Samuelson - "Beware an economic boom. Really."

Lafayette · Dec 4, 2017

Excerpt from WashPo here: Opinions - "Beware an economic boom. Really."

The ultimate source of these boom-bust episodes is human nature. Although prosperity is a good thing, long stretches of good times can become self-destructive. People — consumers, business owners and managers, bankers, investors, entrepreneurs — become sloppy, overconfident and complacent. They become increasingly vulnerable to economic setbacks, but their careless behavior continues because it is crowd-driven.

This history cautions prudence. We don’t know whether the economic recovery that began in mid-2009 will end in some sort of crackup. But we should minimize the odds of this happening by avoiding policies that overstimulate the economy when it doesn’t need more “stimulus.”In the present context, there are two implications. First, the Federal Reserve should continue raising short-term interest rates, which are still low. And second, the Republican tax legislation now being considered by Congress should not increase budget deficits by a penny.

The various tax proposals are estimated to add from $1 trillion to $1.5 trillion to deficits over a decade, depending on how the calculations are done.Lowering tax rates is good; borrowing to do so, as opposed to closing other tax breaks, is bad. What’s often overlooked is that even before the Republican tax proposals, projected budget deficits were sizable.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates them at $10 trillion cumulatively from fiscal 2018 to 2027.Many mainstream economists have convinced themselves that the tax proposals won’t stimulate the economy or threaten the recovery.

The tax-breaks are net-null economically. More important, they are gifts to the super-rich (like the Koch Bros.) who fund the Replicant Party in return for "favors". This "favor" will means millions upon millions of extra-dollars into the pockets of hi-value donors who are expected to return the favor by supporting (with great largesse) the Replicant ticket next November.

Whyzat?

It's a crass politico maneuver. Cuz mucho-moulah buys primetime on the BoobTube, and that induces voters to vote for the Replicant Party. Both parties "sell their candidates for PotUS" like beer or popcorn on TV! I'm joking?

If only I were, we could all have a good laugh. Not much of that going around, except at Replicant HQ in
DC ... !

PS: Who benefits most from the tax-cut? See infographic here (from Business Insider).

joG · Dec 4, 2017

Lafayette said:
Excerpt from WashPo here: Opinions - "Beware an economic boom. Really."

The tax-breaks are net-null economically. More important, they are gifts to the super-rich (like the Koch Bros.) who fund the Replicant Party in return for "favors". This "favor" will means millions upon millions of extra-dollars into the pockets of hi-value donors who are expected to return the favor by supporting (with great largesse) the Replicant ticket next November.

Whyzat?

It's a crass politico maneuver. Cuz mucho-moulah buys primetime on the BoobTube, and that induces voters to vote for the Replicant Party. Both parties "sell their candidates for PotUS" like beer or popcorn on TV! I'm joking?

If only I were, we could all have a good laugh. Not much of that going around, except at Replicant HQ in
DC ... !

PS: Who benefits most from the tax-cut? See infographic here (from Business Insider).

The bad news is that we are already in bubbles in the US, the EU and probably China. Adding fiscal stimulus is not, what we need. This will add to the bubbles, which is actually one of Obama's large failing but in overdrive this time. It is hard to say when and how, but the probability of a bad crush increases. Of course, the problem is a very long term one based in the inadequate way we handled the transition from the end of the Cold War.

The populist muck throwing is sad. If it improves a whole economy, improving the income of the rich is secondary. This is especially true, when the immediate effect does help middle income folks as a good number here have shown us in this forum. Sure, the bill seems to treat folks differently in the future. But as you say is that the bubble will have changed everything by then.

Also the populising use of the rich is willfully leveraging off low knowlege of the target groups. I haven't rechecked recently, but when I analysed the statistics a while ago, the European social powerhouse Germany, whose one overriding goal is helping the poor showed almost identical buying power after taxes and transfers for the lowest 5 percent as did the US.

