We continue to pay the price for Republican economics.
New recession alarms shook Wall Street Tuesday as a key survey of service sector executives showed business activity retreating in January for the first time in nearly five years.
The Institute for Supply Management’s (ISM) non-manufacturing index came in with a reading of 44.6, a new summary number for the report.
The 44.6 summary number is a new reading that does not have comparable readings from past reports.
The reading for business activity in the service sector plunged to 41.9 in January from 54.4 in December. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had forecast a reading of 53.
A reading above 50 indicates growth in the sector, and a reading below 50 represents a sector-wide decline. The January reading is the first below 50 since March 2003.
I read this too quickly at first and thought the title was “Republican Secession Watch.”
But I guess that would have been appropriate too!
Any one of these goofs could be the latter day Edmund Ruffin -
http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/5/16653/58576/66/450459
http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/02/05/romney-backpedals-over-bob-dole-comments/
http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/2008/01/24/secede-and-survive-macho-sectarianism-among-libertarian-secessionists
And what Republican economic policies specifically have caused this Oliver?
In general screwing the economy with skewed tax cuts and a mismanaged unnecessary war of choice to start with.
Jay,
You have been provided simple lists of policies before and you refuse to answer. Why should it be Oliver’s responsibility to provide it now?
z_adura, that ‘list’ was a compendium of political sound bites and conspiracy theories (”Presidents colluding with federal reserve banks”). It was hardly anything resembling something that had to do with economic theory. In addition, nobody could provide any correlation between those policies and the supposedly “horrid” economy.
So here’s Oliver talking about tax cuts and the war. So I ask: How did reductions in the personal income tax rate contribute to issues with the service sector? Especially when the government has been raking in record tax receipts over the last 3-4 years. And how does the war contribute to it?
Anybody can point a finger and make an accusation. It’s a lot harder to actually prove such accusations have any merit. The majority of the time, it’s just hot air.
Jay, why the fuck should we answer your question? What the fuck have you done in the past that makes you worthy enough as a debater, or even just as a human being for us to take the time to answer your question?
You have proven that are you unwilling to stick around in debates you are losing. You have proven that you don’t know the definition of simple words. You have proven you don’t have what it takes to debate.
So I ask again, why the fuck should we answer your question? And I want specifics.
Jay, I am afraid I have to pull credentials here. Please list the sum total of your economic training.
CS, I don’t expect you to answer it because you’re too stupid to answer it anyway. A conversation with the grime that collects on the bottom of garbage cans would be more intellectually stimulating, so you’ll remain on ignore.
I’m asking Oliver. Dude, if you want to respond, let’s hear it. Or you can be honest and just said, “I don’t know, but it sounded like a good thing to write.”
Jay: “CS, I don’t expect you to answer it because you’re too stupid to answer it anyway.”
That’s funny coming from someone who doesn’t know the definition of the word, “analogy.” Or, “argument.” Or apparently, “investment.”
You have done this bullshit in the past demanding answers and whenever we, and I mean anyone on this site takes the time to debate you, it becomes clear you have to fucking intent to do so.
You might be stupid enough to believe your own lies, but no one else here is.
So now it is time for you to run away like the intellectual coward that you are.
Jay, I am afraid I have to pull credentials here. Please list the sum total of your economic training.
I’m not going to play baby games. It’s a simple question. Business activity in the service sector retreated in January. Oliver seems to think it’s because of cuts in personal income tax rates.
If somebody is going to make such a declaration, what is wrong with asking that person for information to support it?
Is it a “baby game” to ask a person who claims expertise in an issue to cite his experience and training in that field? It seems to me the lowest possible level of due diligence. I say that conditioned on the fact that you have a nasty habit of running away from debates on substantive issues, which leaves me with the sneaking suspicion that you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about a considerable amount of the time.
Is it a “baby game” to ask a person who claims expertise in an issue to cite his experience and training in that field?
Where EXACTLY did I claim expertise?
