As you know I'm not pro-Bush on his foreign policies... now that they've got some political clout, will the Dems now ante up and tell us how their influential input will reset the future course in Iraq? I'm thinking not. What are your solutions?

My idea>>> in 1 year US troops should pull out of Baghdad area- then let the Iraqi security forces get a taste for hardcore pulling of their weight. US troops can then deploy along the borders while Iraqi's get school of hard knocks training in large operations by themselves in that area of Iraq. With victories will come confidence. Iraqi citizens will also be getting what most of them hypothesize- US troops out supposedly means a de-escalation of terrorist attacks. As for secterian violence, I don't think US troops can stay in Iraq forever to police that. Sooner or later Iraqis have to sort that out by themselves alone.

Why would we pull out of there.... we went in for oil to hear everyone else tell it. I'm still waiting for some sort of policy or idea from the Democrats. All I hear is how bad it's messed up but nothing about how to fix it or why they voted to authorize war to begin with. Just Bush is a liar yada yada yada.... I keep waiting for an idea. Any idea from the Demo's all I ever hear is that the Republicans are doing it wrong.... I wish all the politicians would just go away and replace them with magic 8 balls. We would probably have better representation that way.....

Junkie

So the Dem's get control of the house and senate. Now they can fix everything. LoL

Investors pull out of the market amid luming taxe increases. The economy goes south. We pull out of Iraq, civil war breaks out. War spreads through the Mid-East. Gas prices hit an all-time high. US unemployment skyrockets as more and more illegal aliens become citizens. Welfare programs create more deficit.

A Republican is elected President in 2008. Mark it down.

i'm young and un-knowledgeable but for what i know i agree with Snot. all i ever hear is how bush is terrible, how badly bush has screwed up, and how much someone needs to fix his mistakes. not once have i heard how it'll happen? good point, Mr. Snot.

I say double dare>>>> Bush is ok, if you like beer:) American beer that is...big smile:)

Investors pull out of the market amid luming taxe increases. The economy goes south. We pull out of Iraq, civil war breaks out. War spreads through the Mid-East. Gas prices hit an all-time high. US unemployment skyrockets as more and more illegal aliens become citizens. Welfare programs create more deficit.

Vinny man I couldn't have said it better. Oh yeah you forgot social security...

We were kissing Clinton's feet while he was busy getting bj's from interns because the economy was so great. Stock market hit 10,000 unemployment was good etc. Forget that it was all gains from the internet bubble that burst because it was over valued. Now we hit 12,000 and nobody hardly mentions it. Not to mention lows in unemployment etc. Now we'll be rewriting laws to subsidise the terrorists who can't afford to come here because dammit they have a right to hate us and we should help them!!! Grrrrrrr.... I'm being silly but it's not that far from the truth. We can't protect ourselvs because someone might be offended or have their phone calls listened to.... grrrrr...

Junkie

Sorry Guys. Lip, your comment on how it happened? Well, dont you think the President of the most powerful army in the world should have had some definate answers of where the weapons of mass destruction were before goin into Iraq?? Or what about having some type of exit strategy? I really think Bush and his administration has done a piss poor job of running this country. Someone even pointed out in this thread something about the economy going south?? Has it gone North since Bush has been in office? I strongly believe that one a Democrat takes Presidential office, we are going to be headed in the right direction again!

Ok dokey folks.... let's show some constructiveness here; to varying degrees most of us agree the dems have avoided putting forth a concrete plan- a politically wise move so that they don't corner themselves but does reveal shallowness. The tune repubs all choral together 'Stay the course' has no meaning to me either since that apparently equates with staying in Iraq until everything is stable- that realistically could be decades -if ever. Secterian divisions there are seeming to be just starting to ferment what with almost 100 secterian torture murders a week in Iraq now. Iraqi citizens are saying time for US troops to go - my Iraqi friends with relatives there feel the same - no, not out of ungratefullness, but as an alternative which could mean hope compared to the current status of horrible attrition for all innocents -US,+ Allied troops, Iraqi police/security forces, and civilians [possibly 650,000 Iraqi killed so far http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6101001442.html].

I entitled this thread 'truth or dare' poking at dem supporters [I'm barely one].
Truth= now that the elections are over-be honest; you have no workable structured plan you all agree on to finish up in Iraq.
Dare= Be bold and at least put forward such a plan.
The election doesn't actually mean Dems are now obligated to put forward such a plan- but it does mean they can seriously influence however Bush chooses to pursue the war from now on. However- with young and old soldiers dying some on 2nd and 3rd tours, hopefully all the leaders cab get together and give soldiers/their families. and the common Iraqi civilian a vision that they have a clue as to how they'd even possibly like to exit the conflict.

