And those things would be? I'd just like to have some constructive suggestions before I bash the current approach (not that I am any fan of it).
Ah, there we go. Thanks!
By the way...sounds suspiciously like Reaganomics, which led our nation into its most affluent postwar boom ever. How we lost that thrust and momentum is the big question...
I thoght it was solely to blame on the previous administrations failed policies?
When an auto company is vetting ot prospective cities in which to build a new plant, there are three MAIN things they consider. Proximity of UAW and their potential meddling, logistics with supplies, and sweetheart tax breakes from states and local governments. Why the shift in auto plants being built all over the south instead of the Midwest? You have the three aforementioned answers.
The Midwest definitely has the logistics, just a problem with the other two...
“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
ugh im so glad i found a job a few months after i got laid off
ScottaWhite wrote:I thoght it was solely to blame on the previous administrations failed policies?
You are correct, sir...the Clinton administration did send us on this path (away from Reaganomics), and the W. Bush administration was too busy playing toy soldiers to see or head off the damage.
It's funny...when we had Rockstar Billy in the WH, we were too stoned and happy to notice his cadre was undoing years of Reaganomics. Then when Bush II came in, we were too busy with "national security" and the like. Man are we stupid! Or at least, easily fed bull@!#$.
NAFTA.......
BILLEYBOY....
YA
Chris
"An appeal to arms and the God of hosts is all that is left us. But we shall not fight our battle alone. There is a just God that presides over the destinies of nations. The battle sir, is not of the strong alone. Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death."
Speech at the Second Virginia Convention at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia (23 March 1775) Patrick Henry
Yeah I'm putting NAFTA at the top of the list for economic downfall. Was working in textiles when wind of NAFTA started in the early 90s, and it was the general consensus that it would hurt textiles. Of course it's spread over other industries too, but the premise that it would bolster Mexico's economy didn't take into account companies would flee to Mexico for cheap labor or ship goods there for assembly due to no tariffs all the while causing the US to lose jobs wasn't taken into account I guess.
And lest we forget...we're now seeing the ultimate backlash of so much outsourcing too, as well as rampant consumerism. Both parties can share the blame.
When we started to lose manufacturing plants in this country (and this started a while ago), I was relieved to see that unemployment did not skyrocket. The national economy can be a very flexible organism, resilient and tough. While unemployment did not rise, we can presume that the folks who lost jobs, in many cases, had to settle for lower paying positions. Also not a bad thing, for their previous factory positions were likely overpaid...at least in the sense of the new market's lower pricing due to overseas competition. Sucks to be them, but overpaid jobs do not a strong economy make.
So, as we shifted more and more to a service economy rather than a manufacturing one, the economy adapted. At the same time, we became more and more driven by excessive consumption and consumerism...instead of saving, or investing, we were spending. Like how! All this spending kept the economy humming along for years, even as we lost manufacturing jobs overseas. But it did nothing for our ability to build a strong foundation.
Trouble was brewing...this economic resilience was not infinite, nor was our ability to obtain even more credit. Soon enough, the loss of manufacturing crimped the economy, and its ability to create new jobs faltered; this occurred in mid-2007. Many are unaware that the bank crises, real estate devaluation, stock market losses, and recession of 2008 were preceded by this negative job growth some time earlier...we'd been adding new jobs for many years until that critical July of 2007. Every month since, we've lost more jobs. it's a helluva roll to be on, and it shows no signs of letting up
You may not have heard about it that early...they kept a lid on it for a while. But this was an early sign of the growing "perfect storm".
Then there are fools like Trump who tells homeowner that have an "upsidedown mortgage" to just walk away and let their house to foreclosure. What is up with that? So as long as the house is appreciating during a bubble, i should honor my obligations, but as soon as it starts to deppreciate, then I should walk? No sir... If you still have your job and can afford your monthly payment... Then you have to pay it... It's the right thing to do. A lot of our current problems are from that kind of mentality.
“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
ScottaWhite wrote:Then there are fools like Trump who tells homeowner that have an "upsidedown mortgage" to just walk away and let their house to foreclosure. What is up with that? So as long as the house is appreciating during a bubble, i should honor my obligations, but as soon as it starts to deppreciate, then I should walk? No sir... If you still have your job and can afford your monthly payment... Then you have to pay it... It's the right thing to do. A lot of our current problems are from that kind of mentality.
