[QUOTE=xtisme]
Well hell…why didn’t you just say that you were smarter than the economic experts who are divided on this issue that to someone of your massive mental abilities AND experience thinks is so cut and dried?
[/QUOTE]
Let’s keep this very simple.
First, this has not been one quarter of unenthusiastic growth. We have serious structural deficiencies in the economy of the US. It is foolish and self-serving to pretend that everything is “humming along” until we reach our second quarter of contraction before finally admitting that we have issues. By then, if we desire to take policy steps to ease the effects of the recession, they will be more costly than nipping it in the bud in the beginning.
What we really care about is not some pedantic definition of recession but whether our economy exhibits symptoms consistent with serious illness. If it does exhibit these symptoms, then we as a society can choose to treat it or not. Waiting six months before triumphantly declaring that yes, now we are in a recession, so now we can take ameliorative action is nonsensical. Why wait for a diabetic’s leg to become gangrenous before treating the underlying cause?
Second, while I am not one of the economists quoted in the NYT, I have a resource that they do not: billions upon billions of records of transaction data.
Your article is six weeks old. I am sure you have noticed that quite a bit has happened in the past six weeks. Opinions have definitely changed.
[QUOTE=Maeglin]
Your article is six weeks old. I am sure you have noticed that quite a bit has happened in the past six weeks. Opinions have definitely changed.
[/QUOTE]
Well…let’s keep it simple as you say. And at least marginally friendly.
I don’t know you. I don’t know what your capabilities are, what your expertise is in this field…or anything else. So…if you feel there is an economic consensus why don’t you simply provide a cite saying so. I’ll read through it and if I’m convinced I’ll agree with you…end of story.
I did notice that article was old…but it was nice because it tied together several opinions in one link. There are other links I looked at that SEEM to say that the jury is still out. You say it isn’t. Fine…let me see a cite that says that, like Global Warming to put it in Al Gores words ‘the debate is over’. Simple.
[QUOTE=Weirddave]
Oh, I see. you’re referencing back to my post where I said that unemployment benefits should be cut, government assistance for job training was a waste of money and that anyone who loses a job deserves to die of starvation. I seem to have lost the link to that post, could you post it? Thanks.
IOW, your post contains more strawmen than Kansas.
[/QUOTE]
No, I was responding to your post that said we’re heading for a recession and things are humming along fine. We certainly don’t need stimulus for a humming economy, I’d guess. The unemployment benefits thing was actually a question. Maybe you’re not against a stimulus package, only rate cuts? Or maybe a stimulus package isn’t interference in your book. Who knows?
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Your hyperbole only makes you look foolish…JMHO of course.
[/QUOTE]
Well, I do have “Moderator” tagged under my name. ::: sigh :::
The statement in question probably does not quite fall on a bright line side of insult. On the other hand, it is well within the shadows (or even the penumbra) of inappropriate behavior. It claims that one poster’s actions made that poster appear foolish rather than asserting that the poster is foolish or that the poster is a fool. That hardly constitutes praise or gracious behavior.
It was certainly unnecessary and did nothing to promote a healthy discussion and I would urge everyone to avoid repeating this sort of behavior.
= = =
In fact, everyone, I am blowing the ref’s whistle on the whole thread as several of you have decided to take personal insult where simply crotchetiness was the only thing in evidence and several of you have gotten well into the shadows of insult (while not quite stepping over the line). Everyone back off and stick to your perceptions of the issues without commenting on the knowledge, abilities, or personalities of other posters.
(And can’t you people confine your personal squabble to the evening hours rather than throwing them out while I am at work to fester all day long?)
[ /Moderating ]
Um…ok Tom. I apologize…I didn’t feel it was an insult. I also felt it DID illustrate something about using hyperbole. But…you are the Mod so I bow to your wisdom.
[QUOTE=Weirddave]
All of this “The sky is falling” economic doomsaying is nonsense, perpetrated by the Democrats to scare people into voting for them, because if they came out and admitted that things were humming along just fine then people might just vote for a Republican, and we can’t have that, can we? (Note: This is NOT strictly a Democrat thing, if there were a Democrat in the White House, the Republicans would be scare mongering just as fast as O’Reilly and Coulter could shovel the shit).
[/QUOTE]
Ermm then why are the Republicans in on it. If it is a Democrat plot, then why does Bush mention the weakening economy in the state of the union address?
