Obama's a neoliberal, so it's surprising that anyone thought he was going to pass single payer and a jobs program. Bernie's refreshing because as an old leftist he's not interested in contemporary identity/culture politics as much as an economic revolution.
Friedman, however, argues that Sanders' plan would be more stimulative because it is pouring money into the economy, as opposed to cutting taxes. Several of Sanders' proposals -- such as spending $1 trillion on infrastructure -- will happen in the first few years of his administration.
The thinking goes: This enhanced government spending would increase demand on businesses, who would then hire more workers to meet their needs. The increase in employment will prompt people to buy more, leading other businesses to hire.
"If there is more spending, people will have more to do," Friedman said, noting that the share of the population with jobs could be restored to its 1999 level of more than 64%, up from its current 59.6% rate.
Obama's shovel ready jobs and I got a good chuckle out of this
You are aware that our best economy is during war when government spending is out of control right? From a fundamental perspective, government spending reduces unemployment and increases corporate profits in the short term. Long-term effects of massive deficits or tax increases are another matter.
That being said, even if Bernie does get elected, none of the shit he's proposing will actually pass.
We already tried what Bernie is advocating which is the point that flew over your head.
And by the most conservative estimates, 600,000 jobs were gained by the stimulus package. Your head has to be firmly lodged into your ass to try to deny that that bill achieved what it set out to do.
Obama himself joked that the jobs weren't a shovel ready as he thought. Real funny
But if you would like to link to your stats in the face of a failing economy still under Obama we can take a look.
The economy still sucks and the money was used to prop up state government unions
By what metric does our economy "suck"? Unless your retirement portfolio consists of 90% oil and gas securities, I'm not sure how one would arrive at that conclusion.
A reasonable person might argue that our economy isn't as robust as it could be, and that our economy is merely average. Or they would make the argument that Obama and the dems' policies have done very little to help the economy, instead we're just seeing the result of the natural uptick of the business cycle. Or perhaps they'd instead credit the Fed's monetary policy and the quantitative easing from 2009-2014 as being far more instrumental in the economy's recovery than any of Obama's fiscal policies. Hell, you'd make a lot more sense if you tried to make the argument that had Congressional Republicans actually allowed a number of Obama's economic proposals to get passed (the American Jobs Act being the most significant example of Obama's economic defeats), our economy would be in much worse shape than it is.
But why try to make any of those arguments when you can just rest your case on "Obama sucks".
The bumper-sticker-politics generation can't die soon enough.
It's great to tout about how much median income is ... everything thinks that that is great until you remind them that costs will probably go up in a similar amount.
I really laugh anytime I decide to go to McDonald's to get breakfast and realize I just spent $10. Where in this world is a McDonald's breakfast worth anything close to $10?
Inflation hasn't gone above 4% since 1991. What the fuck are you going on about?
And as a frequent hungover connoisseur of McDonald's breakfast, you must be nearing your fourth heart attack if you're spending anything close to $10 there.
Sausage Egg McMuffin, Hashbrowns, and a large Orange Juice ...
You forget that I'm approaching old, white, and rich status so therefore I don't order off of the dollar millionaires menu.
It's great to tout about how much median income is ... everything thinks that that is great until you remind them that costs will probably go up in a similar amount.
I really laugh anytime I decide to go to McDonald's to get breakfast and realize I just spent $10. Where in this world is a McDonald's breakfast worth anything close to $10?
Inflation hasn't gone above 4% since 1991. What the fuck are you going on about?
And as a frequent hungover connoisseur of McDonald's breakfast, you must be nearing your fourth heart attack if you're spending anything close to $10 there.
Sausage Egg McMuffin, Hashbrowns, and a large Orange Juice ...
You forget that I'm approaching old, white, and rich status so therefore I don't order off of the dollar millionaires menu.
It's great to tout about how much median income is ... everything thinks that that is great until you remind them that costs will probably go up in a similar amount.
I really laugh anytime I decide to go to McDonald's to get breakfast and realize I just spent $10. Where in this world is a McDonald's breakfast worth anything close to $10?
Inflation hasn't gone above 4% since 1991. What the fuck are you going on about?
And as a frequent hungover connoisseur of McDonald's breakfast, you must be nearing your fourth heart attack if you're spending anything close to $10 there.
Sausage Egg McMuffin, Hashbrowns, and a large Orange Juice ...
You forget that I'm approaching old, white, and rich status so therefore I don't order off of the dollar millionaires menu.
It's great to tout about how much median income is ... everything thinks that that is great until you remind them that costs will probably go up in a similar amount.
