No, it isn't that complicated. Simple answer that you want to make complexGoldenboy219;1058606633]Depends on the Ricardian equivalence. Do you believe there will be greater taxation down the road or not.
Foreign rates only affect import/exports which is a very small part of the GDPK... got'em.... How does exchange effect the income component? (refer to the quantity theory of money).
Pointing out the numbers refute the Obama claim that things are getting better. It doesn't take a very smart person to look at the numbers and see what is happening.You are simply pointing out numbers that have no attached value to your position other than (obama is bad).
Apparently nothing posted is with merit in the world if an apparent intellectual elite.Another blanket statement without any merit.
The Psyche does play a role in this and that is what really helped the Reagan economy. Reagan understood that his economic policy of cutting taxes along with a positive message helped create the greatest economic boom in history. Reagan implemented the economic policy and then got out of the way. Obama wants to micromanage everything.More labels? Seriously though, consider the consumer psyche. They are hesitant to spend even if they did have more money which is what gives your analysis its naivety. Therefore the fed (i no longer wish to discuss the fiscal aspect as you are far too subjective) will constantly monitor employment in attempts to help facilitate economic growth.
Sorry but discouraged workers exist and are being ignored to promote a more positive spin on the current economic disaster. The fact remains, Obama has done nothing that has had a positive affect on the economy and if you are truly a libertarian you would see that.In order for a job to be lost, the person has to have had it and then been fired or released. You are conflating two entirely different aspects of labor economics in an attempt to make an extremely weak point. Unless we see a sudden uptick in U-3 unemployment (or U-6 eclipse 20% on a consistent basis), bringing up discouraged workers is only used as smear against your political opposition.
Every year there is a January. Unemployment is not down it is up. What were the discouraged workers last January? Stop buying what the media and Administration are telling you.Not ignoring anything. Do you find there is significance in reporting underemployment numbers? How about pointing out that they are up or increasing? It is like claiming it is cold in Chicago during January.
I have no personal hatred for Obama but his policies are something that I do hate and make no sense. What economic policy has Obama proposed to help the economy recover? Who pays for Obamacare if it passes? What affect does a repeal of the tax cuts have on private business? Do you honestly believe private sector employers are going to add employees based upon increasing costs?Not an Obama supporter nor care about your view of him. I do find it telling to point out your hate and argue against emotion and ideology. The economy will begin to recover during 2010 and see quite a bit of growth during 2011. Nothing you have presented points to the contrary.
When the Federal Reserve increases the interest rates what does that do to the debt service? What does that increase in interest rates do to private sector borrowing? What aspects of the stimulus have had a positive influence on the private sector?Well that all depends on the level of recovery... does it not? Why is long term credit far cheaper than it was during previous expansionary years? In accordance, what does the cost of credit do in regards to business investment? Forget arguing about fiscal policy. There are other aspects of stimulus not being considered in your analysis.
LOL, again no answer, what do you do when you get to keep more of your own money? let me help you, you spend it, save it, invest it, or pay down debt. All helps the economy. Like a typical liberal you believe purely in mathematics. If you cut taxes and keep the same number of taxpayers tax revenue drops. That never happens however for when you cut taxes you create MORE taxpayers thus grow govt. revenueWhen will they spend? Down the road or right now??? Simply believing increased disposable income is a 1:1 function in regards to consumption is absolutely hilarious! I'd bet anything you do not even recognize your error. Either way, .
The Obama debt is projected to be 20 trillion dollars at the end of his term. What percentage is that of GDP? It really isn't that complex but liberals want to make the simple complex thus their very existence. Think instead of feeling.You mean the equivalence of: You were being taxed $25,000 one year and then $18,750 the next??? That's nice! Was there an incredible national debt exceeding 80% of GDP? Was there high inflation? You take everything to act on the most simplistic basis possible without considering quite a few important aspects.
What do you think I did with that addition $6200? Again you don't truly understand GDP so get the facts before making a further fool of yourself.
Reagan cut taxes 25% and doubled GDP and Govt. revenue. Bush cut taxes but had 9/11, fought two wars to keep us safe, and had three major hurricanes, one being the worst in U.S. Modern history yet still grew govt. revenue. Bush tax rate cuts went into effect in July 2003What was the multiplier effect of tax cuts then? What was the multiplier effect of the Bush tax cuts?
From the U.S. Treasury site
Total Income tax revenue
You really need to get out in the world, away from the textbooks, and experience real world economics and learn how our economy works.Nope. Otherwise we have a non market economy that is driven by the public sector. Instead, we have a primarily market orientated economy that reacts to various endogenous and exogenous stimulus. Thankfully monetary policy was quick to react during such a period.