Page 43 of 48 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 430 of 480

Thread: Breaking: Agreement has been reached on raising the debt limit....

  1. #421
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Obama: We have a deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Obama had a blank check, he got what he wanted.
    Your are incorrect. If you have the means to prove this statement, then by all means be my guest.

    It couldn't have anything to do with the misuse of those funds, could it? Bailing out unions and state contracts along with targeted tax cuts don't sound like shovel ready jobs to me.
    A take from early 2009:

    The starting point for this discussion is Okun’s Law, the relationship between changes in real GDP and changes in the unemployment rate. Estimates of the Okun’s Law coefficient range from 2 to 3. I’ll use 2, which is an optimistic estimate for current purposes: it says that you have to raise real GDP by 2 percent from what it would otherwise have been to reduce the unemployment rate 1 percentage point from what it would otherwise have been. Since GDP is roughly $15 trillion, this means that you have to raise GDP by $300 billion per year to reduce unemployment by 1 percentage point.

    Now, what we’re hearing about the Obama plan is that it calls for $775 billion over two years, with $300 billion in tax cuts and the rest in spending. Call that $150 billion per year in tax cuts, $240 billion each year in spending.

    How much do tax cuts and spending raise GDP? The widely cited estimates of Mark Zandi of Economy.com indicate a multiplier of around 1.5 for spending, with widely varying estimates for tax cuts. Payroll tax cuts, which make up about half the Obama proposal, are pretty good, with a multiplier of 1.29; business tax cuts, which make up the rest, are much less effective.

    In particular, letting businesses get refunds on past taxes based on current losses, which is reportedly a key feature of the plan, looks an awful lot like a lump-sum transfer with no incentive effects.

    Let’s be generous and assume that the overall multiplier on tax cuts is 1. Then the per-year effect of the plan on GDP is 150 x 1 + 240 x 1.5 = $510 billion. Since it takes $300 billion to reduce the unemployment rate by 1 percentage point, this is shaving 1.7 points off what unemployment would otherwise have been.

    Finally, compare this with the economic outlook. “Full employment” clearly means an unemployment rate near 5 — the CBO says 5.2 for the NAIRU, which seems high to me. Unemployment is currently about 7 percent, and heading much higher; Obama himself says that absent stimulus it could go into double digits. Suppose that we’re looking at an economy that, absent stimulus, would have an average unemployment rate of 9 percent over the next two years; this plan would cut that to 7.3 percent, which would be a help but could easily be spun by critics as a failure.

    And that gets us to politics. This really does look like a plan that falls well short of what advocates of strong stimulus were hoping for — and it seems as if that was done in order to win Republican votes. Yet even if the plan gets the hoped-for 80 votes in the Senate, which seems doubtful, responsibility for the plan’s perceived failure, if it’s spun that way, will be placed on Democrats.
    I will post the source in a little bit.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  2. #422
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Obama: We have a deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    You calling Bush a liar? Can't fully disagree with you there, but anyway, this one appears to be true ...
    Bush Minority Homeownership Plan Rests Heavily on Fannie and Freddie

    When President Bush announced his Minority Homeownership plans last week in Atlanta, his top priorities were new federal programs: a $2.4 billion tax credit to facilitate home purchases by lower-income first-time buyers, and a $200 million national downpayment grant fund.

    But none of the new federal programs--if passed by Congress--will come even close to achieving the 5.5 million-household increase in minority homeownership the President set as his target.

    Instead, most of the heavy lifting was assigned to two mortgage market players that have sometimes come under fire from Bush administration officials and Congressional Republicans: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

    Fannie's and Freddie's commitments are the bedrock core of the President's ambitious plans--but didn't get the headlines. Fannie Mae agreed to increase its already substantial lending efforts to minority families by targeting another $260 billion of mortgage purchases to them during the next nine years. Freddie Mac agreed to buy an additional $180 billion in minority-household home loans during the same period.

    Besides its $180 billion mortgage purchase commitment, Freddie Mac gave President Bush a promise to implement a 25-point program aimed at increasing minority homeownership. Some of the points were cutting-edge. For example, as part of an effort to remove the fear of financial loss from first-time minority home buyers, Freddie committed itself to "explor(e) the viability of equity assurance products to protect home values in economically distressed areas."

    Pressed for details on "equity assurance" by RealtyTimes, Freddie Mac vice president Craig S. Nickerson said the idea is still at an embryonic stage, but might involve limited guarantees or insurance coverage to protect buyers from the possibility of loss of their initial equity stakes should property values in their neighborhoods decline.
    I don't see the Democrat position on Home ownership. What are you afraid of?

