Page 135 of 215 FirstFirst ... 3585125133134135136137145185 ... LastLast
Results 1,341 to 1,350 of 2145

Thread: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

  1. #1341
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Kushinator;1062063870]One of the most tax advantageous activities is owning a home! So bring on your evidence to the contrary!
    Yes, and your point? 50% of American families or individual wage earners rent or don't own a home. why didn't they benefit from the Bush tax cuts?



    Not necessarily. It's just that they did not benefit nearly as much as those people who owned homes and had a short (but immense) wealth effect. You know, the types that typically take 20 years. Only this one occurred in a matter of 3.

    Please respond to my posts individually in the future, otherwise, i will no longer respond to any of your posts. Thanks in advance.
    Aw, so now you move the goalposts, so it is now non home owners didn't benefit as much as home owners from the Bush tax cuts? Spendable income increases with tax cuts and that affects human behavior thus economic growth.

  2. #1342
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    A meaningless comment. Your perception of me is of no consequence to this discussion.



    This is still a false dichotomy. Real estate has accounted for a range between 23% and 33% of total assets of households and non-profits for decades. The impact of a 50% decline in value is devastating in terms of both the externalities generated (financial crisis) and wealth effect. That you continue to ignore the significance only weakens your position.



    Says who, you? Do you expect anyone to believe you are an authority in regards to the dynamics of income growth with respects to fiscal policy? You are just rattling on about topics for which you have little understanding. You are witnessing the hangover from too many people making bad financial decisions; it tends to severely impact short and medium term growth prospects. The deleveraging that follows a financial crisis is nasty stuff.



    Much research has gone into understanding the impacts of the Bush tax cuts. We do know that after their implementation, flow of funds into real estate investment increased rather dramatically (for a time). And then came crashing down. Bravo is say.



    No. It has resulted in debt. You want it both ways, but that doesn't work (it defies logic).
    What a bunch of hogwash including attempts at personal attacks. Spending causes debt not keeping more of what you earn. You can site all the studies you want that mean absolutely nothing to the wage earners out there keeping more of what they earn. You see, you keeping more of what you earn isn't an expense to the govt. Tough concept for you to understand

    You see, whether you spend the money, save the money, invest the money, pay off debt with your spendable income you benefit the economy.

  3. #1343
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,691

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Thank you for your analysis and level headed post. I agree with much of it however I will always stand for a much smaller federal Govt. and higher personal income. The govt. isn't a company, it has expenses that it doesn't need because it really produces very little. Govt. spending isn't even close to the largest component of GDP and trying to drive GDP With govt. spending is throwing money down a rat hole. Govt. spending is designed to stimulate the private sector but is offset by very poor economic policies that negate any benefit from that govt. spending.

    Private business, and I am talking mostly about small businesses, aren't going to invest in hiring due to the uncertain costs of hiring and yes firing employees who aren't worthy of employment. We need a pro growth economic policy that we aren't getting from Obama rather than the govt. can do it all attitude that he is creating. There are way too many people unemployed, businesses sitting on too much capital, and a bloated federal govt. that continues to build nothing but dependence.

    I don't disagree that a lot of money went into real estate and some very poor decisions were made on the part of a lot of people. that doesn't however negate the value of having more spendable income and a reduction in the size of govt. I am not a proponent of the "too big to fail" economic policy. I would have never bailed out the banks even though that would have created some severe damage and shock to the system, probably exactly what we need to get back on track.

    What I have a problem with are projections that human behavior won't change due to tax policies. I agree that human nature and human behavior are two different things so I used the wrong term in saying human nature when I meant human behavior. To say that everything would be the same if there weren't tax cuts, that the same job creation would have occurred, and the same economic growth would have occurred is pure speculation and ignores what happens when people have more spendable income, and yes some of that may be poor personal spending decisions.