I think that begins with repubs stop mimicking Bush's cliche lines 'stay the course', 'democrats act like they're helping terrorists/dems are unpatriotic', and enough with smug contempt that if you don't see it the repub way, you're a simpleton. Dems need to stop farting about and come up with a focused idea to present to every american instead of sitting on the fence throwing mudpies at every repub mis-step.

So I ask you folks here- let's deal with what ideas YOU propose as an exit strategy - let's analyze here... did you think my 'exit baghdad' idea scatterbrained ? We can keep bashing each other's political affiliations endlessly-that's easy; however let's see what you can come up with; let's assume you've been given the power to stop the madness> what would you do?

Hey Hell,

I know what you mean. But honestly, Lets put this in perspective. If you were lets say the Chicago Bears this week. And I was the New York Giants. Would you tell me how to win the game? Would you tell me all my weaknesses? Why would the Dems give the Reps their plans while the Reps are in office? You know that the Reps would only put it down first of all, and if by some chance they did put some of the plan to use they would twist it to make it their supreme plan. The bottom line is the Reps are in office and it is their job to have some exit strategy. Yes, the Dems are still americans and they should be putting forth every effort to end this, but honestly, thats not how politicians work. This would be exactly the same if it were reversed. Now that the Dems have House and Senate, lets see what types of "plans" they propose.


In all Honesty, I dont believe we should have been in Iraq to begin with. What your asking here in my opinion is, the Reps shit on the floor. Lets ask the Dems to clean it up. Its not going to be a clean task. There will be dirty hands for any move anyone makes to clean this up.

Hey nothing old chum been awhile.
Well I'm asking for speculations here.... we might have a future President in the making here
I think any solution that is feasible MUST be put forth by the Dems or worked on together with the repubs- Yes I agree not showing your 'playmove' is politically a strategic move if the dems actually have a plan.... but waiting 2 years means in the meantime, alot [thousands] of soldiers and Iraqi civilians will be horribly maimed and killed- is that worth the wait?

I totally agree with you. Im only pointing out that politicians work differently than what we all believe should be. They honestly know that any plan put forth by Dems will be trampled. They did not have the power to push any plan through. Now that they have House and Senate, lets see what they do with that power. We seen what the Reps did. Now lets see what the Dems do.

Do you honestly think we had an "exit" strategy for WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc? Think again. We are STILL IN ALL OF THOSE COUNTRIES!!!!! Do you realize that? It never ends. You think that because we signed a treaty with Germany and the war was "over" that all the guys that were against us just stopped? It amazes me that people think it's like writing a book. Part one drop bombs. Part two use tanks. Part three shake hands. Part four live happily ever after. Do you remember our own history? How long did it take to rid ourselves of tyranny and sort out for ourselves how we would live together? Think about it. How many people died from us killing each other? To think that we could demolish a country and rebuild it completely with a self sustaining "free" government in a matter of a few years is mindless. The republicans from day ONE said it would be hard and take time. And Nothing if you look at unemployment, the stock market, and inflation since Bush has been in office you will see that in fact the economy IS DOING WELL. We keep hearing from the left wing press that a fall is coming a fall is coming.... it's been that way for 3 yrs now. Still hasn't happened.

Junkie

I totally disagree with you. Our economy has gone to shit since Bush has been in office. Look at the euro vs. the dollar these days. Thats one example. Look at how many companies have closed and all the people that are out of work still now because of it. The economy has only stabled. It has not continuously decreased. Thats it! If you think our economy has increased, what are you basing it on? The alltime low we hit? Do you remember hearing about the surplus the government had? Do you remember getting a refund check from the government. I do. That was stupid to refund that to us. That was his attempt to win over stupid americans for his next election. Our national debt is at an alltime high.

Regarding the exit strategy, All I kept hearing during his running for Presidency on his second term was having an exit strategy. They had an exit strategy that would take time to accomplish. What happened to it? If im right, we have only sent more and more soldiers to Iraq. I dont believe this is comparable to WWII because we were not being told we would be letting their country run themselves and then sending more and more troops. Actually, wasnt the reason we went there to begin with to take our Saddam and find their weapons of mass destruction??? We have no business still being there to run their country. They have their own government in place. We need to let them run it themselves. We cant be the worlds bodyguard on every civil issue in every country in the world.

if they have nuclear weapons and hate us enough guess what? it gives a perfectly legitimate to go to Iraq and try and secure the nuclear force that can be used against us/other friendly countries.

So go to another government and take their leader out because of what? Someone said they have nukes? Then why arent we in N. Korea now?

I get what you saying Lip, but we already took Saddam out. What else are we there for? To make sure their government doesnt get overthrown? We could be there forever! Thats not our responsiblity. We cant patrol the whole world.

just cause saddam is gone doesn't mean no one else won't follow his footsteps.

So what, just occupy another country because of the possibility of another dictator coming into power?