[QUOTE=Weirddave]
Squares just ducky with it from where I’m sitting. Maybe you out to go back and reread my first post in this thread, to summarize for you: We’re likely headed for a recession, recessions are a normal part of the business cycle, the Fed should just leave well enough alone and let it happen, historically recessions last less than a year, but the longer you try to stave them off by gaming this system the worse they are when they inevitably do occur. One quarter’s growth numbers(and it was still .6%, not -.6%) being the lowest in 5 years doesn’t mean anything about the overall strength of the U.S. economy.
[/QUOTE]
Since we started guiding the economy, our economy has seen shallower recessions and often only seen “slowdowns” instead of recessions. If you leave the market alone, it is prone to boom and bust cycles.
People sure like to bag on Wal-Mart a lot, but it’s actually a pretty good place to work. It keeps getting named as one of the 100 best places to work by Forbes. The pay isn’t bad, they have health benefits, they promote from within, and they provide pretty flexible working hours.
[/QUOTE]
Wal-Mart is the number one employer in America, so I suppose people better learn to like it. Considering that close to half of Americans earn below $25, 000 and roughly 6% earn $100,000 or more, I don’t think Wal-Mart is generating quality jobs or prosperity.Link, Wal-Mart’s downward push on wages - pdf, Number one employer
[QUOTE=xtisme]
And, again…what is the alternative? Force medical technicians to stay in the US (if this is even a problem…love to see a cite on this)? Force companies to keep skilled jobs in the US only? Force companies to keep manufacturing in the country? Or do you have another workable plan? Lets hear it…because as I’ve said I see no good alternatives to what we have now (well…I think outsourcing IS the good alternative, in the long run, and over all, for the majority of Americans).
[/QUOTE]
Rising prosperity in Asia is creating a demand for medical care. Because there is a shortage of medical care professionals, there will be a global migration of these jobs.
The outsourcing of IT and other white collar jobs is old news. Educated American workers now have to compete in a global market with talent willing to work for less. If the global free market is the inevitable future, the government needs to help U.S. workers make the transition with the same aggression it uses to help American corporations.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Horseshit™. Have you ever BEEN to India? The influx of jobs and capital have had a very real, noticeable effect on the standard of living in India. Take a step back…have you ever been to America or Europe? Have you noticed that OUR standard of living is quite high? Even the poor in America and Europe have a standard of living quite a bit higher than most 3rd world countries. Why?
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think the high standard of living most Americans have historically enjoyed will continue. Obviously, the standard of living has declined and will continue to decline for the majority of Americans.
xtisme, I live in the United States. I even vote. My mother, however, is British, born and raised with socialism. I grew up in a military home, so I have traveled extensively. I actually lived in Europe and communed among the natives. I have never been to Asia but have noticed the extraordinary modernization and prosperity.
[QUOTE=xtisme]
Well…let’s keep it simple as you say. And at least marginally friendly.
I don’t know you. I don’t know what your capabilities are, what your expertise is in this field…or anything else. So…if you feel there is an economic consensus why don’t you simply provide a cite saying so. I’ll read through it and if I’m convinced I’ll agree with you…end of story.
I did notice that article was old…but it was nice because it tied together several opinions in one link. There are other links I looked at that SEEM to say that the jury is still out. You say it isn’t. Fine…let me see a cite that says that, like Global Warming to put it in Al Gores words ‘the debate is over’. Simple.
-XT
[/QUOTE]
Friendliness has diminishing marginal returns.
At the end of the day, I do not care a whole lot whether our current conditions fit the formal definition of, well, anything since the definitions themselves are so prone to political haymaking. We can call our current conditions a “schmecession” if it makes the discussion easier.
There is a strong consensus right now that our economy has some rotten fundamentals. We are not just humming along. Whether this will lead to a short “slowdown”, a longer “recession”, a “deep recession” or what, I don’t know. However, all signals, including the consumer spend data I analyze every day, are telling us that we are headed for something. I think it is inefficient to wait until two quarters of contraction have occurred before we seriously consider taking action. Even should our GDP unambiguously demonstrate that we are in a “recession”, we will still have a Weirddave who will claim that GDP numbers are somehow not indicative of the strength of the US economy. Ok.
And when the market produces suboptimal outcomes, there is never a better time for institutions to intervene to keep it competitive. Politicians talk about “free” markets; economists talk about “competitive” markets. There is a big difference.
