Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 47186
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2025/07/11 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
7/11    

2007/7/6-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:47186 Activity:nil
7/6     Damn this Bush economy!
        http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/07/06/ap3889125.html
        \_ Another piddling job growth report that beat expectations... Great.
           Let me know when wages grow along with productivity, and when the
           savings rate is positive again.  Wake me when job growth meets
           population growth... Go go bushonomics
        \_ Tax Cuts and the Not So Great Economy (Economist's View)
           http://www.csua.org/u/j3f
           \_ This has exactly crap to do with the article.  And this putz
              points to negative job growth and decreasing GDP after 2001 and
              blames the tax cuts?!  No mention of, say, other events in 2001?
              -emarkp
              to the
        \_ Jared Bernstein, senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute,
           a Washington think tank, noted the participation rate has fallen
           especially sharply for young people, blacks and Hispanics, groups
           who are especially sensitive to the economys ups and downs.
           If those missing workers were reported as unemployed, the jobless
           rate would be 5% instead of 4.5%, he said in a report.
           \_ Sure.  A Left think tanker says "which do you believe, me or the
              numbers?"
        \_ Damn these tax and spend Democrats in charge of Congress and their
           nearly instanteous good effect on the economy!
2025/07/11 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
7/11    

You may also be interested in these entries...
2013/2/10-3/19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Uncategorized/Profanity] UID:54603 Activity:nil
2/10    I like Woz, and I like iWoz, but let me tell ya, no one worships
        him because he has the charisma of an highly functioning
        Autistic person. Meanwhile, everyone worships Jobs because
        he's better looking and does an amazing job promoting himself
        as God. I guess this is not the first time in history. Case in
        point, Caesar, Napolean, GWB, etc. Why is it that people
	...
2010/11/2-2011/1/13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:54001 Activity:nil
11/2    California Uber Alles is such a great song
        \_ Yes, and it was written about Jerry Brown. I was thinking this
           as I cast my vote for Meg Whitman. I am independent, but I
           typically vote Democrat (e.g., I voted for Boxer). However, I
           can't believe we elected this retread.
           \_ You voted for the billionaire that ran HP into the ground
	...
2010/2/22-3/30 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:53722 Activity:nil
2/20    Ok serious question, NOT political.  This is straight up procedural.
        Has it been declared that we didn't find WMD in iraq? (think so).
        So why did we go into iraq (what was the gain), and if nobody really
        knows, why is nobody looking for the reason?
        \_ Political stability, military strategy (Iran), and to prevent
           Saddam from financing terrorism.
	...
2009/8/5-13 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:53241 Activity:kinda low
8/5     Regarding NKorea relesing the journalists, here's what I think the
        actual deal between Kim and Obama is:
        - Both agree that Kim needs to save, or gain, face to pave the way for
          his son's succession and for NK's stability.
        - Both agree that Obama doesn't like losing face by publicly
          apologizing.
	...
2009/4/27-5/4 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:52914 Activity:low
4/27    "Obama the first Asian-American president?"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090427/pl_afp/uspoliticsobama100daysasia
        Just like the way Clinton was the first African-American president.
        \_ Two wars, a banking, housing, and general economic crisis, a truly
           massive deficit, and now, Swine Flu.  Has any president except for
           Lincoln and Roosevelt faced worse?
	...
2009/3/13-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:52710 Activity:nil
3/13    So Bill Clinton doesn't know what an embryo is?
        \_ obCigarJoke
	...
2009/2/27-3/6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Tax] UID:52655 Activity:low
2/27    CA unemployment increases from 9.3% to 10.1% for Jan
        \_ Good thing the legislature passed the biggest tax increase in
           history!  That should solve it.
           \_ because cutting taxes has done such a great job so far!
                \_ it has.. giving mortgages to poor folks did us in
                   \_ 100% horseshit.
	...
2009/2/4-9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:52511 Activity:kinda low
2/3     Well said: "What gets people upset are executives being rewarded for
        failure. Especially when those rewards are subsidized by US taxpayers."
        \_ Turns out, he gets it.
           \_ Talk is cheap.
              \_ Freedom is strength.
        \_ Isn't this something like FDR might have said?
	...
