So the obvious question out there is why the jobs report was so disappointing? With more government stimulus money being pumped into the economy than at any time in history, the best we could muster was a slightly above average number of new jobs and a rise in unemployment?
There are theories out there ranging from unemployment payments giving people an incentive to not work, to companies worried about overextending themselves based on an artificially stimulated economy, to inflation concerns, to the very real possibility that the entire Covid lock down mentality has fundamentally altered the economy we had had and that the pre-Covid normal many no longer be normal.
What we should understand in all of this is that no matter how much money the government spends it is never enough to actually work and Keynesian followers will always blame the result on the fact that the stimulus was not big enough. But when we are looking at stimulus in the trillions of dollars, there comes a time when you simply cannot just keep spending more money with no realistic plan to pay it back. It's one thing for a Keynesian to suggest that a trillion dollar bill was not enough. It's quite another when you have had approximately three trillion dollars spent so far on stimulus and some are calling for another two or even three trillion again.
If Keynesian economics "really" requires stimulus into the five or six trillion dollar range to actually work (and there is no promise that that will even work) then it's not much of an economic theory. To keep things in perspective, our discretionary spending has been fairly consistently in the 1.2 to 1.4 trillion dollar range, with non-defense discretionary spending being in the 600-700 billion dollar range. this jumped to over 900 billion in 2020.
Of course the manner in which the stimulus was written places much of the spending on the mandatory side, which went up 1.8 trillion dollars in 2020. Overall our deficit in 2020 was 3.1 trillion dollars, which is not entirely accurate since much of that was from stimulus passed but not yet spent. The big payments sent out in March were actually charged to our 2020 numbers. There will be more money spent in 2021 that will have been paid for in 2020. Right now it appears that another stimulus for 2021 is in the works that will be close to the trillion dollar range again.
But certain people would like even more. They will use this disappointing economic report to justify it. But make no mistake, this is incredibly dangerous thinking.
72 comments:
Everything that's being done to juice a recovery is idiotic. Every single time the government subsidizes something we get MORE of it, and unemployment is no exception.
You want to get people back to work? STOP paying people to not work. But liberals simply can't help themselves. They need to blow another $4 - $6 TRILLION, so they can look like they're "doing something."
If Trump taught us anything he taught us that LESS government and regulatory interference, NOT more, get's us to 3.5% unemployment and a roaring economy. What bothers liberals is that it results in winners and losers, and when your entire existence is based upon class warfare and envy, you just can't abide that.
Just undo what we did to destroy bad orange man. Re-open everything fully, take off the fucking masks, and let's return to pre-Covid. Let the American people do what they do best - work, thrive, and prosper. Leave us the fuck alone.
First Scott. The Republicans don't have any policies right now except to oppose every single thing that the Biden administration has issued.
Second Trickle down economically failed spectacularly.
I will respond directly later.
But
" Tax cuts for corporations and the rich create more and better jobs."
Wrong. Corporations used Trump’s giant tax cut to buy back shares of their own stock and boost share prices. From 2017 to 2018, stock buybacks increased by a staggering 50 percent. Lowe’s spent $10 billion on stock buybacks in 2018, and then fired thousands of workers with no notice or severance. Walmart and AT&T also laid off thousands of workers.
During this pandemic alone, America’s 664 billionaires have added $1.3 trillion to their collective wealth and now own over $4 trillion. That’s almost double the wealth of the bottom half — 165 million Americans.
And contrary to the claim that the tax cut would boost wages by $4,000 a year, a recent analysis found that in the year after the Trump tax cut, wages increased by about the same as they did before it, and then slowed.
Tax cuts for rich individuals don’t trickle down, either. The rich simply get richer. Two years before Ronald Reagan’s first tax cut, the richest 1 percent of Americans owned less than 23 percent of the nation’s wealth. A decade later, after two rounds of tax cuts for the rich, they owned over 28 percent. By 2019, after more tax cuts for the rich by George W. Bush and Donald Trump, people at the top owned almost 35 percent of America’s wealth. Meanwhile, average wealth barely budged for the middle class, and went negative for the bottom 10 percent.
It gets worse. During this pandemic alone, America’s 664 billionaires have added $1.3 trillion to their collective wealth and now own over $4 trillion. That’s almost double the wealth of the bottom half — 165 million Americans.
But nothing has trickled down. Even before the pandemic, wages stagnated. A 3% improvement is minuscule for the working class.
The solution is simple.
