Economic growth likely slowed in second quarter

Second crash for the dollar coming? After trashing the euro to keep the dollar looking good, some more printing and loan would be necessary?

Naaaaahhhhhhhhhhh!!! What a surprise!!

Second crash for the dollar coming? After trashing the euro to keep the dollar looking good, some more printing and loan would be necessary?

Looks more like a global currency crash, someone surely jinxed the US recovery...... mmmmm

“There is a high degree of uncertainty. There is a recovery underway. It is going to be choppy,” said United States Steel Corp. Chairman and CEO John Surma earlier this week.

And when someone says the word 'choppy' you better run as fast as you could ./shivers

The already fragile economic recovery may be getting weaker.

There never was a "recovery". Govt.spending does not a recovery make.

unemployment now at 9.5 percent is likely to stay high.

This is a systemic economic crash that has shut out a large demographic from finding work, mostly in construction. Unemployment is more like 15-18% because many of these folks have given up looking for work and they are not counted in the skewed govt numbers.

"President Barack Obama"

No matter where this guy goes, he's invariably the least qualified person in the room.

Change we be believe in!

Americans have brought this economic wreckage on themselves. All those home loans and credit deals that looked too good to be true, were.

With insanely high house hold debt levels, it is going to take a long time for people pay off their the debt to the point where they feel comfortable buying again. People have no body but themselves to blame for their poor consumer habits and the ensuing economic troubles.

Wouldn’t this be a good time to start a war? Not an Afghan type thing but a real aircraft and ships big number? These are always good for the US economy which has such a large section given over to the production of weapons. Maybe Iran now really does need to be worried.

I also like the bit that goes, “and cash-hungry state and local governments cut spending”. And this after they have just robbed BP of 20 billion. You will not have seen too much about this because admitting that Heyward was right and the money hungry pirates in the US were wrong just doesn’t get the same degree of press coverage. One of the real problems for the US is that they want the almighty dollar to be just that but will not then accept responsibility when it all goes wrong. So what is the next target for getting the US a little extra spending money, oil, are we going to see oil prices messed about with now?

There never was a "recovery". Govt.spending does not a recovery make.

You got that right. There was never a recovery, that was just PR spin while they tried to avoid a crash. But when you are at the end of the largest inflationary bubble in history, which lasted 25 years (or maybe it was 40, or maybe 60) it isn't easy to avoid the crash, as they are finding out.

Will the USA become the next Japan. If they are lucky they will. If not it will be much, much worse. Not that the rest of the world is in any better shape though.

Wouldn’t this be a good time to start a war? Not an Afghan type thing but a real aircraft and ships big number? These are always good for the US economy which has such a large section given over to the production of weapons. Maybe Iran now really does need to be worried.

I also like the bit that goes, “and cash-hungry state and local governments cut spending”. And this after they have just robbed BP of 20 billion. You will not have seen too much about this because admitting that Heyward was right and the money hungry pirates in the US were wrong just doesn’t get the same degree of press coverage. One of the real problems for the US is that they want the almighty dollar to be just that but will not then accept responsibility when it all goes wrong. So what is the next target for getting the US a little extra spending money, oil, are we going to see oil prices messed about with now?

Paranoid much?

The majority of Liberals in America don't understand economics. Many of proud of their ignorance.

the democrats were the cause of the financial meltdown that severely damaged our economy.

As for how to get out of it;

Fannie/Freddie have to be dumped. No more tax payer backing. No more bailouts.

GM/Chrysler should be left to fail on their own.

Banks should be left to fail on their own.

Homeowners should fail if they can't make their payments on houses they couldn't afford in the first place.

Cut spending drastically. Cut the size of government. Cut redundant entitlement and wealth redistribution programs. Put welfare reform back in action, Obama got rid of that. We could even expand it to other entitlement and wealth redistribution programs. Put healthcare back in the private sector. Get rid of the illegal alien problem by prosecuting employers, enforcing imigration laws, and sealing our borders -- both north and south.

Finally, cut taxes and let We The People keep our own money and spend it as we see fit.

