How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Alan Kreuger.....good or bad?   [ Page: 1  2  3  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Alan Kreuger.....good or bad?

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


0 posted 08-30-2011 08:07 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer


Alan Krueger, President Obama’s nominee as chair of the White House Council on Economic Advisors, received accolades from liberals yesterday for his stances on a number of major economic issues, including his support for a cap and trade regime, and value added tax, and the Cash for Clunkers program.
But few of his contributions to economics are more widely hailed by the left than a single study he published with David Card in 1993 which purported to show that a higher minimum wage does not necessarily lead to greater unemployment, as many economists claimed. The study examined the effects of New Jersey’s 1992 minimum wage hike on employment in the fast food industry, using neighboring Pennsylvania as a control group.
The study found that employment at the New Jersey fast food restaurants actually increased at a greater rate than those in Pennsylvania after the former increased its minimum wage. Those findings were touted far and wide by liberal politicians, including Bill Clinton’s Labor Secretary Robert Reich and the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), as evidence of the beneficent economic effects of a higher minimum wage.
But subsequent reviews of the study showed fatal flaws that undermined its findings. In 1996, a review of the study by the Employment Policies Institute found that the data sets Krueger and Card used were so badly flawed that “no credible conclusions can be drawn from the report.” Specifically, the study found, “the data set used in the New Jersey study bears no relation to numbers drawn from payroll records of the restaurants the New Jersey study claims to cover.”
Rather than look at those payroll records, Krueger and Card called fast food managers in New Jersey and Pennsylvania to ask about changes in employment at their restaurants. But not only did the data they obtained inaccurately reflect changes in fast food employment in the two states, according to the EPI, about a third of their data points got the direction of hiring wrong – that is, the data showed restaurants reduced employment when they actually increased it, and vice versa, during the period measured.
The actual payroll records told a very different story. When David Neumark and William Wascher re-evaluated the study, they found that data collected using those records “lead to the opposite conclusion from that reached by” Card and Krueger.

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/08/30/liberals-laud-alan-kruegers-fatally-flawed-minimum-wage-study/

President Obama clearly has closed his mind to any radical change of direction over the duration of his term of office in the White House. By replacing Austan Goolsbee with Alan Kreuger as chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, the President has brought back into his administration a Princeton economist who served an entirely undistinguished term as chief economist at the Treasury Department, advising Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner thoughout the first two years of the Obama administration.

Kreuger’s policy contributions at Treasury were simply dreadful:
He was the architect of the $3 billion subsidy designed to permanently boost auto sales by removing auto clunkers from the road in return for new vehicle sales. Designed to bail-out Government Motors and Chrysler – the two nationalized automobile corporations – the subsidy served beautifully to advance car sales by one quarter, in return for a next quarter’s equivalent decline! He was also the architect of a program of tax credits for employers who took on extra staff during the recession. This program also had no net impact, as employers laid off workers in order to rehire them at a reduced cost. In both cases, taxpayer monies were flushed down the Obama administration’s toilet.
http://charlesrowley.wordpress.com/tag/alan-kreuger-an-obama-retread/

Chairman Sessions: Obama Doubling-Down on Failure
with Another Ivory Tower Appointment
Washington, DC – National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Pete Sessions (R-TX) today released the following comments in response to President Obama’s selection of Princeton economist Alan Kreuger for chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors:

“President Obama is doubling-down on failure. He is selecting yet another academic ideologue with no job-creating experience to be the top cheerleader for his job-destroying tax, borrow and spend agenda.

“Alan Krueger may have academic prowess, but his support for big-government, job-killing tax policies like the Value Added Tax and cap-and-trade shows just how out of touch he is from economic reality. With millions of jobs lost and trillions of dollars added to the national debt, Alan Krueger’s chief advice at the Obama Treasury Department has now earned him the top economic post in Team Failure.

“Ivory Towers are a far cry from Main Street America. It’s time for President Obama to stop studying classroom economic theories and start understanding real world economics of what it takes to run a small business, meet payroll and hire more workers.