2009/2/2-8 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:52497 Activity:nil
2/1     Pres. Obama keeps rendition
        http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-rendition1-2009feb01,0,7548176,full.story
        \_ This does not mean what you (or the LA Times) think it means.
        \_ More on how this article does not mean what you (or the idiotic
           LA times) think it means:
           http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/02/02/renditions
	...
2009/1/27-2/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:52478 Activity:nil
1/27    http://www.realnews.org/index.php-option=com_content&task=view&id=59&Itemid=189.htm
        [Title: Hilary's Bush Connection. Summary: Ties to Alan Quasha.]
        \_ I knew hillary was evil!
        \- in case you are interested, the old white guy to the right of
           the clinton-bushco picture [chalmers johnson] is a former ucb
           prof who sort of went nuts.
	...
2012/12/18-2013/1/24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:54559 Activity:nil
12/18   Bush kills. Bushmaster kills.
        \_ Sandy Huricane kills. Sandy Hook kills.
           \_ bitch
	...
2011/5/1-7/30 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:54102 Activity:nil
5/1     Osama bin Ladin is dead.
        \_ So is the CSUA.
           \_ Nope, it's actually really active.
              \_ Are there finally girls in the csua?
              \_ Is there a projects page?
              \_ Funneling slaves -> stanford based corps != "active"
	...
2010/11/8-2011/1/13 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion] UID:53998 Activity:nil
11/8    Have you read how Bush says his pro-life stance was influenced
        by his mother keeping one of her miscarriages in a jar, and showing
        it to him?  These are headlines The Onion never dreamed of
	...
2010/5/26-6/30 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China] UID:53845 Activity:nil
5/26    "China could join moves to sanction North Korea"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100526/ap_on_re_as/as_clinton_south_korea
        How did Hillary manage to do that when we're also asking China to
        concede on the economic front at the same time?
         \_ China doesn't want NK to implode. NK is a buffer between SK and
            China, or in other words a large buffer between a strong US ally and
	...
2010/4/28-5/10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:53808 Activity:nil
4/28    Laura Bush ran a stop sign and killed someone in 1963:
        http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/28/books/28laura.html?no_interstitial
        How come she didn't go to jail?
        \_ Car drivers rarely go to jail for killing people.  -tom
        \_ Ted Kennedy killed a girl. Dick Cheney shot a man.
        \_ Ted Kennedy killed a girl. Hillary and Dick Cheney both shot a man.
	...
2010/2/21-3/9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:53717 Activity:nil
2/18    If not 0 then 1 - wasn't that the basis of the logic of the bush
        administration on torture?  If we do it, it's legal, and since
        torture is illegal, therefore we don't torture?
        \_ Bush is a great computer scientist.
           \_ He must be, given that he defeated the inventor of the Internet
              and AlGorithm.
	...
2009/12/25-2010/1/19 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:53603 Activity:nil
12/24   Why San Francisco and union and government suck:
        http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/12/unions-graft-stunning-incompetence-make.html
        \_ http://www.burbed.com/2010/01/03/san-francisco-richer-and-richer-and-richer
           San Francisco to become richer and richer and richer. It's
           Disneyland for adults! YAY!!!
        \_ No doubt that there is plenty of corruption in San Francisco that
	...
