep dropping the fed. I have heard rumor that it is going to get in the 4s. SWEET!
Government bailout is reverse-Darwinism. Just like health insurance. I think they should require sterilization in order to receive it.
That's pretty funny. I think you are right though. If you receive government aid, healthcare,welfare, what ever. You should be steralized. There would have to be a limit though. Some kind of guidelines that determine abuse and just plain bad fortune. I think a crack head having 6 kids and being on welfare only adds to the growing crime problems with the country. No to mention gross overpopulation. Watch Idiocracy. It is funny, but sad. Smarter citizens having one or no children while the idiots are popping out 5-6 each, it just grows exponentially. It's not like 2 idiots make a smart kid.
My brother and his wife just had twins. They both make decent incomes both have college degrees and are law abiding responsible citizens and never cheat on their taxes ...ect. In other words contributors to society. His wife will have to take considerable time away from work and their yearly income this year will reduce by 20k plus. His insurance will go up. He will still have long after the babies are home Tens of thousands of dollars worth of medical bills. He will raise kids I have no doubt who will be responsible and law abiding citizens. His kids will be responsible and self supportive. You have nothing to fear and everything to gain from his children being brought into this society. On the other hand your proverbial crack head mother will get paid to have her kid. There will not be bills upon bills upon bills to pay later. The government will get her WICA and she will eat it and use extra cash saved to buy more drugs. The kid will be an asshole. The kid will take extra resources from schools to govern. The kid will be a looser a criminal and most undoubtedly vote for another Democrat as soon as of voting age or well before.
