What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

[garbage can]

He's both dishonest and a hypocrite. He says the solution to the recession and jobs problem is to lower taxes. It's just that simple! Then he turns around and throws his full crazy-mode support behind 9-9-9 which is going to raise taxes on 84% of us.

Apparently the solution was just as simple as raising taxes and penalizing spending this whole time.

Uhmm, Merc, do you know anything about Cain's 9-9-9 plan. Other than what you've got from Politico, Huff post, Daily KOS and Media matters??

Or, can you explain how 9-9-9 is going to raise taxes on 84% of us.

 

[RightField]

Wow, what a great article. No wonder the next generation isn't hitting the streets singing "hope and change" any more. They've been Obamasized (sung to the ACDC song Thunderstruck)

The Economic Disappointment of Generation O
By Diana Furchtgott-Roth

WASHINGTON--Yet another resumé arrived in my email box this week, from a young man who graduated with a BA in economics and a minor in math last May, and has yet to find a job. He's a graduate of York College of Pennsylvania, with summer job experience as an engineering technician at the Patuxent River Naval Air Station in Maryland.

Unable to find a job in an economy with persistently high unemployment because of weak job growth, Anthony Lewis is now looking for an unpaid internship. As a new entrant to the labor force he doesn't get unemployment insurance. He's just looking for a job.

Anthony is not alone. The unemployment rate in 2010 for newly graduated men and women with bachelor degrees was 9.2 percent, far higher than the 5.1 percent rate such adults experienced in 2005.

This is Generation O: the age cohort that contributed, registered, volunteered and voted for Barack Obama with greater intensity than we have seen since at least the 1960 presidential election. Since then, the effect of President Obama's failed economic policies has fallen most disproportionately on them.

The unemployment rates among Generation O not only suggest personal disappointment, but also large and lasting implications for them and for society.

A paper forthcoming in the American Economic Journal Applied Economics found that graduating in a recession leads to earnings losses that last for 10 years after graduation.

The authors, University of Toronto economics professor Philip Oreopoulos, Columbia University professor Till von Wachter, and economist Andrew Heisz of Statistics Canada, found that earnings losses are greater for new entrants to the labor force than for existing workers, who might see smaller raises, but who have jobs. In addition, recessions lead workers to accept employment in small firms that pay lower salaries.

That, in turn, may help to explain why there is in our country a creeping fear of downward mobility, a prospect that Generation O will not do as well as their parents.

Young male graduates have been particularly adversely affected, with an unemployment rate of 11 percent, compared to 7.9 percent for women. Five years ago male graduates had an unemployment rate of 5.8 percent, and the rate for females was 4.5 percent.

This divergence in male and female unemployment rates was a product of the last decade. In 2000 young men and women graduates had similar unemployment rates.

This is puzzling because young men tend to major in science, technology, engineering, math, and business, fields that should be in demand. However, young women may be finding jobs in the service sector, particularly education and health care, which has seen steady growth during the recession.

How would Generation O fare if they remained in school, and earned a master's degree? Not that much better. The unemployment rate for MA degree holders was 7.7 percent in 2010, up from 4.6 percent in 2005.

Breaking the data into subsets tells an even starker story. White males with bachelor's degrees are commonly regarded as a privileged class, but they have not been insulated from economic trends. According to unpublished Labor Department data, their unemployment rates have more than doubled over the past five years, from 5.2 percent in 2005 to 13.1 percent in 2010. Rates for white female grads have soared, from 4.1 percent in 2005 to 12.3 in 2010.

Black male BAs have fared even worse, with unemployment rates tripling from 6.5 percent in 2005 to 24 percent in 2010. This means that nearly one quarter of the black males who made it through a four-year degree program was unemployed.

Politicians and educators tell minority students that educational attainment is the path out of poverty, but this is not persuasive if 24 percent of our black male graduates are unemployed.