1. Open up the economy.
2. Return unemployment to pre-pandemic status.
So simple it goes over the head of Joe Biden.
Rat - the sad thing about all of this is that liberals moving forward will use that 2020 stimulus spending bill (which most of it was not actually spent in 2020) to make the claim that Trump was responsible for the rise in debt.
For eight years, Obama averagesd 1.045 a year in deficit spending.
For the first three years, Trump averaged 877 billion.
But you take that one year (2020) of 3.141 spending and it looks bad. It's completely unwarranted and Covid relief had nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with Covid.
But you can count on the numbers being used to suggest Trump was a big spender.
You won't like my source because it's not pjmedia etc.
https://www.laprogressive.com/trickle-down-economics-myths/?amp=1
Scott, the deficit argument was destroyed by Trump.
Second Trickle down economically failed spectacularly.
Really? We had the best economy pro-Covid under Trump than we have probably had in our lifetimes. Statistically better than either the Reagan or Clinton years. We had record unemployment for many cross sections of the economy, blacks, hispanics were at all time lows and 2020 showed women at 0.98 on the dollar compared to Men in the same jobs.
The year that the economy fell apart was 2020, when we had a 3.1 trillion dollar Keynesian style stimulus spending spree... and here we are almost half way through 2021 and already those effects are wearing thin and all we have left is
1) try to figure out how to pay for the failed stimulus
2) figure out how much more stimulus we need to keep things from combusting
Oh... and we now have to worry about inflation. Direct result of trillions of spending when we didn't pay for it.
The only good thing about this... is I am looking at selling my house this summer and will make out like a bandit. I might get as much as 50 grand more than I though just a handful of months ago.
Second Trickle down economically failed spectacularly.
With the Trump Tax cuts we saw one of the largest surge in economic growth since WWII with the lowest unemployment since the statistic was being kept.
If that's you definition of failure, I'll take it.
As with the Obama stimulus program the massive spending being considered does nothing to reduce unemployment or stimulate the economy.
All it is is dinner time for the special interest who supported the Democrats.
Roger...
You don't think I will like the source? How about the fact that they start out trying to pretend that in 2017 and 2018 that the economy actually wasn't doing well and that people were being laid off in record numbers?
Reality: We had record unemployment in several areas and the economy was booming. When you base your opinion on "facts" that don't exist. Well then I don't like your opinion.
The fastest way to stop me from reading till the end is to start out with bad facts and unwarranted suggestions.
The source is irrelevant.
Because it's not Pravda 2021!
LMAO at you Scott
WELCOME BACK, CARTER: Milton Friedman’s Revenge.
Why anyone would want to repeat this experiment in the dismal science is a mystery. Biden, however, is fixated not on inflation but on repudiating the legacy of the man known for describing it as “always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon in the sense that it is and can be produced only by a more rapid increase in the quantity of money than in output.”
Milton Friedman, whose empiricism led him to embrace free market public policy, was the most influential economist of the second half of the 20th century. But Biden has a weird habit of treating Friedman as a devilish spirit who must be exorcised from the nation’s capital. For Biden, Friedman represents deregulation, low taxes, and the idea that a corporation’s primary responsibility is not to a group of politicized “stakeholders” but to its shareholders. “Milton Friedman isn’t running the show anymore,” Biden told Politico last year. “When did Milton Friedman die and become king?” Biden asked in 2019. The truth is that Friedman, who died in 2006, has held little sway over either Democrats or Republicans for almost two decades. But Biden wants to mark the definitive end of Friedman and the “neoliberal” economics he espoused by unleashing a tsunami of dollars into the global economy and inundating Americans with new entitlements.
The irony is that Biden’s rejection of Friedman’s teachings on money, taxes, and spending may bring about the same circumstances that established Friedman’s preeminence. In a year or two, the American economy and Biden’s political fortunes may look considerably different than when Janet Yellen blurted out the obvious about inflation. Voters won’t like the combination of rising prices and declining assets. Biden’s experts might rediscover that it is difficult to control or stop inflation once it begins. And Milton Friedman will have his revenge.
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/448858/
It's kind of like Socialism every time it's tried.: "We're really going to get it right this time!"
They never learn, and their personal fortunes always insulate them from the needless pain they inflict upon the rest of us.
LMAO at you Scott
Well Roger... that is an impressive argument. You really put me in my place with that intellectually sound, logically cognitive argument that reputes what I just wrote.
Obviously you are of superior intelligence to have come up with such a clever and ingenious rebuttal. We all wait on baited breath for your next round of intellectual profoundness!
