u.s. gdp officially contracts first time in almost 4 years
- Thread starter msog87
- Start date
here, listen to what abunch of able bodied welfare idiots say when interviewed at a new york welfare office. This is why obama was elected and america is in decline...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXYG3k_dzZw
why do you like obama? " cuz he gives me stuff" lol unbelieveable
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXYG3k_dzZw
why do you like obama? " cuz he gives me stuff" lol unbelieveable
By your logic, the Republicans will never win another election for a long time, since the number of people who rely on government in some form will not decline any time soon.
well yeah its pretty scary, however, once the real economic collapse happens which is highly likely during obamas 2nd term, im sure the voters will put a republican back in when the country is beyond fucked. when the real econ collapse happens there wont be any money for govt cheques, so ppl will be forced to work.
Likewise many people voted for Romney because they believe Obama is a foreigner. Talk radio and Youtube are not a substitute for a good education.
dude I knew this shit before the youtube video. I just posted that for liberals in denial.
That will only happen in your imagination. Have fun watching the videos. Have another beer while you're at it..LOL
I don't watch youtube videos for information.....
Thanks for unlocking the tread.....
4 Years in and we see a contracting economy and this morning the unemployment rate ticked up to 7.9%.... Yikes. The POTUS needs to pull his head out of his ass and look to growth policies, I won't hold my breath.
OTB
Oh wow, can you believe how CNBC actually spins an unemployment increase into positive news 
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100426714
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100426714
LOLOh wow, can you believe ho CNBC actually spins an unemployment increase into positive news
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100426714
Yeah, there's no bias in the media....
OTB
The markets like the job numbers and you should check WSJ too if you think CNBC are biased. Keep in mind State & Fed govts having been laying off thousands over the last 4 yearsOh wow, can you believe how CNBC actually spins an unemployment increase into positive news
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100426714
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/02/01/obamas-jobs-record-looks-better/
http://money.cnn.com/data/markets/
NEW YORK (CNNMoney)
U.S. stocks rallied Friday, with the Dow closing above 14,000 for the fist time since October 2007, as investors welcomed a batch of strong economic data.
Fred, that rise in the markets is mostly from speculators, very little to do with an improving economy
We'll be able to tell in 3 to 6 months if they are right.
They could be right, but I dont think they are. I think they are "propaganda spinning"
Or it's possible this time the markets know something you don't know.
____________________________________________________________
More bad economic news for Republicans
http://www.chicagotribune.com/busin...t-growth-in-9-months-20130201,0,2671400.story
U.S. manufacturing shows fastest growth in 9 months
Reuters
9:08 a.m. CST, February 1, 2013
The pace of growth in the U.S. manufacturing sector picked up in January to its highest level in nine months as new orders and employment improved, according to an industry report released on Friday.
The Institute for Supply Management (ISM) said its index of national factory activity rose to 53.1 from 50.2 in December, beating economists' expectations of 50.6.
A reading above 50 indicates expansion in the manufacturing sector.
It was the highest level since April of last year. A source of strength for the economy in the early years of the recovery, the manufacturing sector lost some steam in the second half of last year and contracted in November in the wake of superstorm Sandy.
The new orders index expanded to 53.3 from 49.7, while the employment gauge gained to 54 from 51.9.
Last edited:
^^^ if thats true then unemployment should start going down slowly over the next 6 to 12 months
Lets hope so, I really dont give a shit who's POTUS, so long as they turn things around. 4 years of shitty US economy is long enough (EDIT: no wait, its been almost 5 years now)
Lets hope so, I really dont give a shit who's POTUS, so long as they turn things around. 4 years of shitty US economy is long enough (EDIT: no wait, its been almost 5 years now)
And here in Canada we've had how many years of shitty government? Harper is obviously becoming a liability to the "right". Reading what Dr.Milke from the Frasier Institute has to say make's me chuckle. What happened to all Harpers promises of cutting welfare for the corporations? Guess they went out the window along with the promise of government transparency! I'll stop here, this is quickly turning into a rant.
