The Economy Stinks
GDP growth is anemic this quarter (1.3%) and revised down to terrible (0.4%) last quarter:
“There’s nothing that you can look at here that is signaling some revival in growth in the second half of the year, and in fact we may see another catastrophically weak quarter next quarter if things go wrong next week,” said Nigel Gault, chief United States economist at IHS Global Insight. By “things going wrong,” he said he means “if Congress actually starts implementing a massive contraction by suddenly cutting government spending immediately,” as many Republican representatives hope to do.
Consumer spending was almost flat and inflation is up. There’s nothing good here.
July 29, 2011 11:07 am
Posted in: Decline and Fall
194 Comments
194 Responses
Trentrunner - July 29, 2011 | 11:10 am · Link
Well, it looks like we’ll have a close 2012 election, regardless of who the Repubs run.
Sad.
BGinCHI - July 29, 2011 | 11:10 am · Link
Until the MSM flips the meme from “debt is our problem” to “the GOP is trying to crash the economy in order to win the next election,” we’re in deep trouble.
Otherwise the new normal is Bachmann as a Serious Person.
Journalism has to stop being the Great Enabling Machine.
Belafon (formerly anonevent) - July 29, 2011 | 11:10 am · Link
But those poor rich people having to pay thugs so they can hold onto their money.
El Tiburon - July 29, 2011 | 11:10 am · Link
No worries. Obama’s got this.
After all he nominated two gay judges.
Pat - July 29, 2011 | 11:11 am · Link
Conyers rebukes Obama, we’re all racists now, film to follow.
Dennis SGMM - July 29, 2011 | 11:11 am · Link
If you don’t eat your meat, you can’t have any pudding! How can you have any pudding if you don’t eat your meat?!
Comrade Javamanphil - July 29, 2011 | 11:12 am · Link
Based on the number of sloppy wet kisses this wekk to the return of maverick John McCain I think we can safely concluded we are screwed.
dead existentialist - July 29, 2011 | 11:12 am · Link
Time to start drinking.
PeakVT - July 29, 2011 | 11:12 am · Link
“The market” is rallying on Obama’s 3-minute speech. I wish I shared their optimism.
Crashman - July 29, 2011 | 11:13 am · Link
So, uh, TPM says the new Boehner bill requires a balanced budget constitutional amendment before the debt ceiling can be raised right before the election next year.
Might as well throw in a rider “banning” gay people and baggy jeans while they’re at it.
Zifnab - July 29, 2011 | 11:13 am · Link
I, for one, blame the stimulus. If we’d just cut taxes and slashed spending instead, everything would be better.
Linda Featheringill - July 29, 2011 | 11:15 am · Link
You’re quite correct in your assessment of the economy. Nice use of technical terminology: “Sucks”. :-)
And it doesn’t seem to be getting better.
One thing I haven’t seen discussed in the MSM is that in addition to the number of unemployed people, there are many, many households connected in which an average of 4 people try to get by on half [or less] of their former income. No wonder consumer spending is down and flat.
Derf - July 29, 2011 | 11:16 am · Link
Bahahahah! You people are so predictable. Yesterday after the good unemployment numbers there was nothing but crickets and picutures of gardens. This morning you morons are right back at it. You are not happy unless the news is bad.
I’m guessing Captain Doom John Galt Cole will be talking about this instead of gardens and bakers racks as well. Of course he won’t be able to resist throwing in a bit of Obama concern trolling and rhetorical questions asking of Libertarians have some good ideas.
Stay Gloomy Balloon Juice!
Alex S. - July 29, 2011 | 11:17 am · Link
The dual development of the american and the british economy should make some people think.
BGinCHI - July 29, 2011 | 11:18 am · Link
zifnab, that would be funny if it weren’t exactly the literal read on the economy of 1 out of 2 of our political parties.
They actually believe that.
It’s like hiring a plumber to be your oncologist.
The Moar You Know - July 29, 2011 | 11:18 am · Link
Since the plan is for it to pass the House and then promptly die in the Senate, they might as well load up all the teatardiness that they can into it so they can pass it and get this charade over with. It won’t matter to Boehner anyhow, he’s dead meat on a stick.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 11:19 am · Link
“Nothing can be done!”
Zifnab - July 29, 2011 | 11:20 am · Link
Fixed. But otherwise, I agree.
BGinCHI - July 29, 2011 | 11:21 am · Link
derf, I love your infectious enthusiasm, the way you just turn your frown upside down. You’re an inspiration to us all.
God Bless You.
And God Bless the USA
!!
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 11:21 am · Link
@Derf:
Fred, I know you’re just a spoof, but WTF are you talking about?
New jobless claims of 398K, with last months revised upward to 422K.
BGinCHI - July 29, 2011 | 11:22 am · Link
zifnab, is that the proctologist who rams his foam finger up your ass?
TheOtherWA - July 29, 2011 | 11:22 am · Link
The republic party isn’t backing away from the abyss, they’re leaning farther over the edge.
Stupid, stupid, motherfuckers.
Yevgraf - July 29, 2011 | 11:22 am · Link
Cue the Lee Greenwood!
“Ah’m praaaoud to be ‘Murkaaaaan, where at least Ah know Ah’m fraaaaeeeeeee…
!!”
After that, we can send some troops to support Bibi in his bombing campaigns over Lebanon, Syria and Iran…
paradox - July 29, 2011 | 11:23 am · Link
Yesterday’s unemployment numbers just weren’t lousy, nothing to get cheery about.
The first comment strikes me the most relevantly, it’s so sad and ridiculous 2012 could somehow be in play, but it plainly is, no political scientist could look at this environment and state otherwise. Amazing.
Y’all don’t like to hear it, but Obama has crushed the base and something is going to give. What or how I have no idea, but there will be a heavy price, some way on some awful awful day. I’d be ready for that.
Does it mean 2012 could be sacrificed? Possible, so very possible. What an unforgivable risk to take with the country, my God.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 11:23 am · Link
@Crashman: It’s just a vehicle for Reid to go Bigfoot on and slap some sha-hooge tires on for offroad mudding action!
IOW, it doesn’t matter what’s in it.
The Moar You Know - July 29, 2011 | 11:23 am · Link
Will do.
PurpleGirl - July 29, 2011 | 11:24 am · Link
Derf: Those numbers yesterday were the first month that the numbers were lower than expected—after 3 previous months of higher than expected numbers. And it appears that the increased employment was at the LOW salary end. LOWER salaries are still not good. Those people still can not buy beyond basic survival needs.
Until we have large numbers of middle income jobs returning, people DO NOT have much or any discretionary money to spend.
Crashman - July 29, 2011 | 11:24 am · Link
@16. The Moar You Know
That might be fun. Anyone want to speculate on what dumb stuff they could add? A rider stating that the sun rotates around the earth, maybe? We could make a game out of this.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 11:25 am · Link
@BGinCHI:
Better that one than the one Just Some Fuckhead uses. That guy doesn’t milk the prostate, he gets a grip on the damn thing.
Alex S. - July 29, 2011 | 11:26 am · Link
@Trentrunner:
The only positive outcome of these past few days I can imagine is that Big Business decides to support Obama’s reelection and to give the House back to the Dems. It’s a small hope though.
gnomedad - July 29, 2011 | 11:27 am · Link
The teabaggers think they’re ninjas who will use default as a diversion to storm Washington and Take Back Our Country from Those People.
wrb - July 29, 2011 | 11:27 am · Link
At least he’s not letting our tea partiers run the party. We’re getting quite the demonstration of what happens when the purity idiots run a party.
Dennis SGMM - July 29, 2011 | 11:28 am · Link
Hmm, an economy based 2/3 on consumption fueled by ridiculously easy to get credit which the Fed enabled for years by keeping interest rates artificially low. What could go wrong?
PurpleGirl - July 29, 2011 | 11:29 am · Link
Alex S: I forget where I saw it but of the employees at Goldman Sachs, Romney got some $250,000 and Obama about $127,000 in the past three months.
