David in D

Total Rating:
+1 / 0

25 Comments

    • Sun Nov 2nd 15:42 PM | Rating: +1 0
      Commented on:
      Is Paul Krugman Serious? Sadly, Yes.
      Todd, I suggest you reread Krugman's article. He did not say that "reduction in consumer spending is the cause of the current condition we are in..."; he did say that the reduction comes at an unfortunate time. In other words, your post is built around a straw-man argument in which you claim that Dr. Krugman said something he clearly did not.

      As for many of the other posts here who blindly continue (rank-and-file) to be in the "low-tax" and "screw capital gains tax" camps, have you not learned anything these past thirty years. Until the bottom crust(s) of America experience some serious wage improvements we will not move ahead economically.

      Wage inequality is more at the root of our current crisis than capital gains taxes or "Krugman socialism" as some posters have suggested. Fix that, and you will go a long way toward fixing our fiscal mess.
      View article »
    • Fri Oct 24th 15:22 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Right Way to Encourage Home Ownership
      Mark, I appreciate your heart in wanting to advocate for poorer families, and I think your intentions are noble. But, I agree with several other posters here that really, the REAL solution, is not some sort of fancy program but allowing home prices to seriously fall back to levels that are affordable.

      It seems we are working very hard to ignore the reality that our home assets have become way over valued and until we deal with that every "solutution" will only incite further problems.
      View article »
    • Fri Oct 24th 00:08 AM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      My Plan to Repair Housing in America
      Ditto to Belvedere Research, I think BR has it right. John, in my assessment you have been "drinking the cool-aid" too long and have lost track of the REALITY that home prices ran way ahead of real earnings and need to correct back to what people can afford. It is clear, at least to me and some others, that "housing will find its bottom" (as everyone is eagerly awaiting) when it correlates with what people can historically afford - no sooner.

      Thus, as BR said well, if you want to work on the housing problem start finding ways to improve middle class earnings.
      View article »
    • Thu Oct 16th 14:54 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Another 'Root Cause' That Isn't: Tumbling Home Prices
      Tim: Good article.

      Belvedere Research: Well said, I agree.
      View article »
    • Tue Oct 14th 15:12 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      America Will Print as Much Money as It Takes
      CLH: I am confident there are plenty of people willing to dig themselves into deeper holes and borrow the additional money -- have you met any 20-somethings lately?

      Dr. Duru: A quick question that doesn't explicitly pertain to your article but is vaguely related. Is it safe to assume that excessive printing of currencies causes inflation? If yes, wouldn't inflation help to "stabilize" the housing market by bringing earnings up to the dollar amounts owed (thus stabilizing the ability of the American public to service their debt)? Obviously, this would be good for those heavily in debt and bad for folks who have savings but isn't there a silver lining here in terms of market stability?

      I look forward to gaining your insight on this.
      View article »
    • Sun Oct 12th 22:43 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Difference Between 1993 and 2009
      Anton- While I think your proposal makes limited sense economically, it would have disastorous effects socially and that is a major factor that you have not weighed. I have no idea where you fall on the wealth spectrum, but clearly you do not have an interest in creating a win-win for everyone. Until poverty is alleviated in America and until the working class has wages that are increasing ahead of inflation we cannot will not see a lasting economic recovery.

      Frankly, your 10% income tax proposal and the elimination of the capital gains tax heavily favors those with wealth at the expense of the poor and working class. What exactly do you propose the single mother with two kids and working for $8 per hour do? Cutting her health care access certaily doesn't help her. Seriously, I would like to hear you address the "poor/working class" in America -- what is your proposal for them?

      Finally, your "low tax" agenda will not have another political chance in America for at least a decade. Bush 43 completely discredited it by giving tax breaks to the elite while running up huge defiicts. Republicans, at the moment, have NO credibility as fiscal conservatives. Therefore, if we are going to run big deficits let's at least take care of our poplulance instead of bombing innocent countries and giving contracts to Haliburton to rebuild them.
      View article »
    • Thu Oct 9th 22:41 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Similarities to U.S. 1937, Japan 1998
      Don: Good and interesting article.