Well now you're saying repubs are self-admitted bald-faced liars. I don't think so- the neo-cons, yes [now they've been rightfully given the royal boot with 'we the people' voting in the latest election results]. But many repubs are now coming around to the fact that 'staying the course in Iraq needs a deadline> troops serving, maimed, and dying there deserve some clue of an end to the madness.
From day 1 Bush and coy. said as soon as Iraqis wanted US troops out of Iraq- they would leave- of course that melded into 'stay the course', then 'cutting and running are for unpatriotic traitors'.

Now you list a bunch of countries 'needing' the continued presence of US troops for security.
You omit one important fact ;
US troops can patrol the streets and countryside of those nations without IEDs taking them out at a rate of 100 a month.... In those countries you listed there is no insurgency, nor a fire being kindled for a civil war, nor significant bodies of militia that are 'untouchable' for fear of sparking a civil war. Most Iraqis respectfully want to see the US presence diminishing soon.... The war was brought to a halt in those nations.
Do you see a forsee-able end to the war just by 'staying the course'? The move into Iraq was about WMDs... now due to mangled takeover policies, the terrorists opened up a 2nd Front- a diversionary front-> the Talibans are strengthening to retake Afghanistan- maybe because the US news networks stopped covering that theater of war, it misguidingly appears hunky-dory and all is well in Afghanistan- but its not.
You admit too that the US determined its own fate to become one powerful united nation. Keeping the US troops there has now become a policing job- time to let the Iraqis start learning how to police themselves and start determining their fate- see if they can become one nation or figure out if it has to be beyond the British defined maplines of what we now call Iraq. What's wrong with a gradual withdrawal and letting Iraqis start tending to their own garden.

None of it's working out- it started with Rumsfeld grinning after Bahgdad fell- remarking 'I don't see any rioting!' - then it was, take Fallujah and we'll break the insurgency - after[or before] it was force the belligerent militia clerics to back down and violence will decrease.... then beef up security along the borders. None of it has worked for 3 years.... all it's meant so far is 'stay the staus quo'.

You'll see that gradual withdrawal-even in the heat of battle- is the only option- because the endless attrition of US troops isn't worth a no-goal future.

Hellfighter, you are right on the money man!

Hey, I'm no economist, but right now, the DOW is at 12,133.56. I remember hearing the BIG NEWS in the 90's about it breaking 10,000 for the first time. So, if the DOW is UP 20%, then how is our economy in the toilet. Someone who understands economics better than me please explain that to me.



As for the exit strategy thing, I'm getting tired of hearing it. Why are we going to anounce to the world (and the bad guys in Iraq) that this is what we are going to do to leave? If I knew what the US was going to do in order to leave, I'd either a) make sure that didn't happen, or make it happen on MY time schedule so I'd be the strongest guy in Iraq when the US left. What we need to do, is get the PM, who is a Suni, to get people like Al Sader to get onboard with the new government, and quit running private armies with their own agendas. These religious leaders in Iraq don't want a secular government. They want a government run by their own particular brand of Islam. These are the people who need to start playing ball. They have real power and refuse to fully back the government.

A good indicator of how the economy is fairing in a general way is housing starts; in the US they're going down. Other than that you're right about the economy seeming to be in good shape what with big boom of available jobs lately. Tax cut strategy is apparently paying off too. All the 'wild' stock market figures are saying to me is that the rich are getting richer. Anyway all that good news means inflation rates will likely be going up. Regarding illegals 'taking' jobs- the way I see it is they create better jobs for locals in a round about way.... more 'gathering food' workers means more produced to be shipped- means more processing plants with more skilled labour and more transporters and managers - I think.

Regarding your Iraq comment, you said the key phrase "they want". I believe it's all coming down to that statement. We can't hold their hand forever. Blame who you want for the current mess [I don't hear much about Sadamned not getting much blame-seeing as he could've easily avoided a war by allowing inspectors in to show he in fact had no wmds], but the current status-quo is decimating every innocent in Iraq now. A new strategy is needed - push must now come to shove -the current strategy will not achieve victory. Only Iraqis can do that now I think.

Look at the news today- 150 guys snatched in 20 vans!!!! that's ridiculous - a huge convoy of the enemy freely roaming about and slipping away undetected. Dozens of iraqi police recruits get blasted in a single attack. There is no control the way things are now. Iraqis who want freedom need to face the fact that it'stime to lash back at the enemy. In my opinion they need to undergo a 6 month curfew/lockdown of Baghdad and surrounding area. Let the Iraqi security forces saturate the region and get back confidence. Seems like the rest of Iraq is running 'normal' but the current government in Iraq clearly has no real power if they don't show no-nonsense control in Baghdad. I think it's the iraqi government's fault trying to think there can be a strategy to be all things to all people.... civilised people of various differences will get together and solve their differences but the bands of butchers in fact have free reign to run wild and tear down any civilised progress.