OzoneR - July 29, 2011 | 11:30 am · Link
no, he hasn’t, the rest of the country’s voting habits have demoralized the Democratic base.
For crying out loud, Obama tries to get the country to call their members of Congress. and the “so-called” base who have repeatedly been complaining Obama wasn’t giving them marching orders…is mocking them.
chopper - July 29, 2011 | 11:30 am · Link
i still don’t understand how the house can write a bill requiring the constitution be amended in the future. that’s just wacky.
Pat - July 29, 2011 | 11:31 am · Link
And a good lesson of what happens when you let the “serious” people in the opposition’s party set your party’s agenda.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 11:32 am · Link
@PurpleGirl:
I know what you meant but I liked the way this was worded. They both are among the employees of GS.
OzoneR - July 29, 2011 | 11:32 am · Link
People seem to forget if a Republican wins the White House, the tea party dies. Why wouldn’t big business want that scenario?
chopper - July 29, 2011 | 11:32 am · Link
a spike in interest rates due to a default.
this is gonna be great. huge infusions of cash by the fed and all we could get is .8% growth in 6 months and some inflation, though not enough to keep us away from a liquidity trap. ‘the fundamentals of this economy are not sound’. and now the GOP is going to put sugar in the gas tank out of spite.
PeakVT - July 29, 2011 | 11:33 am · Link
Even the chance of a good rain in Texas is getting worse.
It sucks all over the place.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 11:33 am · Link
@wrb:
Talk about false equivalence.
tomvox1 - July 29, 2011 | 11:34 am · Link
Only a Balanced Budget Amendment can save us now!
arguingwithsignposts - July 29, 2011 | 11:34 am · Link
The House has become Eric Cartman: “Screw you, i’ll do what I want.”
ETA: “Respect mah authoriteh!”
cat48 - July 29, 2011 | 11:35 am · Link
@wrb:
Frankly, I don’t want Obama to look like John Boehner.
Dennis SGMM - July 29, 2011 | 11:35 am · Link
@Alex S.:
Big business is sitting on roughly $2 trillion in cash. If the Republicans crater the economy, and the world economy, again big business will use that money to buy up whatever they can for pennies on the dollar.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 11:36 am · Link
@PeakVT:
It’s a mixed bag I guess. I was really hoping for 2 or 3 inches off the tail of TS Don.
Better than Don jigging North and sitting in the Gulf for 3 days to become Cat III Don.
Stefan - July 29, 2011 | 11:38 am · Link
The dual development of the american and the british economy should make some people think.
Should? Yes.
Will? No.
MazeDancer - July 29, 2011 | 11:38 am · Link
Can only hope the insanity of adding an impossible Balanced Budget Amendment to Boehner bill makes 30 Republicans notice that their “colleagues” are determined to destroy the Republic. And that they get serious, recognize America in default is not desirable, and join with House Democrats to pass whatever the Senate sends.
Otherwise, we are now, defacto, ruled by the American Taliban.
One interesting thing, MSNBC now regularly punditing: We are a 3-party nation now.
So the TParty getting their third party without having to try.
Pat - July 29, 2011 | 11:39 am · Link
@PeakVT
Austin gets screwed again.
Dennis SGMM - July 29, 2011 | 11:40 am · Link
@chopper:
I’d bet the ranch that 90% of GOP Representatives and 100% of the Teabagging GOP freshmen couldn’t define “liquidity trap” if their lives depended on it.
TooManyJens - July 29, 2011 | 11:42 am · Link
That’s unusually blunt and honest for our “both sides do it” media. Kudos.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 11:43 am · Link
@Dennis SGMM:
Opening your last liter of tequila at 8:50PM ?
***shutters***
Dennis SGMM - July 29, 2011 | 11:45 am · Link
@Corner Stone:
LOL! At times like these I wish that I could still drink Maker’s Mark like it was spring water.
chopper - July 29, 2011 | 11:45 am · Link
@Dennis SGMM:
something about putting some juice in an old soda bottle to catch wasps? is that it?
Punchy - July 29, 2011 | 11:45 am · Link
The chief economist is named Ga(u)lt? Are you fuckin kidding me? Says a lot about his analysis.
Hill Dweller - July 29, 2011 | 11:46 am · Link
The GDP numbers for this and last quarter are awful(and will probably get revised down even further in a few months), but the real news(at least for me) were the revised numbers for the last couple of years. GDP for 2008Q4 was initially thought to have shrunk at -6.8%(at an annual rate), but has now been revised to -8.9%. That is depression level contraction.
This is just more evidence the stimulus was too small, but the dye has been cast now, and, sadly, any more stimulus is probably impossible. We’re f’d.
Davis X. Machina - July 29, 2011 | 11:47 am · Link
@Dennis SGMM: I’m not really surprised that most elected representatives know nothing about economics, after all most economists—and some pretty high-profile ones—know damn all about politics.
Dennis SGMM - July 29, 2011 | 11:47 am · Link
@chopper:
For them it’s either that or pouring turpentine on a cat’s ass.
aisce - July 29, 2011 | 11:47 am · Link
too bad cole didn’t run this post. these numbers are so bad, not even derf could stop by and call him a libertarian traitor this time…
Yevgraf - July 29, 2011 | 11:49 am · Link
Jesus hates Texans for their conservative governance…
Davis X. Machina - July 29, 2011 | 11:49 am · Link
@MazeDancer: If that third party is a right-wing “Come ye out from among them and be separate” purist party, I’m all for it.
Dennis SGMM - July 29, 2011 | 11:51 am · Link
@Davis X. Machina:
True. OTOH, it isn’t necessary to understand the Otto Cycle to drive a car but it damn sure helps to know which pedal makes it go and which pedal makes it stop.
keith - July 29, 2011 | 11:52 am · Link
What is sad is that when austerity fails, the GOP solution will be more austerity
TooManyJens - July 29, 2011 | 11:52 am · Link
@aisce: You missed comment #13, I take it.
Villago Delenda Est - July 29, 2011 | 11:54 am · Link
How can you say that “there’s nothing good here”? Galtian overlords are sitting on huge piles of cash. Villagers still are going to their DC cocktail parties, and the supply of tiger shrimp and weenies, not to mention booze, seems endless.
So what that the peasants are starving?
catclub - July 29, 2011 | 11:57 am · Link
Will Boehner lose any (sane) GOP votes by adding in a Balanced Budget Amendment to his bill?
Since the GOP did vote in virtual lockstep for the BBA last time, I suspect the answer is no.
cyntax - July 29, 2011 | 11:57 am · Link
@Hill Dweller:
Pretty much. The Dems are already on the austerity train and it’s left the station heading to Hooverville. As someone said upthread, it’s going to be a close election no matter which mouth-breather the Repubs nominate.
Yutsano - July 29, 2011 | 11:58 am · Link
@Villago Delenda Est: Can we bring back the Red Scare now plz?
Cat Lady - July 29, 2011 | 12:02 pm · Link
Maybe the Tea Party has just had their “blood libel” moment, when the wind shifts enough so that even the Villager CW can’t prop up the both sides! facade. Yeah, that’s the ticket, I’m going with that. Or lots of booze from now until The End.
Linda Featheringill - July 29, 2011 | 12:02 pm · Link
@BGinCHI:
:-)
Zifnab - July 29, 2011 | 12:02 pm · Link
OzoneR:
Lulwhut? I don’t know how that math flies.
The Tea Party was voting for Ross Perot in ‘92. It nominated Barry Goldwater in ‘64 and silently voted for Nixon in ‘68. The Tea Party isn’t new. It’s always been with us, so long as we’ve had angry white entitled assholes with a vote to cast. The Tea Party is not going anywhere.
Big Business isn’t getting the GOP back if Republicans win big in 2012, because Big Business won’t be picking the candidates, anymore than they picked Christine O’Donnell in Delaware or Sharron Angle in Nevada.