      John1, Curbs-In, thedozer: Why are you all so pessimistic towards Obama and "liberals?" It's amazing to me how staunch conservative rhetoric is despite the complete contrary evidence that speaks against the "wisdom" of Reaganomics, trickle-down theory, deregulation, and lowering upper-class tax rates. Are you three for real? Have you been paying attention to the economics of the last 30 years (especially the last 7.5)? The last time we had a balanced budget and improving middle-class wages (which drive our economy) was in the late 90's? Seriously, wake up!
      View article »
    • Tue Sep 30th 23:39 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      3 Things America Needs to Do to Get the Economy Back on Track
      Peter, would you please comment on what you think of Boone Picken's plan, especially as it relates to wind replacing, natural gas which then replaces, foreign oil. I'm also interested in what others think about this.
      dw
      View article »
    • Tue Sep 30th 23:09 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Don’t Blame Wall Street - At Least Not Completely
      Pretzel Logic - Yeah, I said "Reaganomics has now been discredited" and I'll stand by that. Perhaps I need to nuance it a bit but without a doubt the doctrine that prosperity would "trickle down" and tax cuts for the wealthiest portion of America really benefit the general public is now in the trash heap. This isn't partisan politicing - I actually think Reagan did some great things - but the mythos that he helped normal working-class people such as myself is clearly false.

      My comment about the 60's and 70's was (admittedly) not specific enough. What I meant is to say is that middle class wages, as compared with the wealthiest crust of America, were actually much closer than what we have today. Clearly we have a widening wealth gap now and a squeezed middle class and ABSOLUTELY Reagan's notion of a tax cut for all and huge deficit spending was the start of our disaster today. (And by the way, for everyone who want to assert that "defense spending in the 80's brought down communism" and thus were justified deficits, I suggest you look at the correlation btw oil prices and fall of the Soviet Union. Many Soviet economist, post-fall, cite that as the main actual internal problem for the USSR - not Reagan's antics.)

      But I digress, instead or Reaganomics, we need a progressive tax code the lessens taxes for the middle class, holds upper middle-class taxes steady, and raises taxes on the wealthiest couple of percent of America. We should provide targeted incentives for job creation, but a tax cut for the wealthy and job creation are not directly (or at least efficiently) linked.

      To repeat, trickle-down economics has been discredited along with the Bush tax cuts. I'd be interested to hear other thoughts on this along with Pretzel's comments.
      View article »
    • Tue Sep 30th 22:57 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Don’t Blame Wall Street - At Least Not Completely
      Markos, I'm feeling a little bad for you since so many are hoping on your back (me being one of them earlier). So, I'll back off and reiterate that I agree with you that nearly everybody is guilty in some way with this disaster. I also appreciate that you are taking a contrarian view and pointing out that Wall St. shouldn't be the only whipping boys.

      Here's where I think your article is nuts. To claim that Wall St. is responsible for America's prosperity because the guy "working at Wal-Mart" can "buy a car" misses the point. If lending didn't exist in its current form other possibilities would exist for transportation or other products (such as the scooter I ride to work) would be more popular and people would generally save money for what they absolutely needed (or they would ride the bus).

      The problem IS precisely that people - encouraged by Wall St banks - spent more than they could afford and assets rose to meet that false demand. Yes the borrower is guilty of having a bigger appetite than his Wal-Mart wage could sustain, but the tax payer surely should not bail out the banker who made the loan to a person who couldn't repay it. The borrower and the bank should go bankrupt and this is exactly what many people such as myself are saying when we say "you are out of touch with mainstreet." We don't want to pay for other's bad mistakes and I don't think Armaggedon is going to descend on us if we don't bail out the banks... tough times for a while... but not disaster. My daughter (who is now 3) is not going to be paying for this bailout if I have anything to say about it.
      View article »
    • Tue Sep 30th 15:38 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Main Street - Wall Street Bout, Round Two
      Kathy, I like your articles generally, but I think you are wrong on this one. I agree with numerous posts above and would like to say that "main street (generally) isn't stupid." There is a strong judgment from many Wall St. types that they know what is best for the average Joe and frankly I think they have been living in Manhattan too long.

