In response to:

A Non-Prediction

A45 Wrote: Sep 13, 2010 11:42 AM
RAPolitico is betting that people will not check his reasoning. That's why he can make arguments that have nothing to do with Mr. Sowell's article. For example, your proof of Government success is that TARP investments were repaid? How does that disprove unemployment has continued to increase since TARP and since additional Obama meddling? That is the point of Sowell's article. Pulling arbitrary "facts" about Government meddling doesn't prove Mr Sowell got his facts wrong. Indeed it only proves his point. In other words, in spite of Government meddling, unemployment has increased and stayed well above the high-mark set by the brilliant economist Barrack Obama. And the answer is more meddling by the brilliant economist (and...
Join the Debate!
Steven H of WA Wrote: Sep 14, 2010 11:01 PM
I will slow down for the slow thinker:

PAPolitico mentioned "corporate greed"; the most egregious would be the Wall Street traders, CEOs, and Fannie Mae CEOs who take home $90 million or more. I politely call this "skimming", maybe that is not so polite.

Our Democrat controlled congress is on a spending spree for a plethora of pork barrel projects under the rubric of "stimulus". Our own Patty Murray is running ads itemizing all the pork she brought home to WA.

As a result of this spending we are now up to reported $13 trillion of national debt. Add in the future entitlements and state debt and one estimate is $130 trillion. One wag said this is more than the entire wealth on the planet.

It will be future generations that will...
RAPolitico Wrote: Sep 14, 2010 12:09 PM
Steven, you shouldn't even be in the conversation. You obviously have no idea how the US or its vast global economy work. No one is talking about skimming anything off of anything. Charging a fee for services rendered is perfectly legal. Read my comment more carefully. If you are proposing that the gov't should stop abortion you may want to reread Mr. Sowell's article too. He's proposing less gov't intervention. What are you proposing?
RAPolitico Wrote: Sep 14, 2010 11:57 AM
I should have posed the question: How many jobs would have been lost without TARP? What would the unemployment rate be without TARP: 15-25%? In what condition would the economy be in with no intervention? What would people be saying if the gov't did nothing? We don't know for sure but, we can look at history for clues. We know the recession would have turned into a depression. We know it would last a very long time. We know unemployment would be above 9.6%. We know the US would have dragged lots of other economies down with it. We know the dollar would have become unstable and devalued. Countless other economies depend on the dollar. Just because government spending didn't bring unemployment down to 4% doesn't mean it didn't...
Steven H of WA Wrote: Sep 14, 2010 1:46 AM
Excellent rebuttal!

Seems to me the worst form of GREED is to steal from children or the unborn. The traders skim off a tiny percentage of the billion dollar transactions to make themselves millions. The congress spends trillions of dollars on bailouts and pork projects to advance their pathetic political careers and put the tab on future generations. They won’t even be around to apologize!! Which is the greedier?

When people learn that you are an economist, they often want you to predict which way the economy is going. There seem to be more than the usual number of calls for such predictions lately. But an economist should be more aware than others are of how hazardous such predictions can be.

One reason is that what happens in the economy is affected by what politicians do in Washington-- and who can predict what politicians will do?

However, let me go out on a limb, and try to predict what politicians will not do.

What would probably get the economy recovering fastest and...

Related Tags: Jobs Economy News
Friday, June 01 | 03:02 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 03:02 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 03:02 AM ET
Friday, June 01 | 03:02 AM ET