“If President Obama is serious about job creation, he will end his assault on the free enterprise system by rolling back burdensome regulations, cutting government spending and debt and lowering taxes to free America’s job creators to save, invest and hire more workers. More employed Americans means more people investing in the economy and paying sustaining dollars into Social Security and Medicare.

“The key to solving America’s economic crisis is employment through entrepreneurship – not more government. The American people don’t need more failed liberal economic theories; they need sustainable jobs based on proven pro-growth policies for job creation. America needs a leader with job-creation experience. For millions of unemployed Americans, the 2012 elections can’t come soon enough.”

http://www.nrcc.org/?id=274&newsid=3098

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


1 posted 08-30-2011 09:42 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.

It gets worst . . .

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/275797/ten-job-destroying-regulations-andrew-stiles


.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


2 posted 08-30-2011 11:05 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

...and Obama can't understand why businesses aren't hiring. It's all the earthquakes, the Arab Spring, Europe, the Tea Party, the Republicans, Bush....and the list goes on. Obama doesn't realize that, when you point a finger at someone, you've got three fingers pointing back at you. He should stop tryingto alineate businesses but, with this nomination, it's apparent he has no desire to. He, and we, will go down.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


3 posted 08-31-2011 09:53 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


Who gains by regulations that put people
out of work and makes them wards of the state . . .


.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


4 posted 08-31-2011 10:29 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

Does anyone here think that businesses should be tax exempt and completely unregulated?

Wouldn't both of those stipulations work to increase employment?


Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


5 posted 08-31-2011 11:40 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Does anyone here think that businesses should be tax exempt and completely unregulated?

I don't think either extreme works. Businesses should not be over-taxed and over-regulated any more than they should be tax exempt and unregulated. There is a good common ground which the government and businesses should be able to arrive at. Both need to be adept at give and take. This administration, by my view, is not interested in that common ground.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


6 posted 09-01-2011 12:11 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

So we can agree that job creation shouldn't be government's only goal, Mike?

quote:
This administration, by my view, is not interested in that common ground.

Of course they are, Mike. Only someone who was literally trying to destroy this country would willingly and knowingly not seek that common ground. Which certainly doesn't mean that everyone is going to agree where that common ground lies.

When two doctors disagree on treatment we probably shouldn't jump to the conclusion that one of them is purposely trying to kill the patient. Both of them, I think, probably have the best interests of the patient at heart. Differing opinions don't have to equate to good and evil. Of course, at some point the patient has to decide for themselves which doctor's advice to follow.

I think we call that decision an election?

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


7 posted 09-01-2011 03:59 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I have seen no common ground attempt by  the administration. What I have seen is a constant assault against them. What I see is businesses unwilling to hire through mistrust of the administration. I've seen businesses moving overseas with the Obama administration saying, "Who cares?". I've seen Obama constantly promoting class warfare, rich against poor. I've seen other members of the administration do the same. I could paste comments here by Pelosi and Reid following the party line by doing so, but why bother? You have seen them. I've now seen Obama hire this Alan Kreuger, a man dedicated to cap and trade, which would punish business further. Where have  you seen any attempt for reaching common ground? You don't promote common ground by perpetuating a class warfare mentality.

Only someone who was literally trying to destroy this country would willingly and knowingly not seek that common ground

Unfortunately, I agree with you, Ron. I won't go so far as to say Obama is trying to destroy the country  but I believe he is trying to bring it to his knees. I believe he feels America is unworthy of it's standing and wants it to be no better than any country on  earth. I believe he has a chip on his shoulder and is using his position to "get even" with the society that has made him feel inferior. Nothing he has done shows me that he has the best interest of the country at heart. He has placed the country farther in debt than it has ever been. He has raised the unemployment rate. He has alienated business. He has done end runs around the constitution to get things done he wanted, even when they were against the will of the American people. Nero fiddled while Rome burned? People can also say that  Obama teed off while America burned.

Ayn Rand said that everything one does is geared to reach their ultimate goal...and everyone succeeds. If a man's life is a lesson in failure, then he is successful since him main goal was failure, whether he realized it or not. I believe Obama's main goal is the "taking down a peg" of the United States, whether he acknowledges it or not...and his actions are geared toward that goal and, should America fall, he will have been successful. That's a sad thing to say about a president of the United States but the chip on his shoulder, his disdain for the successful in America, and his actions all lead to that conclusion, in my opinion.

