New debt ceiling to be hit in Feb

[werepossum]

Moonie, you need to tell your doctors that these meds made you angry. We need a return to the old meds which merely made you loopy.

Some great points in this thread pro and con. I won't comment except to point out that as a percentage of GDP the federal government is spending twice what it did during the Great Depression. State and local governments are also spending much more, though probably not proportionally. All that non-productive spending leaves much less room for productive spending, which makes it harder to climb out of a recession.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Moonie, you need to tell your doctors that these meds made you angry. We need a return to the old meds which merely made you loopy.

The 'new' Moonie.

 

[QuantumPion]

AN ECONOMIST known as the "Merchant of Gloom" will have to walk from Canberra to the top of Australia's highest mountain after losing a bet about the resiliency of Australian house prices.

Last November, University of Western Sydney associate professor of economics and finance Steve Keen made a high-profile bet with Macquarie Group interest rate strategist Rory Robertson.

The two parts of the bet were that house prices would tank by the end of 2009 and that house prices would fall 40 per cent from their all-time high within 15 years.

The loser of the bet would have to make the more than 200km trek from Canberra to the top of Mount Kosciuszko wearing a T-shirt that says "I was hopelessly wrong on house prices! Ask me how."

House prices are now at an all-time new high, Mr Robertson said in a statement.

"For fun, if Australian house prices ever fall by 40 per cent from any peak in my lifetime, I will follow in Dr Keen's footsteps," Mr Robertson said.

"Similarly, if Dr Keen proves the existence of the Loch Ness Monster, I will take the walk."

Yeah I read about that and had a good chuckle. I still think he makes a convincing argument about debt to GDP levels driving cyclical depressions.

 

[Triumph]

Sure, there is a limit, but we have 10% unemployment, we are going to spend money either way. It's not like we are cutting taxes to create huge deficits in good times like Republicans like to do. We are creating deficits to keep economy from collapsing. 1.56 trillion is 10% of our GDP. If you are making 40K get laid off and rack up 4K worth of debt while looking for work, it's not the end of the world.

I think your math is messed up. Government takes in $2 trillion in taxes, takes out a loan for the remaining $1.5 trillion to equal the 2010 budget. That'd be more like earning $40k and taking out a loan for $30k to pay for your lifestyle. Saying that the deficit is "only" 10% of GDP is like saying that the nation's economy is the government's piggy bank, there for the taking whenever they want it.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Pissing money away today so your kids can pay tommorow...nice. /s

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34802254/ns/business-economy_at_a_crossroads

Stimulus for roads no path to help joblessness
Analysis comes as Obama urges another bill funding more transit projects

WASHINGTON - Ten months into President Barack Obama's first economic stimulus plan, a surge in spending on roads and bridges has had no effect on local unemployment and only barely helped the beleaguered construction industry, an AP analysis has found.

Spend a lot or spend nothing at all, it didn't matter, the AP analysis showed: Local unemployment rates rose and fell regardless of how much stimulus money Washington poured out for transportation, raising questions about Obama's argument that more road money would address an "urgent need to accelerate job growth."

Obama wants a second stimulus bill from Congress that relies in part on more road and bridge spending, projects the president said are "at the heart of our effort to accelerate job growth."

Construction spending would be a key part of the Jobs for Main Street Act, a $75 billion second stimulus to revive the nation's lethargic unemployment rate and improve the dismal job market for construction workers. The House approved the bill 217-212 last month after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., worked the floor for an hour; the Senate is expected to consider it later in January.

AP's analysis, which was reviewed by independent economists at five universities, showed that strategy hasn't affected unemployment rates so far. And there's concern it won't work the second time. For its analysis, the AP examined the effects of road and bridge spending in communities on local unemployment; it did not try to measure results of the broader aid that also was in the first stimulus like tax cuts, unemployment benefits or money for states.

"My bottom line is, I'd be skeptical about putting too much more money into a second stimulus until we've seen broader effects from the first stimulus," said Aaron Jackson, a Bentley University economist who reviewed AP's analysis.

Even within the construction industry, which stood to benefit most from transportation money, the AP's analysis found there was nearly no connection between stimulus money and the number of construction workers hired or fired since Congress passed the recovery program. The effect was so small, one economist compared it to trying to move the Empire State Building by pushing against it.