I agree...but I think it's far too general of a statement for him to make, or be effectively interpreted without knowing the details of a particular case. I'm sure in cases where people got caught up very badly, with huge negative equity, its makes sense to bail. I'd wager those are who he refers to, and from a businessman's point of view, it's what I'd expect to hear from him. Business is about the bottom line.
Also agree that values just don't seem to be what they used to be in terms of responsibility and staying the course. But we must all keep in mind, these are desperate times, and such times do lead to desperate actions being more appropriate...or at least more common!
Greedy Capitalist Pig wrote:I don't believe our economy had an unstable foundation because of the shift from manufacturing to service. Had it not been for the massive housing bubble, and the banking and investment crash which was tied into it, we would not be anywhere near where we are now. These things had nothing to do with shift in the economy away from manufacturing. They were the result of extremely poor policies which not only encouraged, but just about forced, bad lending practices, as well as the derivatives market which became basically a legalized gambling market on failed mortgages. Either one of these was a bomb waiting to go off, and unfortunately, they were both tied together so tightly that they were doomed to set each other off one way or another.
I don't attribute all problems to the shift away from manufacturing either, but it is certainly a factor that helped drive the ultimate inability to "pay the bills". Two things were happening simultaneously, and our great leaders were too optimistic to see them coming...too many bad mortgages were being written, while too many people getting those mortgages were losing their jobs. That proved to be a very fatal cocktail. We can only speculate that had the job losses not been mounting at the rate of hundreds of thousands for each of the last 27 months, perhaps some of those "junk mortgages" would have been more able to be sustained. Making the wages to pay the bills remains a pretty key component to keeping a house.
The housing bubble and bank collapse bursting cannot be attributed to any one factor, but the overused "perfect storm" term is actually quite appropos.
Well, heh...I am not singling out anyone for my disdain. When I say "Great Leaders", I am referring to anyone and everyone whos hand was on the wheel and perhaps could have/should have prevented the problem. I don't have a position other than that.
I'm not at all interested in finding who to blame...think of my PM
Throw the bums out! I like that one
Every new administration blames the "other guys". It's so routine that I find it to be expected. I refuse to raise my hackles over something so commonplace and predictable.
However...As I don't live in any of the districts you mention, I won't be able to exercise any electoral action on those fellas. Not saying your words fall on deaf ears...more like ears busy with things I find more important than those things I cannot change. Besides...how would an average Joe like me ever get to the bottom of it all...every source of information is biased, and God knows what happened that we will never even hear about. I can't develop enough truly dependable data to get fired up about it. They ALL fcuked up. Dems, Repubs, businessmen...the whole lot.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edited Wednesday, October 07, 2009 12:08 PM
I believe it's just a blip on the screen, this improvement. I think it means little unless it becomes a sustained pattern, seen for some months. But, we all know the administration will claim a victory where it can, and who could blame them, Even if all it does really indicate is a leveling off, that in itself's a good thing. We'll know more by February or so, I'd guess!
I'm not convinced that all forms of stimulus are to be avoided. While I well understand the impact of greater indebtedness, I also understand the potentially more destructive impact of an economy allowed to flounder too much. As such, it may be reckless to disavow any and all new stimulus based strictly on the cost.
We wouldn't have this unemployment issues if people weren't lazy pieces of @!#$ and wanted to EARN money...
Well, your statement seemed to indicate a general aversion to stimulus, based on indebtedness:
Misinformation Peddler wrote:...they are talking about passing another form of stimulus, which needs to stop. This group is spending money faster than any, and it need to be shut down before they are able to do any more damage.
As for the wherefores and hows of their approaches, I don't know that you or me are any better suited than the folks in charge of making these calls. A complete economic meltdown was averted by this crew, and we should not lose sight of this fact. Massive indebtedness has occurred before; it's not inevitably a hole we could never climb out of.
I don't think you can count on any major moves by this administration to reduce the jobless rate; not just yet. Keeping folks in a jobless state for the time being may well serve their ultimate purpose of furthering Government as Parent. Making and keeping folks dependent may well be the spirit of the hour in this regard. All involved also realize that the best way to keep funds flowing in that direction is to not "cure" joblessness all too quick. Doing so also satisfies the embattled business owners, for they don't need to be encouraged to do hiring right now. They are too busy restructuring and downsizing and catching their breath and recovering to do new hires right now anyway.