Yes, the election will be the final word. I'm hoping people will  see his goals for what they are. In a country where Lady Gaga and Charlie Sheen will get ten times the coverage of the unemployment figures, I have my doubts.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


8 posted 09-01-2011 08:52 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Employment_Policies_Institute
quote:


In 1995, EPI lashed out at Princeton University professors David Card and Alan Krueger, after they published a survey of fast-food restaurants which found no loss in the number of jobs in New Jersey after implementing an increase in the state's minimum wage. Berman accused Card and Krueger of using bad data, citing contrary figures that his own institute had collected from some of the same restaurants. But whereas Card and Krueger had surveyed 410 restaurants, Berman's outfit only collected data from 71 restaurants and has refused to make its data publicly available so that other researchers can assess whether it "cherry-picked" restaurants to create a sample that would support its predetermined conclusions.
In September 1999, Berman launched another group, the Employment Roundtable, to "build on the successes" of the EPI and to "find solutions for problems such as social security and health care." However, the Employment Roundtable has done nothing public of note.



     It appears that EPI has not yet replied to the cherry-picking criticism leveled against it.

     The rest of the Source-watch writeup has other things to say about EPI and Mr. Berman that make use of this somewhat biased source highly questionable.  Of course, if Mike has evidence that EPI has offered a decent rebuttal to the cherry-picking allegations against the data used in the EPI Study that he is quoting, I think the discussion should be revisited.  I would welcome such information.    In the meantime, it appears that the study has been discredited and that the allegations that Mike is making are based on falsified data.  These seem flimsy; and certainly insufficient for use as the basis of such charges.  Should others disagree, I'd be interested in knowing — without dragging in other data — why.

     If there are sounder bases for such charges, this would of course be an excellent time to air them.  In the meantime, it appears that EPI is not the objective think-tank that it suggests it is, but a publicity outlet for Mr. Berman and his backers.

     For more material on that, I refer you to the Source-watch article I listed above.

     For those of you interested in the way that EPI wishes to be seen by the public, you might try googling their web site.  A side by side comparison with the Source-watch material should provide a few minutes arid entertainment for those skeptics among us.  

     If there is other data bearing on the appointment that suggests why it seems inappropriate beyond the data that Mike suggested, I'd be interested in hearing about them as well, though perhaps spoken of as a separate matter, so we might proceed without confusing the issue of the Right Wing difficulty with this appointment and with other issues they might have of legitimate concern.

     It's very easy to get things tangled up here, without understanding what we have more or less resolved and what we haven't, isn't it?

    
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


9 posted 09-01-2011 11:49 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Bob, I'm not sure why I need to present a rebuttal. Why is that Berman's allegations should come under investigation and yet allegations against his allegations should be taken as gospel?

In addition, Krueger was the architect of Cash for Clunkers, which was a hair-brained scheme that solved nothing (although Ron will not agree) and also a proponent of cap and trade, which would be a death blow to the economy and a plan soundly defeated in the House. He also supports the VAT tax.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


10 posted 09-02-2011 12:28 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
In addition, Krueger was the architect of Cash for Clunkers, which was a hair-brained scheme that solved nothing (although Ron will not agree) and also a proponent of cap and trade, which would be a death blow to the economy and a plan soundly defeated in the House. He also supports the VAT tax.

FWIW, Mike, I would also disagree with your assessments of cap & trade and the VAT tax. As would many others who think Americans should start actually paying for all the bread and circuses they've voted for themselves. But that's okay. Just because I disagree with someone's politics, just because I think their opinions are seriously flawed, that doesn't necessarily mean I believe they are evil incarnate.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


11 posted 09-02-2011 02:33 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



{quote]
Bob, I'm not sure why I need to present a rebuttal. Why is that Berman's allegations should come under investigation and yet allegations against his allegations should be taken as gospel?
quote:


     Whut?

     Why not talk plain English so those of us who can't talk fancy can follow you?

