Obama Failure Thread Part VI

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by argentine soccer fan, Feb 5, 2013.

  1. YankHibee

    YankHibee Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Location:
    indianapolis
    Surely if they're wise, they're also supported by data.


  2. VFish

    VFish Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2001
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Friedman's ideas have worked in practice around the world. Meanwhile another dead economist's theories have proved to be a disaster.
  3. YankHibee

    YankHibee Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Location:
    indianapolis
    Then it should be easy to cite data that says so. They're are many dead economists, so I can't be sure which one you're talking about. Let's focus on living ones who've produced data to reinforce their solutions.
  4. VFish

    VFish Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2001
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Fine, we spent an unprecidented amount on stimulus, nearly a trillion dollars, and all your economists promised the economy would come roaring back. It didn't. In fact we didn't reach even half of their expectations. Give me more Milton Friedman and less Maynard Keynes please.


  5. American Brummie

    American Brummie Member+

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Location:
    Florida
    Club:
    Birmingham City FC
    Country:
    United States
    I don't know why you guys argue this. Political science can tell you why the minimum wage has no effect. All I need is one chart:

    [​IMG]

    In 2008, we had 90% turnout from the richest economic group, compared to about 50% from the lowest economic group. So there's no sense to raise the minimum wage on either party to try and win votes from this group, given that they are also the least informed voting bloc in the country (as a rather humorous aside, I am in this economic tier). However, we still see calls from the Democratic Party to raise the minimum wage every 5-10 years. This is because (okay I lied) of this factor:

    [​IMG]

    Democrats need to win over married women (or just enough of them) to win elections and out-gap the male advantage the GOP has. And as we all know, moms tend to care about their kids getting a good job. If the Democrats raise the minimum wage to help out Junior's first summer job or first college-part time job, Mom's happy and votes for the Democrats. Maybe Junior votes, maybe some low-income voters become more efficacious and vote, but the goal is to boost turnout and support from the high-voting, ever reliable Mom. Republicans don't go for it because they'd lose support from Dad, who earned $.15 an hour when he was a kid and dammit, Junior, you ought to as well.
  6. YankHibee

    YankHibee Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Location:
    indianapolis
    This is the most honest post you've had. It's a concession that you're merely withdrawing to ideology over evidence. Thanks.
  7. VFish

    VFish Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2001
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    His analysis has no merit and is completely FUBAR, but his basic assumption is true, the minimum wage is more about politics than about economics.
  8. VFish

    VFish Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2001
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Sure, no problem. I am just glad the GDP didn't contract last quarter and is humming along at that 4% growth rate your economists promised. Oh wait, never mind.
  9. YankHibee

    YankHibee Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Location:
    indianapolis
    I'm happy to switch to something else with evidence behind it. Surely there's some out there?
  10. VFish

    VFish Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2001
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Obama economists did project 4% gdp growth for 2012-13 when selling the Stimulus. I am not sure why you're upset with me that these fantasy projections didn't come true, seems like you should be upset with Sir Maynard. After all it's just economics, right?
  11. YankHibee

    YankHibee Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Location:
    indianapolis
    I never claimed to be excited about the state of the economy. I do want to follow a plan with some evidence behind it. If we're to change, let's not pick something random.
  12. VFish

    VFish Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2001
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    You don't want to hear my prescription.... but it worked in the 20s, in the 80s and 90s, and for a good part of the 2000s.

    So what's you answer?
  13. Q*bert Jones III

    Q*bert Jones III The People's Poet

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2005
    Location:
    Nueva York
    Club:
    DC United
    You really want to hang your hat on *those* booms?
    Matrim55, ElJefe and luftmensch repped this.
  14. YankHibee

    YankHibee Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Location:
    indianapolis
    Socialism, obviously. I want to provide you access to education.
    Matrim55 and taosjohn repped this.
  15. VFish

    VFish Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2001
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    You're right, I'll go with the 30s, 70s, and this current disaster.
  16. VFish

    VFish Member+

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2001
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    No seriously. What is your answer?
  17. YankHibee