It is foolish to hold the Dow up as an indicator of the U.S. economy. The Dow no longer reflects the U.S. economy - it reflects the global economy. This is why housing can be down and many of our remaining home-based manufacturing facilities are being shut down all the while the Dow is booming.

Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel-winning economist and Harvard's Linda Blimes have calculated that the true cost of the Iraq war will be US$2 trillion (for our European friends, the US trillion is equivalent to your thousand billions). My eyes gloss over whenever I see a figure like that. To put that into perspective, that is the same as spending US$2.7 million every single day since Jesus walked the earth! http://www.harvardmagazine.com/on-line/050682.html

Put it another way, that is a bill that will come due of over US$666,000.00 for every man, woman and child alive in America today!

Perhaps the Dow is up because investors might perceive a slight slowing in the fiscal hemorraging that has become defacto in US policy. Afterall, this election was more about the economy than it was Iraq. People are tired of politicians lining their pockets while building US$232 million bridges to no where. http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/20...dges/index.html

Exit polls showed that voters were more concerned about the economy than they were about the Iraq war or terrorism. Data also shows that the growth in personal income varied widely throughout the U.S. If you lived in Wyoming, Arizona or Nevada, your average personal income went up almost 50% and, in turn, you most likely voted for Republicans. If you lived in Michigan, Ohio or New Hampshire, you didn't do so well and you most likely voted for Democrats. http://usmarket.seekingalpha.com/article/20533

It's the economy, stupid! And most of us are still mighty concerned.

The fact of the matter is that the economy is in fantatstic shape. It been as good as it has ever been since the founding of the country. The liberal media is what keeps telling us that it is so bad. Why? Because the Elephants are in charge. As soon as the Democrats are in power you'll start to hear that the economy is in great shape. This reminds me of when Reagan and Bush were in office and all the media started on about how homeless people are everywhere and the economy is so bad, yadda yadda, yadda. After Clinton was elected, like magic, the homeless "problem" disappeared and the economy was great.

About the economy guys:

I work as an equity sales person and follow the economy very closely. There will always be different opinions, and if you are right and willing to bet on your opinion, you will earn money!



Am I bull on behalf of US? I'm sorry guys I am not! First of all US has a tremendous trade deficit:(6% of GDP - this is serious!)



The fact is that China(mainly) and some other Asian countries have been buying these bonds to keep their own currencies low to sell more cheap products to US citizens. This is borrowed money which have to be paid back. (The idea with loans!) This can't go on forever, you can't fool ALL the people ALL the time. US is just printing up more and more money (bonds) to consume more and more products from Asia. My prediction is that USD will have a tremedous plunge because of this deficit - because there is no way they will be able to pay back. The currency is the "price" on its country and US is in serious debt-trouble. When will this happen? I think soon, maybe a year or so, but I really don't know. China is the key here, when they want to sell US bonds or "justify" their portfolio as they have hinted - thunder breaks out.



Also - as mentioned earlier in this thread - the housing market is weakening. This is NOT a good economic long-term sign for the economy. Think for yourselves guys. The feelgood factor is better when you know that your house you paid 100.000.$ is worth 200.000$ instead of 50.000$ even though you not gonna sell anyway.

That Deficit vs GDP looks like doom - UNTIL you add the most current information for 2006:

For 2006 the US will be under 3%, primarily due to the TAX CUTS which drastically increased growth and tax revenues.

Meanwhile France, Germany, Greece and Italy are all expected to exceed the 3% GDP, primarily due to a faltering economic expansion and rising social security spending.


Old Man Mike

Interesting scope of topic guys, jesus lol… I think we will need 2 seperate topics for this? or do we... Global Economy and Modern Warfare... ah I think there is a thesis coming...

Kleerance, I find it funny that you say the dollar will drag down the world economy. But, a few posts back you said China has bought up all those bonds which in the end will weaken the USD. Plus, I was in Europe when they went to the Euro. I never understood how the DM could be at roughly 1.5 to the dollar, then mix in the economies of Italy, Poland, and Greece, and all of the sudden the Euro is STRONGER than the USD? I just wonder if this was somehow artaficial. Again, I'm no economist, but it seems like the poorer economies of these countries would have dragged on the stronger economies.

We can discuss the stock market and GDP but it doesn't change what's happening to middle and lower-class american's real money. In other words, isn't it true that whether each of us consider the economy up or down really boils down to the old addage, "Where you stand depends on where you sit?"

So that, personally, I make well above the average annual salary. Yet I do not make enough to have ever gotten a Bush tax cut. My company has not given raises in 6 years, yet every normal household expense has increased. Every year, my medical insurance benefits have decreased while the amount I have to kick in to have them has increased. I'm nearing retirement, yet my company has now abolished the pension plan as well as retirement medical insurance. My 401K is worth half what it was 10 years ago, even though I have my contribution to it maxed out.

