(11-07-2012 07:46 PM)niuguy Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 07:41 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 07:24 PM)niuguy Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 03:53 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 01:12 PM)NiuCoils Wrote:  Not true. The middle class are consumers and when they have more money, they spend it, thus creating jobs in manufacturing, design, and service. When the upper class has more money they hoarde it in the Cayman islands, or they create a few jobs that ultimately add up to a net loss from the wealth they removed from the system.

yep!!!

Yup. The more money the rich have the less that enters the economy. Strong middle class is what you need because that is where the economic action takes place.

You do realize Romney would have been 100 times better for the middle class right?

Nope.

When people actually have jobs and are working, wages go up because the supply of the available workforce is less.

(11-07-2012 04:15 PM)BobL Wrote:  Raising the upper tax rate to clinton levels is hardly punitive. We are a consumer driven economy and have been. Manufacturing jobs(as a percentage of total) have been declining at a constant pace since the end of WWII.

It is punitive enough to affect behavior. The upper incomes will simply employ more tax lawyers to find ways to shelter their money. Or, they will move it to the Caymans at even greater levels. If they are doing that now, per Coils post, why wouldn't they do it at an even higher rate?

BobL Wrote:I agree we need to "make" more here in the US and most would agree that will be in "green" technologies. Yet when Obama attempted to spur this he was lambasted. I honestly have no idea how much of that stimulus when to failed companies and this that succeeded but I bet its more to the latter.

We need to manufacture here whatever we can that a consumer will purchase. Our trade deficit would improve if we produced more oil here as well.

My organization was granted stimulus funds. You know where some of it went? We were given a waiver to buy equipment from Sweden. Seriously. In what way does that help our economy? I cannot believe that was the only example of that happening. That is why, instead of trying to stimulate, we'd be better off having the government get out of the way and let the market invent, innovate and stimulate.

(11-07-2012 07:54 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 07:46 PM)niuguy Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 07:41 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 07:24 PM)niuguy Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 03:53 PM)BobL Wrote:  yep!!!

Yup. The more money the rich have the less that enters the economy. Strong middle class is what you need because that is where the economic action takes place.

You do realize Romney would have been 100 times better for the middle class right?

Nope.

When people actually have jobs and are working, wages go up because the supply of the available workforce is less.

I don't believe any of Romney's policies will help the economy. I believe they will hurt the poor, and increase the gap between the top and the rest.

The economy will improve as the housing market continues to clear up.

Our trade deficit would improve if we produced more oil here as well.

Or consumed less...a matter of perspective.


My organization was granted stimulus funds.

So did mine, indirectly...and it kept people employed

(11-07-2012 10:28 PM)niuguy Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 07:54 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 07:46 PM)niuguy Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 07:41 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 07:24 PM)niuguy Wrote:  Yup. The more money the rich have the less that enters the economy. Strong middle class is what you need because that is where the economic action takes place.

You do realize Romney would have been 100 times better for the middle class right?

Nope.

When people actually have jobs and are working, wages go up because the supply of the available workforce is less.

I don't believe any of Romney's policies will help the economy. I believe they will hurt the poor, and increase the gap between the top and the rest.

The economy will improve as the housing market continues to clear up.

Having lower and middle class people working generally lessens the gap, not widens it. Dont believe the poison you have been fed.

(11-07-2012 10:49 PM)BobL Wrote:  Our trade deficit would improve if we produced more oil here as well.

Or consumed less...a matter of perspective.

If we produced more and consumed less, we could export more...

(11-08-2012 09:48 AM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 10:49 PM)BobL Wrote:  Our trade deficit would improve if we produced more oil here as well.

Or consumed less...a matter of perspective.

If we produced more and consumed less, we could export more...

Yep

(11-08-2012 09:48 AM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 10:49 PM)BobL Wrote:  Our trade deficit would improve if we produced more oil here as well.

Or consumed less...a matter of perspective.

If we produced more and consumed less, we could export more...

It's easier to produce goods that people want when you're still supporting innovation and not falling behind. When you invest in infrastructure that match's your rivals. When you're not hoarding cash instead of hiring.