    YankHibee Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2005
    Location:
    indianapolis
    It doesn't have to do with the minimum wage. I'd like to see 75% marginal tax rates on those making above 3 million, a tax deduction for student loans that tops out at four times the present cap, an easy road to citizenship for immigrants with terminal degrees, a luxury tax on all vehicles over 4000 lbs, corporate taxes levied on the non-charitable income of religious organizations, a gas tax that directly funds heavy rail, green city planning incentivized, and nationalization of the trucking industry under the mail service Constitutional authority.
  18. Boloni86

    Boloni86 Member+

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2000
    Location:
    Minneapolis
    Club:
    DC United
    Country:
    Romania
    Obama is just using that as a sales pitch. Anyone with 2 brain cells can see that raising the minimum wage is designed to favor the working poor. The jobs the do are still necessary otherwise they wouldn't exists.

    What we're talking about is basic human rights. If someone is working hard for 40 hours a week they should have enough money to eat and find shelter.

    If a price for a product must go up so that the builders/providers of that product can have a minimum standard of life then the market needs to adjust itself. Consumers will have to prioritize whether that product is essential to them or whether they can find a cheaper alternative. You know ... the free market.

    If those bosses want to take those $6.50/hr jobs to China ... feck'em. They should never see another dime or another favor from the American taxpayer. Those bosses that treat their workers with dignity and keep their jobs in the US should get all the tax breaks possible. You know ... like Santorum's 0% tax on domestic manufacturers. Maybe 0% is a tad extreme, but I have no problem with that for companies that keep jobs at home and pay their employees a fair wage by American living standards.
    Minnman and fatbastard repped this.
  19. ratdog

    ratdog Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Location:
    In the doghouse
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    Are you really that ignorant?

    Seriously, have you never heard of "monetarism"?
  20. ratdog

    ratdog Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Location:
    In the doghouse
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    Sources, please.

    In the meantime, please Google "monetarism".

    Thanks!
  21. ratdog

    ratdog Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Location:
    In the doghouse
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
  22. American Brummie

    American Brummie Member+

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Location:
    Florida
    Club:
    Birmingham City FC
    Country:
    United States
    GiuseppeSignori and Chris M. repped this.
  23. MasterShake29

    MasterShake29 Member+

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2001
    Location:
    Jersey City, NJ
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Country:
    United States
    Um, this chart is for FY2012, and I imagine while FY2012 was still in progress given that 2011 is an "estimate". These things can, and do, change in an instant, and not just when the Administration changes.
  24. ratdog

    ratdog Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Location:
    In the doghouse
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    Country:
    United States
    Nah, I've already beaten down the "We spent billions and got nothing" lie that TPfish and other wingnuts repeatedly keep trying to sell us despite it's being so thoroughly disproved. At this point, their meme isn't so much a rational argument as it is a psychological coping mechanism for them. And because it is psychological that lie is impervious to facts and reason. Mastershake's post is a case in point. He doesn't want to accept the implication that Obama has slowed the rate of deficit growth so he tries to hide behind his hope that things will change for the worse.

    For Mastershake, I offer the following chart:

    http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm

    So from 2002 to 2009, Bush doubled the debt while tanking our economy. Even with the burden of having to clean up the GOP's Great Recession, Obama has not kept up Bush's pace. If you look at the y-o-y change in debt for the last few years of Bush and Obama's first term using the numbers from the chart, you can see the slowdown in growth:

    Sep-07: +$0.50T
    Sep-08: +$1.02T
    Sep-09: +$1.89T
    Sep-10: +$1.65T
    Sep-11: +$1.23T
    Sep-12: +$1.28T


    This supports the main point of the chart to which Mastershake objects due to estimated data. I wonder what sophistic dodge he'll try to hide behind this time.
  25. Kobranzilla

    Kobranzilla Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2001
    Location:
    NY F'in City
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Country:
    United States
    care to guess why the economy contracted in Q4? A DRAMATIC DECREASE IN GOVERNMENT SPENDING

Share This Page