    My solution is first taking SS and Medicare off budget and then reducing the size of the govt. back to levels that were in effect in the 80's. We don't need a 3.77 trillion dollar budget funded by stealing from SS or higher taxes. Give the American people a flat tax of 15% and make the size of govt. fit into that. Return all social programs to the states and let the states and local communities deal with the problems in their area. Implement term limits to get career politicians out of D.C. and back into the communities to live under the policies they created. I could go on but that is a good start.
    And there are many merits of limited or, to put it in today's parlance, focused government. A government that tries to do too much risks inefficiency and ineffective outcomes, much as any other organization that becomes very large and unfocused. I believe there are many areas for possible improvement. The GAO has highlighted some areas where redundancy, overlap, and inefficiency exist. Contracting experience e.g., with the F-35, provides other examples where genuine problems exist.

    The same also holds true for foreign policy. The nation's foreign policy has evolved to the point where it has become disproportionately ad hoc and reactive in nature, with too little attention given to a coherent articulation of the nation's major interests, development of strategic goals consistent with protecting/advancing those interests, and proactive strategy for pursuing those goals, much less contingency planning for the world's consistently unstable regions. The result is that force is used inefficiently with suboptimal outcomes and diplomacy (which depends in part on power and perceptions of power) is rendered less effective than it could otherwise be. To be sure, there are unforeseeable scenarios, but the U.S. has also been "surprised" by many that are not of that category in recent years (not just under the current Administration).

    As for human behavior, there certainly is a response to tax policy changes. Unfortunately, as is the case with human behavior in general, it is highly complex and, in cases, not well-understood. That's one of the big barriers to good economic forecasts. IMO, at the present state of affairs, offering a range of tax revenue outcomes with well-articulated assumptions, including the standard static approach, would probably be more informative than just providing a single number. Re-examining outcomes on a regular basis and trying to understand the variances from the projections could then provide a framework for at least some improvement.
    Last edited by donsutherland1; 07-16-13 at 12:03 PM.

  4. #1344
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    And there are many merits of limited or, to put it in today's parlance, focused government. A government that tries to do too much risks inefficiency and ineffective outcomes, much as any other organization that becomes very large and unfocused. I believe there are many areas for possible improvement. The GAO has highlighted some areas where redundancy, overlap, and inefficiency exist. Contracting experience e.g., with the F-35 provides other examples where genuine problems exist.

    The same also holds true for foreign policy. The nation's foreign policy has evolved to the point where it has become disproportionately ad hoc and reactive in nature, with too little attention given to a coherent articulation of the nation's major interests, development of strategic goals consistent with protecting/advancing those interests, and proactive strategy for pursuing those goals, much less contingency planning for the world's consistently unstable regions. The result is that force is used inefficiently with suboptimal outcomes and diplomacy (which depends in part on power and perceptions of power) is rendered less effective than it could otherwise be.

    As for human behavior, there certainly is a response to tax policy changes. Unfortunately, as is the case with human behavior in general, it is highly complex and, in cases, not well-understood. That's one of the big barriers to good economic forecasts. IMO, at the present state of affairs, offering a range of tax revenue outcomes with well-articulated assumptions, including the standard static approach, would probably be more informative than just providing a single number. Re-examining outcomes on a regular basis and trying to understand the variances from the projections could then provide a framework for at least some improvement.
    Actually it isn't that difficult to understand human behavior because all you have to do is look at yourself. What do you do when you have more spendable income and how does that affect the economy? Too many try to make it much more difficult than it is all trying to justify a particular position or their own position. Economists are given way too much credit for their own opinions. Have you noticed that there are economists on both sides of almost every issue? Who do you believe? Hmmm, I believe that my understanding of what I do with my money is similar to what others do as I am not that different from anyone else.

  5. #1345
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    It does take many years of school, as does other things that are less profitable. No one has a "right" to make any money, let alone a lot of money. But that misses the point, no one is asking that doctors go into the poor house. But reform, that lowers cost, is likely to have SOME effect. So, that in and of itself isn't anything to lose our minds over. Using you're numbers, which or not really anymore sound than mine, shouldn't scare doctors. They will still be making an excellent reward on their investment.

    Now, as for the doctor shortage, of course it isn't instant, which is why other health personal (a cheaper and sometimes even a more efficient option) will also play a role. Few things in life are instant, but you still have to take a step before you can get anywhere. We've spent a lot of years doing nothing. I'm willing to live through messy if it moves forward.
    So let's see. Democrats passed a unilateral program that is so convoluted and daunting the President of the United States has decided to delay parts of it for a year. At the same time, this unilateral take over of 1/6th of the nations economy was passed with components like the "doctor fix" left out to make it look less expensive. And of course, let's not forget this program is going to exacerbate the problem of lack of medical professionals to provide care to the millions of new patients. Finally, the only thing you have presented in reference to Doctor compensation is your brother, while I have presented multiple articles detailing the seriousness of the problem.