As if lack of a job isn't bad enough, large increases in college tuition in recent decades mean that Generation O is graduating with a lot of debt. According to Howard Dvorkin, founder of Consolidated Credit Counseling in Fort Lauderdale, students who graduated in 2011 left school with almost $23,000 in student loans, the most ever.

Anthony told me that he owes $21,000 in student loans, and he needs to start repayments in November.

That's one reason why rates of recent graduates living at home with either a parent or grandparent have increased. In 2005 the share of 20-24 year olds who had at least a bachelor's degree but were living at home was 36 percent, and it reached 43 percent in 2011.

It used to be that if you graduated from college with a degree you were assured of a job. For many in Generation O, this is no longer true.

It's not just bad luck, or President George W. Bush's fault, as Mr. Obama tries to suggest. Mr. Obama has promoted an Old Economy model that favors big corporations, labor unions and more government. But Generation O thrives best in a New Economy model that favors nimble start-ups, hard-charging union-free workplaces and minimal government interference.

Generation O voted for Barack Obama believing him to be a new kind of leader, but he has delivered them an Old Economy with European-style mandates (think Obamacare), sclerosis, and dysfunction. They put him in the White House, Barack Obama has consigned them to their parents' house. Clearly, only one side made out well on that deal.

 

[RightField]

Busting the 1% vs. 99% Inequality Myth
By Investor's Business Daily

Inequality: President Obama's class-envy strategy is built on a false premise - that the rich get richer at the expense of the poor. Amazingly, such zero-sum thinking is influencing public opinion.

Twice as many Americans support the anti-Wall Street protesters as oppose them. And even Rasmussen is polling that nearly half of Americans support proposals to soak the rich.

This is an emotional response to both the hard economic times and dishonest political rhetoric. People are buying into the notion peddled by the left that the rich steal from people. It's a pernicious myth left over from preindustrial Marxism.

The left says current levels of income inequality echo the late 1920s and the Gilded Age. They've zeroed in on the richest 1%, citing Census Bureau data showing these top earners "grabbing" more income than the bottom 90%.

But the census stats are misleading.

For one, they are a snapshot of income distribution at a single point in time. Yet income is not static. It changes over time. Low-paying jobs from early adulthood give way to better-paying jobs later in life.

And income groups in America are not fixed. There's no caste system here, really no such thing even as a middle "class." The poor aren't stuck in poverty. And the rich don't enjoy lifetime membership in an exclusive club.

A 2007 Treasury Department study bears this out. Nearly 58% of U.S. households in the lowest-income quintile in 1996 moved to a higher level by 2005. The reverse also held true. Of those households that were in the top 1% in income in 1996, more than 57% dropped to a lower-income group by 2005.

Every day in America, the poor join the ranks of the rich, and the rich fall out of comfort.

So even if income equality is increasing, it does not mean income mobility is decreasing. There is still a great deal of movement in and out of the richest and poorest groups in America.

The beauty of our free-market system (what's left of it), is that even among the thousands of Wall Street protesters thumping, "We are the 99%," there are those who might not be able to say that a decade or so from now. Some might go on to profit from an Internet start-up. Others might get a rap contract. Anything's possible in America.

One of those street agitators might even become president, following in the shoes of Obama, who's now one of the 1-percenters he mocks.

Another problem with the census data is they don't include the noncash income received by the lowest-income households. Each year, the poor get tens of billions of dollars in subsidies for housing, food and health care. None of these transfer payments, a lot of it paid for by the 1%, is counted as income by the Census Bureau.

One report estimates that the share of total income earned by the lowest-income group would rise roughly 50% if such welfare were considered.

Likewise, the share of total income earned by the top income quintile would drop about 7% if taxes paid to fund welfare were considered.

Census doesn't take into account the equalizing effects of taxes. Though they earn more than 45% of total income, the top 10% of taxpayers pay over 70% of the total income-tax burden. The top 1%? They shoulder a whopping 40% of the tax load.

Federal Reserve and other data - which include all financial and nonfinancial assets, including bank accounts, investments, houses and cars - give a more complete picture of the gap. When you count all wealth, not just income, inequality has not gotten worse.