But you take that one year (2020) of 3.141 spending and it looks bad. It's completely unwarranted and Covid relief had nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with Covid.
But you can count on the numbers being used to suggest Trump was a big spender.
To me, that's part and parcel of the overall effort to destroy Bad Orange Man. Virtually everything we did in response to Covid was stupid, unnecessary and horrifically harmful. The toll on lives and livelihoods above and beyond the Covid deaths - the true number we will never know - fully displays the abject evil that exists within every liberal. The lengths they were willing to go to destroy Trump, and the collateral damage of the millions of lives destroyed is unconscionable.
None of the destruction was necessary, and may those who orchestrated it burn in the hottest corner of hell for all eternity.
Well Roger... that is an impressive argument. You really put me in my place with that intellectually sound, logically cognitive argument that reputes what I just wrote.
Whenever the topic is economics the alky is at a complete disadvantage. And he knows this, so his singular response is to plagiarize his favorite dwarf - Robert Reich.
Associated Press.
Nearly 3 million people avoided looking for a job in April because they feared becoming infected by the coronavirus, according to a government survey. About 2 million women have stopped looking for work since the pandemic, likely because of disruptions in schooling and child care. In April, all the net job growth went to men; women as a group lost jobs. In addition, construction companies and factories have been left short of parts because of clogged supply chains and have had to slow production. Hiring weakened in both sectors in April.
And some businesses complain that a $300-a-week federal unemployment benefit, provided in President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion rescue package, has meant that many unemployed people can receive more income from unemployment aid than from their former jobs.
Jan Riggins, who manages two Express staffing offices in Fort Worth, Texas, said that some job seekers have turned down offers that paid less than they were receiving from benefits. She said health concerns are also a factor, noting that the open jobs that allow working from home, such as taking customer service calls, have been quickly filled.
___
Q. WILL ALL THESE ISSUES CONTINUE TO HOLD DOWN HIRING IN THE COMING MONTHS?
A. It's possible. But most economists say they think April's slowdown will prove temporary. Daniel Zhao, senior economist at Glassdoor, an employment website, notes that Google searches for jobs had declined from mid-March and only rebounded in late April — after the government had compiled the jobs data for last month.
The average workweek rose last month, evidence that companies are asking their employees to work more and will likely need to add workers soon.
And the number of first-time applications for unemployment aid has dropped steadily in the past month, a sign that layoffs are slowing. More people are returning to the job market to look for work again: About 750,000 people have rejoined the workforce in the past two months. All of that should help employers fill more jobs.
___
Q. ARE UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE REALLY AVOIDING JOBS FOR THE EXTRA $300 A WEEK IN FEDERAL JOBLESS AID?
This is a contentious question. One academic research paper has found that for every 10% increase in unemployment benefits, job applications decline by nearly 4%. Yet last spring, when the federal jobless benefit was $600 — twice as large — nearly 7.7 million people returned to work.
Now a couple points.
1: The pandemic has made it difficult to working women with children have not been able to go back to work. The Sleepy Joe plan provides day time care centers for children under the age of kindergarten age. More women would be able to go back to work.
Second, the infrastructure plan is very similar to the Truman and Eisenhower plan to build the largest intestate highway system, but this time they have to rebuild hundreds of bridges and again repair thousands of miles of roads.
Even some Republicans are working with Sleepy Joe on the infrastructure projects.
Also buried inside is a Democratic strategy to overturn "right to work" for less legislation. Right to work laws have drastically reduced the percentage of union jobs.
If he succeeds he will be a transitional leader, reversing the failed trickle down economic disaster.
https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/hudson-valley/ap-top-news/2021/05/08/explainer-did-us-hiring-slow-because-of-a-labor-shortage
Typical alky.
Has nothing to offer but the thoughts of others. thoughts that he himself cannot comprehend, yet he blindly plagiarizes them anyway.
I can see how easily Lydia the Pomeranian was able to clean your financial clock. Like taking candy from a baby.
That is a great article Roger...
These experts can definitely say that some things are possible, that maybe we will see some things, but that other issues are contentious. In other words, a few thousands words to say that they have no real clue what the hell is going on!
Well done!
Can you give us some more wonderful insight? You are laughing your ass off while sending us articles from people who admittedly have no clue? Sounds like a great Saturday morning!
The White House
President Biden’s plan will:
Fix highways; rebuild bridges; and upgrade ports, airports, and transit centers.