Any combination of the above would be a good start. The only problem is, Obama's only worried about paying off his Union buddies. He is doing exactly the opposite of what needs to be done and is doing it as fast as he can because he knows November isn't going to be his friend.

RR

The majority of Liberals in America don't understand economics.

Not true. liberals voted Obama into office based on his extensive economic knowledge/experience and his well documented history of successfully running several businesses as a CEO in the private sector.

Heh, just go back and look as his resume and you'll see what I mean.

RR

"Americans have brought this economic wreckage on themselves"

Specifically American liberals and slackers have brought this economic wreckage on all of us.

"Americans have brought this economic wreckage on themselves"

And what exactly does Japan have to say for itself ? Headlines blarring across the USA today are declaring that China is now the world's second largest economy !

And what exactly does Japan have to say for itself ? Headlines blarring across the USA today are declaring that China is now the world's second largest economy !

Oh well, it's probably too late to watch out for the Chinese... Japan now needs to mull the Indians. Their economy is expected to overtake Japan by 2012!?

So the huge numbers of unsecured loans, the slashing of taxes on the super-rich and the massive amount of US government debt had nothing to do with the financial crash? Come on.

The majority of Liberals in America don't understand economics. The majority of neo-liberals don't either. Talking about pride in ignorance brings George W. Bush to mind.

The majority of Liberals in America don't understand economics. Many of proud of their ignorance.

The majority of conservatives on this board don't understand much of anything. Many are willing to shamelessly lie in the attempt to cover their ignorance.

The first signs of meltdown occurred in late 2007 and reached their zenith in 2008 -- after six years of the biggest tax cuts in U.S. history and the inflation of a housing bubble by Alan Greenspan and the Republican leadership. All the while, median household income declined.

The only thing keeping things afloat under the Bush regime was people cashing out on the over-inflated equity in their homes, and using it to keep consumer spending going.

That's all fine and dandy. Which some are searching for someone to blame, others would be happy just finding a solution....

The majority of conservatives on this board don't understand much of anything.

Just like this Guy when it comes to Economics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0a_DSuh628

That's all fine and dandy. Which some are searching for someone to blame, others would be happy just finding a solution....

The solution is in the link.

others would be happy just finding a solution....

That's the kind of "happy" that goes along with "fat" and "dumb."

Glass-Steagall was found to be a solution that worked for over a half-century, that regulated banks to the extent of them being sound and reliable to the point of being boring. That solution was dismantled in the late 90s by legislation known as "Gramm(R)-Leach(R)-Bliley(R)."

Banks were then free to engage in the speculative behavior that got so many of them in trouble during the 1920s. The real problem is when America finds a solution that flies in the face of conservative deregulatory ideology.

Alan Greenspan ultimately admitted that his core philosophy was ultimately proven wrong. Would that other conservatives admit likewise and begin to work towards adopting a new philosophy. Solutions to the many issues we face would then be not long in coming. Until then, the conservatives will continue to act as an obstacle to the solutions -- and then become one of the biggest problems themselves.

That solution was dismantled in the late 90s by legislation known as "Gramm(R)-Leach(R)-Bliley(R)."

Signed into legislation by Bill Clinton (D).

Yabits,

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, (Pub.L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted November 12, 1999) is an act of the 106th United States Congress (1999-2001) signed into law by President Bill Clinton which repealed part of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, opening up the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies

I guess I can Blame Clinton for our economic mess now. :)

I guess I can Blame Clinton for our economic mess now.

Clinton can be faulted for following a bankrupt and bankrupting philosophy.

The important point that conservatives hate to acknowledge is that the opponents of GLBA were the ones practicing a much sounder philosophy -- and you'll not find a single Republican amongst them.

While it matters who was dead wrong about bank deregulation, it also matters who was right on the money about it. Not giving creedence to those who were right all along is one of the biggest obstacles to America moving forward.

Yabits,

84 percent of the Senate Democrats voted for it and 75 percent of the house Democrats voted for it.