Lafayette · Dec 4, 2017

joG said:
Adding fiscal stimulus is not, what we need. This will add to the bubbles, which is actually one of Obama's large failing but in overdrive this time.

When we need it, it works. (No, I agree, we do not need it now.)

It is and has been (since Keynes first proposed it to Roosevelt) the key financial-measure for reinvigorating a recessionary economy.

No, it was not a failing of Obama. In fact, when he employed it in 2009 (upon entering office), it spiked an exploding unemployment rate at 10%.

Then the Replicants took control of the HofR (in 2011) and all such spending stopped. But so did employment creation. The country created no-new-jobs from 2010 to 2014, when finally it started to do so once again.

America's jobless had to wait three more years to find a job, because the Replicants were toying with the budget to Maintain High Unemployment in hopes of defeating Obama in the presidential elections of 2011.

That's how low they will go to get their way ...

Mycroft · Dec 4, 2017

Lafayette said:
Excerpt from WashPo here: Opinions - "Beware an economic boom. Really."

The tax-breaks are net-null economically. More important, they are gifts to the super-rich (like the Koch Bros.) who fund the Replicant Party in return for "favors". This "favor" will means millions upon millions of extra-dollars into the pockets of hi-value donors who are expected to return the favor by supporting (with great largesse) the Replicant ticket next November.

Whyzat?

It's a crass politico maneuver. Cuz mucho-moulah buys primetime on the BoobTube, and that induces voters to vote for the Replicant Party. Both parties "sell their candidates for PotUS" like beer or popcorn on TV! I'm joking?

If only I were, we could all have a good laugh. Not much of that going around, except at Replicant HQ in
DC ... !

PS: Who benefits most from the tax-cut? See infographic here (from Business Insider).

Although prosperity is a good thing, long stretches of good times can become self-destructive.

How long? Where do you draw the line?

We don’t know whether the economic recovery that began in mid-2009 will end in some sort of crackup.

The economic recovery that began in mid-2009 and ended in late 2016 COULDN'T end in some sort of crackup. Heck, it really wasn't much of an economic recovery at all.

But we should minimize the odds of this happening by avoiding policies that overstimulate the economy when it doesn’t need more “stimulus".

No problem there. Trump doesn't advocate stimulating the economy. He advocates getting the government out of the way of the economy.

Look, let's be honest here. The reason our economy has been limping along for the last 8 years is BECAUSE of excessive government control. If you want things to improve, don't go calling for MORE government control. That improvement will never come.

Lafayette · Dec 4, 2017

Mycroft said:
How long? Where do you draw the line?

The economy draws the line all by itself.

Most recessions are triggered by Consumer Profligacy to spend. Everybody has "gotta have something because everybody else has it". And off we go for a well-deserved bout of a recessional economy.

Then the unemployed get "pissed off" because "nobudy is doin' nuthin"; when in fact the fault of the recession was theirs to begin with.

The science of economics cannot account for human behaviour, even when said behaviour sparks an economic recession (or worse, a depression).

Mycroft · Dec 4, 2017

Lafayette said:
The economy draws the line all by itself.

Most recessions are triggered by Consumer Profligacy to spend. Everybody has "gotta have something because everybody else has it". And off we go for a well-deserved bout of a recessional economy.

Then the unemployed get "pissed off" because "nobudy is doin' nuthin"; when in fact the fault of the recession was theirs to begin with.

The science of economics cannot account for human behaviour, even when said behaviour sparks an economic recession (or worse, a depression).

And yet, that article writer seems to think we (the government) should draw that line and take action (government control). I'm asking where that line is.

Lafayette · Dec 4, 2017

Mycroft said:
And yet, that article writer seems to think we (the government) should draw that line and take action (government control). I'm asking where that line is.

We have one of the worst voter-participation rates of any "democracy" on earth, so I don't give that sort of "action" much of a chance. See here, from Pew Research: U.S. trails most developed countries in voter turnout. Find the US at 9th from the bottom.

Except for a "'lost moment" in the 1860s, neither are we a people that revolts.