The top 1% account for 35% of total wealth, compared with 37% in 1922. In fact, the worst wealth disparity ever was in the 1990s under President Clinton.

 

[Disgustipated]

Uhmm, Merc, do you know anything about Cain's 9-9-9 plan. Other than what you've got from Politico, Huff post, Daily KOS and Media matters??

Or, can you explain how 9-9-9 is going to raise taxes on 84% of us.

Maybe the "economists" behind this plan that are too ashamed to let Cain tell the people of this country who they are can explain it to you.

 

[trysail]

And the government sells my oil and timber to the oil and lumber industry far below market value.

That's a subsidy as well.

Whoa there, cowboy. Not so fast.

Huh ?? Where'd you fish up those little factoids ??


Federal oil and gas leases are the subject of competitive bidding at public auctions. Royalties are calculated using current spot market prices. If you want to talk about massive subsidies, how about the $0.59/gallon credit given to ethanol refiners ( which is directly responsible for the diversion of 40% of the U.S. corn [maize] crop from use as food to fuel ) ?

 

[mercury14]

Uhmm, Merc, do you know anything about Cain's 9-9-9 plan. Other than what you've got from Politico, Huff post, Daily KOS and Media matters??

Everything I learned about Cain's 9-9-9 plan comes from his own website. It's only one page. Stop making up these dumbshit accusations against me please.

http://www.hermancain.com/999plan

Or, can you explain how 9-9-9 is going to raise taxes on 84% of us.

Sure.

"Under Herman Cain's 9-9-9 tax reform plan, 84% of U.S. households would pay more than they do under current tax policies, according to a report released Tuesday by a nonpartisan research group. Those are some of the estimates from the Tax Policy Center's analysis of Cain's proposal, which has helped make him a leading contender for the Republican 2012 presidential nomination.

In terms of investment taxes, capital gains would be tax-free, while dividends would be deductible to businesses paying them out but taxable at 9% for investors who receive them.

According to the Tax Policy Center, households with incomes below $30,000 would have, on average, between 16% and 20% less in after-tax income than they do today.

By contrast, households making more than $200,000 would see their after-tax income grow by between 5% and 22% on average."


Basically people with non-high incomes are going to be hurt very badly by the 9% sales tax. And also middle and low-income (but hard-working) people are going to 1) lose their tax deductions, and 2) start paying a higher rate of income tax. Cain's plan removes the payroll tax but it doesn't make nearly a big enough difference to cancel out Cain's massive tax hike.

Every significant news outlet carried this story. Except Fox News.

https://news.fidelity.com/news/news...18-news-economy-cain_999_plan-index_htm&IMG=N

http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/18/news/economy/cain_999_plan/index.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/study-cain-tax-plan-raises-taxes-84-percent-14764131

 

[mercury14]

Other tidbits for you:

- Among those in the middle, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 would see their taxes increase by an average of $4,400, the report said. Those making between $50,000 and $75,000 would see their annual tax bill go up by an average of $4,326.

- It raises the deficit by $300 billion dollars per year. $3 trillion over the next decade onto the federal debt. "However, the plan would raise about $300 billion less revenue than would be raised by current tax law, under which most 2001-2010 tax cuts would have expired by 2013."




http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/Cain-9-9-9-plan.cfm

 

[unregistered]

 

[mercury14]

Time to impeach the President and his unAmerican policies:

Car Company Gets U.S. Loan, Builds Cars In Finland


By MATTHEW MOSK, BRIAN ROSS (@brianross) and RONNIE GREENE
ABC NEWS and iWATCH NEWS
Oct. 20, 2011

With the approval of the Obama administration, an electric car company that received a $529 million federal government loan guarantee is assembling its first line of cars in Finland, saying it could not find a facility in the United States capable of doing the work.