Rebuild clean drinking water infrastructure, a renewed electric grid, and high-speed broadband to all Americans.
Modernize homes, commercial buildings, schools, and federal buildings.
Create caregiving jobs and raise wages and benefits for essential home care workers.
Revitalize manufacturing, ensure products are made in America, and invest in innovation.
Create good-paying union jobs and train Americans for jobs of the future.
Alongside the American Jobs Plan, President Biden is releasing a Made in America Tax Plan to make sure corporations pay their fair share and encourage job creation at home. The plan will ensure that corporations won’t be able to get away with paying little or no tax by shifting jobs and profits overseas. It will reward investment at home, stop profit shifting, and ensure other nations won’t gain a competitive advantage by becoming tax havens.
The Made in America Tax Plan would fully pay for the American Jobs Plan within 15 years, if passed alongside one another.
-------
The bottom up economic plan will eventually pay for itself by building an economy with millions of union workers and again taxpayers who are working, pay taxes.
My other point is a higher minimum wage will inspire people to go to work, instead of depending on unemployment benefits.
It's a two sided argument but the minimum wage should be increased to match inflation.
Cue the alky etc.
🤣Alky attempting to talk economics😆
Scott, your sources are always political, not just objective economic experts.
But you don't believe Harvard, Yale , etc. Because you believe they are Democratic hoaxes.
1: The pandemic has made it difficult to working women with children have not been able to go back to work. The Sleepy Joe plan provides day time care centers for children under the age of kindergarten age. More women would be able to go back to work.
Exactly what we DON'T need.
We need teachers to go back to work. Stairmaster Joe gives us babysitters.
Second, the infrastructure plan is very similar to the Truman and Eisenhower plan to build the largest intestate highway system, but this time they have to rebuild hundreds of bridges and again repair thousands of miles of roads.
It's not even close. For starters, financially the country was under completely different circumstances. And Slow Joe's plan contains everything BUT bridges, tunnels and roads. It's 5% infrastructure and 95% WELFARE.
So you're wrong on every count alky. And those experts you cite? We had plenty of "experts" put us where we are, and even most recently "experts" predicted a million jobs. we barely got 25% of that.
So alky, you should skip this thread. Maybe Coldheart can put up some little playpen post for you to wax eloquently and plagiaristically about Trump's mushroom penis. A topic you appear to consider yourself an "expert" on.
Shoo alky.
The plan will ensure that corporations won’t be able to get away with paying little or no tax by shifting jobs and profits overseas. It will reward investment at home, stop profit shifting, and ensure other nations won’t gain a competitive advantage by becoming tax havens.
The Made in America Tax Plan would fully pay for the American Jobs Plan within 15 years, if passed alongside one another.
Not my words kputz
Scott, your sources are always political, not just objective economic experts.
Says the idiot who just plagiarized from the fucking White House.
They don't ever do politics there, do they?
95% WELFARE.
Shoo alky.
Fix highways; rebuild bridges; and upgrade ports, airports, and transit centers.
Rebuild clean drinking water infrastructure, a renewed electric grid, and high-speed broadband to all Americans.
Modernize homes, commercial buildings, schools, and federal buildings.
These are the only legitimate project for infrastructure spending. The rest of the list is glorified welfare.
Scott, your sources are always political, not just objective economic experts.
My source for this post was the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Congressional Budget Office Historical budget data - downloaded from their website and analyzed by me.
Can you explain to me how I could possibly had been any more "objective" Roger? In fact, how often does my argument actually involve "quoting" anyone else for their opinion? Generally I quote a story (as a means to introduce a subject), do my own research, and then provide my personal opinion.
Roger Amick said...
1: The pandemic has made it difficult to working women with children have not been able to go back to work. The Sleepy Joe plan provides day time care centers for children under the age of kindergarten age. More women would be able to go back to work.
Second, the infrastructure plan is very similar to the Truman and Eisenhower plan to build the largest intestate highway system, but this time they have to rebuild hundreds of bridges and again repair thousands of miles of roads.
I think to summarize roger (and his article) he is saying it difficult for working women with children to go back to work but with daycare and the small spending on actual infrastructure in the "infrastructure" bill for bridges and roads, women will return to build those since men have already returned to work. The rest of the money will trickle up.
And not having this is what caused April.
Even if none of this was unknown
But it was a bit of a word salad to read.
Analyzed by you? Do you really believe that you are objective?