My friends and family, most of whom have a much lower household income and kids still in school are feeling the stress of all this much worse than I am. And they are worried about losing their jobs and very few jobs of equal pay available. I don't know how they are holding things together, honestly. I see the stress of it in their faces and hear it in their voices everyday.

In our personal pocketbooks, the economy is much worse than it was 10 years ago. The stock market being up and so forth bring a ray of hope that perhaps things may change for the little guy, but so far, we're simply not seeing it.

As for the war in Iraq, everyone's waiting on the Baker report, both dems and reps. That's the right thing to do at this point. And both dems and reps know there has to be a change, some way to reduce American involvement while not adding to the destabilization of the area any further. The issues are very complicated and so will be the solutions. Hellfighter I agree with most everything you have said about this. And the bottom line is that none of our elected officials are going to be able to put this in a neat 30-second sound-bite for the evening news.

I like cheese.

And by the way my 401k is up 14% for the year and my personal mutual funds not associated with my 401k are up 18% for the year. Plus I've made more this year than I did last year..... looks ok to me. Oh, my house has incrased in value by about 15% in the two years I've been in it as well. We can argue all day long about all this and get no where. I hate both parties simply because neither one is interested in doing anything to correct the problems we have. It boils down to power, influence, money, and getting elected. I'm all for a collection of magic 8 balls replacing our elected officials.

Junkie

It's time we brought this guy out of retirement to save us all.

To those that think either party is not doing enough for the economy or the war on terror need to throw a few suggestions out there. We all seem to have the answers and yet none of us do the research necessary to support what we believe. The fact is these are complex times.



Global economy means the US will take a hit financially. Pre-global meant the US had all the power and all the money. That was fine then. It was us against them. The problem is we need them now (them meaning the rest of the world) to manufacture our goods for us because we can't do it cheaply by comparison. The reason we can't is because as individuals we make too much money annually. China's wages are way below ours.



Now here's a shocker...in order for the global economy to balance out, one of 2 things has to happen. Either we take a hit on our wages or China increases theirs. If China raises theirs we pay more for the goods. If we lower ours to make the balance we can't pay our bills. We lose either way. Fact is our arrogance is our own undoing. We seem to think we deserve more. Doesn't work that way anymore. Oddly enough it never should have IMO.



Now the war on terror is just as complex. And we're dealing with non-rational people. People that don't share our values. Should we pull out completely? Was it a mistake to go there to begin with? When they attacked us on our soil should we have said "Shame on you!" ? I don't know about you but I don't have the answers and I wouldn't trade places with anyone that is trying to find those answers. It's a thankless job. Easy for us to sit on our fat asses and play armchair politics because we have nothing to lose. Whole different story when your the one in the hotseat.



These are things I sit and ponder.







-taken from the mindless ramblings of Pain

Let me touch on housing first. Real Estate is at an all-time low this year. There are many many houses on the market that are not being bought. The reason I know this? My Mother is a real-estate Broker and I just bought a house last month. There are soo many to choose from and all sellers are willing to deal big time. Just because someone gives you an estimate on your house and tells you its increased 15%, try to sell it and let me know if you get near it. I bought my house for 25K under asking price. Its a buyers market now and the prices of houses are dropping badly across the country. Yes, there may be some areas that are making out better than others. I can bet these are probably areas that are building up due to retired people that cant afford their current living style that are building new in a cheap area. I dont consider this a positive in the economy, do you?

Lets now discuss taxes. The problem in this country is not that the people are being taxed too high. The problem is how it is being spent. This war in Iraq is killing us. As our national debt gets higher, and the opinion of our country amoung the rest of the world keeps decreasing, so will the dollars that investors around the world were or used to invest in our economy. The biggest icon to me that tells the story is the value of the dollar around the world. If our tax money was spent properly, we should have no problem to keep knocking down the national deficit. This is what is killing our economy in my opinion.

China increasing their price of goods vs. US lowering ours. I am dealing with this on a daily basis. The reason why we have been buying things so cheap in China is because of the many areas of China that are basically still like small villages. These little towns are where most of the items we are buying are being made from. There is no more people making things cheap in Hong Kong. Hong Kong is built up like crazy. People there are making money similar to most in USA now. Their money flow is increasing out to the rest of China now and the price of things being made there are increasing. I am seeing now a huge decrease of items made in China. In my honest opinion, over the next 10 years, there is going to be a huge shift. Things will start being made from other small countries where the pay will still be low such as Africa or Brazil. Then I would like to see what all these people that are arguing about things made in China will start complaining about. Its almost along the lines of people like eating hamburgers, but hate to see cows slaughtered. If we want certain items here, and want to be able to afford them, they must be made by people that have a much lower economy in order to buy them. Who would want to pay usd800.00 for a cell phone, or usd50.00 for a matchbox car for your kid. If you want these items and many many others to be made here, expect to pay a much higher price for them. And dont think that you will make more so you can pay more, because that will not work. Your pay scale can not buy all the necessities of life that are manufactured by people that have the same pay scale as you.


