Dow down over 600!
- Thread starter BobPSU92
- Start date
Allow me to further clarify, the absolute minimum would be $15/hr mathematically given $31K although this assumes that everyone works 40 hours a week. Knowing this isn't a fully valid assumption, average rate of pay is probably $20/hr.
OK, found the data. According to the Bureau of Labor, $44,148 is the median for someone working 40 hours a week. So it is actually $21.23/hr.
According to the Census Bureau, 32% of Americans have a 401(k). Only about 14% of employers offer them.
Half are doing worse. It does not necessarily follow they are doing significantly worse. If you are gonna be a pedantic nitpicker, try to do so in a way that serves your argument.
Btw, the wealthiest folks don' create the most jobs. Small business creates the most jobs.
I am not sure where you are going with the Half doing not necessarily significantly worse. You may need to elaborate to clearly communicate why that point was necessary. I don't disagree with it and clearly the distribution of US salaries doesn't skip specific portions of the full range below the 50% mark. I just have no idea where you are going with this remark.
But since you want to nitpick my "pedantic nitpicking", according to the 2010 US census, 49.2% of jobs belong to small business collectively which is not the total most jobs created. The most new jobs being currently created are small businesses collectively, but definitely not per capita. Who creates more new jobs, the "upper crust" (term originally used) big business owner / CEO or a small business owner (only 21% are actually employing anyone beyond themselves according to the census)? And yet the point remains, if you root against the upper crust, you root against all of us. Do you think the upper crust doesn't support small businesses?
BTW, I am very pro-small business. I am one. In fact, I can tell you 1st hand that this new tax law is a huge boost to small business. Perhaps "pedantic nitpicking" or being more precise about the weeds has helped some lose sight of the big picture. That is that the economy is getting much stronger and ALL AMERICANS will benefit.
I know that doesn't fit the agenda of those rooting against us because their media tells them to, they don't like the President enough to root against their Country and themselves (notice the glee in reporting stock market losses from some), or because they want to hurt the rich even if it means hurting themselves. But I am for us, all of us, even those of you rooting against us, and those of you who get upset that I take the position that our economy is strong. I want us all to be more successful even if it makes some of you miserable because someone else has more or you didn't vote for it.
The big problem with the new tax law is its being paid for by deficit spending. It is a short term boost to the economy and it will be a drag on the economy in the long run. Plus it appears Congress is about to boost spending even more.
Deficit spending is acceptable during recession, but not during times of expansion.
The inmates are running the asylum.
I suppose that it is possible that it could play out that way. But considering that trillions of dollars have already been repatriated to the US and companies were announcing hundreds of billions in US investment like every other day, I'm thinking that the short term debt created by LETTING AMERICANS KEEP MORE OF THEIR EARNED INCOME is going to be short lived and succeeded by long term increases in tax revenue due to increased growth. We are already seeing very positive signs of that growth and recapturing lost tax revenue on those trillions being repatriated.
So while you claim the inmates are running the asylum, one might argue with more validity that the grown ups are now in charge.
The grown ups are running up a massive credit card bill.
Other than the one page report the treasury department issued instead of doing a full analysis as it initially promised, every analysis of the tax bill show it adding to the deficit, and now congress and the president have passed a massive new spending plan to add several hundred billion onto the debt.
I say the inmates are running the asylum because Republicans and Democrats have lost all sense of fiscal responsibility.
Fiscal stimulus ie. tax cuts and spending increases, during economic expansion risks inflation and massive future debt payments.
In the short term any tax cut will add to the deficit. This is investment. Investment in US growth. You cannot make money without investing. You can invest time, resources, assets, and in this case money in the hands of the American people and US businesses.
We are already seeing the potential of the returns with TRILLIONS of dollars coming back home, business investment like we haven't seen in decades, and millions of people getting bonuses and/or pay raises.
Were you as concerned when the last admin rung up more debt than every other admin in the history of the Country combined? Were you concerned when the last admin kept interest rates almost at zero for the better part of a decade to overinflate a stock market that would have tanked on their decade long horrible GDP? It was the only admin that never produced 3% GDP in a single year. Don't you think after a decade of horrible growth, we might want to try to change what wasn't working?
Some of you are just disconsolate. You get a huge tax break on top of an economy showing signs of growth we haven't seen in decades and you have your panties in a bunch? Imagine if we had a lost decade of growth and the doubling of the deficit, you'd probably be content again in misery.
The last administration inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression. Over the course of eight years it progressively shrunk the size of the annual Federal deficit.
The current administration inherits a much healthier economy. The recently enacted tax cuts and increases in government spending promise to return, within one to two years, the annual deficit to levels not seen since the depths of the last economic crisis and progressively increase them over the next decade.......and that's before any spending on a major infrastructure program.
But you just keep believing in the Voodoo. Arthur Laffer has a new book in which you'll be interested:
There are multiple errors in your post. First of all, the Obama administration did not set interest rates at 0,the federal reserve did. And it was the right thing to do. At the time, inflation was essentially 0 and there was a threat of having deflation.