The hundred-odd Tea Party heroes in the House aren’t going to get primary’d away by GOP loyalists. And Rand Paul and Mike Lee are the new normal in the Senate. If the Big Business wing wants to reclaim Congress, I can’t see why the business-friendly wing of the Democratic Party wouldn’t look incredibly attractive right now.
burnspbesq - July 29, 2011 | 12:04 pm · Link
@Derf:
Stay stupid Derf!
Also, welcome to 1937 Part Deux.
singfoom - July 29, 2011 | 12:05 pm · Link
While Derf will call me out for being gloomy (while I consider it being realistic), it doesn’t really matter who wins in 2012. This game is rigged. The same rich corporate backers back both parties, and those with the most votes (They come in the same denominations as greenbacks, actually) get the access to the other rich people to write the laws.
Hell, sometimes, they even just write the laws themselves and give it their representatives. Someone give me a light of sunshine, because there’s nothing I see at the end of the tunnel except more media consolidation, more partisan demonization by both sides (regardless of the false equivalence) and a steady kabuki dance we all do to keep the rich rich and screw the rest of us.
Plus, the US electorate is mostly too busy watching American Idol to actually think about the issues, so we’ll keep this game going until something actually happens to change the dynamic….
Maybe in my lifetime….
OzoneR - July 29, 2011 | 12:05 pm · Link
Where the hell was it from 2001-2009?
Neither of whom would have been nominated without a President Obama.
Juicetard (FKA Liberty60) - July 29, 2011 | 12:05 pm · Link
But I thought Rick Perry prayed to the Baby Jeebus and even did a rain dance?
wrb - July 29, 2011 | 12:07 pm · Link
The upside of awful numbers like these is that they are only describing what you’ve already lived through. There were reasons it felt so bad.
FlipYrWhig - July 29, 2011 | 12:08 pm · Link
Hopefully there’s a pivot coming after the resolution of this fiasco.
Pat - July 29, 2011 | 12:09 pm · Link
Haha – Apple has more cash on hand than the US Treasury. Perhaps someone is toiling away on a catfood-making app.
j low - July 29, 2011 | 12:10 pm · Link
Cornerstone@ 29- TMI
burnspbesq - July 29, 2011 | 12:13 pm · Link
A song for singfoom:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
You may be right (I don’t think you are, but the view from where I sit on the income distribution is a little different), but if you are, a few constructive suggestions would be welcome.
CynDee - July 29, 2011 | 12:16 pm · Link
Nothing will change for the better until:
– the jobs that were sent to foriegn shores are brought back and pay a living wage.
– corporations and the very wealthy pay their fair share of taxes.
THOSE are what we should spend our energy on trying to make happen. In other words, try to get the powerful people to apply as much sense to life as do Tunch and Lily and those of us who love them.
Everthing else is just details fluttering in circles.
NonyNony - July 29, 2011 | 12:19 pm · Link
@OzoneR
Hiding under the bed and peeing its pants because of Sceeeeery Moooooslim Extremists.
Truthfully though – they voted for W. Of course they did – he gave them what they wanted with no consequences. He even tried to kill Social Security for them but it backfired on him.
The Tea Party is just the right-wing rump of the GOP. They’ve managed to take control because of the power vacuum left by W’s disastrous fall, a lack of Republican leadership on the benches, and two years of Michael Steele running the RNC - which has allowed the ‘independent conservative groups’ to flourish without centralized direction.
JPL - July 29, 2011 | 12:19 pm · Link
singfoom …Republicans hate rights for women, and all minorities… It does matter.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ - July 29, 2011 | 12:19 pm · Link
@OzoneR #39:
No fair throwing out obvious Godwin bait like that. Next time try to be a little more subtle about it. A higher degree of difficulty makes the exercise more stimulating, nicht wahr?
ThatLeftTurnInABQ - July 29, 2011 | 12:22 pm · Link
@BGinCHI #21:
Now this is tagline-worthy. Very well done!
Raven (formerly stuckinred) - July 29, 2011 | 12:25 pm · Link
singfoom
It don’t mean nuthin
drive on
Ron - July 29, 2011 | 12:26 pm · Link
@dead existentialist: It’s been time to start drinking for a while now.
DBrown - July 29, 2011 | 12:27 pm · Link
CynDee – then we’d be just like Europe – you saying we should be like those frog eating French? Let’s not even add Germany … of course, the Germans have great beer and rather good food, and the French do have great wine, 30 day paid vacations, paid leave on top of those paid vacations and great universal health care and … wait, we don’t want that because … because … we’d be like those Europeans.
cyntax - July 29, 2011 | 12:29 pm · Link
@Raven (formerly stuckinred):
Good song.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ - July 29, 2011 | 12:30 pm · Link
@MazeDancer #49:
At the very end of HST’s book “Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail 1972” there is a chapter where Hunter and several of his key analytical sources perform a post-mortem on the 1972 election, trying to figure where it all went wrong and whether there was ever any change at all for the Dems. And one of the conclusions they come to is that McGovern might have had a shot at winning a plurality if George Wallace had run as a third-party candidate, because roughly a quarter of the electorate were far to the right of Nixon and the GOP and would have dropped the GOP like a hot potato given the chance.
Plus ca change.
daveNYC - July 29, 2011 | 12:34 pm · Link
Yeah, we’re boned. GDP numbers this bad make me think that unemployment numbers will be dialing back up soon.
So the question becomes, do we want a sane Republican candidate because a crappy economy makes it likely he’ll win, or do we want a crazy Republican because Obama will be needing all the help he can get?
Cassidy - July 29, 2011 | 12:35 pm · Link
We can always eat a Palin kid of food runs short.
singfoom - July 29, 2011 | 12:35 pm · Link
@ burnspbesq
I’m full of constructive suggestions. The problem with them is that all of them depend on our rich representatives in congress enacting new legislation that in this political climate seem just impossible as well as being improbable from the basis of said rich representatives bucking their corporate masters.
#1 – Reform the tax code. And by reform I mean, jack the rates on the uber rich. Remove all exemptions for anyone earning more than $500,000 a year. Increase the funding of the IRS and direct them to concentrate on tax recovery from high value scofflaws before they audit ANYONE else. Change the tax code so it is income source agnostic, so hedge fund managers pay tax on their full income instead of just the capital gains rate.
#2 – Restrict campaign donations to actual citizens This is a pipe dream given the current opinion and makeup of SCOTUS, but this is really the biggest issue. Our political system is awash with cash, from rich people and corporations and totally legal because of Citizen’s United. The real endpoint would be to get rid of all donations and fund elections through the government, but that isn’t happening.
I’ve got more, but this post is long enough so far….
Raven (formerly stuckinred) - July 29, 2011 | 12:37 pm · Link
cyntax
It was an axiom long before it was a song.
Yevgraf - July 29, 2011 | 12:38 pm · Link
John Hausman gives the greatest dialogue on this…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
This line may be the best of all:
Culture of Truth - July 29, 2011 | 12:38 pm · Link
the 0.4% growth is entirely in ‘she loves her veggies ads’
Davis X. Machina - July 29, 2011 | 12:39 pm · Link
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ: A big field cuts both ways We’re saddled with Governor “38%” Paul ‘Landslide’ LePage now because of a five-party gubernatorial field.
GOP, Dem., Friedmanite[1], Vanity/Poujadist #1 and Vanity/Poujadist #2.
[1] Actually “Indy who-used-to-be-a-Dem-but-parties-are-so-over“...
Will - July 29, 2011 | 12:39 pm · Link
Douglas Holtz-Eakin pens this five-paragraph piece of shit, four of which are devoted to blaming…the Democrats, for not passing Boehner’s bill for him. UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLE.
http://www.nationalreview.com/.....oltz-eakin
Davis X. Machina - July 29, 2011 | 12:40 pm · Link
@Yevgraf:
“Don’t ever ask me about my business, Kay!”