As far as having answers for what the country should do. There is not much I can do about it. If I were to quit My job and run for office, then maybe I could do something about it. As of now, the only thing I can do about it is to voice my opinion on forums like this and hope that my thoughts will effect the thought of others and maybe be spread across many households. Also, I can vote for someone that is actually running for office that shares similar views as mine. There is no individual that is running for an office that has the same opinion on every value I have, but I must decide which is best. There are views of Reps that I like and there are views of Dems that I like, just the same as there are views of both sides that I dont like. I must therefore choose which one is best. I believe the Dems have more ideas and beliefs that I think will be better for our economy. I think no matter which party is in office, our homeland security will be a high priority so that is not a worry to me. The biggest worry I currently have is the way our country's economy is headed.

Kleerance,

Shame on you switching it from % of GDP to absolute dollars. Reminds me of those that will claim unemployement is up based on the number of people unemployed instead of the percentage of people unemployed. I expected better.

The same point remains:

That Deficit vs GDP looks like doom - UNTIL you add the most current information for 2006:

For 2006 the US will be under 3%, primarily due to the TAX CUTS which drastically increased growth and tax revenues.

Meanwhile France, Germany, Greece and Italy are all expected to exceed the 3% GDP, primarily due to a faltering economic expansion and rising social security spending.


Old Man Mike

Looks like we have a failure to communicate. One more time in summary form:

Kleerance showed what first appeared to be an alarming chart with US Defict as a percentage of GDP. The chart ended in 2005 with a 6% deficit.

Old Man pointed out that the chart did not have the most current data. The US Deficit as a percentage of GDP will be under 3% for 2006. This improvement is primarily due to the TAX CUTS which drastically increased growth and tax revenues. Meanwhile France, Germany, Greece and Italy are all expected to exceed 3% for their Deficit as a percentage of GDP, primarily due to a faltering economic expansion and rising social security spending.

Kleerance then tried to switch the discussion from Deficit as percentage of GDB to Deficit as dollars only. He even tired to claim that a chart showing deficit only in dollars is the same as a chart showing deficit as a percentage of GDP. If GDP goes up more than deficit dollars goes up, then the percentage goes down.

Old Man said shame on Kleerance for trying to switch the discussion from % of GDP to absolute dollars. Reminds me of those that will claim unemployement is up based on the number of people unemployed instead of the percentage of people unemployed. I expected better.

Old Man Mike

I'm a noob at that but i have a couple of questions

Don't be to rude with me i tell you i'm a noob i just want to understand!!!

One quickie comment on the unemployment statistic. We only count unemployed people based on those who are receiving unemployment benefits. When those benefits run out, those people are no longer counted.

My family lives in rural southern Indiana, where over half of the workers have lost jobs due to manufacturing plants moving overseas. They've long since run out their time on unemployment benefits, although very few have found work at all, and those who have are now working at Walmart-type jobs instead of the decent wages they had before.

So, the current unemployment statistics really don't reflect what's real nor what's happening to the job market.

And i guess illegual immigrant working are not count in that??? Are they?

We have a situation where I live where the local Goodyear plant that employs a ton of people is on strike and likely to close over the union wanting more. They have almost mored themselves out of jobs. It amazes me that an unskilled worker is paid 50k (which is a lot here) will go on strike due to "low wages". The problem in America is everyone thinks they deserve to be upper middle class, have a huge home, drive new cars, have everything etc. It's insane how unions have gone beyond their usefulness and now are DRIVING our jobs overseas. Blame it on taxes etc. if you want but when a business has to pay someone here 50k a yr to watch a robot insert a rivet they are going to send it to China..... Not to mention that NO business will locate in my area because it is a UNION town. Forget that we have a great airport, a sufficient workforce, and are located within miles of several auto plants. We can't get ONE industry to come here. Simply because it is a UNION town.... Look no further to find out why our jobs are going to China and Mexico.

Junkie

But I thought those Goodyear workers were striking on these two points:

1. Not closing additional US plants.

2. No further reductions on retirement medical benefits.

By the way, upper middle class is defined in our economy as $250,000 per year, not $50K!!!

It's so funny to me, the tax cuts go to those who earn more than $250,000 per year. The "death tax" or estate tax, only affects those who are leaving an estate of more than $10Million dollars. Yet, we all are so easily lead to think those things apply to people earning or leaving behind less than this. I simply don't get it.