If you'd like to see what another economist, not sure of his political leanings, says about Flaherty just let me know. The article is almost 30,000 words long and goes into great detail with regards to Flaherty's failings as Finance Minister. Those of us who live in Ontario are not surprised by Flahertys short comings in the finance portfolio, we still remember the mess he and Harris left in Ontario.
I have a renewed respect for Dr. Milke after reading this article. http://www.fraserinstitute.org/author.aspx?id=15062&txID=2964
http://www.timescolonist.com/opinio...-harper-government-s-crony-capitalism-1.55969
You might think the federal Conservatives, who have added $125 billion to the federal debt since 2008 and will add another $21 billion by the end of March, might be shy about unnecessary expenditures.
Alas, it appears Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his colleagues would rather hand out cash to corporate Canada instead.
In just the first two weeks of January, the prime minister announced another $250 million for the Automotive Innovation Fund, a federal subsidy program that provides the auto sector with taxpayer cash for research and development.
Then the prime minister announced $400 million for venture capital, mystifying those of us who thought it was fine to let private-sector angel investors risk their own cash, not that of taxpayers, on high-risk start-ups.
The recent taxpayer gifts are but the tip of the corporate-welfare iceberg. Between 1994 and 2007, $202 billion was disbursed by all governments across Canada through subsidies to business.
Whenever politicians wish to shower taxpayer money around, predictable excuses are offered up in defence of crony capitalism.
One is that corporate welfare creates new economic activity, and thus extra jobs and new tax revenues. The prime minister trotted out a variant of this claim when he asserted that the previous $250-million dollop of taxpayer cash into the automotive fund “returned six times what the government has invested [into] the Canadian economy.”
Why stop at $250 million? Why not drop another $1 billion or more into that fund, given such supposed multiplier effects?
The claim of magical multiplication effects is akin to dropping $250 million in taxpayer cash from the top of the CN Tower onto pedestrians below.
Of course, such soon-collected money will be pocketed and later spent; that cash might create temporary one-time increases in economic activity and spinoff benefits. And no doubt, some politician somewhere would point to the ensuing spending as evidence such economic development strategies work.
But the relevant question is where the money originated in the first place and whether such a “helicopter” approach to economic development is the best use of tax dollars.
Such scattering of tax dollars to the wind ignores the substitution effect. That is where tax dollars must be taken from others (i.e. through personal and business taxes) to finance the new round of crony capitalism.
The economic literature on subsidies and the substitution effect is clear: Had such dollars been left with individuals and businesses (or unborrowed), that money would have been spent elsewhere or saved and invested.
That, too, would have created economic activity, jobs and, eventually, tax revenues for governments. It would have occurred without the inefficient recycling of tax dollars through the political picking of corporate-welfare winners — and losers.
As Terry Buss, an American expert on corporate welfare, described it, the hidden victims of crony capitalism are businesses not on the take and taxpayers in general. Problematically, wrote Buss: “Potential losers are always in other cities or states, and few people concern themselves with the national interest.”
Sometimes politicians will admit that crony capitalism is an economic shell game. Still, they and others will defend it on the grounds that other governments subsidize business, so Canadian politicians play the same subsidy game.
Where pressure exists to subsidize companies or to engage in unproductive tax-credit schemes, one antidote is to toughen up existing free-trade agreements to end such abuses of taxpayers and their money. The very point of free-trade agreements is the pursuit of a level playing field and more economic growth for all.
After all, why should taxpayers (and their money) from any city, province or country be dragged into the competition between corporations? Let companies duke it out without taxpayers being forced into the ring.
Mark Milke is a senior fellow with the Fraser Institute.
© Copyright 2013
I wouldn't get to comfortable with that position.
http://news.yahoo.com/great-rotation-wall-street-fairy-tale-012451222--sector.html