Yutsano - July 29, 2011 | 12:41 pm · Link
@singfoom:
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of what the IRS does. We pretty much chase everyone equally, but we also do have a high-income rule book. And yes the rules get rougher when you earn more than $100K. It’s just not well advertised. And why the hell should someone who’s making $40K but claiming ten kids get away with it just because you think hedge fund managers are flying under our radar?
@Will: I just had a few million brain cells commit suicide after reading that stupidity.
singfoom - July 29, 2011 | 12:45 pm · Link
@Yutsano
I don’t see in there where I said that you shouldn’t go after all tax scofflaws, but since logical goal of the IRS is to bring in revenue, shouldn’t the priority for enforcement be put on those who would bring in the highest level of revenue?
I never said that people making little money should be able to shirk the rules, but it just seems that higher income people should be the priority.
ChrisWWW - July 29, 2011 | 12:45 pm · Link
I think the “so-called” base was hoping the marching orders wouldn’t involve cutting Social Security, Medicare and other social programs in order to pay for billionaire’s tax cuts.
OzoneR - July 29, 2011 | 12:48 pm · Link
Well it doesn’t, Reid’s plan doesn’t do that, so what’s the problem?
ThatLeftTurnInABQ - July 29, 2011 | 12:48 pm · Link
@DXM #98:
Labs of Democracy, dontcha know.
IIRC state level govt has long been a friendlier field for third parties and off-the-reservation candidates, probably because the resources required to run are, at least for the smaller states, much more modest. I think it is actually a good idea for the folks who think the Democratic Party is too conservative for their tastes to concentrate on state and local politics and build from the ground up, if for no other reason than the Overton Window isn’t nailed quite so tightly to the windowsill when you mix in local issues, but this is a very long term project so it isn’t always going to go well.
Yutsano - July 29, 2011 | 12:52 pm · Link
@singfoom:
A) You assume that they’re not, even though I deal with cases where I handle people making upwards of $200K pretty much every day. Just because we don’t publicize our results doesn’t mean the high-end cheaters are getting away with it.
B) We are bound by equal treatment under the law. If you make $20K or $400K I handle you (mostly) the same. I also know which one I’m more likely to get money out of.
agrippa - July 29, 2011 | 12:53 pm · Link
The government did not what I thought was necessary.
And, very few economic experts would agree with me about solutions.
Davis X. Machina - July 29, 2011 | 12:54 pm · Link
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ: Part of the problem is that, if we are to accept Piaget’s findings, half of the adult population never reaches formal operational thought, or figures out tactical voting.
ChrisWWW - July 29, 2011 | 12:54 pm · Link
OzoneR,
Obama’s marching orders speech didn’t call for passage of Reid’s bill, but he did mention making changes to Medicare. Get excited liberal base!
ThatLeftTurnInABQ - July 29, 2011 | 12:55 pm · Link
@OzoneR #104:
Because Obama’s budget negotiating strategy baffles, confuses and enrages most people. It appears to me that he is the master of the bait-and-switch (see budget negotiations, FY2011). He offers the Republicans a pig-in-a-poke, they eagerly take it and then howl like banshees when they find out all they got was a few strips of bacon for their trouble, and the left screams “Porkicide! He’s killing all the pigs!”, and the net result is that Obama gets most of what he wanted out of the negotiations, but with a heaping plateful of hatred from both sides as an unfortunate consequence. So far it has worked pretty well but I don’t know how sustainable this game is.
TooManyJens - July 29, 2011 | 12:56 pm · Link
@ChrisWWW: I’d get really excited if we changed Medicare by, say, allowing it to negotiate drug prices. That would reduce Medicare spending, and it’s good policy.
“People on Medicare should not have their benefits cut” is not the same proposition as “Medicare should operate exactly as it does today.”
cyntax - July 29, 2011 | 12:58 pm · Link
@Raven (formerly stuckinred):
Yeah, I heard my DI use it over twenty years ago, but I still like Cash’s song.
singfoom - July 29, 2011 | 12:58 pm · Link
@Yutsano
We’re in agreement. I know that audits of those making more than 10 million have doubled in recent times. burnspbesq asked me for constructive suggestions and that was one of them. I’m not claiming the IRS doesn’t already do what I’ve suggested and given the changes in audit rates for the ultra-wealthy, it seems to be trending in the same direction.
A bigger change would be making the tax code source agnostic, so hedge fund managers making billions woudln’t be taxed at the capital gains rate. That’s what would seriously make the code more equitable.
ChrisWWW - July 29, 2011 | 12:58 pm · Link
TooManyJens,
Agreed, but ask yourself which kind of changes are more likely to get passed by the Republican House.
Yutsano - July 29, 2011 | 1:03 pm · Link
@singfoom:
Agreed. And eliminating the mortgage interest deduction for all but the primary residence. A lot of wealthy folks use a second house or a rental property as a sweet tax dodge. Especially for a rental that’s essentially double-dipping.
Violet - July 29, 2011 | 1:03 pm · Link
So are we fucked? I haven’t been paying attention today.
TooManyJens - July 29, 2011 | 1:07 pm · Link
@ChrisWWW: I’m just saying, it doesn’t make sense to just assume that when POTUS talks about changes to Medicare, it means he wants to gut it.
@Violet: Well, Boehner’s bill now calls for a balanced budget amendment to pass both chambers and be sent to the states before the debt ceiling can be raised again in a few months, so yeah, I’d say we’re fucked. Though probably not any more than we already were.
wrb - July 29, 2011 | 1:08 pm · Link
Left turn
Very much how I see it.
Unfortunately too many on our side aren’t smart enough to avoid porkicidal panic so we’ll get less than we could.
Derf - July 29, 2011 | 1:08 pm · Link
Ha….you people really crack me up. “But Derf, last months unemployment numbers were revised up and and and the wsj tells me we are doomed and and faux news website says it’s all democrats fault and and….”
Get your fucking heads out of the sand. I live and breath macro economics and know something about this. You people have no fucking clue. Get better sources (once without biased/partisan opinions attached) and while you are at it maybe get a “macro economics for idiots” book.
Fools!
liberal - July 29, 2011 | 1:09 pm · Link
@113 Singfoom wrote,
Better yet, eliminate the distinction between capital gains and other income.
Yutsano - July 29, 2011 | 1:09 pm · Link
@TooManyJens:
Unless you assume he’s a closet Republican who wants to destroy the safety net and restore the Gilded Age in full.
JC - July 29, 2011 | 1:10 pm · Link
This jobless ‘recovery’ is tanking Obama’s numbers.
Raven (formerly stuckinred) - July 29, 2011 | 1:10 pm · Link
cyntax
It is good, Singin’ in Vietnam Talkin’ Blues” is good too.
wvng - July 29, 2011 | 1:11 pm · Link
Violet – Yep, fucked. the republicans made their bill so partisan even Ryan thinks it is unreasonable. So I’m sure it will pass. And then what I don’t know.
liberal - July 29, 2011 | 1:13 pm · Link
ThatLeftTurnInABQ,
Best weapon the Dems have in 2012 is to beat the Republicans over the head with the Ryan plan. By putting Medicare on the table, Obama makes that harder.
singfoom - July 29, 2011 | 1:13 pm · Link
@Derf
I like how you call us fools, appeal to authority, tell us the wretchedness of our sources and provide no sourcing yourself. Good job.
NR - July 29, 2011 | 1:14 pm · Link
You mean like when he agreed to an extension of the Bush tax cuts for the rich (which, btw, is a huge part of the reason we’re in the mess we’re currently in) in exchange for some crumbs on unemployment? Yeah, he sure ate the Republicans’ lunch there, didn’t he?
Unless you’re saying that he actually wanted the Bush tax cuts for the rich extended. Which looks like a strong possibility at this point, I suppose….