America was a great exporter because they were ahead of the curve. When half the country refuses to leave the 1950's that makes it tough.

If we had chose to keep making steam powered rail cars instead of the automobile we'd have fallen behind then. That's what conservatives seem hell bent on doing though. Their refusal to move forward and support the cause is truly depressing, and worse, embarrassing.

When the rest of the world is using alternative energy, high speed rail and nuclear power while we sit here with our coal power plants and pathetically slow trains, well you can't be surprised our goods seem less appealing than they once did. At least the GOP wasn't allowed to stop the auto industry bailout, we still have that to point at as a point of pride.

When you're wasting millions of dollars keeping these people in prison, and then supporting them on welfare when they can't get a job when they get out, you're going to slow down progress. When you're wasting money on things that help no one, you're going to fall behind.

When the other half of the world is doing all they can to promote education and we have a party that rails against even basic statistic modeling and basic science, well, you're going to fall behind. When you have half a country that doesn't even believe in evolution or the Big Bang theory, it's going to slow down progress. When you're putting people in prison for crimes that hurt no one, you're going to fall behind. It's a culture of ignorance that can not be accepted.

If you want to improve exports, stop letting Christian conservatives take over the Republican party. Stop letting the old energy producers buy your representatives. Stop letting prisons lobby policy makers to create an underclass that will never be able to support themselves and drags down the rest of society.

Promote progress. Promote education. Promote infrastructure growth. Stop shifting our wealth from the middle class producers & consumers to the wealthiest of us that hoard their cash with no benefit to society.

(11-08-2012 11:04 AM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  It's easier to produce goods that people want when you're still supporting innovation and not falling behind. When you invest in infrastructure that match's your rivals. When you're not hoarding cash instead of hiring.

America was a great exporter because they were ahead of the curve. When half the country refuses to leave the 1950's that makes it tough.

If we had chose to keep making steam powered rail cars instead of the automobile we'd have fallen behind then. That's what conservatives seem hell bent on doing though. Their refusal to move forward and support the cause is truly depressing, and worse, embarrassing.

Oh, I'm all for innovation. I just don't believe it flows from the government, like you do.

Henry Ford innovated and created the mass produced automobile. He didn't get an innovation loan from the federal government to do so.

Conservatives are hell bent on the market and consumers to drive innovation, instead of relying on government to make great decisions on who merits to move forward. That isn't government's role, and it fails greatly when asked to do so.

Create a business environment that doesn't support hoarding cash or moving investment overseas and you'll see change. Continue ignorant, punitive policies and no amount of high speed rail debacles will save this country.

(11-08-2012 11:30 AM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(11-08-2012 11:04 AM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  It's easier to produce goods that people want when you're still supporting innovation and not falling behind. When you invest in infrastructure that match's your rivals. When you're not hoarding cash instead of hiring.

America was a great exporter because they were ahead of the curve. When half the country refuses to leave the 1950's that makes it tough.

If we had chose to keep making steam powered rail cars instead of the automobile we'd have fallen behind then. That's what conservatives seem hell bent on doing though. Their refusal to move forward and support the cause is truly depressing, and worse, embarrassing.

Oh, I'm all for innovation. I just don't believe it flows from the government, like you do.

Henry Ford innovated and created the mass produced automobile. He didn't get an innovation loan from the federal government to do so.

Conservatives are hell bent on the market and consumers to drive innovation, instead of relying on government to make great decisions on who merits to move forward. That isn't government's role, and it fails greatly when asked to do so.

Create a business environment that doesn't support hoarding cash or moving investment overseas and you'll see change. Continue ignorant, punitive policies and no amount of high speed rail debacles will save this country.

Like it or not the government has fueled much of the innovation in the last 50 years either directly or indirectly.

Tons of stuff has come from technologies developed thru NASA

Bork, the market is clearly not driving that innovation though. That's the point. They aren't paying for the necessary infrastructure improvements. They're hoarding cash and letting us fall behind.

It's pathetic and in my opinion simply Un-American to support us falling behind the rest of the world. It's embarrassing to me and it should be to you.