  3. #423
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Obama: We have a deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Your are incorrect. If you have the means to prove this statement, then by all means be my guest.



    A take from early 2009:



    I will post the source in a little bit.
    Another intellectual book smart street stupid statement. obama got a 800 billion dollar stimulus for shovel ready jobs and tax reform. What did he do with the money?

    Here are the Obama tax cuts


    Total: $237 billion
    • $116 billion: New payroll tax credit of $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010. Phaseout begins at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers.[29]
    • $70 billion: Alternative minimum tax: a one year increase in AMT floor to $70,950 for joint filers for 2009.[29]
    • $15 billion: Expansion of child tax credit: A $1,000 credit to more families (even those that do not make enough money to pay income taxes).
    • $14 billion: Expanded college credit to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000.
    • $6.6 billion: Homebuyer credit: $8,000 refundable credit for all homes bought between 1/1/2009 and 12/1/2009 and repayment provision repealed for homes purchased in 2009 and held more than three years. This only applies to first-time homebuyers.[41]
    • $4.7 billion: Excluding from taxation the first $2,400 a person receives in unemployment compensation benefits in 2009.
    • $4.7 billion: Expanded earned income tax credit to increase the earned income tax credit — which provides money to low income workers — for families with at least three children.
    • $4.3 billion: Home energy credit to provide an expanded credit to homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient in 2009 and 2010. Homeowners could recoup 30 percent of the cost up to $1,500 of numerous projects, such as installing energy-efficient windows, doors, furnaces and air conditioners.
    • $1.7 billion: for deduction of sales tax from car purchases, not interest payments phased out for incomes above $250,000.
    Last edited by Conservative; 08-01-11 at 07:08 PM.

  4. #424
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Obama: We have a deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Which is what made it worse, record high interest rates and high inflation plus rising unemployment. That was worse for the American people than what we we faced in 2008. I lived and worked during the 81 recession, did you?
    The Bush Recession is much worse than the Reagan Recession. No serious economist will argue that.

  5. #425
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Obama: We have a deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    The worst economy any President has ever received came out of recession in June 2009 which makes it hardly the worst economy any President has inherited, Reagan's was worse. Today the GDP growth is meager at best and you keep defending Obama. You are in the 40% that still support him.
    Reagan's recession began well into his first year in office -- that is not a recession inherited. In fact, his was manufactured to combat inflation.

    Whereas Obama who truly did inherit a recession, which resulted in 12 million additional underemployed, bringing the total to 26 million underemployed; GDP falling 5.1%, 9% in Q4-2008 and a stock market which lost more than half it's valuation.

  6. #426
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Obama: We have a deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Which is what made it worse, record high interest rates and high inflation plus rising unemployment.
    This is only your opinion, which is drawn from an incredibly uninformed knowledge base. Any economist worth a damn is in agreement.

    That was worse for the American people than what we we faced in 2008. I lived and worked during the 81 recession, did you?
    Your anecdote is not a valid substitute for an argument.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  7. #427
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Obama: We have a deal

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    The Bush Recession is much worse than the Reagan Recession. No serious economist will argue that.
    Where were you during the Reagan recession? Home interest rates were over 17.5% and inflation was double digit plus rising unemployment. Compare that to what Obama inherited. How could the recession be so bad that it ended in june of 2009? Looks like he inherited an economy coming out of recession. Remember you are now part of the 40% that supports this empty suit

  8. #428
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    08-25-16 @ 08:31 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    11,265

    Re: Obama: We have a deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post

    What did the Democrats do with oversight and what was the Democrat Plan on home ownership? Selective memory as usual
    Democrats weren't in charge. Why are you blaming the minority Democrats for failing to pass oversight when the majority Republicans didn't?

    Seems your outrage is partisan based.

  9. #429
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Obama: We have a deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    This is only your opinion, which is drawn from an incredibly uninformed knowledge base. Any economist worth a damn is in agreement.



    Your anecdote is not a valid substitute for an argument.
    Ever pay 17+% interest rate for a mortgage? Ever live under 20+ misery index? A tough recession today is not being able to get the latest cell phone or an IPAD

  10. #430
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: Obama: We have a deal

    Quote Originally Posted by Sheik Yerbuti View Post
    Democrats weren't in charge. Why are you blaming the minority Democrats for failing to pass oversight when the majority Republicans didn't?

    Seems your outrage is partisan based.
    What was the Democrat Plan on home ownership?

Page 43 of 48 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •