- Aug 18, 2001
- 4,260
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
so is the current housing market "crippled" or "booming", hard to have it both ways...
probably agree with that statement, but hard to n=know exactly how "big" or exagerated the bubble is...clearly, cheap interest rates have propelled both home ownership, and a rise in home prices for the same reason, cheap money with which to finance these purchases...Booming looming on bubble.
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
o.k., so what your saying is the economy is in "recovery"
the economy has been "stimulated"
the economy has "grown"
i just wanted to be clear on the liberal view of the economy.
i would agree.
I would say the economy has grown, but not in one way that I would have liked it to have = manufacturing jobs (the field that I work in). This is the first recovery ever that didn't see an increase in manufacturing jobs as they are heading to Mexico and China (maybe Centra America now too) as quick as we can give them a pink slip.
We'll see how history pans out on Service jobs (although we still manufacturer alot using the best productivity in the world - automation)
However, our production capacity is up, because it appears more people like yourself are empployed than assembly line workers. But you are right, manufacturing employment has been flat the last several years even as production has expanded.
Actually, it's 10% decline (not flat). Some 4 million manufacturing jobs have been lost since 2001 and there is no end in sight (at least at the moment) as the automakers are taking more of a lead and shifting jobs out.
One statistic I would like to see is how temporary works effect the manufactuirng numbers. I know that many manufactures acutally use temp services (for up to several years as does Toyota in Georgetown, KY) for some time before making those employees permanent (if at all). Since there has been a boom in temporary workers, I wonder if many of those are replacing full time manufacturing workers (with no benefits and lower pay of course).
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
now i'm confused....one of you says the growth is in the housing sector.....the other says it's in the service sector.
the one who states it's in the housing sector claims it's because of Clinton's tax cut on capital gains from house sales from 1992.
This begs the issue why the boom in the housing sector happened 13 years later....oh well, don't let facts get in the way of good story..
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
o.k., so what your saying is the economy is in "recovery"
the economy has been "stimulated"
the economy has "grown"
i just wanted to be clear on the liberal view of the economy.
i would agree.
I would say the economy has grown, but not in one way that I would have liked it to have = manufacturing jobs (the field that I work in). This is the first recovery ever that didn't see an increase in manufacturing jobs as they are heading to Mexico and China (maybe Centra America now too) as quick as we can give them a pink slip.
We'll see how history pans out on Service jobs (although we still manufacturer alot using the best productivity in the world - automation)
However, our production capacity is up, because it appears more people like yourself are empployed than assembly line workers. But you are right, manufacturing employment has been flat the last several years even as production has expanded.
Actually, it's 10% decline (not flat). Some 4 million manufacturing jobs have been lost since 2001 and there is no end in sight (at least at the moment) as the automakers are taking more of a lead and shifting jobs out.
One statistic I would like to see is how temporary works effect the manufactuirng numbers. I know that many manufactures acutally use temp services (for up to several years as does Toyota in Georgetown, KY) for some time before making those employees permanent (if at all). Since there has been a boom in temporary workers, I wonder if many of those are replacing full time manufacturing workers (with no benefits and lower pay of course).
Over the last several years the employment indexes for manufacturing has neither been growing or shrinking. but you are right over the past couple of decaded manufacturing employment has been contracting and I expect that continue because of engineers like yourself.
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
so is the current housing market "crippled" or "booming", hard to have it both ways...
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
so is the current housing market "crippled" or "booming", hard to have it both ways...
once again, nice reading.
You ridiculed the notion that a housing boom could trail tax changes by nearly a decade. i gave you a reason why this might hae been the case. Don't forget the extreme unlikelihood of such a boom from 199-2003ish, given the overall state of your economy.
In fact you'll note that housing starts have generally increased since 1992 after a rather severe drop in 1990/91. census link.
A market can face crippling 'factors' and yet still grow - it is economically impossible that the softwood lumber dispute helped the housing market in the western United States, since the Canadian softwood lumber is not an 'inferior good' let alone one of the infamous-but-mostly-theoretical 'giffen goods'.
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
so is the current housing market "crippled" or "booming", hard to have it both ways...
once again, nice reading.
You ridiculed the notion that a housing boom could trail tax changes by nearly a decade. i gave you a reason why this might hae been the case. Don't forget the extreme unlikelihood of such a boom from 199-2003ish, given the overall state of your economy.
In fact you'll note that housing starts have generally increased since 1992 after a rather severe drop in 1990/91. census link.