Cache (3944 bytes)
www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/07/06/ap3889125.html
Employers boosted payrolls by a better-than-expected 132,000 jobs in June, enough to keep the unemployment rate at a relatively low 45 percent. It was another sign that the economy is snapping out of a nearly yearlong sluggish spell. The latest picture of the nation's employment climate, released by the Labor Department on Friday, also showed that workers saw solid gains in their wages last month. The tally of 132,000 new jobs was stronger than the 125,000 that economists were forecasting. They did, however, predict that job growth would be sufficient to hold the unemployment rate at 45 percent, where it has stood for three straight months. "The economy seems poised to return to its full potential," said Carl Tannenbaum, chief economist at LaSalle Bank. "Employers are seeking opportunities to add to their talent pools. The demand for labor is being driven by very solid demand for goods and services." New hiring in the areas of education, health services, leisure and hospitality and government drove overall job growth last month. Construction companies also expanded employment - even as they coped with fallout from the housing slump. Those employment gains swamped job cuts at factories, retailers and certain professional and business services. Meanwhile, the economy added more jobs in April and May than the government previously thought. Revised figures released Friday showed that payrolls grew by a strong 190,000 in May, much stronger than the 157,000 reported last month. In April, 122,000 positions were added, which was better than the 80,000 previously reported, which had been the fewest in two and a half years. Wage growth is important to workers and supports consumer spending, a major ingredient in healthy overall economic activity. The modest increase in wages should ease inflation fears. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and his colleagues keep a close eye on wages for any signs that they might generate inflation. Out of control inflation is bad for the economy and for the pocketbook. It shrinks paychecks, erodes purchasing power and eats into the value of investments. The Federal Reserve last week noted that there have been some improvements on some inflation readings but made clear that it is not letting down its guard on this front. The biggest danger to the economy is if inflation doesn't recede as the Fed anticipates, Fed policymakers said. Still, Fed policymakers have enough faith in their inflation forecast that they left a key interest rate last week at 525 percent, where it has been for a year. Companies have continued to hire at a decent pace even as the economy has endured a nearly period of sluggishness. But the strain of the ailing housing market and problems in the automotive industries have clearly been felt. In the first half of this year, job growth averaged 145,000 a month. That was weaker than the average monthly gain of 189,000 for all of 2006. Economic growth nearly stalled in the first three months of this year, with business expansion slumping to a pace of just 07 percent, the worst in more than four years. The ailing housing market was a main factor behind the weakness. Analysts believe the economy rebounded in the April-to-June quarter, expanding at a pace anywhere from 23 percent - to more than 3 percent. The government's estimate of second-quarter economic activity will be released later this month. Despite the healthy jobs market and the budding rebound, the public is giving President Bush low marks for his economic stewardship. Only 37 percent approve of his handling of the economy, tying a record-low set in November 2005, according to an AP-Ipsos poll. Trying to capitalize on that, Democrats have been pushing policies they say are aimed at closing the gap between low-wage and high-wage workers. The first increase of 70 cents will go into effect later this month. Across the country, the length of peoples' job hunt was little changed.
Cache (8192 bytes)
www.csua.org/u/j3f -> economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/06/bruce_bartlett__1.html
I compared the state of the economy today to where it was at the exact same point during the previous business cycle. Thus, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the most recent recession ended in November, 2001. For example, real GDP has risen at a 31 percent annual rate since the end of the recession. But in areas such as this, there are no objective criteria for saying what is a good performance from a bad one; First, when Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992, he repeatedly said that the economy was the worst since the Great Depression, and he continued saying so well after he took office--two years into the recovery. In other words, the recovery from the 1990-91 recession was so anemic that voters elected a new president in order to get the economy moving. Therefore, we are not comparing today's economy to one that was historically robust, but one that was widely viewed as being exceptionally weak. Second, the data raise serious questions about the role of taxes. Republicans are convinced that the Bush tax cuts saved us from doom. But there is really no evidence whatsoever to support this claim. Unless one believes that there would have been no recovery at all and that we would still be mired in recession without the tax cuts, it is hard to find any positive evidence of their economic impact. Investment stinks, employment growth has been mediocre, and even the stock market increase is nothing to brag about. Third, it is worth remembering that Clinton raised taxes right out of the box in 1993. Every Republican opposed it and virtually every conservative economist predicted disaster. Yet it is hard to find any evidence that the tax increase had any negative effect whatsoever. One can easily argue the opposite based on the economic results. I am not arguing for a reversal of the tax cuts or in favor of a tax increase. I am just saying that one has to do more than mindlessly repeat mantras about the benefits of tax cuts or the horrors of tax