January 22, 2021 – Two faculty members from Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health—Sara Bleich and Benjamin Sommers—and one former faculty member, Gina McCarthy, have been chosen for roles in the new Biden-Harris administration.
The appointments for Bleich and Sommers were announced January 20, shortly after the inauguration of President Joe Biden. McCarthy’s appointment was announced in mid-December.
Sara Bleich
Bleich, professor of public health policy in the Department of Health Policy and Management, will serve in the new position of senior advisor for COVID-19 in the Office of the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). In that role, she’ll lead efforts related to the pandemic, economic recovery, and federal nutrition assistance programs.
Bleich previously served as a White House Fellow from 2015 to 2016, working as a senior policy advisor in the USDA’s Office of the Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services. Speaking about the importance of her new role, she said, “COVID-19 is a public health crisis, an economic crisis, and a growing hunger crisis which has laid bare racial and social inequities. The U.S. Department of Agriculture is central to the federal response for each of these crises.” Bleich is excited “to work with very talented staff and appointees to meaningfully address the pandemic.”
In addition to her role at Harvard Chan School, Bleich is also the Carol K. Pforzheimer Professor at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study and a member of the faculty at the Harvard Kennedy School. Her research provides evidence to support policies to prevent obesity and diet-related diseases, particularly among high-risk populations. For example, she has published studies on the health impacts of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes, on connections between chain-restaurant advertising and obesity in adults, and on how to modify SNAP (Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program) policies to promote population health. Bleich has also written or co-authored a number of media articles in recent months on how the COVID-19 pandemic is affecting food security and nutrition in the U.S. Bleich holds a BA in psychology from Columbia and a PhD in health policy from Harvard.
Benjamin Sommers
Sommers, Huntley Quelch Professor of Health Care Economics, will serve as deputy assistant secretary for planning and evaluation (ASPE) in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). In that role, he will lead the Office of Health Policy, which addresses issues related to Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act, Medicare, health care quality, and public health, including COVID-19. His role will be to ensure that policies are based on solid evidence and science.
“With the COVID-19 pandemic, a recession and threats to health insurance coverage for millions, and ongoing unacceptable racial and ethnic disparities in the U.S. health care system, the work that the Department of Health and Human Services will be doing for the next four years is perhaps more critical than ever,” said Sommers. “I’m honored and thrilled to be chosen for this position, but well aware of the incredibly hard work ahead.”
Sommers previously served as a senior advisor in the Office of the ASPE from 2011 to 2012 and in a part-time advisory role from 2013 to 2016.
In addition to his faculty position at Harvard Chan School, Sommers is a practicing primary internist and a professor of medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School. A health economist, his main research interests are health policy for vulnerable populations, the uninsured, and the health care safety net. Some of Sommers’ recent studies, for example, have focused on the health impacts of Medicaid expansion and on work requirements for Medicaid recipients. Sommers has been quoted widely in the media and has written many articles of his own. One of his recent articles highlighted the importance of the Affordable Care Act in preventing people from losing health insurance during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sommers holds two Harvard degrees—a PhD in health policy and an MD.
Trump put unqualified hacks in the same positions.
The plan will ensure that corporations won’t be able to get away with paying little or no tax by shifting jobs and profits overseas. It will reward investment at home, stop profit shifting, and ensure other nations won’t gain a competitive advantage by becoming tax havens.
It will do nothing of the sort.
Every penny of additional corporate tax will be passed through to the consumer. It was worked this way since the fucking Bronze Age.
Furthermore, outside of his bullshit rhetoric, Slow Joe is powerless to affect tax laws of other sovereign nations. Money flows to where it's treated the best, alky. This is a basis of all economics in a most general sense. When faced with multiple investment options I look for the best rate of return. Same with global corporations and tax treatment.
We compete across the globe with every other nation for corporate HQ's assets, capital, etc. If they offer a more attractive set of options for global corporations, that's where they'll go.
It's the same with states across America. Why are NY and CA LOSING population while TX and FL are gaining? People are voting with their feet AND their wallets.
rrb said...
Scott, your sources are always political, not just objective economic experts.
Says the idiot who just plagiarized from the fucking White House.
They don't ever do politics there, do they?
And I have no idea why roger posted a long description of Sara Bleich's background.
Infrastructure ???
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Analyzed by you? Do you really believe that you are objective?
I'd say he is. There's only one way to honestly and objectively interpret numbers alky.
You seem enamored with flourishing rhetoric you can't possibly understand, and with the Ivy credentials of people you don't know and will never meet.