     If Mr. Berman wants his allegations taken seriously, he should respond to the allegations of cherry-picking made in response to him, just as those who wanted Mr. Kreuger's study taken seriously responded seriously to Mr. Berman.  If those who are attempting to take Mr. Berman's part here can only reply with comments that seek to confuse the issue, such as,

[quote]
Why is that Berman's allegations should come under investigation and yet allegations against his allegations should be taken as gospel?



then I suspect that they haven't understood the problem here.

     Mr. Berman's folk have cherry-picked a response to a selected portion of the sample — about one-third of it — and have tried to suggest that that third is the same as the whole sample.  If they believe this to be true, I have some investments I would like them to make.  They can pay me $100.00 and I'll pay them back a total of $33.33, and they can be thrilled with their profits and believe that they've done everything right.  Under those circumstances, I promise I won't complain very much at all, and will be pleased to allow them their gains, as long as they leave me alone in the future.

     When they are trying to get me to take the short end of the same bet, however, as it appears they are trying to do in this case, at least according to Source-watch, I have a bone or two to pick.  

     Mike may not be sure why he need offer a rebuttal.  I would suggest, of course, that he need not offer one at all if he doesn't see the problem.  Indeed, perhaps I may be the only one who does; though, please, permit me my doubts about that.


Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


12 posted 09-02-2011 07:34 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

As would many others who think Americans should start actually paying for all the bread and circuses they've voted for themselves.

Not sure I understand the meaning of that statement, Ron. Americans vote for one thing, mainly...the politicians they hope will do the best possible for them and the country. If there are any bread and circuses around, it's the politician's work, not the rank and file Americans. All the bread? Why does Marie Antoinette come to mind?

Yes, I was one child of many whose dad said, "This is going to hurt me more than you" before the spanking began. Funny thing is, I never heard him cry out in pain or miss a golf game because of it.

"Many" Americans support the vat tax and cap and trade? I suppose that would depend on your definition of many, wouldn't it? Perhaps you are referring to many in your circle but I doubt if you mean many average Americans keeping their heads above water who would not favor legislation that would tax them even further.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


13 posted 09-02-2011 09:59 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

There will be no significant recovery in the United States of America while Barack Obama is President.  The evidence is overwhelming:  everything Obama has tried to fuel a recovery (with his Democratic allies in Congress) has failed.  Statistics claiming jobs saved by the stimulus package were mostly fiction, and cost American taxpayers about $275,000 each.  Nearly 2-1/2 million fewer Americans have jobs than before the stimulus.

Barack Obama has been President for 30 months—2-1/2 years. He spent the first year obsessed with passing Obamacare, a program that doesn’t create jobs, but might destroy a lot of them.  He “bailed out” GM, but many believe that his interference didn’t save GM; it merely cost taxpayers an extra $15-20 billion, and stole from legitimate investors to buy off the UAW.  His broken campaign promises are too numerous to list.  At some point, his statute of limitations on blaming Bush runs out.

But that was then, and this is now. Since Obama took office the situation has gotten much, much worse. Obama has run up the deficit at more than twice the rate Bush did. During the first quarter of 2011, the US economy “barely grew” —at 0.4%—that was followed by second quarter’s “anemic growth” of 1%.  This was during the period when the Obama recovery was supposed to be well underway.  Employment data is unremittingly terrible:  new jobless claims are stuck at 400,000+/- each month, with job creation well below what it takes just to absorb new workforce entrants.  More Americans have been unemployed longer than ever in our history.  And looking ahead, the news is not good.

This is Obama’s failed American recovery, and in the near future, Obama’s impending double-dip recession (thanks in no small part to his three consecutive years with Trillion-dollar in deficits that have inflated the national deficit to soaring heights—$14+ Trillion.)  That legacy clearly belongs to President Barack Obama and with help from the Congress led by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi during 2008-2010.   Thanks to them, our country hasn’t even had a budget since Obama took office.