And no, illegal immigrants are not counted in any unemployment statistics.

Also, industries are not coming to your state no matter what infrastructure you have. Those auto companies can get "rivets watched" as you put it, for $1,000 per year someplace else and yet sell their product back here in the US for the same or higher price, netting a bigger profit share, bottom line. Fat cats get richer, the little guy gets pushed down into poverty-wage jobs when their jobs dry up. But the larger profits makes the stock market rise. That's the truth about the global economy and capitalism. That's why the divide in our country between the rich and poor is getting bigger, ergo more unrest.

And that's precisely why our politicians keep debating things like gay marraige and crap like that, to get us to vote against our own family's and country's futures.

Hey Steel,

The loss of bennies you were mentioning your company is feeling, are those because your company isn't able to make as much, or pay for as much? I ask this, because most places I've worked we see that. Only to find out the the "golden parachutes" are getting bigger, and the raises for the leadership are increasing. I mention that because, and stick with me here, most raises are based on % right? Now, lets say you make that 50K. Now your CEO and CFO make 500K. Board of directors make 350K, and VP's make 300K Now give everyone a 5% raise. You get 52.5K, CEO/CFO 525K, BoD 367.5K, and VP's 315K. So the "flunkies get 2,500 extra a year. between the CEO,CFO, lets say 7 BoD, and 6 VP's make a total of 262,500 per year. Boy that is a lot of grunt raises. See how that can work against you in the long run? The guys at the top ARE going to get their raise, even if you don't.

My CEO's annual salary is $1.25 million per year. He and all upper level manager's salary annual increases are set in stone, in both cash, raises, and stock options, they get it no matter what. And so forth on down to us regular employees.

We are supposed to get a bonus, based on an un-understandable equation (it's sort of Return on Investment versus cost of business and a bunch of mumbo-jumbo) that's so far never gone positive, then it is multiplied by a percent of company earnings and then multiplied by our yearly salaries.

It so far has consistantly meant nothing for anyone below upper management, but tons of money for everyone higher-up.

My company is doing gang-busters, and a big buy-out is in the wings with senior management and above guaranteed millions each if the deal goes through, nothing for the workers.

Actually that's not true. We have several auto makers who have moved to Alabama. One of which is 15 miles from where I live. However, because it is a union town they wont even consider coming here. While other towns have benefited from suppliers, we watch as they continue to locate around us. I by no means make a lot of money. BUT I live well. Save enough that Lord willing I'll retire early. AND have zero debt other than my home. These people who just can't make it on 50k a year get the big HAHAHAHAHA from me. I have little sympathy for those who would rather more their jobs away than keep them. Don't get me wrong I have friends who work there. Their dad's work there etc. I feel bad that they are not working but talk about cutting off your arm to save a fingernail..... this is the third time I know of this has happend. Once they shut the plant down for a year or so. This time might be for good. Our steel mill left completely. The people here still have the Union mentality that they are entitled. Things change and we either change with them or we get left behind. Unfortunately the town I live in is getting left behind...... I understand what unions were intended to do and now they have gone beyond making working conditions and wages reasonable. I promise you it doesnt take 2-3 new cars, a boat, 4 wheelers, a $250,000 home (which is damn expensive here), and all the trimmings to be happy. However, our nation has come to expect this. Think I'm wrong? Look around a bit and see how many people live within their means? I'd love to drive a new car and live in a bigger home. Instead I hoard my money for retirement because there's no frickin way I'll get Social Security. I get irritated everytime I look at my check stub thinking about it..... anyway I'm through with worrying about it. I get one vote for a choice of candidates that are going to screw me coming or going my choice. If one was obviously better we'd not be having this discussion we'd be counting our money with all our overemployed friends.....

Junkie

Where did you get this data? I tried to search for it, but could not find a definate projected trade deficit as percentage of GDP. But I did find this from a editiorial in NYT from yesterday.



"Just as the summer driving season was winding down, oil prices started to fall. The combination of less demand and lower prices was a potent mix, helping to narrow the United States' trade gap significantly in September, to $64.3 billion from $69 billion in August, according to the latest tally.

That's welcome news, illustrating yet another upside to curbing the nation's oil consumption. But it's also sobering. The decline in September's trade deficit was the largest in nearly two years. And yet, the United States remains squarely on track for a record trade imbalance in 2006: a projected $790 billion, compared with $717 billion last year.

(snip...)

As recently as a few years ago, economists warned that a nation was courting a financial crisis if the size of its trade deficit exceeded 3 percent of its economy. Today, the United States' deficit is approaching 7 percent. The best way to avoid the worst is to define the problem honestly, and craft the remedies accordingly."



Now, how could the US be projected for a record $790 billion trade deficit, $73 billion more than last year, yet cut the perecage as compared to GDP in half? Did the US GDP more than double in 1 year? That's one hell of a year!