Oh, and with Trump. The guy who brought us 3.5% unemployment, 6% real wage growth, and the lowest minority unemployment EVER. The best economy of my lifetime.
Oh I see
TDS
everything is Trump...
should have known
Link it
Analyzed by you? Do you really believe that you are objective?
Yes Roger... analyzed by me.
Unlike you I am capable of looking at raw data, deciphering it and coming to a personal opinion or conclusion about things. Unlike you, I simply NEVER take the word of any media economist (conservative or liberal - trickle down or Keynesian) without verifying if the data they use to draw their conclusions is accurate or otherwise manipulated or misrepresented.
Either way... you suggested that my "sources" are always biased. Obviously the BLS and CBO provide raw data and raw data (by definition) is not biased. You can choose to read or ignore their own analysis if you so choose. Either way, I take those opinions with a grain of salt and rely on the actual data to draw conclusions.
So yeah, Roger... in terms of where I get my opinions, those are mine. You can choose to call "me" biased all you like. But my numbers are unbiased raw numbers supplied by those tasked to collect and report on it in raw form.
And I have no idea why roger posted a long description of Sara Bleich's background.
Infrastructure ???
It's what he does when he desperately flails. He's SO out of his depth on this topic it's not funny. And he knows it. So he frantically searches and copy's and pastes anything that HE believes is even remotely relevant to the topic. He seems drawn to folks with advanced Ivy degrees, even though it is most often those with advanced Ivy degrees that get us into messes like this. and then they flee back to academia, just like they did under 0linsky.
It's ironic. He'd be better off using this time to attend to life's little necessities...
...Like brushing his teeth.
In case anyone is wondering or interested in raw numbers.
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2021-02/51134-2021-02-11-historicalbudgetdata.xlsx
The link downloads the most recent raw historical budget numbers all nicely put together in a spreadsheet format. The sort of thing (but more detailed) that I look at everyday in my job.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Link it
Link WHAT exactly, alky?
It shows that the deficit in 2020 was the extraordinary highest in history
Scott I have Microsoft excel so I saw it is unbelievably higher since 1962
I used spreadsheets for 20+ years
Blogger Roger Amick said...
It shows that the deficit in 2020 was the extraordinary highest in history
And this is where the simpleton in you shines through.
You actually think that 'BLAME TRUMP!!!' has some relevance to this conversation. It doesn't. The issue is not what occurred under Trump. The issue is what's happening right now, and what's happening right now is that Biden* is blowing it and blowing it big time. And it's not like the solution to all of this is complicated. it's staring us right in the face. The solution is STOP. Stop right now. Stop spending, stop juicing, stop paying people to not work, stop with the eviction moratoriums, and stop with the TRILLION$ in new spending which are NOT infrastructure. Not even close.
Fully open this economy and let it organically recover on it's own.
Blowing TRILLION$ just so you can take credit for blowing TRILLION$ while calling it stimulus is fucking stupid on stilts.
Debt Held by the Publica
248.0. 1962
254.0
256.8
260.8
263.7
266.6
289.5
278.1
283.2
303.0
322.4
340.9
343.7
394.7
477.4
549.1
607.1
640.3
711.9
789.4
924.6
1,137.3
1,307.0
1,507.3
1,740.6
1,889.8
2,051.6
2,190.7
2,411.6
2,689.0
2,999.7
3,248.4
3,433.1
3,604.4
3,734.1
3,772.3
3,721.1
3,632.4
3,409.8
3,319.6
3,540.4
3,913.4
4,295.5
4,592.2
4,829.0
5,035.1
5,803.1
7,544.7
9,018.9
10,128.2
11,281.1
11,982.7
12,779.9
13,116.7
14,167.6
14,665.4
15,749.6
16,800.7
21,019.1. 2020
Blogger Roger Amick said...
I used spreadsheets for 20+ years
Debt Held by the Publica
So... what's your point as it relates to Scott's original post, alky?
Your own words from your own analysis, without plagiarism, gibberish or Trump.
It shows that the deficit in 2020 was the extraordinary highest in history
Gee Roger...
You obviously didn't read my post or any of the comments referring to this. Failure to understand that both stimuluses (not just the one that was sent in 2020, but the recent larger one sent in 2021) were both part of the original two stimulus bills passed in 2020.
So yeah... as I stated to Rat.
Dumb people with no perspective will be dumb enough to make the dumb argument that Trump was responsible for the deficit... even though had Trump not signed the two large Covid stimulus packages into law, people would have attacked him for that.