I really laugh anytime I decide to go to McDonald's to get breakfast and realize I just spent $10. Where in this world is a McDonald's breakfast worth anything close to $10?
Inflation hasn't gone above 4% since 1991. What the fuck are you going on about?
And as a frequent hungover connoisseur of McDonald's breakfast, you must be nearing your fourth heart attack if you're spending anything close to $10 there.
Sausage Egg McMuffin, Hashbrowns, and a large Orange Juice ...
You forget that I'm approaching old, white, and rich status so therefore I don't order off of the dollar millionaires menu.
Where are you getting this, the Times Square McDonalds?
It's great to tout about how much median income is ... everything thinks that that is great until you remind them that costs will probably go up in a similar amount.
I really laugh anytime I decide to go to McDonald's to get breakfast and realize I just spent $10. Where in this world is a McDonald's breakfast worth anything close to $10?
Inflation hasn't gone above 4% since 1991. What the fuck are you going on about?
And as a frequent hungover connoisseur of McDonald's breakfast, you must be nearing your fourth heart attack if you're spending anything close to $10 there.
Sausage Egg McMuffin, Hashbrowns, and a large Orange Juice ...
You forget that I'm approaching old, white, and rich status so therefore I don't order off of the dollar millionaires menu.
Where are you getting this, the Times Square McDonalds?
No He's back to the future to 2017 at a McDonalds in the Seattle city limits. Except He'll need to forgo the OJ for water.
The Federal Government simply tries to do too much. There are too many departments, too many employees, and much of its spending isn't very efficient. Even though Federal Infrastructure spending lacks great efficiency, it at least has a higher economic multiplier than paying people not to work (Social Security Disability fraud) or giving pap smears to 85 year old women (Medicare churn for more $$$). USPS still loses over $5 billion per year and they've made a few improvements but hasn't stopped Saturday deliveries (no need for them, at least when considering the costs).
A moderate like Kasich or Bloomberg (maybe even Rubio) should introduce the natural sun-setting of laws so that the outdated ones won't be automatically renewed.
I appreciate that the Defense Department has been trimming their budget and hope the next President keeps it up because it too is bloated.
Business tax reform and ending the 2nd home mortgage deduction would be ideal too. Repealing the latter would bring in $10 billion in tax revenues a year and it's something most in DC should support (except for those in vacation / retirement states).
Friedman, however, argues that Sanders' plan would be more stimulative because it is pouring money into the economy, as opposed to cutting taxes. Several of Sanders' proposals -- such as spending $1 trillion on infrastructure -- will happen in the first few years of his administration.
The thinking goes: This enhanced government spending would increase demand on businesses, who would then hire more workers to meet their needs. The increase in employment will prompt people to buy more, leading other businesses to hire.
"If there is more spending, people will have more to do," Friedman said, noting that the share of the population with jobs could be restored to its 1999 level of more than 64%, up from its current 59.6% rate.
Obama's shovel ready jobs and I got a good chuckle out of this
You are aware that our best economy is during war when government spending is out of control right? From a fundamental perspective, government spending reduces unemployment and increases corporate profits in the short term. Long-term effects of massive deficits or tax increases are another matter.
That being said, even if Bernie does get elected, none of the shit he's proposing will actually pass.
We already tried what Bernie is advocating which is the point that flew over your head.
And by the most conservative estimates, 600,000 jobs were gained by the stimulus package. Your head has to be firmly lodged into your ass to try to deny that that bill achieved what it set out to do.
Obama himself joked that the jobs weren't a shovel ready as he thought. Real funny
But if you would like to link to your stats in the face of a failing economy still under Obama we can take a look.
The economy still sucks and the money was used to prop up state government unions
Or perhaps they'd instead credit the Fed's monetary policy and the quantitative easing from 2009-2014 as being far more instrumental in the economy's recovery than any of Obama's fiscal policies.
Those were some amazing links to factual stats. How about we just add to the $200 trillion IOUs and call it all good?
Or perhaps they'd instead credit the Fed's monetary policy and the quantitative easing from 2009-2014 as being far more instrumental in the economy's recovery than any of Obama's fiscal policies.
Those were some amazing links to factual stats. How about we just add to the $200 trillion IOUs and call it all good?
What part of everything will be free did you not understand?
The Federal Government simply tries to do too much. There are too many departments, too many employees, and much of its spending isn't very efficient. Even though Federal Infrastructure spending lacks great efficiency, it at least has a higher economic multiplier than paying people not to work (Social Security Disability fraud) or giving pap smears to 85 year old women (Medicare churn for more $$$). USPS still loses over $5 billion per year and they've made a few improvements but hasn't stopped Saturday deliveries (no need for them, at least when considering the costs).