I say that conditioned on the fact that you have a nasty habit of running away from debates on substantive issues
Horseshit. I don’t bother to continue because it continues to get bogged down in the same kind of bullshit that you’re engaging in right now. Instead of just answering a simple question, you want to start comparing resumes. Jeebus Christmas. Answer the question or just freaking say, “I don’t know.” It’s not that difficult but it seems par for the course for people to retreat to the same old shit time and time again whenever their BS is challenged. If you want an echo chamber, then enjoy. But don’t try this lame ass tactic of trying to put the blame on me because you’re rather drag everything down to semantics.
which leaves me with the sneaking suspicion that you don’t know what the fuck you are talking about a considerable amount of the time.
Yeah well, opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one.
So, in getting back the point. Does anybody want to explain how reductions in personal income tax rates led to a retreat in the service sector in January?
Jay: “I don’t bother to continue because it continues to get bogged down in the same kind of bullshit that you’re engaging in right now.”
Jay, this is a fucking lie. This is such a huge fucking lie that no one who spends any time here could believe it is true. … Not even you.
You run when you know you are beaten. You run and you pretend the battle never happened. That is exactly what will happen this time, which is why no one is answering your question.
Does anybody want to explain how reductions in personal income tax rates led to a retreat in the service sector in January?
Does anybody want to explain how reductions in personal income tax rates led to a retreat in the service sector in January?
The people who had their taxes reduced are making millions each year. I’m not one of those people. People with jobs are LOSING income because they can’t keep up with the inflation caused by our massive national debt. Remember when we had a Democratic president and a budget SURPLUS?
The economy is in rags because it runs on money borrowed from Chinese Communists, and because what industrial capacity we have left is busy turning out weapons, which do nothing to improve life for Americans who are not defense contractors. Try running your household on credit cards, while giving your job to someone who doesn’t live there and tell us how well you are doing.
Everything in America that makes money is being sold to other countries, and the money that is generated is untaxed because it never enters the US.
You seem to think that there are no overlaps from one corner of the economy to another. This is not true.
Thanks Repack. Very concise and on point.
I would only add that our gasoline addiction is tightly wrapped up in this as well. We are sending more money to foreign governments for oil because our dollars are devaluing. Our dollars are devaluing because we are borrowing money in this Republican economy to pay for foreign wars. We are spending more on staple goods because they have to be shipped using fuel-based transport. More on basic goods = less on services.
There Jay. You didn’t even have to pay $35,000 a year for an Ivy education to understand that.
Oliver, you may think it overlaps and if so, you shouldn’t have a problem laying out the route that took us from personal income tax rate decreases to a slowdown in service sector jobs. If you cannot, then you’re not making statements of fact, but rather assumptions.
The people who had their taxes reduced are making millions each year. I’m not one of those people. People with jobs are LOSING income because they can’t keep up with the inflation caused by our massive national debt. Remember when we had a Democratic president and a budget SURPLUS?
Repack, I don’t understand what this has to do with service sector jobs. Oh and the budget surplus was a facade. It was a the result of fancy accounting and in the last few years of the Clinton Presidency, he and the GOP Congress spent like drunk sailors, reducing said ’surplus’ to nothing within a span of two budget years.
In addition, much of what you talked about didn’t start happening in January of 2001. It’s been going on for quite some time.
I would only add that our gasoline addiction is tightly wrapped up in this as well. We are sending more money to foreign governments for oil because our dollars are devaluing.
Our “oil addiction” is of our own making and has nothing to do with who’s in office. The fact of the matter is, people in this country are greedy. We want our cake and we want to eat it too. People were happily spending money on ridiculously oversized gas guzzling SUV’s, huge homes with absurd square footage, and not caring one bit about using alternative energy sources. We’re not sending more money to foreign governments for oil because our dollars are devaluing. We’re doing it because we consume so much oil.
Our dollars are devaluing because we are borrowing money in this Republican economy to pay for foreign wars.