98 percent of the Republican Senators voted for ut and 98 percent of the House Republicans voted for it (so much for not a single Republican opposed it).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Vote_1999.png

The vast majority Democrats loved this bill also and there were very few who 'were right all along' on this one.

Senator Shelby Republican from Alabama was the Senate vote opposed to this by the way. I'm just sure you'll give the good Senator from Alabama credit now.

Senator Shelby Republican from Alabama was the Senate vote opposed to this by the way.

The official link shown below shows how the Senate votes lined up. Not a single Republican, including Shelby, voted against it. Only one Democrat, South Carolina's Hollings, voted for it.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1999-105

The vast majority Democrats loved this bill also and there were very few who 'were right all along' on this one.

Wrong. My previous post clearly provides the proof needed that, in its purest form -- before the bill went through the process of horse-trading, attaching riders and other "compromises" to make it more palatable to its opponents, the measure to repeal Glass-Steagall was very much opposed overwhelmingly be those who were later proven to have been right.

As a result, Shelby may have believed that the bill had been watered down TOO MUCH from the original form he voted YES on. He therefore gets no credit for sticking to his guns on a bankrupt and bankrupting philosophy.

What's important to you, Yabits, might not necessarily be important to others. I think most agree that it was a combination of different things that created the financial crisis. Going after one group of people specifically can probably be done if you choose any one piece of evidence. In the end you're just wasting time playing partisan politics for the sake of mental masturbation. That's obviously what's important to you....but again, maybe not others.

China would need a GDP at least 10.31 times the size of Japan to be as wealthy as Japan. China is still a third-world nation.

I think most agree that it was a combination of different things that created the financial crisis.

At the policy level, there were lots of different things that helped to create the crisis. However, all of those policies, of which GBLA was merely one example, were based upon a single philosophy which held that government is bad, regulation is bad and that the magic of tax cuts and the unbridled "free" market would take care of everything.

That philosophy came in to oppose and dismantle the New Deal philosophy which created the massive and prosperous American middle class. Again, the opposition to and dismantling of Glass-Steagall is but one example.

There are plenty of dollars to be invested, but they aren't hoping that Obama stimulus program will fail and then the republicans will have a big blow hard. But the big money isn't going to hold out much longer. They need to invest it before the new year.

Banks refusing to loan to small business is also holding up employment. Until the banks will open their doors again, it's not going to get much better.

After all the jobs left the country, under tax breaks for taking jobs overseas, it's going to take decades to bring those jobs back to the United States. <:-)

"The New Deal philosophy which created the massive and prosperous American middle class."

My belly hurt after reading that. A good laugh. I thank you for that.

Again, the opposition to and dismantling of Glass-Steagall is but one example.

Not a whole lot of opposition to the final vote in the Senate to send to President Clinton for his signature.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s1999-354

Yabits,

Nice spin with the your previous link show preliminary votes and avoid the one that really counted or as John Kerry would say " I voted against it before I voted for it".

Oh and Yabits,

Both Pelosi and Reid voted a big YEA on it also.

Yabits: were based upon a single philosophy which held that government is bad, regulation is bad and that the magic of tax cuts and the unbridled "free" market would take care of everything.

And may I ask what the opposite philosophy is? I'm assuming you don't go around saying that you support big government, regulation on everything, increased taxes, and severe restrictions on a free market, right?

It's going to take time to fix the damage caused by the Bush administration and the Republicans, LOL.

Nice spin with the your previous link show preliminary votes and avoid the one that really counted

Again, the votes were on the bill in its "purest" form -- before all the nongermane riders were attached to it to get more support. In other words, when JUST the issue of doing away with Glass-Steagall was considered, not a single Republican Senator voted against it.

Shelby's later opposition doesn't count because he was never against the repeal of Glass-Steagall in principle. His early vote proves that. The only ones who opposed the repeal in principle were to be found on the Democratic side. That some Democrats were later bought off does not count against those who remained true to their opposition to a completely bankrupt philosophy.

And may I ask what the opposite philosophy is?