This kind of rhetoric won’t solve America’s problems.   It takes strong, informed, and experienced leadership to get through a mess like this one. We need a fixer, not a hypocritical speechmaker in the White House.  Barack Obama is not that man.  A wise man once told me, “The person who got you into a problem is seldom the one who will get you out of it.” That’s why there will be no recovery on Obama’s watch, but there could be a double-dip recession.


http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/galleries/wags_of_tennis/wags_of_tennis.html

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


14 posted 09-02-2011 11:06 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Having run out of reasonable responses to the discussion on Alan Kreuger ... Good or Bad; and being unwilling or unable to take that discussion further, this last posting appears to be a rehash of other attacks on The President rerun from other threads.

     At a minimum, the initial attacks in regard to G.M. tended to state that the  aid to G.M. was simply not going to work.  Having been proved wrong about that, the partisans are now attempting to retrench and find another way to say that saving the company and saving the jobs was a waste of time.

     If the company had in fact gone under, I can only imagine the glee that would have followed the fulfillment of the initial Republican dire predictions.  Now Mike appears to be making an attempt to save disaster from the jaws of success.  It is as though the Republicans hadn't attempted to cut the throat of every attempt The President has made to turn the economy around; not, mind you, that any of them have shown any particular backbone or stamina in standing up to the very top economic brackets that seem to be giving the Republicans their marching orders these days.  President Obama is still to my mind a basic slightly to the right of center Republican wearing Democratic drag.

     Mike ought to acknowledge he has no basic traction on the topic he brought up, Alan Kreuger, and try to deal with the change in subject in another thread.

     And no, while President Bush has been out of office, his party has been roadblocking any attempt to address the economic disaster they left behind with great energy.  President Bush may be gone, but his legacy is alive and active, and shows itself by its repeated success in cutting back on the social support net and by its refusal to allow the super rich to be taxed at an appropriate level.  It has also seemed to prevent regulation of the financial industry and its attacks on the environment have not been repaired.  The suggestion that these depredations upon the public health and safety  have been addressed and repaired since the ejection of President Bush is simply untrue, and the attacks on the social support network have made us a less capable nation as a result.  The Republicans have refused to allow these issues to be addressed or repaired by their use of the threat of tying legislation up entirely in the senate, where it now requires a two thirds majority to do the job that the founders intended to be done by a simple majority.

     Filabuster is not a notion to be found in the constitution as far as I'm aware.  I don't know that it's a bad idea in itself, but I believe that it requires that both parties keep a clear eye on what is useful for the country and not simply for their own party interests.  It is not clear to me that this is the current state of affairs.

     These are probably suggestions that might be better followed up in another threrad, of course, one not devoted to Alan Kreuger.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


15 posted 09-02-2011 11:36 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Bob, you can beat the Bush drum as loudly as you like for as long as you like. You can complain about the evil republicans not allowing the democrat president and democrat senate do all the good things they want to do for as long as you like. The carcass of that horse is already stiff and smelling. There's no more mileage to be gotten from it. I realize that you and yours won't stop the chant and that's fine. It's now having the negative effect by showing Obama is unwilling, after all of his programs and after almost 3 years in office, to assume any responsibility for not being able to either create jobs or lower the unemployment rate. When you point the finger at Bush and completely ignore the fact that many of the factors leading to this economic chaos were put into motion before Bush even took office, then you are acknowledging that your bias goes only to Bush, while you choose to ignore any of the other factors that would also have to be considered for a fair and balanced assessment of the country's situation.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


16 posted 09-02-2011 11:55 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

When customers come to me asking for services I tell them " I'm sorry but I just can't hire somebody to fill your demand because I don't trust this administration (even though taxes are lower than they were under Reagan).  No, really, keep your money until a Republican is in the White House."

Come to think of it, I should fire the sales staff.  If they sell something I might be forced to hire.

[This message has been edited by Local Rebel (09-03-2011 12:40 AM).]

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


17 posted 09-03-2011 05:04 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



quote:

When you point the finger at Bush and completely ignore the fact that many of the factors leading to this economic chaos were put into motion before Bush even took office, then you are acknowledging that your bias goes only to Bush, while you choose to ignore any of the other factors that would also have to be considered for a fair and balanced assessment of the country's situation.