increases if you want to be taken seriously in this debate. I also wish the mindless repetition of false mantras would end, but I don't expect it to change much. In the media, the commodity being sold is entertainment, not information, so it shouldn't be too surprising that the two will come into conflict even on shows labeled as news. Still, I would have thought there would be more market discipline than exists now. There seems to be little penalty for providing false or misleading information (even if it leads to war) so long as the entertainment value is high enough (unless you count even more bookings and more exposure in the media as a penalty). I wish I knew how to bring the information and entertainment objectives into better alignment, we need it, but I don't know what the answer is. But one area that could stand improvement is the level of competition in the market for news and entertainment. We need to ensure that robust competition is present in this marker so that whatever market discipline does exist with respect to the presentation of accurate information and informed analysis has a chance to fully express itself. "First, when Bill Clinton ran for president in 1992, he repeatedly said that the economy was the worst since the Great Depression" Yes, he lied then and kept lying right through his 8 years. The recession of the early 80's was FAR worse than the extremely mild recesion of 1991 "It is obvious that by every standard, the recovery and expansion after the 1990-91 recession was significantly better than that after the 2001-01 recession" And late into that recession there were tax cuts, the capital gains tax cuts of 1997 were a huge economic stimulus for the expansion of the late 90's. "but one that was widely viewed as being exceptionally weak" Widely viewed "exceptionally weak" only by the ignorant, the economy had already been growing strong before clinton took office, and actually grew more the year before he took office than the year he took office. "Republicans are convinced that the Bush tax cuts saved us from doom. But there is really no evidence whatsoever to support this claim." There is overwhelming evidence, the Bush tax cuts of the lower three tax brackets were enacted in mid 2001 and for almost the next 2 years we had negative job growth and anemic GDP growth. Almost immediately after the top two tax bracket cuts were enacted in June 2003 the economy exploded into growth and since then we have a net gain of over 9 million jobs created. And now, as in the expansion of the 90's, real wage growth comes in late in the expansion and we have had very solid wage growth. "Third, it is worth remembering that Clinton raised taxes right out of the box in 1993. Every Republican opposed it and virtually every conservative economist predicted disaster. Yet it is hard to find any evidence that the tax increase had any negative effect whatsoever" Hard to find evidence? Only if your eyes are closed, look at the massive slow down of economic growth in 1995, no negative effect? "I am just saying that one has to do more than mindlessly repeat mantras" Yes and will you and your kind stop mindlessly repeating your idiotic mantras of tax cuts don't work. bruce bartlett, as always, reminds us what an honest conservative looks (and thinks) like. TB reminds us what a dishonest shill of the american right-wing looks like. sadly, as our host noted, the ignorance of the TBs rules our discourse, while the honesty of bruce bartlett got him fired from a supposed think tank. TB - As an unreconstructable left winger, I'll admit I'm biased toward thinking that tax cuts for high income brackets don't usually stimulate the economy, but I'm open to being convinced. Now you have brought forth quite a bit of evidence to support your thesis that the Bush tax cuts for the rich did stimulate the economy. To me, however your evidence seems largely circumstantial. Other factors were involved, including exceptionally low interest rates, and a massive increase in government spending. This means that it's hard to prove your point with macroeconomic evidence. What puzzles me the most is exactly what have the very rich done with all the money that Bush has left them? In fact, what hits the headlines is companies buying back their stock, because they don't know what to do with their money. My impression is that the very rich are simply contributing to speculative bubbles while US industry continues getting hollowed out. You seem to be a proponent of faith based economics, which is often an important positive factor. So please restore my faith that capitalism is good for America. That was no evidence whatsoever: in the Clinton case, TB claims that 93 tax increases were responsible for a slowdown in 95, but that 2003 tax cuts on the very rich were responsible for immediate growth. So, the real message is: when there is a tax increase, we'll say that the next slump in the future is clear proof of the destructive effects of taxes, and when there is a tax cut, well any growth (however sluggish compared to previous recoveries) in the future or indeed at the very same time, even though there will not have been any time for investment to take place, shows us that tax cuts pay for themselves. Cyrille, in simple times, TB's lag times for the effects of tax cuts / increases to work through the economy are different. Farrar R is spot on in saying it is erronous to state only one thing led to the economic growth that occured, while we all know reality is quite complex and a bunch of factors influence to a greater / lesser extent the economy at any particular time. Bruce Bartlett is quite right in analysis, since both the general extent of growth and even more so the quality of growth from the recession end in November 2001 has been inferior to that after the recession ending in 1991. The extent to which the middle class has gained since 2001 is distinctly inferior to gains made after 2001. The question of how economic structure has changed since 2001, limiting general economic growth and the ways in which the proceeds of growth are being shared is continually masked by looking beyond domestic economic structu...