"Opposite" is a terrible way to describe what are actually several alternative philosophies.

Earlier, you wrote about finding solutions to problems. Glass-Steagall was such a solution that had proven itself in addressing a problem that had occurred over a half-century earlier. Common sense would dictate that a philosophy which advocates the principle of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," would best be described as pragmatism.

And may I ask what the opposite philosophy is?

Something needs to be added here. The question above is like asking what the opposite philosophy of voodoo is.

The philosophical underpinnings of the original Glass-Steagall Act came from the rational point of view that the largely unregulated, laissez-faire economic system the U.S. operated under from the 1870s to the Great Depression was a serious failure.

The rational viewpoint sees a vital role for government, which has to be at least as big as any entity it is compelled to regulate.

I see this thread ended up with the usual red team-blue team cheer-leading competition. A few important points - yabits is right that Glass-Steagall should have never been repealed, but there is no point in arguing about the politics. Since the Clinton takeover of the Democrats, there is no difference between the two parties, they both serve the same masters. The Obama reform bill, which contains nothing meaningful at all, and the kabuki performance over the vote just prove that again.

Second, the American free market fundamentalist ideology was never anything more than political and intellectual cover for lining the pockets of the banking and corporate classes. It has no basis in reality. That doesn't mean that capitalism is bad, it means unregulated free markets are not capitalism. And if you think what you have now is captialism, ask yourself why you get 0.1% or whatever interest in the bank for your "capital".

Third, any debt based money system which has a massive inflation in the money supply (ie. USA since going off the gold standard in 1971), and where this money gets concentrated in the hands of a smaller and smaller group of people will eventually crash and collapse. That is not a left wing or right concept, it is just the reality of how the system works. The concept has been known and understood since the Depression, and then ignored because understanding that will not help you get rich. But in the end it will crash and burn, and that is where we are now.

Yabits: The rational viewpoint sees a vital role for government

Easier said than done. I don't think too many people want zero regulations of any kind. The question is where to draw the line. Just because someone doesn't agree on where the line should be doesn't mean they have "a single philosophy which held that government is bad, regulation is bad and that the magic of tax cuts and the unbridled "free" market would take care of everything." Obviously my point before was to make your statement sounds as silly as claiming there is a philosophy where people want huge government, massive taxes, regulation on everything, etc.

And may I ask....do you often use preliminay votes when talking about Congress? Or is this an isolated case? In the end it kind of sounds like you're taking about two people who voted for the same thing and making them different by saying they voted for different reasons so only one of them can really be held responsible.

I see this thread ended up with the usual red team-blue team cheer-leading competition.

While it ultimately appears that way, a look through the thread will first find the typical tripe putting the blame for the economic crisis on liberals and Democrats.

A few important points - yabits is right that Glass-Steagall should have never been repealed, but there is no point in arguing about the politics.

The point is how much the voodoo, bankrupt philosophy that has brought the country to the point of ruin is allowed to continue to have influence. That the Democrat Clinton bought into some of them is irrelevant. The roots of the corrupt bankrupt philosophy lie within the Republican Party.

Second, the American free market fundamentalist ideology was never anything more than political and intellectual cover for lining the pockets of the banking and corporate classes. It has no basis in reality.

This is the truth that will help make the American people free again. However, the end goal is more than simply the lining of pockets. The goal is nothing less than the ipso facto control of the resources of the country and lives of Americans by the military-corporate complex.

Just because someone doesn't agree on where the line should be doesn't mean they have "a single philosophy which held that government is bad, regulation is bad and that the magic of tax cuts and the unbridled "free" market would take care of everything."

The philosophy you desribe is that of Ayn Rand -- who has millions of devotees, including one of the chief architects of the dot.com and housing bubbles: Alan Greenspan. Greenspan admitted that his philosophy was wrong. The odds that viable solutions will come out of wrong-headed thinking are nil.

And may I ask....do you often use preliminay votes when talking about Congress? Or is this an isolated case? In the end it kind of sounds like you're taking about two people who voted for the same thing and making them different by saying they voted for different reasons so only one of them can really be held responsible.