Kane - July 29, 2011 | 1:14 pm · Link
In the first quarter of 2009, the average credit card debt in the U.S. was at $5,776. It recently reached a 10-year low of $4,679 in the first quarter of 2011.
http://consumerist.com/2011/07.....-debt.html
While consumer spending was almost flat, there is good news and a silver lining. Americans are paying off the credit cards and are becoming more selective in the junk they buy.
liberal - July 29, 2011 | 1:14 pm · Link
Yutsano wrote,
Yawn. While his supposedly proposing raising the eligibility age from 65 to 67 isn’t “destroying the safety net,” it’s terrible politics and terrible policy.
singfoom - July 29, 2011 | 1:15 pm · Link
@liberal
So, that’s exactly what I said. Making the tax code source agnostic would
eliminate the distinction between capital gains and other income
Linda Featheringill - July 29, 2011 | 1:15 pm · Link
@TooManyJens:
Think about Medicare Part D, the prescription program, that EVERYBODY says should be reworked. [Which the Republicans passed but did not fund.]
liberal - July 29, 2011 | 1:17 pm · Link
@127 NR wrote,
Sorry—-you need to read the O-bot memo on how any concession to the Republicans was worth those UE extensions, because either they’re unemployed or they know someone who’s unemployed.
Then again, maybe not—-O-bots don’t seem to understand how cost/benefit analysis works, since they don’t seem to count the cost of Obama’s noises on entitlements in terms of eroding the Democratic brand.
NR - July 29, 2011 | 1:18 pm · Link
Wait, I thought that all this looking “reasonable” and “bipartisan” was supposed to help Obama with independents? Are you telling me that independents actually care more about jobs than they do about bipartisanship, the deficit, or who is willing to compromise more? Gosh, who’da thunk it?
liberal - July 29, 2011 | 1:23 pm · Link
ThatLeftTurnInABQ wrote,
I don’t disagree, but IMHO the #1 reason is that if one really wanted to build a lasting “movement” and its associated institutions, it seems like the best way to go is to start locally. Outfits focussed on national issues or candidates don’t really seem to have mass appeal; they eventually become money raising machines only, ISTM.
Though perhaps that’s just another way of saying what you already said.
aisce - July 29, 2011 | 1:24 pm · Link
@ derfykins
this is the part where question how somebody who “lives and breathes macroeconomics” has such a poor record of prognostication? although, given how shitty genuinely paid economic forecasters are at that job, the joke is less biting than i’d like…
cyntax - July 29, 2011 | 1:25 pm · Link
@Derf:
Yes, the UI numbers are down, but everyone who “gets” macro-economics (like CalculatedRisk) uses the 4 week moving average:
If you referenced it, I missed that.
@Raven (formerly stuckinred):
Like it—thanks for the recommendation.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 1:26 pm · Link
I saw a blurb about UE for African Americans, and just found a link at CBS:
African-American unemployment at 16 percent
“The most recent figures show African American joblessness at 16.2 percent. For black males, it’s at 17.5 percent; And for black teens, it’s nearly 41 percent.”
Holy jeebus cracker.
Just Some Fuckhead - July 29, 2011 | 1:28 pm · Link
@NR:
According to Martin, the only people that care about jobs are the 9.2% of Americans who don’t have one.
Uncle Clarence Thomas - July 29, 2011 | 1:29 pm · Link
.
.
Fortunately, President Obama knows how to handle drug-addled, fucking retarded old firebaggers like this dood –
.
.
Derf - July 29, 2011 | 1:30 pm · Link
singfoom,
I have all the proof I need. It’s called my investment portfolio.
When you were all running around on here absolutely certain the banks were all gonna fail and cashing in your 401K’s I was quietly buying bank stocks.
Here is something NONE of you realize. The people planting these ideas in your heads are the same people profiting from your reaction to it. Not just financially but politically as well. Think about that.
Also, here is something none of you realize either. If you are reading about something regarding economics it is ALREADY too late to react to it. See, rich people are rich for a reason. They don’t run around reacting like you idiots. They understand what is going on and don’t listen to this noise on opinion blogs coming from the opinionated press.
So thank you for being idiots. Without people like you, people like me could not make the kind of money investing like we do. We are absolutely 100% dependent on peoples unlimited capacity to be stupid about money and seeing the forest from the trees.
So while all of you are busy deciding how you will deal with a US default, people like me are planning for how to profit from that reaction. Because we know it won’t happen. And guess what, people in congress know it won’t happen either. You are watching a play on a stage. It’s all political theater. And you people take the bait every single time.
Fools!
BGinCHI - July 29, 2011 | 1:30 pm · Link
derf owns us!
I don’t know how I ever got by without its posts.
Trollenschlongen - July 29, 2011 | 1:32 pm · Link
Relax, folks: HE’S GOT THIS!
Also, too, furthermore, and additionally: This talk of prostate milking has me all agog.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 1:32 pm · Link
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ:
I agree in theory, this is the obvious route for future building.
But take TX for example, or at least my general 3 county spread of an area.
You can not get elected dog catcher as D here, unless you are 80 years old and have been playing in the Old Boys Network your entire life. All of the back bencher positions, all the growth and future politicians have an R behind them. That’s one reason I hate the stupid fucking, “I don’t vote for the Party, I vote for the best person!”
Yeah…who 99.9% just so happens to have an R behind their name.
Anyway, good in theory hard as hell to accomplish sometimes. I guess that’s why they call it “work”.
And just as an aside, I volunteered for Bill White’s campaign for Governor and got to meet a lot of pockets of good solid D’s across a wide spread of TX who are just as frustrated as I was/am.
Kirbster - July 29, 2011 | 1:33 pm · Link
I was just out picking up a reserved book at my public library and scanning the New Fiction shelf when I came across a novel called The Fund by H.T. Narea. The quick synopsis on the inside book jacket flap has a nefarious Middle Eastern hedge fund manager plotting to crash the world economy. What a bitch for the author to have the plot of his brand new debut novel co-opted by a bunch of tea terrorists in the US House of Representatives.
FollowtheDough - July 29, 2011 | 1:35 pm · Link
I swear to christ someone needs to make a documentary called “11 Dimensional chess”. Use matrix theme as the background music while narration explains the stealth manuvering that Obama administration is doing all for the greater good of american people and this country. I bet you Obama loyalists would be ecstatic viewing it. “I knew it!! He’s got this!!”
You could have as features:
Bob Cesca
Karoli from Crooks and Liars
The whole brigade at Peoples View
David Corn
We See You
Joy Reid
Bill Press
Osborne Ink
Whoever invented this hypewagon term to begin with
and narrated by a enthused delusional Lawrence O’Donnell.
The tagline for the film “He’s Got This!”
And at the very end after all the blustering,praising you could just play that segment that George Carlin said so eloquently of owners of our nation. In startling black and white with imagery from our country over the past 100 years, of the owners and their intrusion into our nation. NO one has GOT this. The media is rigged and our 2 political parties are paralyzed with corruption to do anything about it.
chopper - July 29, 2011 | 1:36 pm · Link
yeah, you morans!
chopper - July 29, 2011 | 1:39 pm · Link
oh, derfy isn’t an investor. but he does play one on the internet.
cyntax - July 29, 2011 | 1:39 pm · Link
@BGinCHI:
Well his sign off does kind of make me feel like we’ve got our own super-villain: “Fools!”
Or at least our own Monty Burns.
aisce - July 29, 2011 | 1:42 pm · Link
@ derf the day trader
wait, now i’m confused…who’s the libertarian here?
your trolling sprang a leak. you broke the fourth wall.
daveNYC - July 29, 2011 | 1:43 pm · Link
I’m sure the Senate will get right on that.
What, you want us to get a better source of data than the BLS? What school of economic thought do you subscribe to that makes .4% growth in Q1 and 1.3% growth in Q2 not suck balls?
