AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.
This stuff should be taught in 7th grade, and repeat in 8th grade, to make sure that future dropouts have been exposed to SOME financial education...
People who fail to prepare for their own future have first been failed by their parents, then their schools. I wish there was a magic wand that we could use like a stick to beat some sense into people's heads, but I already know that all that would do is make the stupid have sore heads. Some of my siblings need that magic wand applied to them in spades...but at their age, it is too late for them.
BTW, stupid means KNOWING you are uneducated, and still you avoid gaining knowledge like it is a disease or something.
Most everyone has sufficeint smarts to learn, but many choose willful ignorance.
Oracle of Utah
Truth rings hollow in empty heads.
You just said, "If you don't have the money to spend, then don't borrow it so you can." Well, our government does not have $700 billion dollars to pay for the largest tax cuts to go to the smallest number of people. It just doesn't make good financial sense to give tax cuts to those who really don't need them. If the government doesn't borrow the money, they'll be forced to print it with no way to actually pay for it other than eventually increasing taxes or cutting alot of programs. I know the latter is what many Conservatives would rather have happen, but if any of you have been paying close attention to what's happening in many European countries right now, the U.S. is bound to face the exact same problems if Republicans regain control of Congress.
If we are to turn our economic situation around, some tough decisions will have to be made in regards to government spending. This we all can agree on. But the bigger issue for the here and now is how best to spur economic growth. I think the President has this country moving in the right direction. By enacting legislation that provide small business loans through those financial institutions who can reach small businesses faster (small, local banks and credit unions), capital will begin to flow again to get our economic engine moving again. Providing tax cuts to the middle-class should give consumers some financial breathing room so that they (and by "they" I mean those of us who make up the middle-class) can buy goods and services, thus, spurring consumer demand. Once demand increases, productivity is bound to follow. As productivity increases, so should business revenue. Where revenue increases, businesses should have the working capital to add to their payrolls which means they'll be able to hire more.
The wealthy don't need tax cuts, not for their personal income. They need it for the very businesses they create and manage. Therefore, it makes more sense to give those tax breaks (cuts) to small businesses themselves rather then focusing same towards the personal income of the rich. Let's face it, the truth is the wealthy won't use their pre-tax dollars to invest in small business ventures. They'll place their pre-tax dollar in tax shelters (i.e., 401K, ETF, mutual funds, etc.) to increase their networth. Granted, these investments do help major corporations generate revenues (i.e., sell of stocks, bonds, T-Bills, etc.) and that's what many people think of when the discussion of tax cuts to the wealthy comes about, but these such investments commonly don't benefit the typical "small business", i.e., the day care center, lawn care service, barbar shop, auto mechanic, small bouteque, the hair salon, the small independent book seller, the TV/copier repair service, the small restuarant owner, the corner coffee shop (that's not Starbucks), your cleaner or tailor, etc., etc...the vast number of small businesses that do the majority of the hiring across the country. These are the businesses who need the economic help the most because they hire more people from within their communities!
So, if you (Republicans) really want to help move this nation's economy forward either get behind legislation that will help move this country forward or get the hell outta the way!
The sad part here is that what UtahBill (and Boo Radley) have mentioned concerning the lack of elementary financial management skills that should be taught at school and in the home was the focus of a recent Senate hearing held just yesterday. It's no wonder so many are finding themselves way below the povery line when something as basic as economics - how to balance a checkbook or prepare a budget - are no longer (or barely) taught in our nation's schools. And that's just the surface of the matter!
If we want the poor to start fending for themselves, they have to be educated that there is better for them other than their present condition. From there, the opportunities have to be created and recognized. Unless and until these things happen, there will always be those who either find themselves on social services program OR dependent/reliant on same to survive.
This linked article isn't exactly what I'm referring to above, but it certainly speaks to the theme of this thread - the disparity in the gap betweent he rich and the poor in this country, and to my argument personally - the fact that not everyone wants to be on social services programs, but sometimes circumstances beyond their control force people to turn to such programs. For some, such programs are the last resort.
Last edited by Objective Voice; 10-01-10 at 11:29 AM.
The rich will continue to get richer because they send their children to private schools while the poor have their children going to public schools, where loyalty to the Unions comes before loyalty to the children's education.