     And where do you get the notion that I blame only Bush, Mike?  I have been clear that I thought that the issues go back considerably further, through both Democratic and Republican administrations.  I have said that I thought President Obama bore some blame for not pushing for a larger incentive early on in his administration, and for allowing the form of the incentive to be framed too much by his opponents instead of more reliable economic advisers, such as Dr. Krugman.  I also credited President Bush for his incentive program, much against the desires of the Democrats at the time.  I've said I thought that took courage.

     You may recall you disagreed with me at the time, and thought that President Bush was behaving badly, Hmmm?  I think that suggesting that I don't think for myself is simply wrong.  Pfui.

     Would you care to specify where your thinking allows you to blame any Republican administrations, or would you settle for acknowledging that you're reacting without as much thought as a full consideration might require?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


18 posted 09-03-2011 05:21 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Bob, I could give you too many examples to count, even much stronger than And no, while President Bush has been out of office, his party has been roadblocking any attempt to address the economic disaster they left behind with great energy.  President Bush may be gone, but his legacy is alive and active

I could also point out the times ( I stopped counting at 27 ) where you referred to the "past eight years" of Bush, even though six of those years were excellent. I have not seen you refer to Fannie or Freddie or Barney Frank's part in the conver-up of their financial burdens. Even in this thread, your finger points only to republicans. They would not let Obama or the democratic House and Senate do what they wanted to do. Interestingly enough, they had no trouble getting the stimulus or Obamacare through, did they? A large portion of the stimulues money was very badly spent and mishandled by Obama but I haven't seen you mention anything about that, have I? Even now the continual finger-pointing at Bush goes on, basically because democrats have no where else to point, except to Obama, of course, and I can see even a little of that surfacing.....encouraging. Obama said at the beginning of his term that, if he couldn't get the economy turned around by his third year, he deserved to be a one-term president. That's one of the few things I agree with him on.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


19 posted 09-03-2011 05:29 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


20 posted 09-03-2011 07:18 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:


Regulations, taxes aren't killing small business, owners say

WASHINGTON — Politicians and business groups often blame excessive regulation and fear of higher taxes for tepid hiring in the economy. However, little evidence of that emerged when McClatchy canvassed a random sample of small business owners across the nation.

"Government regulations are not 'choking' our business, the hospitality business," Bernard Wolfson, the president of Hospitality Operations in Miami, told The Miami Herald. "In order to do business in today's environment, government regulations are necessary and we must deal with them. The health and safety of our guests depend on regulations. It is the government regulations that help keep things

.....

McClatchy reached out to owners of small businesses, many of them mom-and-pop operations, to find out whether they indeed were being choked by regulation, whether uncertainty over taxes affected their hiring plans and whether the health care overhaul was helping or hurting their business.

Their response was surprising.

None of the business owners complained about regulation in their particular industries, and most seemed to welcome it. Some pointed to the lack of regulation in mortgage lending as a principal cause of the financial crisis that brought about the Great Recession of 2007-09 and its grim aftermath.

Wolfson's firm is readying to open a Hampton Inn this year in Miami on land purchased from a condo developer during the housing downturn. His business could be in line for higher taxes if President Barack Obama allows the current, lower rates on the richest Americans to expire in 2012 and return to previous levels.

That didn't seem to bother Wolfson, who through his partnership declares profit and loss as a pass-through on his personal income taxes, as many small businesses do.

"Higher taxes are not good for business, but some of the loopholes and deductions should be looked at," he said.

The answer from Rick Douglas — the owner of Minit Maids, a cleaning service with 17 employees in Charlotte, N.C. — was more blunt.

"I think the rich have to be taxed, sorry," Douglas said. He added that he isn't facing a sea of new regulations but that he does struggle with an old issue, workers' compensation claims.

Douglas told The Charlotte Observer that he's hired more workers this year, citing pent-up demand from customers.

"My theory is that the people that do have jobs are working harder and they have less time to clean. People were holding back for such a long time, and then they started spending a little more," he said.

Then there's Rip Daniels. He owns four businesses in Gulfport, Miss.: real estate ventures, a radio station and a boutique hotel/bistro. He said his problem wasn't regulation.