"As a policy tool for creating jobs, this doesn't seem to have much bite," said Emory University economist Thomas Smith, who supported the stimulus and reviewed AP's analysis. "In terms of creating jobs, it doesn't seem like it's created very many. It may well be employing lots of people but those two things are very different."

Too small of a pebble
Transportation spending is too small of a pebble to quickly create waves in the nation's $14 trillion economy. And starting a road project, even one considered "shovel ready," can take many months, meaning any modest effects of a second burst of transportation spending are unlikely to be felt for some time.

"It would be unlikely that even $20 billion spent all at once would be enough to move the needle of the huge decline we've seen, even in construction, much less the economy. The job destruction is way too big," said Kenneth D. Simonson, chief economist for the Associated General Contractors of America.

 

[Moonbeam]

Pissing money away today so your kids can pay tommorow...nice. /s

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34802254/ns/business-economy_at_a_crossroads

Stimulus for roads no path to help joblessness
Analysis comes as Obama urges another bill funding more transit projects

WASHINGTON - Ten months into President Barack Obama's first economic stimulus plan, a surge in spending on roads and bridges has had no effect on local unemployment and only barely helped the beleaguered construction industry, an AP analysis has found.

Spend a lot or spend nothing at all, it didn't matter, the AP analysis showed: Local unemployment rates rose and fell regardless of how much stimulus money Washington poured out for transportation, raising questions about Obama's argument that more road money would address an "urgent need to accelerate job growth."

Obama wants a second stimulus bill from Congress that relies in part on more road and bridge spending, projects the president said are "at the heart of our effort to accelerate job growth."

Construction spending would be a key part of the Jobs for Main Street Act, a $75 billion second stimulus to revive the nation's lethargic unemployment rate and improve the dismal job market for construction workers. The House approved the bill 217-212 last month after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., worked the floor for an hour; the Senate is expected to consider it later in January.

AP's analysis, which was reviewed by independent economists at five universities, showed that strategy hasn't affected unemployment rates so far. And there's concern it won't work the second time. For its analysis, the AP examined the effects of road and bridge spending in communities on local unemployment; it did not try to measure results of the broader aid that also was in the first stimulus like tax cuts, unemployment benefits or money for states.

"My bottom line is, I'd be skeptical about putting too much more money into a second stimulus until we've seen broader effects from the first stimulus," said Aaron Jackson, a Bentley University economist who reviewed AP's analysis.

Even within the construction industry, which stood to benefit most from transportation money, the AP's analysis found there was nearly no connection between stimulus money and the number of construction workers hired or fired since Congress passed the recovery program. The effect was so small, one economist compared it to trying to move the Empire State Building by pushing against it.

"As a policy tool for creating jobs, this doesn't seem to have much bite," said Emory University economist Thomas Smith, who supported the stimulus and reviewed AP's analysis. "In terms of creating jobs, it doesn't seem like it's created very many. It may well be employing lots of people but those two things are very different."

Too small of a pebble
Transportation spending is too small of a pebble to quickly create waves in the nation's $14 trillion economy. And starting a road project, even one considered "shovel ready," can take many months, meaning any modest effects of a second burst of transportation spending are unlikely to be felt for some time.

"It would be unlikely that even $20 billion spent all at once would be enough to move the needle of the huge decline we've seen, even in construction, much less the economy. The job destruction is way too big," said Kenneth D. Simonson, chief economist for the Associated General Contractors of America.

"God damn it, I look like an idiot arguing against stimulus in general so now I'm going to argue with the minutia of what the stimulus included because I don't want to leave looking like a total nut."

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

"God damn it, I look like an idiot arguing against stimulus in general so now I'm going to argue with the minutia of what the stimulus included because I don't want to leave looking like a total nut."

...and what do you look like Moonie?

 

[Moonbeam]

You know that when they start in with the meds you have them on the ropes

"We can't take him down with logic so let's flee into irrationality by calling him insane"

You fucking wimpy little cowards..........Hehehehehehehehehe

 

[marincounty]

We need to listen to some of the Republican economists. You know, the ones that said we can have tax cuts while fighting two wars and pass a prescription drug benefit, and everything will turn out peachy.