Is Barack Hussien Obama purposely trying to destroy the US economy?

[Crazed Rabbit]

Yes the U.S is such a commie state right now. Already Lenin statues are being erected allover the place, everyone calls eachother comrade and has started growing a beard (indeed even the women)!

Get serious people. Isn't 20 years post cold war enough to give up believing to McCarthy?

The U.S, like every other western country needs to adopt a mixed economy model (Indeed there is no pure capitalism nor any serious economy supports such a contraption) and introduce controls and welfare elements. Being reluctant to do this, the U.S was forced into the blitzkrieg economical readjustment that we are seeing today. Let mistakes past become lessons learnt.

You're not terribly familiar with the economic realities in the US, are you?

We have welfare and lots of government regulations over the economy. Indeed, it was federal policies aimed at increasing home ownership and the reckless loans given by the semi-governmental financial institutions Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that caused most of the underlying problems.

Being too laissez faire has nothing to do with this.

CR

[Ironside]

Unfortunately, we don't have a control experiment to check against. We tend to interpret the Great Depression through our own beliefs. I don't know of a major economy that has tried to step away entirely and let the whole thing go to the wall to see what happens, but maybe a keener student of economics can illuminate.

Subject to the caveat noted above, I don't disagree. But the effect of letting the banks go bust is not measurable given the nature of the over-reliance on financial services for the latest spurt of growth. I think you are optimistic to think that such a go-to-the-wall philosophy wouldn't hugely impact on standards of living. If I understand it, the significant moment propelling the sharp downturn was the hands-off decision on Lehman Brothers.

While I can't really illuminate what it means, banking and thus a better credit flow has been vital for the growth of the "modern" economy for about 800 years (I might be a bit off on dates, but the riches of the templars came through banking). Risking a cascade effect that takes out most of the banking system would then probably be extremely bad.

Well, lots of corporations are in danger of losing lots of money. Corporate tax cuts let them keep more money, so the business is healthier. Capital gains tax cuts encourage stock market investment.

That's a bigger cut of a smaller pie (companies get taxes on thier profit). I recall the opposite argument when tax cuts are mentioned. And stock market investments? They would then be built on nothing concrete, thus having market bubbles tendencies (that might survive if the stimulus is enough to make the consumption grow again though).

According to some theories, tax cuts and burrowing have the same effect in terms of deficits. The difference is how the money you spend/give back to people affects the economy. This new stimulus, IIRC, offers great new amounts of funds to welfare and makes it easier for people to get on welfare.

As a temporary action it makes sence, people will feel slightly more secure and thus spending more. And the people that end up on welfare as the get fired atm can steel maintain some levels of spending.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

True getting them as permanent welfare recivers would be bad, but increased welfare during hard times are logical, it's in fact intended. Getting them off welfare when the times improves are intended as well though.

I never really gotten they idea that making unemployed dirt poor will somehow make them create work, I mean you only need to look at eastern Europe to see that the concept if flawed and that other factors are much more influencal.

You're not terribly familiar with the economic realities in the US, are you?

We have welfare and lots of government regulations over the economy. Indeed, it was federal policies aimed at increasing home ownership and the reckless loans given by the semi-governmental financial institutions Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that caused most of the underlying problems.

Being too laissez faire has nothing to do with this.

CR

Actually it does. If you haven't missed it, the bubble of the US house market were the catalyst and not the cause of the current situation. It viewed the flaw of the whole system (eternal growth).

[gaelic cowboy]

Dev Dave trust me you dont want to live in a country where your ideas are are put into action.

[Yoyoma1910]

What we need to do is start a war between some sneetches, which can all profiteer from.



Especially amongst the ones with bellies with stars, and the ones with none upon thars.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Dev Dave trust me you dont want to live in a country where your ideas are are put into action.

Don't worry, we'll burn this country to the ground before we lower government intervention.