The value of the dollar has nothing to do with the war. Repack touched on it with his comment about our industrial capacity. The United States doesn’t manufacture much anymore. Whose fault is that? Once again it comes back the consumer. We want cheap goods. People always chant, “Buy Made In The USA!”, but some of the things we get to purchase relatively inexpensively, would probably double in price were it manufactured here in the United States because the unit cost would be so high.
To answer the question, the slowdown in the service sector has nothing to do with income tax tax cuts and it has nothing to do spending more on basic goods. It is related directly to the housing bust which has nothing to do with “Republican economics.”. When one considers the slump in housing, there are less people going to banks, mortgage brokers, and credit unions to secure loans. Less people are purchasing insurance, and insurance companies are not selling certain types of insurance in states. In addition, the people who bought homes at the height of the housing boom in the summer and fall of 2005, are now upside down on their mortgages, so they have no equity, leaving them less to spend – ie, no vacations, less eating out, etc. The result? Less money overall that is spent in the service sector.
Don’t you just love those “Personal Responsibility” Repubs?
According to them, President Clinton shouldn’t get any credit at all for the strongest economy this country had seen in 50 years, and George W. Bush shouldn’t get any blame at all for his disastrous economy which is going to come crashing down at any moment.
If Repub fiscal policies are so damned great, then why are they failing? Who will the Repubs blame for their failure?
“Repack, I don’t understand what this has to do with service sector jobs. Oh and the budget surplus was a facade. It was a the result of fancy accounting and in the last few years of the Clinton Presidency, he and the GOP Congress spent like drunk sailors, reducing said ’surplus’ to nothing within a span of two budget years.”
Jay, you fucking ‘tard, Bush uses the same fancy accounting. In fact, Bush does it worse because he’s kept most of the cost of the war off the books.
“It is related directly to the housing bust which has nothing to do with ‘Republican economics’.”
Actually, you are partly right here. It has a lot to do with the housing bust, but the housing bust has a lot to do with “Republican economics.” You see, the Republicans have been trying to keep the numbers high while doing nothing about the fundamentals. Giving a tax cut during a time of war is a perfect example of this. By revving up the economy like this, they built up a bubble that couldn’t sustain itself. There have been warning signs for years that this was going to burst, but nothing was down to prevent it from happening, or even simply planning for that eventuality. It was just tax cuts and more tax cuts.
“Don’t you just love those ‘Personal Responsibility’ Repubs?”
For them, “Personal Responsibility” is just a code for, “Protect corporate interests at all costs.”
Jay, you are clearly not connecting the dots, so let me try:
1) Federal debt/deficit: according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 84% of the reemergence of deficits is attributable to increases in defense spending and tax cuts. Republicans are to blame.
2) Reliance on foreign oil on the supply side is the result of a failure to plan and fund alternative fuel research. Republicans are to blame.
3) Reliance on foreign oil on the demand side is the result of a failure to provide public transportation alternatives and communities based on energy efficient principles. Republicans are to blame.
4) Consumer spending may indeed be out of control due to lower cost offshore manufacturing. In economic theory, this will balance itself out over the long-haul as they start to demand goods and services from the U.S. But the fastest growing cost in the economy is healthcare, which now consumes 16% of U.S. economic output. This is a a function of, you guessed it, bad Republican policies.
Now, put this all together – current accounts deficit, Federal budget deficit, healthcare and fuel inflation and you have an inevitable shrink in service output. And for that, we owe Republicans.
“And what Republican economic policies specifically have caused this Oliver?”
Well you could bring up the fact that the mouthbreathing, shitstain, 9-11!, 9-11!!, president for the last 8 years has not created NOT ONE NET JOB for a start.
I’m not going to play baby games.
So…knowing what one’s talking about is “playing baby games”. Not suprising coming from someone whose political ideology considers “I don’t know what you’re talking about, therefore, you are wrong.” to be a valid argument.
Jay, I’ll be happy to answer your question when you answer mine: Why do you hate America so much?
Jay, you fucking ‘tard, Bush uses the same fancy accounting.
