Page 32 of 63 FirstFirst ... 22303132333442 ... LastLast
Results 311 to 320 of 628

Thread: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

  1. #311
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:30 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,261

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by carlkay58 View Post
    My local mall is over 50% empty and has more employees than shoppers for most of the day. When it does have shoppers, over 3/4 of them are Canadian (I live next to the border). If it was not for Canadian shoppers, my county would be much worse off. As it is we have an official unemployment rate of 24% with the unoffical rate of 39%.
    Are you in the Detroit metro area, or a suburb such as West Bloomfield? I would tend to agree that Detroit in itself is near a depression state, however various social safety nets are keeping the area from entering it.

    Yes, check with your local banking sources. As a bank investor I have the bank's annual report in front of me. It tells me that at any one time it could have as much as 90% of its "Cash on Hand" in FED paper.
    That has everything to do with a zero bound federal funds rate, and nothing at all with how your bank operates. In the absence of historic low rates, it is technically impossible for banks to run those type of reserves following a period of unprecedented defaults/instability. Also, lending capability can be achieved via multiple mechanisms utilizing TALF and the discount window simultaneously. However, banks are afraid to loan to the sub prime borrower of which has began to represent more and more of the loan market as of late. But to state that banks will not lend because they are afraid, and wanting to keep "cash on hand" is misleading. The tools to make such loans are there, and the incentive (profitability) to do so has never been higher.

    That may be, but the FED is still holding on to the local banks' money and that helps it maintain credit lines for both private and government.
    Care to link/clairify this statement? It seems a little fuzzy.

    Currently the majority of the out go seems to be Government, but we can't prove or disprove this because the FED is above approach and audit.
    Are you stating that the Fed is currently purchasing Treasuries? You are aware they cannot purchase them directly from the Treasure?.?.?. So you must clarify this statement as well.

    I agree that that is the theory and practice. As to how well it works, that is personal opinion and we probably don't agree on.
    And we will not know until we begin to see some serious inflationary pressure.

    So they can continue to collect income over $500,000 per year and maintain their huge bonuses? To get out from under the Government's Banking Czar's arbitrary, populist, and very visible public oversight?
    You side step my question in an attempt to go negative. How about the particular health of their industry? Does their desire to repay TARP say something about their ability to operate without government aid?



    No offense, but i would not call any of the three credible. Not by a long shot!

    I don't have too much more time to search for more, but I recall reading many MSN Money articles over the past few months detailing the fact that the new wave of foreclosures are people who lost their jobs and can no longer make the payments. Add in the new credit card rules coming up and banks are wisely building up their cash reserves.
    Again, reserves are at their height because of Fed actions, not on their own accord.

    Really? Bailout of GM and Chrysler? What bailout? Oh - you mean the forced bankruptcy of GM? You remember, where the President of the US fired the CEO of GM for saying that if the US wanted GM to go bankrupt then why did they lend any money to GM in the first place? In return for the $25 billion bailout money the US now owns about 59% of GM? That was no bailout - that was a straight up purchase of GM at a steep discount. And none of that money came to Michigan, it was mostly spent by the government studying how to break up GM as fast and profitable as possible. Michigan has received less than $4 million from the currently $157 BILLION handed out from the stimulus. Yep perfectly fair there.
    GM and Chrysler were on the verge of liquidation, which is a national security matter as well as economic. Would your city/state have been better off with the two of them dissolved and liquidated. BTW, Michigan gets more than $4 million per week in unemployment benefits; can you explain how?

    And I would have been there with the same opinion as you at the time. But politics is politics and unless palms are greased and pockets lined, forget it. Both parties are pretty much the same in that regard.
    I agree. However, do you subscribe to the thought that we should just "do nothing"?
    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. #312
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job


  3. #313
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    obama is slowly starting to recognize the problems
    Or maybe you're slowly starting to notice.

  4. #314
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    more mindlessness from misterman

    from the cnn article linked above about obama's "major address" tuesday at brookings on JOBS:

    "obama's latest set of proposals includes several BRAND NEW measures"

    (emphasis mine)

    among these most recent "fluctuations of legislation" obama includes, according to cnn:

    "tax breaks for new jobs" (including a "payroll tax holiday")

    "boosting investment"

    and "lending support"

    by that latter, obama means to encourage bankers to put some of that tarp stuff out there for the little guys

    after having bailed out all the Too Bigs, and all

    the president feels that the the goldmans and morgans kinda owe it to him

    "look, you have a responsibility now, now that we have pulled you back from the brink," the chin in chief chafed in allentown

    (from the wsj link)

    the monday "meeting comes amid a MAJOR NEW push from the white house for jobs creation"

    (emphasis mine)

    he's really gonna bitch em out on monday, just wait

    and they're gonna listen, too

    don't they always?

    LOL!

  5. #315
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    "obama's latest set of proposals includes several BRAND NEW measures"
    Like those are the only measures.

    It was just a suggestion, get over it.

  6. #316
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    a MAJOR NEW push for JOBS

    only now

    pathetic

  7. #317
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by The Prof View Post
    a MAJOR NEW push for JOBS

    only now

    pathetic
    You're right, the stimulus should have been bigger the first time.

  8. #318
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    thus, even the mindless perceive the failure

    it's undeniable

  9. #319
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,494

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Then as now, only the government has the capacity to spend the money necessary to get our economy moving again. Of course, our debt was much greater this time before the emergency spending began thanks to our two optional wars.

    So, after the economy has improved, it will be very important to start paying down our national debt as quickly as possible. Our fore fathers used a war tax to help accomplish this. I think the same thing will be necessary this time.
    Why did the war end the depression and the New Deal didn't?

    I think the point ya'll are missing, is the difference between certainty and uncertainty in the private sector. The New Deal, as with the current strategy launched by the Libbos in D.C. created uncertainty.

    Without certainly in the private sector, the government can spend gazillions of dollars and nothing is going to improve. Not to mention, the government can't create wealth.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  10. #320
    Sage
    misterman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Seen
    02-09-12 @ 08:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,913

    Re: LA Times: Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Why did the war end the depression and the New Deal didn't?
    Yes, why?


Page 32 of 63 FirstFirst ... 22303132333442 ... 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
  •