Vice President Joseph Biden heralded the Energy Department's $529 million loan to the start-up electric car company called Fisker as a bright new path to thousands of American manufacturing jobs. But two years after the loan was announced, the job of assembling the flashy electric Fisker Karma sports car has been outsourced to Finland.

"There was no contract manufacturer in the U.S. that could actually produce our vehicle," the car company's founder and namesake told ABC News. "They don't exist here."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/car-company-us-loan-builds-cars-finland/story?id=14770875

I don't give a crap that they have a factory in another country. Most of America's large corporations do. As long as they're making payments on their loan everything is fine by me. They'll pay it back with interest so the US should actually make a profit.

I'd much rather see the market contain American companies with overseas factories than by foreign companies with overseas factories.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

I don't give a crap that they have a factory in another country. Most of America's large corporations do. As long as they're making payments on their loan everything is fine by me. They'll pay it back with interest so the US should actually make a profit.

I'd much rather see the market contain American companies with overseas factories than by foreign companies with overseas factories.

I will give you value, when you lean how to create wealth. till then you are just a user of the system

 

[mercury14]

Vette, did you even read your own article? It says that Fisker and Tesla bought a shuttered GM plant in Delaware and are constructing a new facility in California where they will be manufacturing their cars in the future.

 

[mercury14]

Here you go, Garbage, AJ, Vette, RightField, and whoever else backs 9-9-9. Find yourself on this chart and see how much more you're trying to tax yourselves.


http://taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/Content/GIF/T11-0374.gif

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Vette, did you even read your own article? It says that Fisker and Tesla bought a shuttered GM plant in Delaware and are constructing a new facility in California where they will be manufacturing their cars in the future.

look at you go! maybe some day you can get a real job?

 

[koalabear]

Everything I learned about Cain's 9-9-9 plan comes from his own website. It's only one page. Stop making up these dumbshit accusations against me please.

http://www.hermancain.com/999plan




Sure.

"Under Herman Cain's 9-9-9 tax reform plan, 84% of U.S. households would pay more than they do under current tax policies, according to a report released Tuesday by a nonpartisan research group. Those are some of the estimates from the Tax Policy Center's analysis of Cain's proposal, which has helped make him a leading contender for the Republican 2012 presidential nomination.

In terms of investment taxes, capital gains would be tax-free, while dividends would be deductible to businesses paying them out but taxable at 9% for investors who receive them.

According to the Tax Policy Center, households with incomes below $30,000 would have, on average, between 16% and 20% less in after-tax income than they do today.

By contrast, households making more than $200,000 would see their after-tax income grow by between 5% and 22% on average."


Basically people with non-high incomes are going to be hurt very badly by the 9% sales tax. And also middle and low-income (but hard-working) people are going to 1) lose their tax deductions, and 2) start paying a higher rate of income tax. Cain's plan removes the payroll tax but it doesn't make nearly a big enough difference to cancel out Cain's massive tax hike.

Every significant news outlet carried this story. Except Fox News.

https://news.fidelity.com/news/news...18-news-economy-cain_999_plan-index_htm&IMG=N

http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/18/news/economy/cain_999_plan/index.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/study-cain-tax-plan-raises-taxes-84-percent-14764131

Other tidbits for you:

- Among those in the middle, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 would see their taxes increase by an average of $4,400, the report said. Those making between $50,000 and $75,000 would see their annual tax bill go up by an average of $4,326.

- It raises the deficit by $300 billion dollars per year. $3 trillion over the next decade onto the federal debt. "However, the plan would raise about $300 billion less revenue than would be raised by current tax law, under which most 2001-2010 tax cuts would have expired by 2013."




http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/Cain-9-9-9-plan.cfm

I don't give a crap that they have a factory in another country. Most of America's large corporations do. As long as they're making payments on their loan everything is fine by me. They'll pay it back with interest so the US should actually make a profit.

I'd much rather see the market contain American companies with overseas factories than by foreign companies with overseas factories.

Vette, did you even read your own article? It says that Fisker and Tesla bought a shuttered GM plant in Delaware and are constructing a new facility in California where they will be manufacturing their cars in the future.