CS, I never said Bush did anything different. Such accounting is a trick used by the government and both Republicans and Democrats play the game.
By revving up the economy like this, they built up a bubble that couldn’t sustain itself. There have been warning signs for years that this was going to burst, but nothing was down to prevent it from happening, or even simply planning for that eventuality. It was just tax cuts and more tax cuts.
What in God’s name are you talking about? The centerpiece of Bush’s tax cut program was two-fold:
1. Reducing the tax rates of 15, 28, 31, 36, and 39.6 to 10, 15, 25 and 33 percent
2. Doubling of the child tax credit to $1000 per child.
I don’t see how this correlates to the housing bust. In addition, you’re complaining that “nothing was done to prevent it from happening.” What could have been done? Should the government have stepped in and prevented people from buying homes? Why is the government to blame because people were paying the overvalued price for a home in 2004 and 2005? Everybody and their mother that knew anything about markets knew the dot.com bubble was going to burst, but nobody did anything. The market did it’s thing, the bubble burst and it led to a recession that started taking root in the summer of 2000.
Jay, you are clearly not connecting the dots, so let me try
You’re all over the map.
Federal debt/deficit: according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, 84% of the reemergence of deficits is attributable to increases in defense spending and tax cuts. Republicans are to blame.
Wonderful. But it has nothing at all to do with Oliver’s initial claim. In addition, tax reductions on their own do not contribute to deficits. It’s when spending rises just as fast that it becomes a problem and that is one area where the GOP DOES deserve blame. They controlled Congress and the White House and they didn’t care about spending, spending and spending more.
Reliance on foreign oil on the supply side is the result of a failure to plan and fund alternative fuel research. Republicans are to blame.
Sorry, but you’re wrong. Both sides are to blame on this one. Once again, you like so many others, believe history began on January 21, 2001.
Fact: Democrats controlled both chambers of Congress from 1986-1994. What did they do during that time to fund alternative fuel research? Answer: Nothing.
Fact: A Democrat was in the White House from 1993-2000. What, other than some minor executive orders did President Clinton present that would help the US invest in more alternative fuels? Answer: Nothing. Any why should he? In 1998 and 1999, gas prices were down below 1.00 a gallon at certain times. It was right around this time that SUV sales started to soar.
Reliance on foreign oil on the demand side is the result of a failure to provide public transportation alternatives and communities based on energy efficient principles. Republicans are to blame.
See above.
You see, a rational person (such as myself) recognizes that what you’re talking about is not the fault of any one party. It is the fault of both parties, but it is also largely the fault of the US consumer. Once again, we like nice cheap stuff. And for the longest time we enjoyed nice low gas prices, which allowed people (myself included and I have since traded in my Ford Explorer for a Honda Accord) to purchase gas guzzling SUV’s. Nobody cared, because it didn’t cost that much to fill the tank. Nobody wanted to spend tens of thousands of dollars on an ugly Prius Hybrid.
The same thing happened with the housing boom. People weren’t content in their 1500 square foot home, so as prices rose, they sold and used the equity to purchase the unnecessary 3000 square foot home. People who should have waited a few more years and continued to rent, got caught up and bought homes they really couldn’t afford, nor did they do enough to understand the ARM mortgage’s they were getting into (granted, there were many people that were given assurances that the market would continue to explode and that they could refinance in two years and get a better rate, but that’s a risk people take).
Jay,
Opinions are like assholes – everybody has one. But apparently only liberals have facts…
I can’t waste any more time trying to wander through the rampant stupidity of your last post, so let me rather just focus on two issues you raised – one macro and one micro.
Macro Issue
When the government spends more than it makes – like consumers – it has to borrow. We have to spend more because we spend $100-200 billion a year on a stupid Republican war and $200 billion on stupid Republican tax cuts. Thus, we borrow heavily. When we borrow this way, it impacts our creditworthiness, crowds out private investment and reduces our ability to spend on domestic discretionary programs. Our creditworthiness impacts the yield investors demand on our debt issuance, i.e. more money to China and less to us. Private investment dollars that might have been funneled to consumers and corporations in the form of commercial paper and low interest personal debt get replaced by government-fueled debt. Discretionary domestic spending, i.e. transfer payments, etc., is reduced, never multiplies through the economy, and brings down total service sector spending. This is basic economics. You may want Democrats to own this, but the simple fact is: Republicans are to blame. YOU are to blame.
Micro Issue
You obviously know very, very little about alternative fuel spending. I do, so why don’t you sit down, shut you mouth and open your ears. NREL is but one small but important piece of R&D research into alternative fuels. Nonetheless, under Republican leadership, it’s budget was cut by $20 million in 2005-6 forcing them to eliminate 11% of their staff. In 2007, after Democrats took over, their budget was increased by 50%. To put this as blatantly as possible: Republicans are to blame. You need to listen to people who know what they are talking about and SHUT THE FUCK UP.
There, got that off my chest. As you were.
I can’t waste any more time trying to wander through the rampant stupidity of your last post
Translation: I’m too lazy to respond to it so I will just call it “stupid.” Typical.
As far as your ‘macro issue’ you need to improve your reading comprehension because I said right here:
It’s when spending rises just as fast that it becomes a problem and that is one area where the GOP DOES deserve blame. They controlled Congress and the White House and they didn’t care about spending, spending and spending more.
Comprende?
In addition, the government does not “spend” money on tax cuts. There isn’t this pool of money out there that the federal government allocates to tax cuts. Government revenues (ie tax collections) have broken records over the last 2-3 years. It’s the reason why over that same period, that despite those lower taxes and the war, the deficit had been going down. And now it is on the way back up. Why? Thanks largely to the stupid Medicare prescription drug program – which by the way, Democrats wanted to expand further! So yes, the GOP is largely to blame, but it doesn’t work the way you explained it.
Your knowledge of government expenditures and tax receipts is extremely poor.
Nonetheless, under Republican leadership, it’s budget was cut by $20 million in 2005-6 forcing them to eliminate 11% of their staff. In 2007, after Democrats took over, their budget was increased by 50%.
More ignorance. First off, the 2007 budget for NREL was never approved by Congress, nor signed by the President, so it was funded at 2006 levels.
In addition, if you actually believe that a couple of hundred million in funding for the NREL is some kind of testimony to how Democrats are in the forefront of alternative fuel research, then you’re a hopeless pathetic partisan and nothing more. Where were the bold initiatives? Where were the plans for bigger and better things? It never happened.
So please. Go ahead and live in your little fantasy world where Republicans are blame for all the problems in the world and the good Democrats are standing by with their capes and magic wands ready to rescue and cure the country of its ills.
I’ll maintain my presence here on planet earth.
Sorry Jay, I can’t persist in this pointless discussion. Go back to pumping gas or delivering mail or whatever a third-rate mind like yours enables. Thankfully, you are now in the minority in America.
That’s about the kind of a response I expected. Typical.
“That’s about the kind of a response I expected. Typical.”
And I figured you would just run. At least this is a new twist on you running away. At least you are predictable, which is why we treat you the way we do.
… Fucking sub-human.
I knew it. The debate got too intelligent for CS so he left only to show up like the little troll he is when Pia Zadora tucked his tail between his legs and ran off.
You’re such a predictable little cocksucker.
Hey Pia, when you grow some balls, respond to my comments instead of crying.
Cheers losers.
“I knew it. The debate got too intelligent…”
Too intelligent? You fucking stuck your fingers in your ears and ran off. If you honestly think what you engage in is intelligent, you are seriously fucking deluded.
“You’re such a predictable little cocksucker.”
Nice touch of homophobia here, it goes well with the misgyny in the post. Now all you need is a bit of racism and you can complete your Republican Trifecta.
You are less than human and should be treated as such. You are ilk should be round up and sent into exile lest you contaminate others with your ignorance.