ThatLeftTurnInABQ - July 29, 2011 | 1:51 pm · Link
@NR #127:
Yes in fact he did or came as close as could be managed under the circumstances. Because the tax cuts which he extended and which you hold in such obvious contempt were also tax cuts for the middle class, so in addition to protecting our most vulnerable citizens by getting UI benefits extended he also kept an important campaign promise from 2008 and managed to obtain a mild form of Keynesian stimulus in a political climate where no other form of stimulus had a hope in hell of passing Congress. That is no small accomplishment, and he did it to benefit people who are apparently a little too off-stage in your world to make it into your political calculus.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 2:07 pm · Link
More Krugthulu:
Stagnation Nation
TK-421 - July 29, 2011 | 2:07 pm · Link
Because 398,000 new jobless claims is a reason to celebrate, apparently. That statement would be funny if it didn’t accurately represent the thinking of large swaths of people in power in DC. They keep thinking this recession is over, and these facts and numbers are annoying them because the masses won’t stop whining about the economy.
burnspbesq - July 29, 2011 | 2:16 pm · Link
@singfoom:
I agree with you that eliminating preferential treatment for capital gains is a good idea. Demonizing hedge-fund managers doesn’t help your case, however. They’re not breaking, or even bending, any current laws by getting capital-gain treatment for what is effectively compensation for services. That’s a totally vanilla application of long-settled partnership tax rules.
burnspbesq - July 29, 2011 | 2:19 pm · Link
@singfoom:
Actually, it’s not. In the tax world, “source” is about where income is earned or expenses are incurred. What you’re talking about is “character.”
TK-421 - July 29, 2011 | 2:20 pm · Link
Before I waste a lot of time reading through all of the specific comments and debates going on in this thread, I simply want to point out that the economic situation is providing a constant reminder that the Obama Administration has been fundamentally wrong on basic economics since, well, almost since Day 1.
This isn’t hard to see. Yet so many people want to imply (or perhaps say explicitly) that there was no way the Obama Administration could have done any better. Have any of you thought through the logical implications of such a belief?
Let me summarize this belief and extend it out to demonstrate what I mean: yes, the Obama Administration has been wrong on the economy from the beginning, but they did the best they could, and therefore firebaggers, liberals, manic progressives, etc. should stop asking for good economic policy because good economic policy is impossible.
If you truly believe that, then you should be rooting for default. If you truly believe the American government is literally incapable of competency, regardless of who’s in charge, then overhauling it, no matter how destructive that may be in the short term, is probably a good idea in the long term.
I am not advocating for or defending the Teahadists here. But that’s because I don’t believe it’s out of bounds to criticize the one serious adult in this years long mess, something which is often at odds with members of the community here. I believe if President Obama and his handlers want to be perceived as Very Serious Adults, then it’s completely reasonable to expect and demand adult behavior (i.e. don’t embrace Hooverism during the Second Depression), and criticize him when he fails to do that (i.e. seriously, Austerity won’t help you at all). I think many people here disagree with that belief, but haven’t or refuse to think through what it means to disagree with that.
The resolute defenders of President Obama and his Administration should think long and hard about how and when it is appropriate to criticize, because the implications of those beliefs are much closer to Teahadism than anyone would care to admit. If we are a failed state, then we should just let the state fail.
burnspbesq - July 29, 2011 | 2:31 pm · Link
@TK-421:
I don’t think they were wrong in 2009. The stimulus was pretty orthodox Keynesianism. You can argue, as Krugman has at excruciating length and with painful frequency, that the Administration pussied out by not trying to get more and getting the balance between actual spending and tax relief wrong, but there’s no way of knowing whether anything more than they got could have been gotten.
I’m more inclined to say Obama fucked up since the midterm elections. I will give him a pass on the extension of the Bush tax cuts, because he got something meaningful in return. And there really isn’t very much he could have done to prevent what’s happening now. But anyone who knows anything at all about the Great Depression knows that abandoning stimulus at this point in a weak recovery is just asking for a rerun of 1937. And that’s what we’re getting. And even if the political advisors were right about the meaning of the midterm elections, trying to do the right thing and failing is better than not trying.
burnspbesq - July 29, 2011 | 2:34 pm · Link
The cover of the new issue of the Economist is awesome.
singfoom - July 29, 2011 | 2:37 pm · Link
@burnspesq
My apologies. I was using source in the common parlance and not in the tax specific meaning. I’m neither an accountant nor a lawyer.
My intended meaning was the same as that other commenter posted.
Also, I’m not demonizing hedge fund managers. They’re people. I’m sure some of them are incredible assholes. I’m sure some of them are great human beings. I just think they should be taxed at a higher level. That’s not a hit on them, it’s a hit on the tax code.
cyntax - July 29, 2011 | 2:37 pm · Link
@TK-421:
I think that’s a pretty fair critique. Obama has been wrong on the severity of the economic downturn and this informed his thinking and his approach.
He wasn’t engaging in 11th dimensional chess when he asked for the stimulus he got; he asked for what he thought was needed. To assume anything else is to do both him and us a dissrevice. I think he takes his job seriously (unlike say Boehner, Cantor and many of the Repubs in the House), and as such he was acting erroneously (in an objective sense) but in what he thought was good faith (subjectively).
So yeah, constructive criticism of him is what’s needed at all times. Conversely, we should acknowledge what the limitations of a given situation are while not making excuses, and that’s where a lot disagreement ensues.
Finally, I do think he’s gotten some good stuff done, and it’s only fair when being critical that one praise what’s been done well.
OzoneR - July 29, 2011 | 2:41 pm · Link
This is NEVER true in politics. EVER. There’s no such things as trying and failing. There is only winning or never tried hard enough/at all.
Case in point
Also perhaps because he ACTUALLY DID TRY to end the Bush tax cuts by using his so-called bully pulpit for a few months only to have his own party in Congress punt?
OzoneR - July 29, 2011 | 2:45 pm · Link
Actually, it is. The 300,000-400,000 level is pretty normal.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ - July 29, 2011 | 2:50 pm · Link
@burnspbesq #157:
I’ll cosign that, but with a difference in emphasis. I think Obama made a mistake right out of the chute picking too many neoliberal Rubinistas to fill out his economic team, with Larry Summers being a poster-boy but really pretty much the whole team was tainted fruit. It was clear to me by late 2009 that they’d grossly underestimated the extent to which we were in a recession driven by the rapid contraction of household balance-sheets. They thought that by getting credit markets open and functioning and refloating the FIRE sector with the bank bailouts, and given the Keynesian stimulus that they actually were able to pass thru Congress, all that combined would be enough to restart the economy and that by now we’d be back to solid GDP growth, something like 3-5% per year. But that these remedies would take a year or so to bear fruit, so once that work was done it was on to the next major item of domestic policy, which was health-care reform.
But their plan didn’t work because even with the banks recapitalized and credit markets re-opened, too many households were no longer in a position to borrow at any rate of interest and in fact were using income to pay down existing debt. So trying to reignite the credit bubble driven economy of the 1990s, which is essentially what Larry Summers, et al wanted to do, that went nowhere.
And by the time Obama and his team figured out that their original economic forecasts and policy initiatives were wrong, it was too late to change course because Congress was past the point where the GOP was going to let the admin get anything positive passed in the way of economic stimulus, except where they could sneak it in via the backdoor in the form of tax cuts. And now we’ve gone from bad to worse, where out-and-out economic sabotage is the order of the day and Obama is preoccupied with just trying to limit the damage.
TK-421 - July 29, 2011 | 2:51 pm · Link
First of all, a stimulus that was arbitrarily scaled back for political reasons is not and never will be “orthodox Keynesianism.” And a stimulus that is significantly driven by tax cuts is not “orthodox Keynesianism.” That premise is faulty, but no matter- I don’t care about the label we put on the policy, I care only about the impact of the policy (i.e. whether the policy was “right” or “wrong”).