Here you go, Garbage, AJ, Vette, RightField, and whoever else backs 9-9-9. Find yourself on this chart and see how much more you're trying to tax yourselves.


http://taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/Content/GIF/T11-0374.gif

FRAUD ALERTS


The Department of Defense has become aware of various fraudulent schemes being perpetuated via the internet. These cyber criminals, posing as military members, prey on victims in an attempt to elicit money and/or personal and financial information. In many instances, the scam perpetrators say they are deployed, whether to Iraq or Afghanistan, and claim to need money for everything from leave papers to a flight back home. They may pose as an Air Force lieutenant, an Army general, or other military member, and provide you with fake or stolen photos. Often, they will contact members of the public by e-mail, instant messenger, online chat, and internet VOIP phone.

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Wow. Merc just housed motherfuckers up in here with direct info they can't refute.

 

[unregistered]

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Yeah, we were all astounded.

Don't worry, pal. I won't tell everyone how you got served the morning papers.

 

[unregistered]

 

[cebalrai]

You should probably go peddle yours.

Yeah Mr. Moustache, but we're all kind of standing here wondering what you plan to peddle in order to pay your extra $4,300 per year in taxes each year.

Twelve bucks per day to the government you hate so much. For the rest of your life, sucka'.

Wait, sucka??? There's your twelve bucks per day right there.

Wow. Merc just housed motherfuckers up in here with direct info they can't refute.

Since I'm apparently Mercs alt you can send the credit my way, bro.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Your entire narrative is that there aren't jobs because of Obama. Now you're able to flip flop so severely that you're saying that 2 million laid-off federal workers could just find jobs... if they were motivated? And that the millions currently out of work are just lacking the motivation? THAT'S your new reason for 9% unemployment?

Hypocrite.

Are you fucking insane?

Is that it?

It must be, for I can find no other rational explanation for the crap that comes out of your keyboard...

Obviously I am talking about an alternative to Obama. Everyone can see that.



It's like all the 9,000 posts about the unseen and the government proclivity to plunder and the disaster of public-sector employment just goes straight over your head. It must be a purposeful act. No one other than LT is possibly that fucking looney...

"We know that the number of government jobs has been increasing steadily, and that the number of applicants is increasing still more rapidly than the number of jobs. … Is this scourge about to come to an end? How can we believe it, when we see that public opinion itself wants to have everything done by that fictitious being, the state, which signifies a collection of salaried bureaucrats? … Very soon there will be two or three of these bureaucrats around every Frenchman, one to prevent him from working too much, another to give him an education, a third to furnish him credit, a fourth to interfere with his business transactions, etc., etc. Where will we be led by the illusion that impels us to believe that the state is a person who has an inexhaustible fortune independent of ours?
Frédéric Bastiat

FUCKTARD!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Merc you're posting models again...

We cannot examine the assumptions of these models.

If they are based on Keynesian analysis, then they will be wrong...



And about that future car plant in California, it's about as likely as the "Summer of Recovery."

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Uhmm, Merc, do you know anything about Cain's 9-9-9 plan. Other than what you've got from Politico, Huff post, Daily KOS and Media matters??

Or, can you explain how 9-9-9 is going to raise taxes on 84% of us.

Yes he can, but like the anti-FairTax arguments, you first have to ignore the elimination of the hidden taxes (that would be more like the VAT Michelle you fucking idiot moron of a tax attorney) currently imbedded in the cost of every good and service we buy, plus you have to pretend (like that lying bitch Bachmann) that wholesale is the exact fucking same thing as retail, and then you can easily prove that it will destroy the middle-class, whatever is left of that polite fiction under the current "progressive" tax scheme...



... oh yeah, it helps to pretend that FICA and the other payroll taxes don't go away...

 

[Wat_Tyler]

The bit I like about one of the 9's is that folks today who pay no taxes will be contributing something to the national pie. That bit seems to have gotten no air-time.