And it worked, foreign investors snapped up U.S bonds like they were candy.
Also, deficit spending during recession is to be expected because government revenue falls during a recession. Plus this is the time when you do want to have fiscal stimulus to jump start the economy without running the risk of inflation.
Now that the economy is expanding, there is a risk of inflation, but Trump and Congress are now cutting taxes and increasing spending, which could worsen inflationary pressures.
It’s not just Trump, congressional Democrats and Republicans are just as complicit. That’s what I mean by inmates running the asylum. They’ve all brain dead.
You complain about Obama, but Trump hasn’t cut spending, in fact has increased it by several hundreds of billions of dollars and passed a tax cut that will add 1 trillion to the deficit.
Trump used to complain about the deficit when Obama was in office, but when he gets in office, what does he do, increase the deficit even more. It is absolutely ridiculous.
...and the last administration inherited that because the Rs controlled both houses of congress and the WH. Thats how all the big panics and crashes start.The last administration inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression. Over the course of eight years it progressively shrunk the size of the annual Federal deficit.
The current administration inherits a much healthier economy. The recently enacted tax cuts and increases in government spending promise to return, within one to two years, the annual deficit to levels not seen since the depths of the last economic crisis and progressively increase them over the next decade.......and that's before any spending on a major infrastructure program.
But you just keep believing in the Voodoo. Arthur Laffer has a new book in which you'll be interested:
You can find it in the Children's Section.
Let's try not to be partisan. There is more than enough blame for the last crash to be shared by Democrats and nominal Independents, too.
You know you have a a problem when the only guy demonstrating an ounce of clear thinking is Rand Paul.
Thank you for correcting the wording with regard to interest rates. I did not mean to imply that Obama set those rates, merely that they were the result of his anemic GDP growth rates being the first to never have a year of at least 3% growth. So I am in agreement that the actions of the fed were likely necessary for an extended period although a decade of near zero rates is embarrassingly telling and artificially inflated the stock market by a large margin. The original point that lead us here was that this artificial propping of the stock market would deflate when the rates finally rose and that is what is currently playing out (due to economic strength after a decade of weakness).
Now allow me to correct your errors which seem somewhat dishonest to me in an attempt to ascribe the crash of 2008 on Bush and Republicans. 1st, Bush and the Republican controlled Congress inherited a dot com bubble and 911 from Clinton. Clinton's growth was mostly good but the dot com bubble would burst no matter who was in office (essentially did as Clinton was leaving) and if Bill was less interested in BJ's in the oval office, he could have had Bin Laden. This is well documented. But alas, in Bush's 1st year he had to deal with both and although the economy was definitely rattled, it withstood and went on for strong gains the rest of the 6 years of Bush and Republican Congress control.
However, Democrats took control of Congress in 2007 about a year before the 2008 crash and proceded to argue against adding liquidity in the face of the housing crisis about a year later which eventually lead to a freeze of central banks. Now to the housing crisis, sown in the Clinton years with the Democrat rules for affordable housing further pressuring banks to make riskier loans particularly with the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall Law. It was Glass-Steagall that prevented the banks from using insured depositories to underwrite private securities and dump them on their own customers. This ability along with financing provided to all the other players was what kept the bubble-machine going for so long. This support for affordable housing is on the surface a wonderful idea except that subprime lending and targeting of home buyers who had no way of actually paying became rampant. The housing bubble, like the dotcom bubble was created under Clinton even though the early roots were in the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 under Jimmy Carter and the you guessed it, a majority Democrat House and Senate.
Back to attempts under Bush to avert the housing crisis, Democrat Barney Frank led the charge to go full speed ahead into the crisis. The Bush Whitehouse warned about the housing crisis and attempted to tighten regulations on Fannie and Freddie which were consistently blocked by Democrats 5 years before the crisis. Frank was adamant that "these two entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are not facing any kind of financial crisis." When the White House warned of "systemic risk for our financial system" unless the mortgage giants were curbed, Frank complained that the administration was more concerned about financial safety than about housing. If you need to hear Frank discuss this for yourself, there are plenty of youtube speeches on this by him available.
So Obama inherited what he as a Democrat and particularly as a Senator leading to the 2008 market crash helped create.
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/09/subprime-market-2008.asp
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/09/financial-crisis-review.asp
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blog...of-glass-steagall-caused-the-financial-crisis
http://archive.boston.com/bostonglo...ngerprints_are_all_over_the_financial_fiasco/
This is all great but not relavent as to why the market went down for a week. The reason is the HFT decided to go short, therefore people panicked, volatility went up, the inverse vix products blew up and the mess spread. Read Cramer , he does have clown tendencies, but he is spot on in this case. By March this will be a distant memory, just like Long Term Capital
If you want politics, we have a board for it. Keep it there. Stock market OT is fine, leave the politics out. Y'all oughta be smart enough to know the President, any President doesn't control the market in the first place.
Well, they don't make people go off the rails, politics does. No problem talking Dow and stuff like that, it's the slinging of party bs that doesn't go well.
I'd like to sling road apples at both castrated parties. F'n parasites
.Similar threads