I know it's hard for someone of your advanced age... but try to keep up.
Here is what I wrote Roger in the post you are commenting on?
Of course the manner in which the stimulus was written places much of the spending on the mandatory side, which went up 1.8 trillion dollars in 2020. Overall our deficit in 2020 was 3.1 trillion dollars, which is not entirely accurate since much of that was from stimulus passed but not yet spent. The big payments sent out in March were actually charged to our 2020 numbers. There will be more money spent in 2021 that will have been paid for in 2020
So you see... you explaining to me that the deficit was large in 2020 proves positively that you do not actually understand what I am writing. So wonder you believe that my "sources" are someone else and simply kneejerk discount everything as "biased".
because you do not read it or understand it if you did.
Not sure what your point is about commenting on a post, when you never bother to read it. But at least it explains why you always appear to out to lunch.
Scott, you used the word stimulus several times.
The President bill does not include additional stimulus checks.
When millions of Americans go back to work on the infrastructure will pay billions of taxes.
The President's plan is not Keynesian. That's your opinion.
Scott, you used the word stimulus several times. The President bill does not include additional stimulus checks.
A stimulus bill is not exclusive to sending checks, Roger. Stimulus is anything that the Government is spending to "stimulate" the economy. Whether that be trying to create new jobs, sending checks, or even giving tax incentives to businesses to expand or hire.
So the fact that the new bill will not send new stimulus checks is irrelevant as to whether or not they are looking to spend upwards of two trillion more dollars.
If it is your opinion that Keynesian economic philosophy and large stimulus bills are not related... then you can hold that opinion. It's wrong by definition, but that is what happens when you rely on yourself for opinions.
Lastly... both of the first two stimulus "checks" were part of the first two stimulus bills. But "charged" to the 2020 deficit, even if the spending portion takes place in 2021.. which is why the 3.1 trillion dollar deficit is misleading.
A slight change.. it's is something like Keynesian
Nothing in the Biden agenda is different from what many European countries have been implementing Keynesianism in recent years. The higher level of government spending relative to GDP, more stringent environmental regulations, higher taxes, and “quantitative easing” have not led to higher growth rates in Europe. On average, the large economies of Europe saw a bigger decline in their GDP than the US did. They will also likely recover at a slower pace than the US. The new U.K. lockdowns and the spike in Covid-19 cases in Germany should revise European growth forecasts downward. Nevertheless, in the U.S. the 2021 economy, given the 2020 decline, will likely grow at over 4%, partly in new directions and partly catching up.
The potential for a rebound is there, especially if the vaccines prove effective and state and local governments begin to lift restrictions.
____
If the states open up their economies the recovery will increase tax payoff of the deficit, and eventually bring the deficit down to near zero, like in the Bill Clinton era. Plus increasing taxes on the top one percent of the one percent will reduce the deficit.
Eventually, according to my opinion, the recovery plan will start eventually eliminate the deficit and the economy created by Sleepy Joe Biden will start to pay off the national debt.
Lack of child care and again fear of the virus caused the low level job growth.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/alejandrochafuen/2021/01/09/the-2021-economy-we-are-all-super-keynesian-know/
misleading
Fake news new etc.
������
Lack of child care and again fear of the virus caused the low level job growth
We LOST 18,000 high paying manufacturing jobs
other manufacturers are looking at leaving America AGAIN
increasing the size of government makes us weaker as a nation
And more beholden to countries like China
You know, where the virus came from
Not a good thing.
Roger AmickMay 8, 2021 at 12:26 PM
A slight change.. it's is something like Keynesian
I commented before I checked it out
Was child care and the virus not issues in Republican states ? I think those were universal.
The 10 highest unemployment rates in America are all in states run by democrat governors.
The democrat party is failing us and America
Actually Roger...
Not sure if you understood the article you cut and pasted.
But it suggested that European countries that have been using Keynesian are seeing a larger economic decline because of Covid and are expected to recover at a slower pace.
So in essence the article is stating that Keynesian economic policies did a poorer job of insulating themselves from the economic effects of the pandemic while simultaneously putting those economies on pace for a slower recovery.
It was not an article "praising" Keynesian economic policy, Roger.
Unless you see it as "praising" it because the article suggested that it is in line with what struggling European countries are using and suffering from.
Ultimately it was an article stating that Keynesian economies performed worse than ours did. Not sure how that helps your argument?