"Absolutely, positively not. What is choking my business is insurance. What's choking all business is insurance. You cannot go into business, any business — small business or large business — unless you can afford insurance," he told Biloxi's Sun Herald.

Since 2008, Daniels has opened one business and expanded another, hiring as many as 15 people thanks to lower labor costs and an abundance of overqualified job candidates. He credits the federal stimulus effort with helping to keep some smaller firms afloat.

"It allowed those folks to spend and have money and pay for the essentials," said Daniels, whose business pays corporate taxes. He grudgingly supports closing some business tax deductions to reduce the federal budget deficit.

"Who wants to pay more? I certainly don't. I want to pay my fair share, and I do," Daniels said, adding that he wouldn't resist loophole closures to cut deficits.

For Zajic Appliance in south Sacramento, California's capital city, business also has picked up. The company hired two workers this year, bringing the total to 18, said Christopher Zajic, who manages the family business.

One odd reason for his improving business: sales of bank-owned properties in a city that's among those hardest hit by the housing crash. When these houses sell, he said, their new owners generally replace appliances.

California used some of its federal stimulus money to pay for a "Cash for Appliances" program last year, a rebate program for purchases of energy-efficient washing machines and refrigerators.

"It spiked sales," Zajic told The Sacramento Bee, adding that he thinks the effort simply compressed sales into a shorter time period rather than created new demand.

For many small businesses, their chief problem is an old one: navigating the bureaucracy of the Small Business Administration to secure government-backed loans.

"My biggest problem is the current status of the banking system and how it's being over-regulated," Dennis Sweeney, a co-owner of Summit Sportswear Inc., told The Kansas City Star. "I want to grow this business, and I'm using the same credit line that I've been using for five years."

Kansas City-based Summit, 20 years old, supplies college-licensed clothing to university bookstores in four Midwestern states. Sweeney hired his fourth employee in August. He's adding licenses to sell apparel to colleges in the Southeast and Atlantic region, but his company doesn't have inventory or other collateral that bankers usually want to secure loans.

And the small local banks Summit deals with frown on the red tape required for SBA loans, after a loan he got in 2008 took three months of nightmarish documentation.

"It was only $35,000," Sweeney said. "Our bank basically said it would never do that again."

Other small firms say their problem is simply a lack of customers.

"I think the business climate is so shaky that I would not want to undergo any expansion or outlay capital," said Andy Weingarten, who owns Almar Auto Repair in Charlotte. He's thinking about hiring one more mechanic.

Added Barry Grant, the regional president of Meritage Homes Corp., in California, "It starts with jobs. ... There's an awful lot of people sitting on the fence; they're waiting for a sign."

One reason hiring remains dampened is the prolonged slump in the housing sector, a driver of the pre-crisis economy. Meritage builds homes in California and six other states. It'll build fewer than 1,000 homes in the Golden State this year, well below the 2,500 annually it built during boom times.

Another cause of sagging demand for new houses, Grant told The Sacramento Bee, is the planned October change to loan limits in order for a homeowner to qualify for a federal government-insured home loan. It was boosted to as high as $769,000 in parts of the country during the financial crisis, but Republicans in Congress have pushed for a return to lower limits and less government involvement in the housing market.

In Sacramento County, the change would mean a new loan limit of $474,000 to qualify, well below the current $580,000. Around the nation, the loan-limit change has created uncertainty...
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/09/01/122865/regulations-taxes-arent-killing.html





Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


21 posted 09-04-2011 02:17 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


quote:


Mike, version one:


When you point the finger at Bush and completely ignore the fact that many of the factors leading to this economic chaos were put into motion before Bush even took office, then you are acknowledging that your bias goes only to Bush, while you choose to ignore any of the other factors that would also have to be considered for a fair and balanced assessment of the country's situation.