A moderate like Kasich or Bloomberg (maybe even Rubio) should introduce the natural sun-setting of laws so that the outdated ones won't be automatically renewed.
I appreciate that the Defense Department has been trimming their budget and hope the next President keeps it up because it too is bloated.
Business tax reform and ending the 2nd home mortgage deduction would be ideal too. Repealing the latter would bring in $10 billion in tax revenues a year and it's something most in DC should support (except for those in vacation / retirement states).
When will all public employee pensions be eliminated? Never right? They should be forced to fund their own retirements. Look at just the state of Connecticut alone for example.
• The average Connecticut state government employee in our data sample receives an annual salary of $70,970, plus annual benefits, either received in that year or accrued toward retirement, worth between $54,561 and $75,641, depending upon how future pension benefits are valued. A private sector employee with similar education, experience and other characteristics would receive $71,112 in average annual salary, but only $29,371 in annual benefits. In total, the average Connecticut state employee receives between $125,531 and $146,611 in annual salaries and benefits, versus $96,177 for a comparable private sector employees. On average, Connecticut state employees receive total pay and benefits from 25 to 46 percent higher than comparable private sector employees.
• Pensions and health coverage are the greatest budgetary burdens of public employee compensation, as well as the elements of compensation that are most generous relative to the private sector. Were the Connecticut state government to pay employees at market levels, it would save between $1.4 billion and $2.5 billion in annual compensation costs.
• Thus, it seems appropriate that policy reforms focus on making public employee health, pension and retiree health plans fiscally sustainable and competitive with the private sector.
Or perhaps they'd instead credit the Fed's monetary policy and the quantitative easing from 2009-2014 as being far more instrumental in the economy's recovery than any of Obama's fiscal policies.
Those were some amazing links to factual stats. How about we just add to the $200 trillion IOUs and call it all good?
What part of everything will be free for poor folk like me did you not understand?
Or perhaps they'd instead credit the Fed's monetary policy and the quantitative easing from 2009-2014 as being far more instrumental in the economy's recovery than any of Obama's fiscal policies.
Those were some amazing links to factual stats. How about we just add to the $200 trillion IOUs and call it all good?
What part of everything will be free did you not understand?
If that communist ever wins, I'm going straight to a Ben and Jerry's location and demand free ice cream.
Why drive all the way to Vermont? Just go to the local store and grab it off the shelf. Make sure you introduce yourself to the store manager on the way out before kicking him in the balls and taking his wallet.
Why drive all the way to Vermont? Just go to the local store and grab it off the shelf. Make sure you introduce yourself to the store manager on the way out before kicking him in the balls and taking his wallet.
Well... being the greedy capitalist that the shop owner is, he'd deserve it.
Comments
You forget that I'm approaching old, white, and rich status so therefore I don't order off of the dollar millionaires menu.
A moderate like Kasich or Bloomberg (maybe even Rubio) should introduce the natural sun-setting of laws so that the outdated ones won't be automatically renewed.
I appreciate that the Defense Department has been trimming their budget and hope the next President keeps it up because it too is bloated.
Business tax reform and ending the 2nd home mortgage deduction would be ideal too. Repealing the latter would bring in $10 billion in tax revenues a year and it's something most in DC should support (except for those in vacation / retirement states).
Those were some amazing links to factual stats. How about we just add to the $200 trillion IOUs and call it all good?
• The average Connecticut state government employee in our data sample receives an annual salary of $70,970, plus annual benefits, either received in that year or accrued toward retirement, worth between $54,561 and $75,641, depending upon how future pension benefits are valued. A private sector employee with similar education, experience and other characteristics would receive $71,112 in average annual salary, but only $29,371 in annual benefits. In total, the average Connecticut state employee receives between $125,531 and $146,611 in annual salaries and benefits, versus $96,177 for a comparable private sector employees. On average, Connecticut state employees receive total pay and benefits from 25 to 46 percent higher than comparable private sector employees.
• Pensions and health coverage are the greatest budgetary burdens of public employee compensation, as well as the elements of compensation that are most generous relative to the private sector. Were the Connecticut state government to pay employees at market levels, it would save between $1.4 billion and $2.5 billion in annual compensation costs.
• Thus, it seems appropriate that policy reforms focus on making public employee health, pension and retiree health plans fiscally sustainable and competitive with the private sector.