patrick.net

Clearly we need to cut government spending, reduce government employment, and bust unions wherever they may be.

I do wonder what kind of game the Republicans think they are playing.

They may get another turn at the tiller next year, but they're going to need to bring their A game to make any positive contribution to things.

I don't think they even have an A game. Raygun's big deficits and big military is already being done now, we need to cut that stuff back probably.

They're religiously against raising taxes back to Clinton levels, so I just don't see how they're going to cut deficits without throwing the nation into a bona fide depression.

The $6T/yr we're spending on gov't isn't just getting buried in a hole somewhere. Its tens of millions of paychecks.

I don't think either party can fix the system. Neither of them got an A game.

The Dems are very disorganized. Many of the Dems who had a seat in the House from 2008 to 2010 acted like Republicans and were eventually replaced by Republicans in 2010. They were mere bench warmers. If the Dems want to do anything, the Party of No stonewalls the hell out of them till they collapse.

I think the Republicans are in better shape to fix the economy, but that is assuming they do the right thing and make the right decisions. They have a blind obsession with Tax Cuts.

tdeloco says

but that is assuming they do the right thing and make the right decisions

curious, what do you think these decisions are?

Bellingham Bob says

Clearly we need to cut government spending, reduce government employment, and bust unions wherever they may be.

I'll see your cut gvt spending and reduce gvt employment and may even accept bust gvt unions if you concede a 50% marginal tax on the top 1.0 to 0.5 %, a 75% marginal tax on the top 0.5% to 0.1% and a 90% marginal tax on the top 0.1% regardless of whether the income comes from wages or capitial gains.

tdeloco says

I don't think either party can fix the system.

The only way either party could help would be by passing election reform allowing for proportional representation and instant runoffs. That way we could get better policy makers.

Dan8267 says

tdeloco says

I don't think either party can fix the system.

The only way either party could help would be by passing election reform allowing for proportional representation and instant runoffs. That way we could get better policy makers.

I certainly wish that this could be an "American" thing, and not a "party" thing. Those job facts are scarey.

MarsAttacks! says

Ireland has both proportional representation and ITV, but they STILL got their asses sold out to the bankers by their 'better policy makers' who were elected under that system.

Better doesn't mean perfect. In any case, pretty much all of Europe uses PR and has faired mostly better. Of course there are some issues in which they have failed and the Euro is suffering for it, but overall there is greater accountability for politicians in Europe than in the U.S.

Bellingham Bob says

tdeloco says

but that is assuming they do the right thing and make the right decisions

curious, what do you think these decisions are?

From their point of view? I have not the slightest idea. I said they're in better shape simply because they're the only party that can get something done. The democrats pretty much have their hands tied.

ObamaCare is not what Obama promised it to be. He succumbed to pressure from lobbyists of the healthcare industry and pressure from the Republicans. Despite having made so many concessions, some of the GOP candidates have promised to wipe out ObamaCare and all of his other policies.

In my opinion, I think we should default. Let's go bust now rather than kicking the can down the road. I really don't think any of the politicians will go for that. I'm not even sure that it's the correct thing to do, but that's my opinion.

tdeloco says

ObamaCare is not what Obama promised it to be.

"ObamaCare" is the primary problem that needs to be solved now, huh?

LOL.
It's not Canada's Medicare, but it's better than what we have now.

I think we should default.

Default on what? The debt we owe ourselves?

Uncle Sam owes me about $15,000 from overpaid FICA 1986-2009. The State of Alaska had $45B of treasury holdings in its permanent fund the last I checked.

We as a nation are not broke, the latest Z.1 shows $72T of assets against $14T in liabilities, and that's just non-corporate holdings.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/z1r-5.pdf

"default" is a wee bit premature here, and causes many more problems than it solves.

Bellingham Bob says

"ObamaCare" is the primary problem that needs to be solved now, huh?

I never said it was. It isn't exactly what was promised, but I cannot hold that against Obama. And I agree that it's better than what we have now. My point was that even after giving up so much in negotiations just to accomplish ObamaCare, the far right still intends to wipe the slate clean.

Bellingham Bob says

We as a nation are not broke, the latest Z.1 shows $72T of assets against $14T

Rep. Frank Wolf is claiming $62T in unfunded liabilities:
http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2011/may/23/frank-wolf/rep-frank-wolf-says-us-has-over-62-trillion-unfund/
This older article is claiming $99T in unfunded liabilities:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/139841-federal-u-s-debt-has-ballooned-to-over-100-trillion

I don't know how accurate those claims are. But at this point in time, I'm sure that somebody's gonna get hurt... the question is: who?

So, Bellingham Bob, what are your ideas on how to fix the economy?

This is the end result of globalization. There simply isn't enough work to go around. You have two options:

- Protectionism / isolationism

- Strong social programs and high taxes

No society with sustained high unemployment can remain a stable democracy. If this goes on for another 5 years, we're looking at the same situation that led us to the regimes the appeared in Europe and Asia during the 1930s.

tdeloco says

Rep. Frank Wolf is claiming $62T in unfunded liabilities:
http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2011/may/23/frank-wolf/rep-frank-wolf-says-us-has-over-62-trillion-unfund/
This older article is claiming $99T in unfunded liabilities:
http://seekingalpha.com/article/139841-federal-u-s-debt-has-ballooned-to-over-100-trillion
I don't know how accurate those claims are. But at this point in time, I'm sure that somebody's gonna get hurt... the question is: who?
So, Bellingham Bob, what are your ideas on how to fix the economy?

An unfunded liability is not the same as debt.

The scary unemployment factors only apply to guys. If ladies get venturous, they get paid well.....

Trudy Nycole Anderson has accused her former employer Derek Wright of sexual harassment, including attempting to enforce a dress code that included “miniskirt Mondays,” “tube top Tuesdays,” “wet T-shirt Wednesdays,” “no bra Thursdays,” and “bikini top Fridays.” (Apparently, his alliterative skills tapered off as the week went on.)

In addition, Anderson alleges that Wright, the owner of Lone Peak Controls and D&L Electric Control Company in Pleasant Grove, Utah, watched pornography in his office, touched her inappropriately, and fired her after she reported the sexual harassment.

"As a result of the stress and emotional trauma of this experience, Ms. Anderson has been losing sleep, seeking professional help and has ulcers," the complaint, filed in U.S. District Court, reads, according to the New York Daily News.

Bellingham Bob says

bust unions wherever they may be

I'm disappointed Bob. I know you have a libertarian streak, but are you really advocating an acceleration of the dismantling of the middle class?

Unions are making concession right and left as they must in this environment. To advocate total dismantling of all unions is to say that there is no hope of us getting back economically to where we can support their outrageous demands for decent pay and fair treatment?

marcus says

I'm disappointed Bob. I know you have a libertarian streak, but are you really advocating an acceleration of the dismantling of the middle class?

it's a sad day when sarcasm is so hard to see.

OH, oops. I thought for a moment you went over to the dark side. What fooled me is we really do need to cut government spending, or at least drastically change what we spend it on.

I should have read the rest of your comment more carefully.

tdeloco says

I don't know how accurate those claims are. But at this point in time, I'm sure that somebody's gonna get hurt... the question is: who?

So, Bellingham Bob, what are your ideas on how to fix the economy?

Most of those unfunded liabilities you mention is simply medicare:

The results of CBO’s projections suggest that in the absence of changes in federal law:

â–  Total spending on health care would rise from 16 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2007 to 25 percent in 2025, 37 percent in 2050, and 49 percent in 2082.
■ Federal spending on Medicare (net of beneficiaries’ premiums) and Medicaid would rise from 4 percent of GDP in 2007 to 7 percent in 2025, 12 percent in 2050, and 19 percent in 2082.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/87xx/doc8758/maintext.3.1.shtml

This cost growth is not due to increased demand, it's simply due to increased rent-seeking in medicine:

Spending 16% of GDP on health care is ridiculous enough, our per-capita cost is currently twice that of the global norm.

http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/OECD042111.cfm

Cutting this down to Canada's level would save a TRILLION dollars a year right now.

Those cost savings will be eaten up by baby boomer health needs this decade and next, but it's a start.

Unfortunately, the health sector is 14 million people, and they don't want their golden oxe gored, so any changes here are one helluva fight.

The next fix we need, on the order of $500B/yr, is the trade deficit with China, Mexico, and the major oil exporters (ex Canada).

I really don't know how to solve this one, but it is bleeding us dry. Tariffs or something on China, and a very serious and very major directed research program on replacing the existing imported energy economy with a more efficient transportation arrangement.

I don't know what this looks like, but it might be natural gas-powered buses.

If we cut $200B from the defense budget we could build a million buses in just two years for free, one bus per 300 people. Not that there's a bus shortage per se, but there is a real gap in our investment in local mass transit still.

Speaking of cutting the defense budget, this is something we really need to do, even though it is the best jobs program we got going, since it sucks as a jobs program. We're spending around $800B on defense, at $100,000 per job that's 8M jobs. There probably isn't 8 million actual defense sector jobs, more like half that, and much of the DOD budget is just sheer waste anyway.