Josh Marshall just pointed out that actually, with these latest economic numbers that include revisions going back to 2008, we now have even more definitive evidence that the impact of the Stimulus was too small and the Obama Administration’s efforts to shrink the size of that bill were wrong wrong wrong. Note that I’m not directly addressing the politics here- I’m simply pointing out that the Obama Admin’s policy was wrong, and we are still paying the price for that wrong policy.
And again, I invite you to carefully think through the implications of your last statement in my blockquote. If one wants to imply that wrong wrong wrong was the absolute best we could hope for (you specifically may not believe that, but certainly many people here do), with the Democratic Party holding massive majorities in both houses and a popular Democrat in the White House, then one needs to mentally take the next step.
If one believes the best we can hope for is incompetence, no matter the reasons for that incompetence, then one essentially believes we are a failed state. And, well, if a state is failed, then what’s the harm in forcing that state to default on its debt?
Again, I don’t believe that what we’ve seen from the Obama Administration is the best they could have done (or for that matter could do in the future). I believe they’re better than this, which is exactly why I believe it’s appropriate to criticize them.
Again, I think many people in this community are driven by the desire to deny power to Republicans, which is why they get so angry with liberals and like to point at Jane Hamsher when the Obama Administration does some bad stuff and do their best to beat back liberal criticism of the Administration. Just look at this thread for examples.
But think it through- if one blindly supports the Administration no matter how many crucial mistakes and wrong choices they make, then one is simply attempting to preserve the existing infrastructure of a government that no longer functions. That makes no sense, IMO.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 3:03 pm · Link
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ:
Sorry, but Brachiator disagrees with you en totes:
TK-421 - July 29, 2011 | 3:04 pm · Link
Ironically, when you start drilling down on the “what were they thinking?” question, you eventually arrive at an on-the-record quote from some Admin econ advisor who said (paraphrase) “well, we figured if the first Stimulus wasn’t enough then the economic numbers would be compelling enough to Congress that we would be able to pass a second Stimulus.” I vaguely recall that type of rhetoric coming from the White House during the Stimulus debate, so I believe they thought this. (No, don’t make me go search for that link, because I’m a lazy asshole.)
And wow, what a massive political error that was, one liberals like Krugman and the GOS were desperately trying to get the Obama Administration to understand. Liberals were screaming that we’re only going to get one bite at the apple, and thus we should not be stingy because the risks of a too-small stimulus were too great. And liberals like Krugman and the GOS pointed out that if a too-small stimulus is all we can get right now, then you had better position yourself rhetorically so you still have credibility to ask for another stimulus (i.e. don’t praise the Stimulus as perfect and wonderful and juuuuuuuuust right, rather point out that you wanted more but in the spirit of compromise went along with Republicans and Blue Dogs).
The Obama Admin rejected both of these political points, which haunts them to this day. Ironically, the liberals had the politics right on this, which many people here believe is never the case.
wrb - July 29, 2011 | 3:09 pm · Link
Don’t say stinks, darling. If absolutely necessary smells but only if absolutely necessary
ThatLeftTurnInABQ - July 29, 2011 | 3:13 pm · Link
So we disagree, big deal. In the abstract I sympathize with the argument that B is making, which is that inner character and subjective motivations don’t count, results do. Fine so far. But now we have the results in hand, and they didn’t turn out well. So it seems to me that it is reasonable to perform a post-mortem on the results and ask “how did this happen?” and in that instance motivations and character are fair game if there is objective evidence to document them. And when I call Larry Summers a neoliberal Rubinista, and infer that the approach to political economy you’d expect from somebody with those views matches what we actually got (what didn’t work), I think the objective evidence backs me up on that. Others may differ on that score.
burnspbesq - July 29, 2011 | 3:13 pm · Link
Untrue. There were never 60 reliable votes in the Senate for anything.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 3:24 pm · Link
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ:
Amusingly, he is the only one making that argument, not the people he’s trying to bash with it. Others are making the argument you are making here, which he is getting his panties bunched over.
Which was the point I was trying to make by annoyingly cross posting it into this thread.
ETA, sorry to have peed in the bucket but it fit too perfectly for me to resist.
TK-421 - July 29, 2011 | 3:25 pm · Link
Jesus Christ. I didn’t say the Democratic Party had massive reliable majorities, I said they had massive majorities. Count it up however you want, but the fact remains that the Democrats had majority control of both houses. (And BTW who characterizes a political party by evaluating its “reliability?” It’s a large group, diversity is inevitable, and there will always be some strays.)
And for the love of everything good in this world, please take the next mental step- if you believe large/historic/massive majorities in both houses and control of the White House is insufficient to produce good or “right” economic policy, then you believe this is a failed government.
I am amazed at how reluctant people are to come right out and say what they mean. Oh, you believe Once-in-a-Lifetime Democratic Control of Government isn’t enough to enact good economic policy? Then just say it- we are a failed state. Just say it, fercrissakes.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 3:27 pm · Link
Even more annoyingly, I have now lost the edit feature.
TK-421 - July 29, 2011 | 3:30 pm · Link
Still waiting for ABL’s apology post.
/being a dick, but goddammit she was wrong and hasn’t admitted it yet
FlipYrWhig - July 29, 2011 | 3:31 pm · Link
@ ThatLeftTurn : I think I’d sign on to virtually all of this in terms of policy. I would add that the tone of emergency around TARP, which did galvanize a “bipartisan” deal, probably played a significant role in making it hard to deploy the tone of emergency around anything else.
My biggest complaint with the way that the policy side tends to get discussed, though, is that IMHO the “left” critics of the politics around that policy underestimate the degree of resistance to stimulative and “government spending” initiatives not just among Republicans but also among very many “moderate” Democrats. And the fact that those “moderate” Democrats are, in my well-considered view, a characteristic amalgam of douchebag and dumbfuck, doesn’t make it possible to sway them into making better policy (if they are politicians) or voting for better politicians (if they are rank-and-file voters).
In other words, in politics, being right and having better ideas doesn’t necessarily win the argument. When stubborn and dumb meets stubborn and cynical, that’s virtually impossible to overcome.
But in terms of policy per se, yes, there are many things to fault.
FlipYrWhig - July 29, 2011 | 3:36 pm · Link
I don’t know about “failed.” It seems more like a government that, when governed by majorities, produces policies that resemble the median policy preferences of that party, rather than the best policy ever brainstormed by any member of that party. A sufficient degree of Democratic Stupid can dumb down what emerges from a Democratic-controlled government.
Just Some Fuckhead - July 29, 2011 | 3:43 pm · Link
@burnspbesq:
It only takes 50 votes (plus a tiebreaker by the veep) to pass legislation.
Here’s a refresher.
Uncle Clarence Thomas - July 29, 2011 | 3:57 pm · Link
.
.
@169 burnspbesq
Nor a reliable president.
.
.
TK-421 - July 29, 2011 | 4:01 pm · Link
And if the “best” median economic policy of the “best” political party when they have the best (no quotes) control they could ever hope to have results in incompetent policy, then what would you call that? No snark, please think about what that is in your own words.
I’m calling that a failed government (which again I don’t actually believe because see upthread). I don’t believe a government that is incompetent at best on the economy is a government that is legitimately functioning in any real sense, at least not in the long term. Basic economic order, stability, and growth are crucial and IMO necessary requirements to the legitimacy of a given government. I’ve been trying to think of a government that could be considered as functioning, while simultaneously incompetent on economic matters. I can’t think of an example (Japan comes closest). I welcome suggestions and/or corrections here.
I suppose we could call it failing, rather than failed, but really that’s a distinction without a difference IMO. Again- if one believes (as is frequently implied here) that economic incompetence is the best plausible result from our government, no matter the reason, then one believes we have a failed state and should actually condone or even support a forced default on our debt.
Uncle Clarence Thomas - July 29, 2011 | 4:13 pm · Link
.
.
@173 TK-421
Her love for President Obama means she never has to say she’s sorry.