In my years walking this earth I have met a couple of people who have money.
And when I say they have money, I mean they have money. To understand them
reminds me of an interview I saw on TV of Donald Trump years and years ago. Trump was
trying to explain to the interviewer how he viewed money much like a person would a "scoreboard"
at a sporting event. Kinda like football. Money is how he "keeps score".
Do really rich people hoard money? Are they driving around in "Volt" cars?
Are they eating off the dollar menu and stockpiling cash? My very small sample size led me to think they are not wired that way.
I was left with the impression, when they get a boat load of money, to quote jaws, "your gonna need a bigger boat", they want more.
Getting "more" money is what drives em. Just like folks are addicted to other things...
Money is their "fix" and as "The Donald" said, it's how they keep score....and they want more.
Really rich people do many things, but hoarding cash, odds are is not one of them.
The egos are HUGE and in their minds, there is nothing they can't do, especially make more money.
Schmucks like me save and save and save some more, but the really really rich folks......no way jose.
It would think it would be akin to a corporation only want to make "so" much profit or
a football coach only wanting to win "so" many football games. Not sure corporations or coaches are wired that way either.
Just my severely limited observations of the filthy rich...lol.

(11-08-2012 12:23 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  Bork, the market is clearly not driving that innovation though. That's the point. They aren't paying for the necessary infrastructure improvements. They're hoarding cash and letting us fall behind.

It's pathetic and in my opinion simply Un-American to support us falling behind the rest of the world. It's embarrassing to me and it should be to you.

Actually, it is pathetic that you think a federal employee can make better choices than the free market and the consumer. I guess you are comfortable giving away more and more of your personal liberty. The rest of us aren't.

Solyndra sucked. The Volt is a disaster.

We've tried government involvement and it isn't working. So, we do more, double-down on that and we think it will now work?

No. We get government out and let the market drive the innovation.

(11-08-2012 11:04 AM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  

(11-08-2012 09:48 AM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 10:49 PM)BobL Wrote:  Our trade deficit would improve if we produced more oil here as well.

Or consumed less...a matter of perspective.

If we produced more and consumed less, we could export more...

It's easier to produce goods that people want when you're still supporting innovation and not falling behind. When you invest in infrastructure that match's your rivals. When you're not hoarding cash instead of hiring.

America was a great exporter because they were ahead of the curve. When half the country refuses to leave the 1950's that makes it tough.

If we had chose to keep making steam powered rail cars instead of the automobile we'd have fallen behind then. That's what conservatives seem hell bent on doing though. Their refusal to move forward and support the cause is truly depressing, and worse, embarrassing.

When the rest of the world is using alternative energy, high speed rail and nuclear power while we sit here with our coal power plants and pathetically slow trains, well you can't be surprised our goods seem less appealing than they once did. At least the GOP wasn't allowed to stop the auto industry bailout, we still have that to point at as a point of pride.

When you're wasting millions of dollars keeping these people in prison, and then supporting them on welfare when they can't get a job when they get out, you're going to slow down progress. When you're wasting money on things that help no one, you're going to fall behind.

When the other half of the world is doing all they can to promote education and we have a party that rails against even basic statistic modeling and basic science, well, you're going to fall behind. When you have half a country that doesn't even believe in evolution or the Big Bang theory, it's going to slow down progress. When you're putting people in prison for crimes that hurt no one, you're going to fall behind. It's a culture of ignorance that can not be accepted.

If you want to improve exports, stop letting Christian conservatives take over the Republican party. Stop letting the old energy producers buy your representatives. Stop letting prisons lobby policy makers to create an underclass that will never be able to support themselves and drags down the rest of society.

Promote progress. Promote education. Promote infrastructure growth. Stop shifting our wealth from the middle class producers & consumers to the wealthiest of us that hoard their cash with no benefit to society.

+1000
Well said!

(11-07-2012 07:41 PM)MaddDawgz02 Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 07:24 PM)niuguy Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 03:53 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 01:12 PM)NiuCoils Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 07:44 AM)klake87 Wrote:  FYI, the middle class DO NOT create jobs and neither does the government(without running up debt.)