    I'm sorry, but I have not seen anything in your argument what would compell me to think differently about Obamacare. However, it is the law of the land, and all of us will be forced to swallow whatever comes down the road.

  6. #1346
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Some reading:

    By Denis Cortese
    President and CEO, Mayo Clinic
    To create meaningful health care reform that benefits patients, every stakeholder will have to rethink their role. As providers, we need to shift our primary focus from providing episodic care for the ill to providing continuing, preventive, coordinated care that keeps people health. There will always be a need for treating the ill, but that should not be the basis of a heatlh care system.
    Reforming payment to reward coordinated care that creates value (better outcomes, better safety and better service) is something we at Mayo Clinic are excited about. This strategy aligns with the Mayo Clinic Health Policy Center cornerstones for health care reform -- Create Value, Coordinate Care, Reform the Payment System, and Provide Health Insurance for All. These cornerstones are the result of a consensus process involving more than 2,000 representatives of stakeholder groups inlcuding patients and families.

    Will Health Care Reform Squeeze Doctors? - Health Care Experts

    PROVISIONS AFFECTING PRIMARY CARE PHYSICIAN PROVIDERS
    Healthcare reform is also addressing the looming shortage of primary care providers. To encourage more medical students to concentrate on primary care, healthcare reform provides for expanded funding for scholarships and loan repayments for primary care providers working in underserved areas beginning in 2011. To supplement workforce shortages, reform initiatives will also expand primary care and nurse training programs, such as the Medicare Graduate Medical Education Program, beginning in July 2011.10 Primary care providers (pediatricians, family physicians, and internists) will also receive increased Medicaid payments starting in 2013, gradually increasing to Medicare payments levels by 2014.11

    (Snip)

    CONCLUSION
    Overall, changes to the US healthcare delivery system under the reform initiatives are intended to improve the quality of care delivered to patients, as well as to reign in healthcare costs and increase patient access. Many physicians are critical of healthcare reform for failing to address issues regarding: the Medicare Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR); increases in the cost of pharmaceuticals production; and, changes to the Medicare benefit structure for patients.14 While time will tell who the ultimate winners and losers will be, amid the looming uncertainty of reform, one thing remains clear healthcare reform must be viewed as a process rather than as a single event. This series will continue to explore this process in the next issue with a discussion regarding the impact of healthcare reform on employers.

    http://www.healthcapital.com/hcc/new...11/effects.pdf

    One thing that feeds the skeptic. Who is in charge, and words and phrases like "reform initiatives are intended" and "viewed as a process".

    In spite of decades of examples from other countries around the globe, we think we are so good, we can do it better. So far, all "we" are seeing is "intended" and "it's a process".

    With the governments track record, "intended" and "process" will likely be operative words for decades to come.

  7. #1347
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Really? I will take that wager
    Okay you took the wager

    and you need to stop believing all that you read from leftwing big govt. promoting sites. You really don't understand that tax cuts went to all taxpayers and the withholding tables changed meaning more take home pay thus more spendable income. You think that apartment dwellers who have jobs didn't benefit from the Bush tax cuts?
    WOW some BS rhetoric realy makes you the clear winner, NOT.

  8. #1348
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Okay you took the wager



    WOW some BS rhetoric realy makes you the clear winner, NOT.
    Ever figure out what accrued means? Do you ever admit that you are wrong and apologize? IOU's have to be paid for and where does the money come to fund those IOU's when they become due?

  9. #1349
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,316

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    No. You don't understand my argument.

    Following the Bush tax cuts, real estate prices shot up nearly 60% (in as little as 3 (1/2) years).
    And how did Bush policies cause that?
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  10. #1350
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,261

    Re: U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    And how did Bush policies cause that?
    Follow the money. Where did the proceeds of the tax cuts flow?
    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

Posting Permissions

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