      Yes, average Americans generally understand that not providing a bailout will cause immediate problems, but frankly average Americans have not benefitted much from the economic forces of the last three decades.

      The revolt, although somewhat knee-jerk and unconscious, is really about the widening wealth gap in America and until the US government wants to acknowledge that the middle-class has been getting screwed while Wall St. elites have been reaping rewards, we will fundamentally go no where.

      An agreement must be reached that "insures" the risk at hand and companies who made dumb decisions should pay an appropriate premium for that insurance... otherwise they should go bankrupt with the consumers who made bad decisions borrowing what they did.

      We have got to quick rewarding bad decisions!
      View article »
    • Mon Sep 29th 23:29 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Why This Bailout Can't Work - And What Will
      Julian - All I can say is WOW! I'm glad you are not calling the shots in the upcoming economic turmoil. I think you would manage to exacerbate the problem by many factors. I'd think again about most of this post... although I do think you are right about the fundamental problem of overvalued assets.
      View article »
    • Mon Sep 29th 23:13 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      The Great Bank Rush of 2008: What's the Money For?
      Thanks for sharing this. I had no idea. I wish there were a way for a broader readership to find out more about this. Very helpful, thanks.
      View article »
    • Mon Sep 29th 23:02 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      Don’t Blame Wall Street - At Least Not Completely
      Markos- Really, come on man, are you serious? Without a doubt, most Americans hold some of the blame; and there is certainly enough blame to go around in terms of government, the Bush Administration, ratings agencies, and Wall St. But do you really think the difference between America and the developing world is Wall Street? You have been in Manhattan too long.

      Here's the truth. America was the great economic superpower it was because of the middle-class. Hard working, smart, dependable people who put great ingenuity to play for the whole world. Our greatest days were the 1960-70's when the middle-class got a fair shake and when the difference between the wealthiest crust of America was closer to the median American worker. That is what built America's economic prosperity.

      Now that Reaganomics has been discredited, the Bush Administration is found lacking in all areas, and Wall Street's own inventions have imploded we would best use our energies figuring out how to reward the middle 90% of America.

      Seriously though, you have to get a grip and go live a while with normal people!
      View article »
    • Tue Sep 23rd 18:55 PM | Rating: 0 0
      Commented on:
      More on Interdependence and This Crisis
      Thanks for the follow up post. I have a question about scale for you and your readers. Let's suppose that the $700B loan to buy up sketchy mortgages does work and provides capital to keep lending practices moving forward and we fast forward one-year from now. In my assessment home prices in my neighborhood are running somewhere between 20-40% higher than they should be (and this is after already losing 20-30% from their 2005 highs) in realtion to real working-class earnings. With 20-40% additional "melt" in the market it seems that a sea of additional foreclosures will occur and the root problem (bad mortgages and other lending) will only compound even with this bailout. I just can't see how the $700B helps with the reality that too much money is lended on assets that simply aren't worth what is owed on them.

      I'm no professional economist, but in this "best-case" scenerio wouldn't the only real solution be to actually encourage inflation to bump incomes upward 20-40% to make the existing paper loans affordable? I recognize that inflation also produces adverse effects in terms of savings being gobbled up, but it seems to me that the only sort of solution is an "adjustment" of asset prices as it is related to (particularly) working class earnings and I don't see how to do that outside of inflating our economy.

      I am curious to hear your (and other's) thoughts on this.
      View article »
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links:
Contribute an Article Become a Seeking Alpha Contributor

Transcripts

More Transcripts»