Not true. The middle class are consumers and when they have more money, they spend it, thus creating jobs in manufacturing, design, and service. When the upper class has more money they hoarde it in the Cayman islands, or they create a few jobs that ultimately add up to a net loss from the wealth they removed from the system.

yep!!!

Yup. The more money the rich have the less that enters the economy. Strong middle class is what you need because that is where the economic action takes place.

You do realize Romney would have been 100 times better for the middle class right?

Absolutely not!

(11-08-2012 01:07 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(11-08-2012 12:23 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  Bork, the market is clearly not driving that innovation though. That's the point. They aren't paying for the necessary infrastructure improvements. They're hoarding cash and letting us fall behind.

It's pathetic and in my opinion simply Un-American to support us falling behind the rest of the world. It's embarrassing to me and it should be to you.

Actually, it is pathetic that you think a federal employee can make better choices than the free market and the consumer. I guess you are comfortable giving away more and more of your personal liberty. The rest of us aren't.

Solyndra sucked. The Volt is a disaster.

We've tried government involvement and it isn't working. So, we do more, double-down on that and we think it will now work?

No. We get government out and let the market drive the innovation.

That was one of the Romney campaign stances. In one of the debates, Romney pointed out all the mistakes that Obama's administration made in choosing companies (like Solandra). He stated about 1/2 failed and went bankrupt. Turns out like 3 of the companies did go bankrupt, but it was only an 8% fail rate. When Romney was with Bain, they had a 22% failure rate with companies going bankrupt or losing a huge % of the money invested. Some companies are not going to make it. But this was just another lie that the Republicans kept spouting.

(11-08-2012 01:07 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  Solyndra sucked. The Volt is a disaster.

I know 2 people that own a Volt and love it. The car is not a disaster, GM's marketing of it has been.

My next car will be a Volt and GBF ill let you drive next year before a game.

(11-08-2012 02:38 PM)BobL Wrote:  

(11-08-2012 01:07 PM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  Solyndra sucked. The Volt is a disaster.

I know 2 people that own a Volt and love it. The car is not a disaster, GM's marketing of it has been.

My next car will be a Volt and GBF ill let you drive next year before a game.

Only if we can do burnouts in the Convo lot...

(11-07-2012 01:06 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 10:33 AM)niusfactuary Wrote:  Stock market down 2% already today.

Obamaconomy!

Do you realize what you're saying here?

You're implying the stock market is down 2% today due to Obama winning.

That means.. the people who are in charge of money, looked at hundreds of polls, and a ton of stastical data, that clearly said Obama was going to win, without much of a doubt by the last week. And somehow completely misread it and were stunned by the results and are now changing their positions. If you're the manager of any hedge fund who was surprised by this result, you simply need to be fired. Today. Before lunch. No questions asked. Fired.

If you have a concern, it should be that investors in control of billions of dollars are apparently unable to do simple math and statistical analysis. That's how you end up with a stock market collapse.

Actually, the stock market fell by 2% yesterday due to failed policies of the Bush administration. It would have crashed completely, and caused another great depression, but Obama prevented it by doing something that probably involved spending more money.

We're all in this together.

(11-08-2012 05:20 PM)Huskie_Jon Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 01:06 PM)HuskieFan84 Wrote:  

(11-07-2012 10:33 AM)niusfactuary Wrote:  Stock market down 2% already today.

Obamaconomy!

Do you realize what you're saying here?

You're implying the stock market is down 2% today due to Obama winning.

That means.. the people who are in charge of money, looked at hundreds of polls, and a ton of stastical data, that clearly said Obama was going to win, without much of a doubt by the last week. And somehow completely misread it and were stunned by the results and are now changing their positions. If you're the manager of any hedge fund who was surprised by this result, you simply need to be fired. Today. Before lunch. No questions asked. Fired.

If you have a concern, it should be that investors in control of billions of dollars are apparently unable to do simple math and statistical analysis. That's how you end up with a stock market collapse.

Actually, the stock market fell by 2% yesterday due to failed policies of the Bush administration. It would have crashed completely, and caused another great depression, but Obama prevented it by doing something that probably involved spending more money.

We're all in this together.

Presidents can't spend money
Ask your fiscal conservative buddy Lyin Ryan how it works. He's a nice big spender.