Daniel Gross doesn't understand that economics is not linear, but circular. There is a beginning and an end, a top and a bottom, and it always moves up and down. The fact that this "recession" is taking so long and has been delayed for 8 years after the first bubble popped shows that Bush's economic policies are incredibly sound.

We did not hit a depression. All economics showed that after Clinton, we should have. Why? Because thats how the economy works. It "resets" and puts things back to normal.

Now, lets go to some absolute lies: "in 1993 that the Clinton program of spending cuts and tax increases on the wealthy "

Except that Clinton didn't do either, but expanded government programs and increased spending by a lot, and didn't return anything back to the tax payer. The only reason why the economy didn't collapse was from the software boom that came from those like Bill Gates.

That ended. The economics caught back up. Bush saved us from it.

Daniel, you are speaking like an Econ 101 flunkie. Seriously, you need to find a job that you actually know what you are talking about, because you live in a fantasy land when it comes to history and economics.

San wrote: "Now, lets go to some absolute lies: "in 1993 that the Clinton program of spending cuts and tax increases on the wealthy "

"Except that Clinton didn't do either, but expanded government programs and increased spending by a lot, and didn't return anything back to the tax payer."

Now let's go to the description of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 at wikipedia

The bill, which both raised taxes and cut government spending, has been credited as the major cause behind the deficit reduction and eventual surpluses during the 1990s, by sources such as the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.

massive credit devaluation across numerous industries is not indicative of a business cycle. Credit is a necessary ingredient to any economic recovery\growth. When credit itself is the problem, you have a systemic issue, not a circular fluctuation.

If a wheel comes off your car as you are going downhill, you could probably take comfort in the fact that any point on the rubber portion is periodically moving uphill, so all is not lost. Of course, when the wheels come off your car, you might find yourself with more to think about than the beauty of cycloids. It is probably better to drive safely in the first place.

It clearly says RAISES TAXES.

Damn. You are an idiot.

" massive credit devaluation across numerous industries is not indicative of a business cycle."

Except that credit was something that didn't fully establish itself until after the 60s, and economic cycles existed far before then,

Oops. Next time, don't talk out of your ass.

I keep hearing the Argument that expanding any Government agency hurts the economy and wastes tax dollars... And I am either not getting it, or surrounded by other who don't.

I am honestly not sure which.

We had multiple cases of dangerous and even deadly products slipping past our inspections officers because the agencies involved have less than a tenth of the manpower they need to actually do their job. This killed tax payers, caused consumer unrest, hurt international relations and saw many unnecessary hospitalizations.

We have an FDA that isn't inspecting everything that gets sold as medicine, because they don't have the manpower. This example of small Government has had the same results; death, economic distress, consumer unrest, and harmed relations with nations who would be a part of our markets.

We have border patrol shortage, and those who cut the budget each year, are the ones who cry out the loudest that something must be done to secure our borders.

Personally, when I was a young man and unemployed, I wasn't paying any taxes. Because I was a young man, with no job, and thus, had no real taxes to pay. Now, if I had been offered a job, say, with the FDA; I would have paid out taxes, been able to support my family, contributed to my local and national economy while helping to insure the safety of millions of Americans.

That is bad because???

I am very ok with the Government spending money on job creation which is in turn used to protect American citizens in all the ways a population this size desperately needs protection. Increases to those programs does not hurt the economy, it finds balance with it or, more often than not, improves it.

Now, if you told me the Government was going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on commercials to convince people to stop having sex for safety’s sake... I would have to agree with THAT being a pretty good example of Government waste and excess.

Still, if the trickle down effect worked, then the rich would not be getting richer while the poor got poorer. Because of all the trickling down you see. But the rich are getting richer, and as they do the resources at our disposal move upwards leaving more and more Americans with less to get by on every year. Almost every year for the last 3 decades. Unless the ultimate goal is to have a handful of survivors while the rest starve out and die, we will eventually have to reverse that trend. Taxing the super rich and utilizing that money to increase the health and safety of the general masses strikes me as pretty good way to start. Remember, the Government isn’t hiring robots from a distant star to perform these tasks, they are hiring our friends and neighbors.

?

Not sure how that argues against my point... Of course business cycles always existed. That is irrelevant.

As you say, credit as we know it today is a relatively new phenomenon that has become more and more far reaching in our economy. Its a systemic attribute of contemporary economic growth. This downturn is a direct result of credit overstretch due, in part, to lending practices.

Seems to me like what you said underscores my arguement.

"We had multiple cases of dangerous and even deadly products slipping past our inspections officers because the agencies involved have less than a tenth of the manpower they need to actually do their job."

Blah blah blah.

This doesn't belong in this thread. Your rant doesn't follow the topic at all.

So really, what is your problem? Are you unable to read a topic, or do you just not give a damn about what you spam?

And tax the super rich, guess what they do? LEAVE THE COUNTRY.

"This downturn is a direct result of credit overstretch due, in part, to lending practices."

Not even close, you twit.

This downturn is part of normal inflation deflation economic turns. Its called "rocking the boat". If a business booms, everyone joins it. It creates too much supply and not enough demand, which causes the profits to drop, and many to go out of business. New area opens up or people fill in the void and repeat.

That is economics. That is what is happening now. The Housing market did it, inflated, and busted. Thus, people are now able to buy cheap houses again. Thats economics. It happens every 10 years.

Oh, come on!

World Gross Product is approximately $50 Trillion per year. The total face value of the debt instruments currently in circulation is $500 Trillion to $750 Trillion. Do you really claim that this 10:1 to 15:1 leveraging of everything is typical of an economy which is merely going through a normal business cycle?

Thats a load of crap.

The approved National Debt is 9 trillion. They require a law to expand it.

At least don't make stuff up like that. Its rather disgusting that you did.

<link>

Thats if you don't believe me.

Now please apologize to the community about your lie. Thanks.

Note that my post was about World product and debt, not about the National Debt, which includes only US Treasury debt. Total debt of the US alone includes state, municipal, corporate, bank, and private debt and is much larger than National Debt. Of course, World debt is much larger than that total.

Ahem.

PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS

Good point Dausuul. Apparently I was too much of a twit to see otherwise.