We either need to use our 21st century military capability -- the 10 active divisions and the 12 carrier groups -- or lose it. I vote the latter, but I'd keep USAF spending high since it is the purest form of defense, and I'd keep the USMC around as-is since they should be the go-to guys to mess up other countries, like they were prior to WW2. Most everybody else should re-train as bus drivers or something.

Those are the tree long poles in the tent, the next is just trimmings. We need to close the $1T+ deficit, and to do that we probably need to raise taxes on the "job creators". We should start high, the top 0.5%, and move downscale until the budget deficit is closed or all the filthy rich flee to Dubai, whichever comes first.

The top 5% is taking 33% of the national income, so there's theoretically plenty of surplus to tax there. Unfortunately, this 5% have created quite an impressive message machine since the 1970s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_F._Powell,_Jr.#The_Powell_Memorandum

and aren't going to part with their not-so-hard-earned money without a fight.

MoneySheep says

Trudy Nycole Anderson has accused her former employer Derek Wright of sexual harassment, including attempting to enforce a dress code that included “miniskirt Mondays,” “tube top Tuesdays,” “wet T-shirt Wednesdays,” “no bra Thursdays,” and “bikini top Fridays.” (Apparently, his alliterative skills tapered off as the week went on.)

When I was 23 I worked for a real estate firm (hence my hatred of realtors...); I was a secretary. One of the realtors stood in front of me and threw paperclips down the front of my shirt and told me he'd get me fired if I moved. He was a horrible asshole, but held the power of a job that I needed desperately. At the time, I didn't even say a word to the boss because I believed Paul (the asshole realtor). I just looked him up, he's still a realtor.

what an asshole.

Unfortunately, he's in Ogden Utah. I hope he's broke.

MoneySheep says

If ladies get venturous, they get paid well.....

If they are young and not fat. Take a look around your local grocery store. Most women don't meet this criteria, and the ones that do can attract a mate to pay for nice things.

Dan8267 says

MoneySheep says

If ladies get venturous, they get paid well.....

If they are young and not fat. Take a look around your local grocery store. Most women don't meet this criteria, and the ones that do can attract a mate to pay for nice things.

Oh, Dan, I hope that you're joking.

Bellingham Bob says

They're religiously against raising taxes back to Clinton levels, so I just don't see how they're going to cut deficits without throwing the nation into a bona fide depression.

You assume that they believe in cutting deficits. This was not true when the president was not The Black Other, and there are still questions as to why these Republicans continue to support spending money in Iraq, since money spent here, we are now told, hurts America and makes the Founding Fathers weep.

The solution is to bomb our own schools and bridges, then the government will pay for them to be rebuilt.

And when they miss, they can pay 5 figures to the survivors' families, just like they do abroad.

There's always almost a trillion for "Defense" in third world countries on the far side of the world, why not at home?

That'll stimulate!

marcus says

OH, oops. I thought for a moment you went over to the dark side. What fooled me is we really do need to cut government spending, or at least drastically change what we spend it on.

I should have read the rest of your comment more carefully.

Government spending isn't going to spend on you. They will give out truck loads of tax dollars to Solyndra and other fellow friends before they spend anything helping the middle class or the poor.

It's a pretty corrupt system, it's not about how good you are or what you can do. It comes down to who you know in government. And that type of socialism I reject.

Dan I think you should make point 19 a lot higher on the list. Because that's the future of American work force. You are going to be competing with Indians, Chinese, etc...

Scary statistics indeed. Scary because I was laid off in 2009 and was out of work for a full 4 months. Prior to that it had taken me maybe a handful of resumes and a week or two to find a new job. I must have put in 250+ resumes. I consider myself very lucky to have a job.

What's also scary is that I know A LOT of people who are unemployed, underemployed, or just barely making it. One has now been out of a job for over 3 years. Again- I am very glad to have a job right now. But you had better believe that I am holding onto every dollar I can save, building up more cash savings so that if worse comes down to worse we'll be ok for awhile. This- amongst other obvious reasons- is why I'm not buying an overpriced Bay Area house. The instant liability it would bring would not be worth it.

FortWayne says

Dan I think you should make point 19 a lot higher on the list.

I agree. It should be #1, but I didn't order the list. I just copied it so people didn't have to click through 20 pages.

7. At 2000 participation levels, the unemployment rate would be 13%

I don't understand this one???

zzyzzx says

7. At 2000 participation levels, the unemployment rate would be 13%

I don't understand this one???

It means that many of the people who were counted as part of the workforce (the employed or counted unemployed) are no longer being counted as part of the workforce because they ran out of unemployment benefits. Once that happens, the government no longer counts you as unemployed since they are just counting benefit requests.