A market can face crippling 'factors' and yet still grow - it is economically impossible that the softwood lumber dispute helped the housing market in the western United States, since the Canadian softwood lumber is not an 'inferior good' let alone one of the infamous-but-mostly-theoretical 'giffen goods'.
So now that capital gains have been cut again, the housing boom should continue for another decade?
Possibly - I tend to agree that the mix of tax cuts and spending patterns means interest rates won't be falling again any time soon, and this will certainly moderate any continued boom. The problem with big government (and I say this as someone who doesn't entirely reject the idea of an economically active government) is that they can almost always 'buy' productivity and economic growth, at a cost that they hope to defer to beyond the next election cycle.Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
so is the current housing market "crippled" or "booming", hard to have it both ways...
once again, nice reading.
You ridiculed the notion that a housing boom could trail tax changes by nearly a decade. i gave you a reason why this might hae been the case. Don't forget the extreme unlikelihood of such a boom from 199-2003ish, given the overall state of your economy.
In fact you'll note that housing starts have generally increased since 1992 after a rather severe drop in 1990/91. census link.
A market can face crippling 'factors' and yet still grow - it is economically impossible that the softwood lumber dispute helped the housing market in the western United States, since the Canadian softwood lumber is not an 'inferior good' let alone one of the infamous-but-mostly-theoretical 'giffen goods'.
So now that capital gains have been cut again, the housing boom should continue for another decade?
extreme unlikelihood of such a boom from 199-2003ish, given the overall state of your economy.
There are always crippling, or potentially crippling factors at work in any market, regardless of it's state of 'booming' or not.Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
extreme unlikelihood of such a boom from 199-2003ish, given the overall state of your economy.
but liberals tout the fantastic state of the economy under Clinton!! Market was sky high, we had a budget SURPLUS [albeit funded by gutting military spending, and selling off our strategic oil reserves)..
according to liberals, the economy was robust under clinton, and in the toilet under Bush....so your logic still fails me...how a incentive for housing purchases created by Clinton during a booming economy, only become manifest 13 years later under a weak economy by Bush...
and while an market can face crippling factors and still grow, i don't believe it's reasonable to claim crippling factors are present during booming housing market.
i would argue that the use of the word "crippling" is hardly appropriate.
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
o.k., so what your saying is the economy is in "recovery"
the economy has been "stimulated"
the economy has "grown"
i just wanted to be clear on the liberal view of the economy.
i would agree.
I would say the economy has grown, but not in one way that I would have liked it to have = manufacturing jobs (the field that I work in). This is the first recovery ever that didn't see an increase in manufacturing jobs as they are heading to Mexico and China (maybe Centra America now too) as quick as we can give them a pink slip.
We'll see how history pans out on Service jobs (although we still manufacturer alot using the best productivity in the world - automation)
However, our production capacity is up, because it appears more people like yourself are empployed than assembly line workers. But you are right, manufacturing employment has been flat the last several years even as production has expanded.
Actually, it's 10% decline (not flat). Some 4 million manufacturing jobs have been lost since 2001 and there is no end in sight (at least at the moment) as the automakers are taking more of a lead and shifting jobs out.
One statistic I would like to see is how temporary works effect the manufactuirng numbers. I know that many manufactures acutally use temp services (for up to several years as does Toyota in Georgetown, KY) for some time before making those employees permanent (if at all). Since there has been a boom in temporary workers, I wonder if many of those are replacing full time manufacturing workers (with no benefits and lower pay of course).
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
so you don't dispute that tax cuts stimulated the economy and increased tax revenues...your just against excess spending and deficits....
well, i would agree with you..
keep the tax cuts, reduce spending...
Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
so you don't dispute that tax cuts stimulated the economy and increased tax revenues...your just against excess spending and deficits....
well, i would agree with you..
keep the tax cuts, reduce spending...
What tax cuts? There was no tax cut! Rather, as a result of the "tax cut" the nation's national debt will increase, which means higher taxes tomorrow to pay for a "tax cut" today. It was really a tax shift (or should I say shaft).
At the very least the "tax cut" should have come in the form of credits for businesses that increase the net amount of full time employeed with benefits receiving middle class wages. At least that would be tied directly to employment in some way.
Instead the tax cut went to the wealthy who haven't really suffered the negative effects of the nation's economic malaise. What a huge waste.
Originally posted by: Genx87
The tax cuts arent the complete problem. It is the out of control spending that is going on in DC. Nobody ever wants to address that side of the equation because it means some special interest group gets their spending cut.
Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
now i'm confused....