Part of the Sleepy Joe plan
$37 billion in funding is in the legislation to supercharge chip manufacturing in the United States as a shortfall of semiconductors has forced U.S. automakers and other manufacturers to cut production.
China has almost all of the world's semiconductor products. Sleepy Joe is planning to bring those jobs back here, if the Republicans don't block it.
The GPS system in your car was made mostly from China.
The President's plan is not Keynesian. That's your opinion.
Slow Joe's plan is Keynesian BY DEFINITION, alky.
What Is Keynesian Economics?
Keynesian economics is a macroeconomic economic theory of total spending in the economy and its effects on output, employment, and inflation. Keynesian economics was developed by the British economist John Maynard Keynes during the 1930s in an attempt to understand the Great Depression. Keynesian economics is considered a "demand-side" theory that focuses on changes in the economy over the short run. Keynes’s theory was the first to sharply separate the study of economic behavior and markets based on individual incentives from the study of broad national economic aggregate variables and constructs.
Based on his theory, Keynes advocated for increased government expenditures and lower taxes to stimulate demand and pull the global economy out of the depression. Subsequently, Keynesian economics was used to refer to the concept that optimal economic performance could be achieved—and economic slumps prevented—by influencing aggregate demand through activist stabilization and economic intervention policies by the government.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Keynesian economics focuses on using active government policy to manage aggregate demand in order to address or prevent economic recessions.
Keynes developed his theories in response to the Great Depression, and was highly critical of previous economic theories, which he referred to as “classical economics”.
Activist fiscal and monetary policy are the primary tools recommended by Keynesian economists to manage the economy and fight unemployment.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/k/keynesianeconomics.asp
And it never fucking WORKS.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Roger AmickMay 8, 2021 at 12:26 PM
A slight change.. it's is something like Keynesian
I commented before I checked it out
Doesn't matter. You don't know wtf you're talking about anyway.
No, I didn't say that.
I said that Sleepy Joe
The potential for a rebound is there, especially if the vaccines prove effective and state and local governments begin to lift restrictions. Mainly because we have vaccinated 1/3 of all American.
Because when the states open up their economies the recovery process will be a lot better than in Europe. The Keynesian approach will be a lot better than in Europe, like your favorite Sweden.
Their Keynesian economies performed worse than ours will, because again Biden's first 100 days were very successful.
Ok?
But it suggested that European countries that have been using Keynesian are seeing a larger economic decline because of Covid and are expected to recover at a slower pace.
Precisely what made the Great Depression "GREAT".
Slow Joe, who sees himself as the next Fascist Delano Roosevelt anyway, is pursuing the same nonsense FDR did, and will enjoy the same result. FDR paid Bob to dig a hole and Bill to fill it in. The rest of the industrialized world suffered from the same economic depression that we did. We just dragged it out because of asinine policies like make work jobs and wage and price controls. Because "EXPERTS."
Fucking Ivy League egghead experts. Who have never signed the front of a paycheck. Only the back. Like the alky.
The Keynesian approach will be a lot better than in Europe, like your favorite Sweden.
Why and how exactly?
Please be specific.
You make these fucking declarations with not a thing to back it up. So please explain in some detail how this will magically happen.
Keynesian economics focuses on using active government policy to manage aggregate demand in order to address or prevent economic recessions.
Got the United States out of the Great Depression in a 1930s idiot
Their Keynesian economies performed worse than ours will, because again Biden's first 100 days were very successful.
Ok?
No. Not OK. Biden* deserves ZERO credit for the economic performance of this country in his first 100 days. None. In fact, you can't point to a single policy of his, a single thing he did that had any impact at all when it comes to the economy, vaccines, or anything he inherited from his predecessor.
Blogger Roger Amick said...
Keynesian economics focuses on using active government policy to manage aggregate demand in order to address or prevent economic recessions.
So now you're even plagiarizing the definition that I provided.
Fuck you alky. You're an imbecile and a parrot. And you parrot things you don't even understand.
Go brush your teeth.
"Not my words " Deedless Roger
Yes, I know. You don't know enough about economics.
Roger Amick said...
Keynesian economics focuses on using active government policy to manage aggregate demand in order to address or prevent economic recessions."
Give us the 2nd Key Component of the Keynesian theory.
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/05/07/gaetz-greene-tour-485924
These nuts believe that Trump is the President now
", Keynes advocated for increased government expenditures and lower taxes to stimulate demand"
Roger is a Halfback, Halfwit.
Debate economics HalfBaked.
Post a Comment