.
.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ - July 29, 2011 | 4:23 pm · Link
@FlipYrWhig #174:
Yeah pretty much this. You govern with the Dems you have, not the Dems you wished you had, and that goes for voters as well as leaders.
I think folks on the Left are miscalibrated in our expectations because too few people remember or have studied enough history to realize the degree to which the great era of progressive advancements under FDR and LBJ were accompanied and made possible by an acute sense of existential crisis which is largely missing today, and in large part missing because of the safety nets designed back then. The financial crisis in 2008 wasn’t nearly big enough or prolonged enough in duration to create the sort of ZOMG! panic that we had in 1933 or the sense of national trauma after the JFK assasination in 1963 which FDR and LBJ respectively so adroitly leveraged into moving massive legislation quickly thru a system which was designed for gridlock. That just wasn’t going to happen this time. Folks think Obama had a choice between being FDR or what we’ve actually got from him. Not so. The choice was between what we’ve actually got from him or being more like Harry Truman. And Truman left a lot of colorful quotes behind but he didn’t get shit passed in the way of progressive legislation, and don’t even get me started about Taft-Hartley.
P.S. I owe you a citation re: my comment yesterday that in 1932 FDR ran to the right of Hoover on budget cutting. Here it is: H.W.Brands’ A Traitor to His Class, Chapter 20 on page 257 (hardback ed), citing from FDR’s public papers, campaign speech given October 19, 1932. Let me know if you’d like the quotes Brands cites exerpted and I’ll post it in another thread over the weekend.
FlipYrWhig - July 29, 2011 | 4:24 pm · Link
@ TK : I don’t think it’s inherently, structurally incompetent, but that a new set of conditions—including a lockstep intransigent party that (1) runs more on tribalism than on improving citizens’ lives and thus (2) is virtually unconcerned about doing anything resembling “a good job”—is seizing up the machinery in unprecedented ways.
But if The Thing That Can Save The Economy is Keynesian stimulus, I do not think that this government will produce that to a sufficient degree, because of deficit-hawk Democrats sharing assumptions with “welfare”-averse Republicans. I would love to see the 2012 election spark a meta-conversation about “stimulus” and the vital importance of the much-demonized Government Spending, but I’m not holding my breath.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 4:25 pm · Link
@Uncle Clarence Thomas:
I apologize for having to disagree with you Uncle Clarence Thomas, but it is obvious that it is, “His love for ABL means she never has to say she’s sorry.”
FlipYrWhig - July 29, 2011 | 4:27 pm · Link
@ ThatLeft : Thanks. At some point I should definitely read more about the Depression, FDR, and the New Deal.
Pat - July 29, 2011 | 5:07 pm · Link
No shit – the excuse-making for this President’s failures rivals the pass Bush got for 9/11 happening on his watch.
JR in WV - July 29, 2011 | 5:19 pm · Link
Derf:
You say we don’t have a clue, and then you stop, like we don’t need a clue from someone who claims to understand macroeconomics. What’s with that, you just won’t share the goodies with unwashed DFHs?
I could use a clue or two from someone who knows more than I do… nothing shows that you are that person.
I’m old enough to remember that when I was a kid, strong hard-working men would come to our door, knock quietly, and then ask Mom if she needed anything done around the place, that they could take care of for her, for groceries so his kids could eat.
Mom knew our family was doing OK, so the answer was always yes. And these guys, laid of coal miners, mos often, would rake leaves, clear brush around the edges of the lawn, clean out drainage ditches, or even mow with our mower.
After a couple of hours, Mom would give them a doubled brown paper bag full of groceries, including canned meats, canned tomatoes, dry beans, lots of them fit around the canned goods. Nothing that needed kept cold, they probably didn’t have electric at this point.
We’re getting close to that world, like the 1950s in coal mining country, after machinery in the mines replaced shovels and mules. When 75% of the able bodied men were laid off, not needed since heavy equipment replaced a strong back.
Derf, you are a troll bastid, with no heart – anthing happens to you, it’s what you deserve. Best of luck, A’‘hole.
TK-421 - July 29, 2011 | 5:22 pm · Link
Ok. So I guess the next question is, do you think these “new conditions…seizing up the machinery in unprecedented ways” are temporary, or will they be with us for the foreseeable future?
If you think these conditions are temporary, I fully disagree with you and use as evidence the behavior of modern Republicans every effing time a Democrat is elected President. They investigated and accused Bill Clinton of smuggling, murder, etc., and eventually impeached him for a blowjob. Yes, President Obama’s blackness has increased the intensity of the opposition, but not to any substantive degree- in their minds, if s/he’s a Democrat, then s/he must be opposed anywhere and everywhere, until “rightful” Republican rule is restored. IMO, these conditions are here to stay and it’s up to Democrats to adapt to this reality (to which IMO the Obama Admin has failed miserably).
If, on the other hand, you agree with me that these conditions are relatively permanent, and still believe President Obama and the Democrats are doing the best they can, then IMO you are describing a failed/failing state. I just don’t know how one can state these conditions cannot be overcome (i.e. President Obama is doing the best he can), aren’t going away, are doing great economic harm, but don’t effectively eliminate the functionality & legitimacy of our government. I’d love to see someone square that circle.
Again, my bottom line- President Obama can, should, and needs to do better than this, which is why he deserves criticism. Anyone who believes otherwise really needs to think through the implications of their unwavering support.
FlipYrWhig - July 29, 2011 | 6:20 pm · Link
@ TK : I fear that it’s relatively permanent, but hope that at some point an influx of “more and better Democrats” who point to Republican failures and their cynical meta-strategies (like using slippery language around taxes to suggest that raising rich people’s taxes is ‘raising taxes’ in a way that hits everyday people) will work like Fonzie hitting the jukebox.
I don’t think Obama can do better legislatively. I think he could do better rhetorically, and could do better with actions that circumvent the legislature, but I think the legislature is badly broken and got that way because of Republicans opting out of actually serving their constituents, coupled with Democrats in red states swallowing conservative dogma about spending. And I think that doing better rhetorically doesn’t translate into action, which is why framing/memes/rhetoric is not high on my list of political solutions.
OzoneR - July 29, 2011 | 6:32 pm · Link
I do believe this is a failed government. I’ve been trying to make that argument for months.
OzoneR - July 29, 2011 | 6:36 pm · Link
where?
OzoneR - July 29, 2011 | 6:44 pm · Link
No one is going to remember the Ryan plan next year. It’s stupid to think they will.
Uncle Clarence Thomas - July 29, 2011 | 6:57 pm · Link
.
.
@182 Corner Stone
I’m going to have to see the tape on that, if you please. Just mail it forthwith and posthaste c/o Coca Cola Corporation, Atlanta, GA, thanks.
.
.
Ben Wolf - July 29, 2011 | 8:09 pm · Link
We have $50 trillion in private debt. We can either have a debt jubilee, or a couple of decades of painful deleveraging. Either way, the economy cannot recover until the debt is put to rest.
Quite simply we allowed banks to create endless supplies of money in the form of a credit boom in the ‘90s and 2000s, credit that should never have been extended in the first place. Now there’s no money flowing because the middle class has been buried under it.
Corner Stone - July 29, 2011 | 8:10 pm · Link
@Uncle Clarence Thomas: Well, not physically obviously.
But every night when she scrubs her nubs and slips on the jammies she just knows in her little teddy bear heart that President Obama loves her the bestest.
Uncle Clarence Thomas - July 29, 2011 | 8:52 pm · Link
.
.
@193 Corner Stone
Obviously? I’ll have you know that everyone does it. Everyone that can land a date has the… oh, I see what you mean now. Nevertheless, I’d regale you with my latest fornicational activities with my foxy flatbellyer Ginni but “Dirty”[sic] DougJ the Prude in Chief Censor Nazi would no doubt be roused to take the only action he knows how to pull off successfully.
.
.