We complain a lot on debate-forums such as this one, but that's about all ...

Mycroft · Dec 4, 2017

Lafayette said:
We have one of the worst voter-participation rates of any "democracy" on earth, so I don't give that sort of "action" much of a chance. See here, from Pew Research: U.S. trails most developed countries in voter turnout. Find the US at 9th from the bottom.

Except for a "'lost moment" in the 1860s, neither are we a people that revolts.

We complain a lot on debate-forums such as this one, but that's about all ...

Voter turnout is irrelevant. We are talking about the economy.

Lafayette · Dec 4, 2017

Mycroft said:
Voter turnout is irrelevant. We are talking about the economy.

Voter turnout determines who controls (or not) both Congress and the Presidency (in LaLaLand on the Potomac)

Government spending has a very large influence upon the economy.

There's no link between BigBusiness and who runs the government? Is that what you intimate ... ?

Mycroft · Dec 4, 2017

Lafayette said:
Voter turnout determines who controls (or not) both Congress and the Presidency (in LaLaLand on the Potomac)

Government spending has a very large influence upon the economy.

There's no link between BigBusiness and who runs the government? Is that what you intimate ... ?

There's no significant difference between the two major parties when it comes to the economy, so it doesn't matter who the voters elect. That's why they are irrelevant...at least, as long as they keep electing Elites. That IS changing, albeit slowly.

James972 · Dec 30, 2017

Mycroft said:
There's no significant difference between the two major parties when it comes to the economy,

100% absurd and 200% blind. 100% of Republicans voted for tax cuts, and 100% of Democrats voted against. Honestly what planet have you been on that you missed this??

Mycroft · Dec 30, 2017

James972 said:
100% absurd and 200% blind. 100% of Republicans voted for tax cuts, and 100% of Democrats voted against. Honestly what planet have you been on that you missed this??

1. You are being disingenuous when you snip a part of my quote and leave off the rest.

"There's no significant difference between the two major parties when it comes to the economy, so it doesn't matter who the voters elect. That's why they are irrelevant...at least, as long as they keep electing Elites. That IS changing, albeit slowly."

2. The post I was responding to had nothing to do with the vote on the tax cuts...which hadn't even happened yet.

Lafayette said:
Voter turnout determines who controls (or not) both Congress and the Presidency (in LaLaLand on the Potomac)

Government spending has a very large influence upon the economy.

There's no link between BigBusiness and who runs the government? Is that what you intimate ... ?

3. So...you can take your snarky comment and shove it.

James972 · Dec 31, 2017

Mycroft said:
"There's no significant difference between the two major parties when it comes to the economy, so it doesn't matter who the voters elect. That's why they are irrelevant...at least, as long as they keep electing Elites. That IS changing, albeit slowly."

100% absurd and 200% blind. 100% of Republicans voted for tax cuts, and 100% of Democrats voted against. Honestly what planet have you been on that you missed this??

James972 · Dec 31, 2017

Mycroft said:
The post I was responding to had nothing to do with the vote on the tax cuts...which hadn't even happened yet.

you said Democrats and Republicans were the same on economics when they are in fact opposites. 98% of Republicans voted against Obamacare and 100% for tax cuts. How is it even possible you didn't know that?

James972 · Dec 31, 2017

Mycroft said:
So...you can take your snarky comment and shove it.

if you have an objection to my comment please tell us what it is exactly?

Mycroft · Dec 31, 2017

James972 said:
if you have an objection to my comment please tell us what it is exactly?

I did.

James972 · Dec 31, 2017

Mycroft said:
I did.

if you object to comment please tell what objection was exactly. How will you learn if you are afraid to try?

Lafayette · Jan 31, 2018

Mycroft said:
3. So...you can take your snarky comment and shove it.

Bend over ...

Samuelson - "Beware an economic boom. Really."

Lafayette

joG

Lafayette

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.

Lafayette

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.

Lafayette

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.

Lafayette

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.

James972

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.

James972

James972

James972

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.

James972

Lafayette