Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Somebody better be in a panic, there is only so much debt you can build when it comes to spending your way out of a recession.
At some point you are going to overload the country with so much debt you won't be able to recover from it. Or at the very least some drastic and painful actions will need to be taken to correct it.
So yeah, I am glad that somebody is in a "panic" over it.
Your Krugman article is from 2004. In 2004, there was no recession. The recession of 2000-2001 had already ended. Therefore, deficit spending was no longer needed in 2004. In 2009, we were in the midst of a recession. Deficit spending was the correct approach to stimulate demand. It increased the deficit, but it also bought the country some time to recover. There is no inconsistency in the Krugman position.
Uh-huh, I see.
So deficits are much, much better when in the middle of a recession.
Recessions are common occurrences every ten years or so - it is the government's reaction to the recession that determines just how bad it will be. When the government intervenes and takes money OUT of the economy to spend as it sees fit, it only makes it worse.
The obama administration has made a bad recession even worse with its deficit spending and expansion of government.
The correct reaction from the government is to get out of the way so the private sector can regroup and start generating jobs/growth.
The state of the economy is too much of a political football, especially during an election year. They just can't resist meddling and interfering for political expediency.
Your Krugman article is from 2004. In 2004, there was no recession. The recession of 2000-2001 had already ended. Therefore, deficit spending was no longer needed in 2004. In 2009, we were in the midst of a recession. Deficit spending was the correct approach to stimulate demand. It increased the deficit, but it also bought the country some time to recover. There is no inconsistency in the Krugman position.
The deficit in 2004 would be like smoke coming out of an oven. The deficit we have now is like a kitchen fire. Keep up the spending and it is going to get ugly.
Spending is fine when you don't have high levels of debt. People also need to remember that the federal government was not weighed down by entitlement programs in the great depression. They are already becoming growing burdens on our budget and they will make it much more difficult to pay off the debt we build up.
Conservatives are fear-mongering about the budget deficit in exactly the same way they were trying to scare us about Saddam Hussein’s supposed weapons of mass destruction. And just like the war with Iraq, they want us to attack the wrong enemy. The deficit isn’t the problem… right now. Going after the deficit during a major recession is like trying to save on your water bill while your house is on fire. Government spending is the right thing to do to end a recession. Everybody knows that—especially the Republicans who are arguing against it. That’s because they don’t want the recession to end… until Obama is out of the White House.
Krugman is a partisan retard. "Liberal vs. Conservative" rules his little world. Can't he fathom that some conservatives (like myself) could be against the Iraq War and for fiscal discipline? But no...he just buys the homogenized view of his supposed enemy.
The neo-cons aren't true conservatives and I'm disgusted that I am lumped in with them just because I happen to be a classic Goldwater-style Republican. Bush ran fairly large deficits and expanded the size of the federal government. He and his ilk are not true conservatives.
Something is wrong with our economy and our government if we allow the national debt to get to such a high debt-to-GDP ratio. At least with World War II there was a damn good reason for it. But, what is the reason now? Bloated entitlement programs, pet stimulus dollars flowing into local areas to fund pork, and the bailing out of "too big to fail" companies who should be allowed to die for ****ing up so badly.
It made me nauseous to watch Cheney make the rounds on political talk shows harping upon Obama's fiscal recklessness when he was a part of an administration which pretty much doubled the size of the federal debt. It's like we're speeding toward the edge of a cliff. When we reach the cliff we will die. Bush was going about 75 MPH toward the cliff and Obama is going about 95 MPH.
So deficits are much, much better when in the middle of a recession.
Recessions are common occurrences every ten years or so - it is the government's reaction to the recession that determines just how bad it will be. When the government intervenes and takes money OUT of the economy to spend as it sees fit, it only makes it worse.
Hmmm.....explain how the government takes money out of the economy when it is spending (i.e pouring money into the economy) as it sees fit. Or maybe you just don't realize that you have contradicted yourself.
The deficit isn’t the problem… right now. Going after the deficit during a major recession is like trying to save on your water bill while your house is on fire. Government spending is the right thing to do to end a recession. Everybody knows that—especially the Republicans who are arguing against it. That’s because they don’t want the recession to end… until Obama is out of the White House.
I thought we were suppose to out of the recession with two quarters of increasing GDP now? That's not my point for replying though, I don't know if the republicans have been against stimulating the economy with government spending as much as they're concerned with who it's stimulating along with all the other spending that will increase with some of the things being proposed, like the HC bill (with all it's fuzzy math from the CBO).
The deficit in 2004 would be like smoke coming out of an oven. The deficit we have now is like a kitchen fire. Keep up the spending and it is going to get ugly.
Spending is fine when you don't have high levels of debt. People also need to remember that the federal government was not weighed down by entitlement programs in the great depression. They are already becoming growing burdens on our budget and they will make it much more difficult to pay off the debt we build up.
Sure, let's cut our deficit. First order of business is to close all our military bases overseas, pull out from Iraq, and cut military spending.
Sure, let's cut our deficit. First order of business is to close all our military bases overseas, pull out from Iraq, and cut military spending.
That too, along with ending the bulk of social welfare programs. Glad we could work it out.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