The NY Times says the projected deficit as a percentage of GDP is closing on 7%. Their numbers seem to back that up. Maybe you're making a mistake on the 3% Mike. Your source wasn't a republican ad poster, was it?



Also don't know how you attribute an upper class tax cut from 4-5 years ago to a drop in the trade deficit as percentage of GDP 4-5 years later after several years of record trade deficits. The two seem completely unrelated, and, as pointed out, I don't think there's been a drop at all in the trade deficit for the year, in real dollars or percentage of GDP.

It is hard to follow some of this logic when people don't site specific statistics.

Kleerance, thanks for those charts!

Old Man, your claims of growth are undermined by reports generated by the Bush administration themselves. Can you please site your sources?

The claim that tax cuts pay for themselves had already been rejected by the Administration's own leading economists. Edward Lazear, the current chair of President's Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, recently stated, "I certainly would not claim that tax cuts pay for themselves." N. Gregory Mankiw, President's Bush's former CEA chair and a well-known Harvard economics professor, has written that there is "no credible evidence" that "tax revenues… rise in the face of lower tax rates." Mankiw compared an economist who says that tax cuts pay for themselves to a "snake oil salesman trying to sell a miracle cure." - http://www.cbpp.org/9-27-06tax.htm

A deficit of $260 billion in 2006 would represent the largest 6-year deterioration in the budget in 50 years. In 2000, there was a surplus equal to 2.4 percent of Gross Domestic Product.[4] A deficit of $260 billion this year would be equal to an estimated 2.0 percent of GDP. That 4.4 percentage point deterioration in the budget would be the worst 6-year deterioration in half a century (the next worse was from 1998 to 2004, when the deterioration was slightly less than 4.4 percentage points). This deterioration is hardly a reason for jubilation. - http://www.cbpp.org/8-17-06bud.htm

I grew up outside Boston. In the 50's and 60's a Boston Police officer could afford his own home in a decent section of the city. He was the lone wage earner as his wife typically was a stay-at-home mom. In addition to his first home, he could afford a second lakeside home in Maine or New Hampshire. Not far from where I live here in Maine we have a tight-knit community of cottages that were all built and occupied by Boston police and firemen. Today, those same cops and firemen can't even afford a single home in Boston and that is with their spouse working one or two additional jobs. In fact, if a Boston cop came here looking to buy a second home, everyone would assume he was on the take.

Our economic situation here in the U.S. has changed dramatically and yet, so much of it is hidden by a mountain of personal debt (how else do you think most of those people can afford those 2-3 cars, the boats and 4-wheelers!) and an astronomically high national debt.

Sure, there may be individual success stories and many of us feel that we are doing quite well, but the big picture here is not nearly as rosy as it should be.

It seems as if both our economic policy and our political policies have been turned on their heads. It used to be that a conservative meant someone who didn't want to be involved in "nation building," who believed in lowering the nation's debt and was someone who certainly didn't want to bow down before China and Japan. There is no better example of this than Paul Craig Roberts. He was the brains behind Jack Kemp's Supply-side economic movement, he worked for Ronald Reagan as his Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. He was a conservative's conservative. Find anything that he has written in the last six years and you'll be amazed. Recently he has been warning that the U.S. will soon become a third world country.

Take a look at this column which ran in the conservative Washington Times. It is enough to make your head spin: http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/proberts.htm

A column of his that ran in the American Conservative speaks directly to our discussion of trade imbalance and the loss of jobs to China. http://www.amconmag.com/2005_07_04/article1.html Roberts notes that the jobs we are losing are not all blue collar jobs as most would have us believe. Go get a CAT scan and you'll most likely find that the radiologist who reads the scan is based in either China or India.

Today, many of Roberts columns are carried on liberal websites as he speaks truth to power. He makes an interesting case study in just how odd politics in America has become. Here is a collection of his columns if anyone is interested: http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts-arch.html

As far as the war on terror, I feel the focus has changed from such to attempting to resolve a religious war. I think it's time for all to realize that there will always continue to be terrorist threats and terroist infiltrating our countries.

Personally, I think that money could be better spent on keeping them out, instead of continually sending our brothers and sisters to their death beds.

I don't know if any of you have checked out the site for the United Nations, but they are offering people over $100,000.00 for a 6 month job in some foreign countries....where there is a slim chance you will ever return. I know all over Canada they are promoting this.... shame shame. Oh yea, looks nice reading it, can probably feel the money in your hands...don't hold to tight. After paying for a funeral and taking care of a spouse and child for one year, what do you have left.

I think it's time that our Governments step back and re-evaluate the situation and decide what is going to better our Countries!

There will be Wars with no winners only losers and if our government continues to try and solve the worlds problems..we just might end up the big losers!