A bill which emerges from committee is most certainly not the "same thing" as a bill which has been corrupted with irrelevant riders and targetted earmarks which have nothing to do with the principle of the main point of the bill. The combination of moneys paid by the banking/financial industry to politicians in conjunction with bribes in the form of getting pork-barrel projects approved via riders to a bill, while all too typical -- makes it very difficult to know who is voting for or against something on principle alone. Unless, that is, you go back to the point where the bill was presented (and voted on) that did not contain those irrelevant additions.

So you're saying that when you speak of the votes on any particular bill you refer to the preliminary voting? I'm just curious is this is a one-time thing or if it's something you do every time.

"That the Democrat Clinton bought into some of them is irrelevant. The roots of the corrupt bankrupt philosophy lie within the Republican Party."

But you don't really think anyone will buy that, do you? You're essentially inventing a way for Democrats to get an unlimited free pass regardless of their actions because the "philosophy" of others is the real culprit, even if the Democrats actively participated in the actions that caused the collapse.

military-corporate complex

Isn't this mostly a catchphrase that has no real meaning?

So you're saying that when you speak of the votes on any particular bill you refer to the preliminary voting? I'm just curious is this is a one-time thing or if it's something you do every time.

To the extent that a person's true belief about an issue can be assessed, it is FAR better to look for a vote on a bill that contains only that issue, rather than a vote on a bill that contains a whole hodgepodge of stuff. I can't think of a time when I'd not want to do that.

You're essentially inventing a way for Democrats to get an unlimited free pass regardless of their actions because the "philosophy" of others is the real culprit, even if the Democrats actively participated in the actions that caused the collapse.

I don't see it as a Democrats vs. Republicans thing, other than where the pendulum currently is in swing, it is the Republicans that represent the far greater evil, and are not likely to come up with any real solutions to the problems with the economy. Not as long as they remain so invested in a bankrupt philosophy.

To give an example, the Republican George H.W. Bush had it right on from the start: Supply-side economics is voodoo economics. Over time, even he started to mumble along with the voodoo. So it wasn't the fact that he was a Republican -- it's the blind belief in voodoo that's the problem. (Gee, do we really need to spend so much of the nation's time and resources proving that voodoo doesn't work?)

Isn't this mostly a catchphrase that has no real meaning?

Only to someone who is extremely gullible and who can't see the forest for the trees. Look at the revolving door between corporate boards and government, especially between the Department of Defense and defense contractors. These are not powers that have any intention of serving the interests of the average American. It is about getting the average American taxpayer to serve their interests. No, it's not a catch-phrase; it's merely shorthand to describe the reality of the current situation. The nation long ago became precisely what Ike feared it would become.

As regards the size of government, most Americans want better government as opposed to smaller government. Especially to tackle the complex, difficult problems like economic growth.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/07/pdf/what_americans_want.pdf

The middle class is shrinking, Obama is taking the American Dream away from millions.

Obama is taking the American Dream away from millions.

The mechanisms that brought the American dream to millions were put into place by the New Deal. The dismantling of that came long before President Obama hit the scene.

Yabits: To the extent that a person's true belief about an issue can be assessed, it is FAR better to look for a vote on a bill that contains only that issue, rather than a vote on a bill that contains a whole hodgepodge of stuff. I can't think of a time when I'd not want to do that.

So you're saying that when you've mentioned votes in the past and when you mention votes in the future, you're talking about the prelims? Or is this the first time you've used that technique?

I don't see it as a Democrats vs. Republicans thing

Really?

The point is how much the voodoo, bankrupt philosophy that has brought the country to the point of ruin is allowed to continue to have influence. That the Democrat Clinton bought into some of them is irrelevant. The roots of the corrupt bankrupt philosophy lie within the Republican Party.

The majority of the American public now blame Obama rather than Dumbya for the state the US economy is in. Dems own the coming Depression.

This is just an after-effect of the Republicans-Bush-Cheney-instigated financial disaster. It's going to take time to fix. Obama is on it.