Mike, version two:

Bob, I could give you too many examples to count, even much stronger than And no, while President Bush has been out of office, his party has been roadblocking any attempt to address the economic disaster they left behind with great energy.  President Bush may be gone, but his legacy is alive and active




     At no point did I say that  Bush was flawless.  At no point did I agree to give the man or his party a pass for things that I believe they’ve done wrong.  If you have somehow read that into my comments or statements, you have made a mistake.  I stand by the criticisms I have made of Bush and the Republicans.  If I have reason to rethink them, then I’ll be happy to say so.  I have done so in the past; I have no problem with doing so in the future.  

     I have made a point of being critical of Democrats as well.  The examples you say you can give me appear to be examples of me being critical of Republicans and President Bush.

     I understand that you may believe that being even-handed may mean being critical only of the party one does not belong to, and reserving praise only for one’s own party.  Respectfully, I must disagree.

quote:


I could also point out the times ( I stopped counting at 27 ) where you referred to the "past eight years" of Bush, even though six of those years were excellent. I have not seen you refer to Fannie or Freddie or Barney Frank's part in the conver-up of their financial burdens. Even in this thread, your finger points only to republicans. They would not let Obama or the democratic House and Senate do what they wanted to do. Interestingly enough, they had no trouble getting the stimulus or Obamacare through, did they? A large portion of the stimulues money was very badly spent and mishandled by Obama but I haven't seen you mention anything about that, have I?



     Nor have you seen me do much talking about flying saucers, illegal immigration and the torture issue here either.

     That’s because the thread is about “Alan Kreuger.....Good or Bad?” and these things are off subject, aren’t they?  I notice you don’t seem to have much to say on that subject at this point for some odd reason.

     If you want to raise any of these other issues, I might make a comment or I might not, depending on my interest at the time, just as I might take up a thread about Obamacare or Barney Frank or not, depending on my interest.  To be castigated for not bringing the issues up myself in a thread on Alan Kreuger, though, is stretching things a bit, though, don’t you think?

     As for giving Republicans credit in this thread, in post # 17 I said,

quote:

And where do you get the notion that I blame only Bush, Mike?  I have been clear that I thought that the issues go back considerably further, through both Democratic and Republican administrations.  I have said that I thought President Obama bore some blame for not pushing for a larger incentive early on in his administration, and for allowing the form of the incentive to be framed too much by his opponents instead of more reliable economic advisers, such as Dr. Krugman.  I also credited President Bush for his incentive program, much against the desires of the Democrats at the time.  I've said I thought that took courage.



     I’ll repeat that, in case you didn’t hear it.  I think that took courage.

     By the way, I also admire the posting that Local Rebel just put up.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


22 posted 09-04-2011 09:35 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


“Americans should start actually paying for all the bread and circuses they've voted for themselves”


I think most Americans beyond basic services simply want to be left alone.
It’s special and vested interest groups that with a thousand, ( and more),
cuts through government bleed a society to the point of helplessness.


.

[This message has been edited by Huan Yi (09-04-2011 11:22 AM).]

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


23 posted 09-04-2011 11:42 AM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Americans who...

have houses on fire...  want to be left alone?

have hurricanes flooding thier streets.... want to be left alone

are retired and need 24/7 nursing care...want to be left alone

are unemployed and have nothing to eat.... want to be left alone

have had a debilitating accident and are no longer able to work ......want to be left alone

were born into poverty and want to go to school....want to be left alone

want to drive their car on a nice highway with bridges that dont fall down....want to be left alone

want to drink clean water....want to be left alone

want to make investments with thier earnings without being defrauded....want to be left alone

want to borrow money to buy a house without paying usery level interest rates....want to be left alone...

one man's extravagent expense, another man's basic service
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


24 posted 09-04-2011 02:16 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


.
    Which services would you like your fellow citizens to give up, John?  I understand that going from the theoretical to the specific is asking for time you may not have, but then your claim staked out a lot of territory, too.

     I can believe that you're talking for yourself here; that makes sense.  You even say, "I think... ."

     Which services do you want to give up?  Roads, police and fire, the VA, the armed services, customs and immigration, the courts, food and drug laws, environmental regulation, social security medicare and medicaid, unemployment insurance, welfare?

     And which ones do you believe the majority of Americans would agree are a waste?
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Alan Kreuger.....good or bad?   [ Page: 1  2  3  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors