Tea Party Wins

[Haletown]

Like the teabaggers who screamed that and tax hikes would kill the economy?  Well, no tax hikes, and yet look at the markets.

Brilliant analysis.  Simply brilliant.

Gonna write it down so I don't forget it.

Thanks for sharing.

Could you explain how tax hikes help an economy?

 

[Redeye]

Brilliant analysis.  Simply brilliant.

Gonna write it down so I don't forget it.

Thanks for sharing.

Could you explain how tax hikes help an economy?

Oddly enough, I didn't say they did, did I?

 

[Haletown]

Oddly enough, I didn't say they did, did I?

Translation please:

"Well, no tax hikes, and yet look at the markets."

 

[Redeye]

Translation please:

"Well, no tax hikes, and yet look at the markets."

For months, the rhetoric from the right is that ending the Bush tax cuts would somehow put the markets into a tailspin, and that any tax hikes (which, incidentally, are inevitable at this point in the US) would somehow cause the markets great distress.  This deal gets done, rotten though it is, without anything on the revenue side despite that inevitability, and the markets still slide.

David Frum, one of the last sane conservative pundits in the States, tweeted this morning "And we were told that Mr Market would be pleased that taxes aren't rising" - I find myself doubting they'd be any worse if the Congress had had the spines necessary to tackle the issue of tax hikes, especially on the wealthy, which a pretty solid majority of Americans want.

 

[Infanteer]

I find it funny that in the period of, likely, the least degree of existential threat to the United States its defence spending is so out of control that it'll be the nail in its economic coffin.

Linking a radical islamic terrorist movement with Afghanistan and/or Iraq is foolish.  Neither have been about Al Qaeda since about 2005/2006.  Both had to do with large Western armies bumbling around the countryside for various other reasons.

 

[Haletown]

David Frum, one of the last sane conservative pundits in the States, tweeted this morning "And we were told that Mr Market would be pleased that taxes aren't rising" -

Ahh a good Canadian boy who believes the only thing that drives markets are tax issues.  Smart boy that David, ignoring the ECB debt and deficit mess that set off the great slide today.  He can see through all that Euro stuff to pinpoint the one and only issue that makes markets tick.

And thanks for clearing up that misconception so we are now clear about your belief that not increasing taxes is not good for the economy, which is sort of not  what you said if I understand what you are not trying to say.

 

[Redeye]

Ahh a good Canadian boy who believes the only thing that drives markets are tax issues.  Smart boy that David, ignoring the ECB debt and deficit mess that set off the great slide today.  He can see through all that Euro stuff to pinpoint the one and only issue that makes markets tick.

And thanks for clearing up that misconception so we are now clear about your belief that not increasing taxes is not good for the economy, which is sort of not  what you said if I understand what you are not trying to say.

Frum made his comments before the open, actually, and while Europe's also weighing on, the US debt ceiling nonsense has been a drag on markets as well, and it was widely touted that getting rid of the "uncertainty" would help stabilize them.  So much for that.

I'll type slower next time, maybe that'll help your comprehension.  I think I use a lot of big words too - I'll work on that.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Do you want the ultimate oxymoron? Consider this from today's Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-aims-for-it-savings-with-new-agency/article2119773/

“The Harper Conservatives say streamlining government will require the creation of a new federal agency, this one designed to find savings in information technology systems.”

This is a classic example of the sort of bureaucratic mindset that gets us to this:

The DJIA for 2011-08-04
Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/markets/

I guess I wasn't watching; I didn't realize Obama had crossed the border.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Do you want the ultimate oxymoron? Consider this from today's Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-aims-for-it-savings-with-new-agency/article2119773/

“The Harper Conservatives say streamlining government will require the creation of a new federal agency, this one designed to find savings in information technology systems.”

:rofl:  Saw the story elsewhere, but not quite this oddly put - thank you for sharing.

- edited to add following -
And the new team, "Shared Services Canada", already has a CEO.

Shared Services Canada - sounds suspiciously like the "Ministry of Administrative Affairs" to me.

 

[Haletown]

the US debt ceiling nonsense has been a drag on markets as well, and it was widely touted that getting rid of the "uncertainty" would help stabilize them.  So much for that.

Touted by those who think digging the national debt holes faster and deeper by increasing government borrowing and spending. Those folks usually are on the ones who depend on a government teat or still believe socialism and massive government intervention in a nation's economy is a viable economic policy. 

What was also touted by sane people was that unless out of control government spending wasn't controlled the world markets were in for turmoil.  You can't print prosperity and you can't teleprompter your way to a successful economy.

Barry is channeling his inner Greek, Spaniard, Portuguese, Irishman and the markets have noticed.


Or other politicians like Dulton who figure it is good economic policy to pay 80 cents to people for electricity that he can sell for 20 cents.  Wish I knew if he was getting that money from the education or hospital budgets, or just "borrowing" it from his grandchildren.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

:rofl:  Saw the story elsewhere, but not quite this oddly put - thank you for sharing.

- edited to add following -
And the new team, "Shared Services Canada", already has a CEO.

Shared Services Canada - sounds suspiciously like the "Ministry of Administrative Affairs" to me.

Terry Gilliam's BRAZIL  ;D

 

[cupper]

In actual fact, most analysts today are attributing the market melt downs not to a reaction to the debt ceiling resolution, but rather to the continued downward economic spiral that has gone on, while everyone was distracted by the political gamesmanship that has taken place over the past month or so.

European markets continue to decline on more and more dismal news about the European debt crisis, and contractions in the economy, and austerity measures that are being taken. US markets are responding to the reports on slower than expected growth in the GDP, poor jobless numbers, and declines in the manufacturing and commercial sectors. Japanese markets are reacting to both US and European economic news. We'd see this fall in the markets regardless according to most economists.

 

[Edward Campbell]

In actual fact, most analysts today are attributing the market melt downs not to a reaction to the debt ceiling resolution, but rather to the continued downward economic spiral that has gone on, while everyone was distracted by the political gamesmanship that has taken place over the past month or so.

I agree with most of the analysts.

European markets continue to decline on more and more dismal news about the European debt crisis, and contractions in the economy, and austerity measures that are being taken. US markets are responding to the reports on slower than expected growth in the GDP, poor jobless numbers, and declines in the manufacturing and commercial sectors. Japanese markets are reacting to both US and European economic news. We'd see this fall in the markets regardless according to most economists.

And none of those problems can be addressed by continuing to spend as much as we all are ... or by raising taxes.

But, I would not be opposed to tax reform for Canada: reduce corporate taxes, by a lot; reduce income taxes - maybe even adopt a flat tax - but take at least the 'bottom' 5% of taxpayers off the federal tax rolls; add a green, carbon tax that is, de facto, a consumption tax that works like the HST in that it 'flows through' carbon producers and suppliers and middlemen and so on and is paid, 100%, by us, the ordinary consumers every time we fill the tank, turn on the air conditioning, switch on our big-screen TV, buy groceries and, and, and ... I'm thinking 10% will do nicely to offset big income tax deductions and lower the deficit and debt much more quickly and change our behaviour, making us greener, too.

 

[cupper]

Here are a couple of questions for people to chew on.

First: If not increase taxes, how about reducing tax loopholes that only the higher income earners and corporations can take advantage.

Second: How much has the current Fed policy of near zero interest rates over the past few years, and prior years on relatively low interest rates contributed to the poor economic performance since the collapse in 2008?

 

[Nemo888]

Cutting government or finding efficiencies is a great idea. Cutting taxes is fine as well. Though we only pay 2% more by GDP in total taxes than the USA for a pretty impressive array of extra services and social programs. Perhaps we don't have as much pork and corruption as the USA.

I believe in the capitalist idea that if you cut so far you push the GDP into negative territory you will kill the economy. This becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. No one would invest in a business trying to cut its way to solvency. That is the road to bankruptcy. I will agree to any cuts after you get annualized growth to 1.5% real. If the stats could actually be trusted I could even deal with 1%. Cut whatever you want as long as it does not push the GDP below that. Otherwise you just have to wait. Pushing the economy into cardiac arrest for ideology is too fanatical. Canada is in decent shape if we can find new markets equal to the rate of our export shrinkage to the US. We need more trade with Asia to not get flushed away with our cousins to the South.

 

[Brad Sallows]

If one wishes to criticize the Iraq war, it should be possible to do so without creating strawmen and citing absolutes where there were none.  It is so hard to find a "justifiable" war (meaning, justly initiated), that the charge is a nearly universal criticism of wars.  The Iraq war wasn't pointless - not worth the cost after the first 3 months, but certainly not pointless.  Knowledge of lack of WMD is known only with hindsight and was believed otherwise in the run-up; that anyone would use it to criticize the "justification" reveals a lack of ability to separate causality and knowledge across time.  What was well-known prior to the outset is that the "containment" was unravelling.  The US worry was that the WMD nearly all countries _believed_ Iraq had _might_ find their way into the hands of a third party, not that Iraq was already responsible.

>The Dems forced the war expenditure onto the books when they took Congress in 2006

So what?  There was no mystery attached to the special appropriations; and, being special, they were more obvious than if they were hidden in the baseline.

>Afghanistan is a slightly different story - intervention there was justifiable.

Go on, then.  Justify it.  I'll give you the easy task, and just ask for the 6 traditional criteria to be met.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The root of the US debt explosion does not lie in presidential administrations, let alone presidential administrations of a particular party.  The root lies in entitlements and birth rates.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Businesses cut their way to solvency all the time.  The usual technique is to divest the money-losing parts (ie. the parts that some other business already does more effectively).  If nothing is separable, the business is unlikely to succeed because it has been outcompeted in all aspects.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Markets are declining because the wheels are coming off in Europe today: Spain and Italy are thought to be on the threshold of no return, and Belgium is about to add a "B" to PIIGS.  Investors are perfectly capable of reading the mood of German taxpayers with respect to the prospect of bailing out the irresponsible Euro-users, and perfectly capable of recognizing that the debt ceiling increase negotiated in the US does little to slow debt growth even as the debt pushes past the 100% of GDP marker (also today).

And those problems, curiously enough, originate with untrustworthy politicians and not with informal grassroots groups.

 

[Nemo888]

So how can you keep GDP in positive territory while slashing government expenditures? Why not just slash as much as growth allows? I feel that to the tea party killing GDP and making the recession worse is acceptable losses. Why make main street pay in the most painful way possible? Sounds more Fanatic than Conservative to me.